Does the bible refer to Hindu epics?

[Samuel Linton Boot]

4There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. Genesis 6:4 (King James Version)

What's this about?

[Agnideva]

Originally Posted by Samuel Linton Boot

4There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. Genesis 6:4 (King James Version)

Doesn't ring any bells. With which Hindu epic or epic episode do you see commonality here?

A.

[tropheus74]

Please see the discussion "The Nephalim" and "Who were the men of old/reknown"

This quote is thoroughly discussed in those threads.

I have no knowledge of the Hindu epics. Is there a story that refers to giants breeding with human maidens?

[I, Brian]

The pre-existence of giants seems to be quite a common theme across various pantheons.

Interestingly enough, I seem to recall ancient Greeks viewing Mycenean monuments as having been built by giants - when actually the Myceneans were simply the forebears of the Greeks themselves.

[InChristAlways]

Originally Posted by Samuel Linton Boot 4There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. Genesis 6:4 (King James Version)

Originally Posted by tropheus74

Please see the discussion "The Nephalim" and "Who were the men of old/reknown"

This quote is thoroughly discussed in those threads.

I have no knowledge of the Hindu epics. Is there a story that refers to giants breeding with human maidens?

Hi tropheus. Can you provide some links to the threads for me on this? Thanks.

(Rotherham) Genesis 6:4 The giants, were in the earth in these days, and also, after that, when the sons of God began to go in unto the daughters of men, and sons were born to them, the same, were the heroes that were from age-past times, the men of renown.

[taijasi]

The large statues at Bamian/Bamiyan (Afghanistan), which the Taliban blew up ... were supposed to have been built by these giants of long ago. They were meant as representations of our Humanity's relative size, as we progressed through the development of the race.

I think only two statues were known, although a third may have been discovered (?) ... but I've seen it stated that there were five altogether (a number which corresponds with Tibetan Buddhist teachings), since we are now in the fifth race - as viewed by some. Atlantis would have preceeded us, then Lemuria before that, and it was the Atlanteans who built the Bamiyan statues - just as the Lemurian cyclops (the giants of the Biblical accounts) built the monuments on Easter Island.

After many repairs over 100's of thousands of years (or millions), the Bamiyan statues have ended up looking like Buddhas, with exaggerated features (like the drooping ears), but there's no surprise there - since it was Buddhists who rebuilt them! I wonder what they'll look like once we rebuild them? A project is already underway, I believe.

Anyway, here's an article on the statues.

Andrew

[Faithfulservant]

http://www.comparative-religion.com/...ead.php?t=2728

The Nephilim thread

http://www.comparative-religion.com/...ead.php?t=2043

The Men of old/reknown

both are in ancient lore and mythology.. if that helps. Lots of interesting threads on biblical stories.

[Vajradhara]

Namaste taijasi,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by taijasi

The large statues at Bamian/Bamiyan (Afghanistan), which the Taliban blew up ... were supposed to have been built by these giants of long ago. They were meant as representations of our Humanity's relative size, as we progressed through the development of the race.

do you have any non-Theosophical references to support this view? to be quite frank with you, i'm unaware of any of the Suttas/Sutras positing that which you are claiming.

metta,

~v

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

do you have any non-Theosophical references to support this view? to be quite frank with you, i'm unaware of any of the Suttas/Sutras positing that which you are claiming.

Why on earth should it matter?

And define non-Theosophical. No, to the best of my understanding, this is the only account that suggests the statues are ancient (versus very old). I have not read much about these statues, and in fact, I didn't even know about them (or their sad destruction recently) until a fellow student of the Ageless Wisdom mentioned the subject to me. I was simply dumbfounded to hear how they were built, and by whom (probably the last point being most fascinating, given the mistaken account of evolution which science presents - the "missing link" destined to remain such, because - non-existent!).

I think if you're interested, you should google it up a bit, just trying to find what conventional history says. And by the way, the Buddhists who rebuilt these statues, might easily refer to people living tens, or hundreds of thousands of years ago - not just 2500 years or so. I hope that time frame doesn't cause problems in your thinking. Shakyamuni Buddha, after all, was expected as another Enlightened or Awakened One ... just as Jesus was looked for as an Annointed One (and clearly not the first "Christ").

I would be most eager to hear what the traditional account of the Bamiyan statues is, no matter what the source. Maybe by putting some of it together, we can get a better picture. I would be very surprised ... if in the end, the Theosophical account (according to Blavatsky) - didn't prove the best framework overall. I don't mean to sound so biased ... it's just that HPB's dictated teachings (from Indian Mahatmas, mind you, as well as a Tibetan (Buddhist) Teacher!) - usually prove correct. Still, no need to put the cart before the horse ...

Cheers,

taijasi

[Vajradhara]

Namaste taijasi,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by taijasi

Why on earth should it matter?

i do not share the same view that you have towards Theosophy, thus, i am interested in alternate sources. no more or less complicated than that.

And define non-Theosophical.

well... coming from a source which isn't based on Theosophical teachings, i suppose, would work well enough as a definition.

