Does the bible refer to Hindu epics?

Discussion in 'Comparative Studies' started by Samuel Linton Boot, Dec 24, 2005.

  1. Samuel Linton Boot

    Samuel Linton Boot Subdued Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2005
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
    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?
     
  2. Agnideva

    Agnideva Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    0
    Doesn't ring any bells. With which Hindu epic or epic episode do you see commonality here?

    A.
     
  3. tropheus74

    tropheus74 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    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?
     
  4. iBrian

    iBrian Peace, Love and Unity Admin

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,532
    Likes Received:
    10
    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.
     
  5. InChristAlways

    InChristAlways Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2005
    Messages:
    249
    Likes Received:
    0
    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.
     
  6. taijasi

    taijasi Gnōthi seauton

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    6
    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
     
  7. Faithfulservant

    Faithfulservant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    2,792
    Likes Received:
    0
  8. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    45
    Namaste taijasi,

    thank you for the post.

    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
     
  9. taijasi

    taijasi Gnōthi seauton

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    6
    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!). :cool:

    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
     
  10. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    45
    Namaste taijasi,

    thank you for the post.



    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.

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

    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.

    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/geography/Buddha/buddha.html

    metta,

    ~v
     
  11. taijasi

    taijasi Gnōthi seauton

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    6
    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. :confused:

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

    taijasa
     
  12. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    45
    Namaste taijasi,

    thank you for the post.

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

    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?



    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.

    metta,

    ~v
     
  13. taijasi

    taijasi Gnōthi seauton

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    6
    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 :p).

    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
     
  14. taijasi

    taijasi Gnōthi seauton

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    6
    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
     
  15. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    45
    Namaste Taijasi,

    thank you for the post.

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

    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.

    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.

    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 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.

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

    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
     
  16. taijasi

    taijasi Gnōthi seauton

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    6
    I think this part of our discussion is off topic, so I'll let it drop. Theosophically, a Buddha is about as far beyond an arhat in terms of unfoldment ... as an arhat is beyond your garden-variety dolt. :p I think Buddhists would nod in affirmation, though even speculation on arhat-consciousness is somewhat lost on me ....

    No, not at all. I posit (or concur with those who do) that evolution is a guided, intentional, purposeful process ... and I look at the arising of Buddhas & Bodhisattvas as surely one of the most carefully chosen events that could possibly happen in the external world. Likewise, the remains of prior races (Atlantis, Lemuria, and the first two non-physical ones) - do not appear to us for a reason. Part of this has to do with the fact that the Lemurian landmass configuration has shifted much over millions of years, and entire continents (or their equivalent) are still submerged, while in other cases/places they have risen again.

    What would actually be amazing is that fossil discoveries of these ancient giants might be found (!), given the type and degree of cataclysms that befell them. And yet, just such evidence has been found, at least according to dozens upon dozens of researchers. Try this link for starters. I notice that the accounts are not footnoted, so you'd have to look them up on your own. But there are cases, and new discoveries are made every day.

    I think what is most amazing is that science will slowly, very gradually, and certainly only begrudgingly or reluctantly ... yet inevitably... come to support some very alternate views of human history, compared to those still commonly accepted today. It is already being shown by very credible scientific researchers - that Humanity is far older than has commonly been accepted, and that we were far more advanced in the past than we have imagined.

    Clairvoyant evidence is still dismissed by many people, and yet we accept as a given that it is possible to have religious or mystical experiences - such as samadhi/satori, or the Tibetan Tong pa nyid. Isn't it amazing how, when certain individuals present their findings, based on non-traditional methods of investigation, these contributions are almost summarily dismissed! Corroboration from different religious traditions (scriptural sources alone) definitely supports the notion of "giants" in Humanity's past. I think it will surprise us all to find out just what role they played in our development, how they themselves came about, and what the relationship was during those truly ancient times (~5 million years ago, and earlier) - between God (or the Divine) and man.