No, to the best of my understanding, this is the only account that suggests the statues are ancient (versus very old). I have not read much about these statues, and in fact, I didn't even know about them (or their sad destruction recently) until a fellow student of the Ageless Wisdom mentioned the subject to me.

you didn't see the news or the papers when the Taliban was trying to blow them up? many, many beings from around the world protested their actions.. even Muslim Imams from other nations told them they shouldn't engage in such activities... after all, Muslims don't want other beings to destroy mosques and so forth.

I think if you're interested, you should google it up a bit, just trying to find what conventional history says. And by the way, the Buddhists who rebuilt these statues, might easily refer to people living tens, or hundreds of thousands of years ago - not just 2500 years or so. I hope that time frame doesn't cause problems in your thinking. Shakyamuni Buddha, after all, was expected as another Enlightened or Awakened One ... just as Jesus was looked for as an Annointed One (and clearly not the first "Christ").

indeed... time frames in linear thought are fairly irrelevant to me. Buddhist thought is that time is cyclical, not linear. in any event, our fortunate eon will have over 1,000 Buddhas arise in it... so this is no worry for me.

for the interested reader:

http://www.buddhistnews.tv/current/bam-rebuild-F.php

http://www.hazara.net/hazara/geograp...ha/buddha.html

metta,

~v

[taijasi]

That should be 10,000 Buddhas! Shakyamuni had his 900 arhats - fairly close to 1,000. [Yes, I know an arhat isn't a Buddha.] Maitreya Buddha is the Buddha of 10,000!

This is something worth pondering. Even to meet one Teacher - one Arhat - is a blessing that cannot be described. In Theosophical teachings an Adept (or an advanced Arhan, Arhat, Lohan, etc.) ... is described as "the rarest flower of a whole generation of seekers" - and on their own, they're only supposed to make such attainments every few 100 years or so.

I sometimes wonder how many arhats (4th degree Initiates esoterically, regardless of outward traditions, religious choices, trappings, etc.) ... are active in the world today, in incarnation. It's almost as if one such person, and his or her group of disciples (students, what-have-you) - make up for the errors and ignorance of 100, or 1,000, ordinary people.

At any rate, if the Theosophical stuff gets in the way, then one must see beyond it, or contextualize it in one's own framework. I didn't catch any of the Bamiyan statue destruction stuff in the news, because I refuse to watch FOX, CNN, or any of the other major networks. I watch CSPAN sometimes, or the Daily Show, but if I see "our illustrious leader" on the tube, I am quite tempted to throw things and break stuff.

So much for vipassana, mindfulness, calm-abiding, shamatha, tonglen, and a dozen other things I should be practicing!

taijasa

[Vajradhara]

Namaste taijasi,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by taijasi

That should be 10,000 Buddhas!

why "should" it be 10,000 when the Suttas say 1,000?

Shakyamuni had his 900 arhats - fairly close to 1,000. [Yes, I know an arhat isn't a Buddha.]

quite far from one, indeed. also, you realize that when a being is Awakened, that does not mean that they are Buddhas at that point, yes?

Maitreya Buddha is the Buddha of 10,000!

hmm... well.. in the Sutras Maitreya will be the 5th Buddha to arise in this world system... soo... Buddah Maitreya would be counted amongst the rest.

At any rate, if the Theosophical stuff gets in the way, then one must see beyond it, or contextualize it in one's own framework.

it does, for me.

i am pleased that it works for you

I didn't catch any of the Bamiyan statue destruction stuff in the news, because I refuse to watch FOX, CNN, or any of the other major networks. I watch CSPAN sometimes, or the Daily Show, but if I see "our illustrious leader" on the tube, I am quite tempted to throw things and break stuff.

do you read the AP or Rueters news wire services online? i actually heard of it through the Buddhist News network and not a mainstream commercial operation, as it were.

metta,

~v

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

hmm... well.. in the Sutras Maitreya will be the 5th Buddha to arise in this world system... soo... Buddah Maitreya would be counted amongst the rest.

it does, for me.

i am pleased that it works for you

do you read the AP or Rueters news wire services online? i actually heard of it through the Buddhist News network and not a mainstream commercial operation, as it were.

Of course Buddha Maitreya is the 5th Buddha. This corresponds to the Theosophical idea of the 5th Root Race, by the way. Just out of curiosity, what do Buddhist Sutras have to say about it? In other words, what other reason is given for his being the 5th Buddha to arise? Surely we would not just say ... that it is arbitrary (?). And yes, I am quite familiar with the exoteric presentation of 5 of the 7 Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. What is your understanding of the reason there are 5?

Why do Theosophical ideas present a stumbling block for you? I am most curious about this. I can probably give you 12 reasons why conventional churchianity - I mean, christianity - gets in the way for me, if asked. But as a Tibetan Buddhism-practicing ex-girlfriend of mine used to say, "Let's not toss the baby out with the bathwater." Indeed, I attribute 85% of my understanding of Buddhist ideas to Theosophy (and more specifically to the writings & influence of H.P. Blavatsky, her Eastern teachers, and especially to the Tibetan Master!).