    As Graham Hancock says, "we are a race that suffers from amnesia," and I dare say we have forgotten the better (as in greater, larger) part of our heritage ... and perhaps also the most mysterious part. But the clues are numerous, unavoidable, and only seem to proliferate once we begin to investigate!

    andrew
     
  17. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    45
    Namaste taijasi,

    thank you for the post.

    the linked site you provided states that remains have been found... strangely enough, there are no records of these things. according to the site, this is due to the global corporate conspiracy to prevent knowledge of UFOs and Christ coming back in one... or something along those lines... it's a bit confusing :)

    Lemuiran landmass? what is that?

    the last one on the site is from the late 1800's. one would tend to think that we've not found them all, yet. perhaps we could get a photograph of one and then have some scientific tests to, you know, determine what, when, where and why :)

    why is that, may i ask?

    how old do you think that homospaien spaiens are? iirc, Spencer Wells can take a geneic male marker back to an African Bush tribe circa 50,000 B.C.E. that's pretty darned old ;)

    as they should be. we should, in my view, never be in a position where we accept things without verifying them to our own satisfaction. that some beings do not hold that clairaudience and so forth are manifest is precisely what we'd expect :)

    for a non-religous person, these are not sufficient evidence to make the claim credible, though it may be so for you and i.

    if there is evidence to support the claim, let the evidence be brought forth.

    that seems to be a very reasonable approach to such things, in my view.

    metta,

    ~v
     
  18. taijasi

    taijasi Gnōthi seauton

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    6
    Primarily located in the Pacific, Lemurian remnants including Hawaii, Easter Island (submerged and resurfaced throughout the ages), parts of Indonesia. See maps, near bottom of this page. For brief discussion of history/namesake, etc. ... see here.

    It is amazing to me that science will succeed in showing our antiquity and history to be much different than commonly accepted nowadays ... because so many people - entire branches of western science ... are presently quite entrenched and hellbent on maintaining the status quo. Man rose from the ape, the pyramids are a few 1000 years old (& built by slave labor), and "modern man" is, again, just a few thousand years old - at best. According to such absurdities, and as long as we hold to such a worldview, there is practically no rhyme or reason to anything! Religions arise, people fight wars in the name of "God," and my .sig line is born out, again & again. :cool:

    Science finally concurs with Plato's account of the sinking of Poseidonis, the last remnant of Atlantis, during the last ice age ... circa 10,000 BC (again, see the above maps, which place the final catastrophe of Poseidonis at 9564BC). Water damage to the Sphinx has been determined to have occurred at least this far back, although scholars are wise to speculate that its origin may be older.

    Records indicate (and no, no matter what is offered, it will not likely meet with your satisfaction, nor that of many others) ... that the Giza Pyramids are over 200,000 years old. They were certainly not built as tombs; indeed, no evidence of any sort of burial has ever been found inside almost any of them! Certainly not the Great Pyramid. At any rate, the age of the Sphinx is given as predating the Pyramids. So much for 50,000 years. And the builders would certainly have been advanced in their thinking, and their technology (techne = skill) - or use of tools. If you know much at all about these monuments - and other ancient monuments worldwide, then you know that they are almost always built to very precise standards (surpassing even what is possible today, by today's greatest architectural experts). There is an extremely advanced knowledge of astronomy demonstrated in the alignment of the pyramids, Stonehenge, and other structures ... and this definitely shows us something about the zodiacal era(s) in which such monuments were constructed.

    Question is - even if we date something like the Sphinx back to Leo (this is astronomy, btw, not astrology - science, not pop astrology) ... halfway around the zodiac, does that mean it was just 12,000 years ago, or do we start adding increments of 25,000, for prior zodiacal cycles completely!? I argue the latter, and I estimate EIGHT such cycles in order to reach an antiquity of ~212,000 years at least. The reference is to the Greater Zodiac. Our Solar System orbits Alcyone, of the Pleiades. Most people do not take this into account, or have never familiarized themselves with these discoveries of modern science (known to the Ancients millions of years ago, as architecture proves). But indeed, that orbit is ~25000 years. Split twelve ways, and that is our 12-sign zodiac of ~2083 years ... you know, Pisces into Aquarius, and so forth. (Prior signs - Aries, the ram/lamb, Taurus, the bull/calf, etc.)

    This could all lead to another thread entirely, and admittedly deviates from the specific topic of Biblical Giants ... but my point is that the references in Biblical scripture, Hindu epics, the Popul Vuh, and other mythologies ... have been researched time & time again throughout the ages, including recently and by western science, with varying findings & opinions. Most "experts" have dismissed the very notion of an antiquity pre-dating the figures you gave (50,000 years) as quackery, and to them, I nod. I can laugh, too. :p

    Indeed, if we can trace our history back 5 million years and better, to physical beings 27 feet high (!), when Buddha Kashyapa walked among us ... then what does this mean? I am at least as interested as you are, but i don't have all the answers. I am quite curious to see how things fit together!

    Indeed, my verification came many years ago. It has only increased throughout 15 years, and though I enjoy discovering the gaping holes in my understanding - both of self & others, and of a bigger picture, or metaphysics/cosmology - I have yet to even come close to finding something that would cause me to "throw the baby out with the bathwater." Indeed, it's like finding that in a giant, jigsaw-mosaic montage, one tiny piece has been missing. Add in enough of these missing pieces, and the entire vision can change, or be revealed in a different light. Enough new perspective (a vital, constant need) ... and suddenly it becomes obvious that this vision, however wholistic, is but a fragment of a greater reality. In the end, it's all just thoughts, ideas, leaves floating on the never-ending stream ... but it's fun to come and watch, and see what the leaves look like today. :)

    Nope, it definitely takes faith. You can always take a leap, but I couldn't begin to defend all the notions I casually toss out. I just think it's dry as hell nitpicking over biblical passages, references to a dozen sutras, and records that 99 out of 100 people don't believe exist anyway. Even the records that we do have, are not always accurately read, or references - to wit, the fossil record. Carbon dating is not perfect, not exact. Likewise with astronomy. Our Cosmos is a heckuva lot older than a mere 18 billion years. By most ancient systems of reckoning, that's just a few minutes ago. ;)

    So if we want to stick to science, and proving things to the skeptic in all of us, then you won't hear another peep outta me. I got no interest in that. I can only provide sources, reasons why it "gels for me," and throw in as much anecdotal stuff as you like. But if you think that stuff about the pyramids and so forth is wacky, try going to visit. Go into the great pyramid. Meditate within the King's Chamber. Then come back and say it was a tomb, built 5,000 years ago for whoever. :p

    Btw, Robert Schoch (and others?) have discovered, through sonic, geological type research (scientific tests, I'm too lazy to look it up - Google it, it's there) ... that beneath the left (?) paw of the Sphinx, there is - beyond a shadow of a doubt - a chamber. Also, the reading suggests that it very likely contains something. Ahhhh, well this is precisely what Edgar Cayce said ... during one of his trance readings (yeah, more of that unreliable, skeptical stuff, eh?) quite a few decades ago. But the damndest thing is, authorities won't let anyone explore/dig/investigate further. Gee, wonder why that is. After all, careful enough exploration would defintely not compromise the integrity of the structures, but then, the average person would buy that as the excuse. Could it be Zahi Hawass has a vested interest in preserving certain - understandings - regarding these monuments, their origins, their age, and Egypt's national identity & role in all of this? After all, what would it mean, if the glorious Egypt we know about - was the tail end of a much MORE glorius age, which itself was but a pale reflection of the splendors that were Atlantis? A people, mind you, who were psychically more advanced than we are (!), but not intellectually.

    Well, I know, I digress (usually, actually). But I think Zahi just represents modern science, especially archaeology & paleontology ... but also much religious thinking, as well. Hell, political ideologies, for that matter. What is established - is surely better than anything that could ever have existed to date. And, naturally, it can't get any better, since it's already perfect (or close enough) now, so stop trying to change what's getting us by.