No, I don't read AP news, except on occasion. I have grown extremely frustrated by the news media ... and only recently during Hurricane Katrina coverage have they somewhat been vindicated for me - as they finally began to call it like it was.

Do, please, also show me in Buddhist teachings - where references to Maitreya mention 900, or 1000, arhats. I am unfamiliar with the source.

Getting back on topic, though, since we're starting to meander ...

As I said in my first post, the statues at Bamiyan aren't the only accounts we have that the Biblical giants actually existed. Easter Island has always been a mystery to us, just as Stonehenge, the Pyramids, and the Sphinx. The remaining heads of the original statues on Easter Island, are said in some accounts to have been built as self-portraits ... originally belonging to statues that directly depicted the size of the cyclopean inhabitants of Lemuria. This would be about 27 feet tall, and 8 feet across at the shoulders (according to eyewitness accounts of Captain Cook - of the statues, not the Lemurians ).

I believe the Bible says, in Deuteronomy 3:11, that the bed of Og, king of Bashan, was 9 cubits by 4 cubits (approximately 14 ft long by 6 ft wide). This is diminutive in comparison with the above accounts, yet it still depicts a being well over twice the height & size of today's largest humans.

I would be willing to do some research to show that indeed, these accounts do correspond to Hindu epics ... but I'm hoping the thread-starter will respond, and save me that trouble. How 'bout it?

Cheers,

andrew

[taijasi]

By the way, Vaj, I just wanted to add ... that we don't have to be on the same page here. I don't expect us to be! After all, you've got your Book (`Book of Life'), and I've got mine. I look at each person's book, or existence, as like a page in the book - and this makes us each an author, commentator, what-have you ... while preserving & respecting the true muse, or Inspiration, behind it all.

Sound anthropomorphic? Not at all. I think you might appreciate a post I just made (on the narrow gate thread), which represents what I truly believe - about Buddhas, Christs, etc. Check it out.

Peace, and Namaskar,

andrew

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Taijasi,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by taijasi

Of course Buddha Maitreya is the 5th Buddha. This corresponds to the Theosophical idea of the 5th Root Race, by the way. Just out of curiosity, what do Buddhist Sutras have to say about it? In other words, what other reason is given for his being the 5th Buddha to arise?

Buddhas arise due to causes and conditions, like other phenomena. to be clear, that one is Awake does not a Buddha make

Surely we would not just say ... that it is arbitrary (?).

not at all. Buddhism doesn't really espouse that things like this happen for no reason. Buddhism, generally, teaches that things arise in dependence upon causes and conditions with Buddhas no exception.

it is true, however, that one of the primary causes, karma, is operative in a different manner for Buddhas, however, that is outside the scope of our conversation here.

And yes, I am quite familiar with the exoteric presentation of 5 of the 7 Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. What is your understanding of the reason there are 5?

well.. not to be trite... 5 comes after 4 in our numeric system our eon is a very fortunate eon since there will be many Buddhas arising. there are some eons which are very unfortunate since no Buddhas will arise there.

that does not, however, mean that a being cannot Awaken during that eon.

Why do Theosophical ideas present a stumbling block for you? I am most curious about this.

i find some of their ideas to be inconsistent with regards to the Buddha Dharma. other than that... it is simply a matter of personal capacity, i lack the capacity for Theosophical practice.

I can probably give you 12 reasons why conventional churchianity - I mean, christianity - gets in the way for me, if asked. But as a Tibetan Buddhism-practicing ex-girlfriend of mine used to say, "Let's not toss the baby out with the bathwater." Indeed, I attribute 85% of my understanding of Buddhist ideas to Theosophy (and more specifically to the writings & influence of H.P. Blavatsky, her Eastern teachers, and especially to the Tibetan Master!).

i tend to go straight to the source.

as an old Tibetan saying goes.. if the water is pure, it can be traced to its source in the Snowy Mountains.

Do, please, also show me in Buddhist teachings - where references to Maitreya mention 900, or 1000, arhats. I am unfamiliar with the source.

i'm not sure i understand what you are asking... Buddhas and Arhants are not the same thing....

Getting back on topic, though, since we're starting to meander ...

As I said in my first post, the statues at Bamiyan aren't the only accounts we have that the Biblical giants actually existed. Easter Island has always been a mystery to us, just as Stonehenge, the Pyramids, and the Sphinx. The remaining heads of the original statues on Easter Island, are said in some accounts to have been built as self-portraits ... originally belonging to statues that directly depicted the size of the cyclopean inhabitants of Lemuria. This would be about 27 feet tall, and 8 feet across at the shoulders (according to eyewitness accounts of Captain Cook - of the statues, not the Lemurians ).

if there were human giants, wouldn't you expect that we could find some physical remains of their dwellings, perhaps even fossile remains? perhaps i'm misunderstanding what you are postulating here...?

metta,

~v