    Sadly, that kind of thinking doesn't help, and it's part of the power trip that may just necessitate a visit from the Vogon Construction Fleet - real soon. I hope I can find Ford Prefect in time.

    yeah, I know, Pandora's box. oh well.

    andrew
     
  19. Vajradhara

    Vajradhara One of Many

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,786
    Likes Received:
    45
    Namaste taijasi,

    thank you for the post.

    interesting.

    hopefully, we'll find some evidence of this landmass at some future date.

    for instance?

    that isn't what the TOE proposes, it says that apes and humans shared a common ancestor, rather different than saying that humans arose from apes. perhaps, however, that isn't all that germane to our conversation.. which is about the Bible mentioning the Hindu scriptures :)

    why do you say that it is an absurdity?

    based on the evidence that we have collected, thus far, this is the conclusion that is drawn. clearly, as we accumulate more evidence, if it shows that humans or pyramids were around for longer than we think, our views will change.

    most beings no longer believe that the earth is flat, though, strangely, some still do, to wit: http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm

    how have you determined what i will accept as evidence or not?

    that is a rather unusual sentence. you say that the "certainly were not and no evidence of any sort, in almost any of them" which would imply that there was this evidence in some of them.

    the 50,000 years is genetic evidence of a male gene traced back to an African Bushman tribe and has nothing to do with pyramids or anything of that sort.

    "almost always" indicates that sometimes they weren't.

    in any event, it seems rather unrelated to the topic at hand, don't you think?

    which experts are you referring to? i'm not all that keen on overly generalizing such things. of course, that is just my view :)

    you know.. that would make us nearly the size of King Kong...

    oh. well.. that sort of puts an entirely different spin on things, doesn't it?

    no worries.. i shant ask you to substantiate any of your claims ;)

    it seems wholly reasonable to use the scientific method to determine scientific results. how one could do so otherwise is quite a mystery.

    is it your view that claiming scientific results without verifying them through the scientific method is likely to produce valid cognitions of the phenomena under discussion?


    i've been there many times.

    you know they don't let people do that, right?

    according to this fellow :

    http://www.robertschoch.net/Redating%20the%20Great%20Sphinx%20of%20Giza.htm

    "Based on either this chain of reasoning, or the scenario suggested immediately above-and given that the weathering of the limestone floor of the Sphinx enclosure is fifty to 100 percent deeper on the front and sides of the figure than at its rear-we can estimate that the initial carving of the Great Sphinx (i.e., the carving of the main portion of the body and the front end) may have been carried out ca. 7000 to 5000 B.C. (in other words, that the carving of the core body of the figure is approximately fifty to 100 percent older than ca. 2500 B.C.). This tentative estimate is probably a minimum date; given that weathering rates may proceed non-linearly (the deeper the weathering is, the slower it may progress due to the fact that it is "protected' by the overlying material), the possibility remains open that the initial carving of the Great Sphinx may be even earlier than 9,000 years ago."

    which is, i should say, a rather far cry from 200,000 years ago as you claimed initially.

    perhaps you have my confused for somebody else?

    how do you know that more digging and excavating wouldn't hurt them?

    metta,

    ~v
     
  20. taijasi

    taijasi Gnōthi seauton

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    6
    Egyptologists come to mind, but also archaeology/paleontology as a whole. Science has decided that the cosmic clock is now clearly visible, thanks to carbon dating, and thus any ideas that challenge this method are ridiculed, and all efforts are made to shoot them down. Another branch of science that is slow to adapt, is astronomy. Most of us are fairly open to the idea that intelligent life is actually the rule, and not the exception in Cosmos ... yet it is often the hardcore radio astronomer sitting at his terminal ostensibly searching for faint signs of ET life, who ironically decries the very likelihood that ET is even "out there," let alone here, or has already established contact. But this gets a bit off topic again. :p

    Precisely. I am in complete agreement. I think you missed my sarcasm ... lol This entire sentence is meant tongue-in-cheek: Man rose from the ape, the pyramids are a few 1000 years old (& built by slave labor), and "modern man" is, again, just a few thousand years old - at best.

    Here are stated four explicit non-truths, though many scientists maintain at least three of them (or 2 & 1/2), while Creationists are convinced that the ape bit is still what science teaches! So again, wrong x 4. ;)

    Because, although yes, granted, the evidence has yet to be properly considered by a non-biased, open-minded audience (of scientists & laypeople alike, who are not determined to keep to the conventional understanding of human history), this is not for lack of trying! The evidence is there, it is just being ignored, or only slowly pondered. That's okay, it will out! But in the meantime, I look at our current understanding in precisely the same way that you & I both view the members of the Flat-Earth Society. Sure, one has the right to hold to such a ... "view." So long as we don't teach that in schools, it's okay.

    Mmmm ... good point. I think you're a pretty open-minded dude. ;) However, when we get to the part below about the scientific method & all, you do come across as quite the rationalist. And that's fine. Reason is goooooood. :p However, neither as the pure empiricist, nor as but an armchair philosopher, shall we reach & attain the deeper Wisdom. Each has its place, but science is only a means of inquiry, an avenue of approach. I trust that the Holy Grail (whose symbol may be a cup, yet whose truth is non-material in essence) can be discovered, and lifted, by artists, holy rollers, and maybe even politicians alike (!) :p ... just as well as by scientists. Strange, though. Our society has made of science, a god (or simply, `G-d'), and tends to bow down ... (when we are not worshipping before the television, of course). What, me a cynic? :rolleyes:

    Yes, I think that one of the pyramids (not a Giza Pyramid) did have clear evidence that it had been used as a tomb. Even it, may not have been built as such, however. What is most likely is that the pyramids were built - almost universally - no matter the country, or world era, as both Temples and as sacred sites for Initiation, and maybe even for more mystical purposes than these ...

    No, not per se. I'm just pointing out that ... while we may "know" we're at least this old ... we may well be a good bit older. But to me, the "may well" is not just a definite possibility, it is a matter of fact, plain & simple. The African Bushmen represent the last surviving remnants of Lemuria, and even 50K years ago ... were ancient. Today, this is more so, but compared to a Lemurian civilization at its height 5 million years ago, 50K years is - just yesterday. 1 small % point of their total history. (And no, Lemurians certainly did not "look" like that. They have certainly evolved, adjusted, adapted, and so forth ... so that as I say, they are a remnant.)

    I could be wrong. But my guess is that, while many - or even most - ancient monuments are built with concrete evidence of an expert knowledge of astronomy (and various other natural sciences) ... still, even in these cases, there is often the incorporation of (an appreciation for) Beauty, and the spiritual/sublime. It just may be possible that in some cases, it is the latter which "rules" (governs, determines) the layout & design of the monument(s) in question, rather than astronomical/astrological factors. However, to most of the ancients, the distinction I am trying to make ... was probably not as pronounced as it might be to us, just as their religious beliefs were not considered separately from their socio-political system - and lo! ... it seemed to work for them. :cool:

    Sadly, we insist on separation of Church & State, and while this would be good for American Democracy right now, imho, it's already out the window, as the window itself is being slammed shut - fingers caught being of little consequence to those doing the slamming. If that's obscure, then good. But if you get my point, also good. Right now, a Frank Lloyd Wright can still build his home the way he wants. Just wait. Perhaps soon, those funny designs will ... will ... ummm ... attract Terr'rists, yeah, and ... ummm, be illegal. God help us all.

    The experts I refer to include probably 90 to 95% of mainstream archaeologists, paleontologists, geologists, etc. There are those who have their own national interests in mind, including the implications for one's national history, if current dating schemes prove inaccurate. Zahi Hawass, the "Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities," is a good example. I daresay he has the tourist trade in mind, to boot. And understandably so, but the consequences of his pride, arrogance, and special interests ... are that we face tremendous obstacles in moving forward.

    But there are also those in almost every field of human endeavor, who would be required to rethink the current "world picture," if we were able to conclusively push the dawn of human civilization back to 15+ million years. Don't you think so? :cool: Although I do know for certain that many do maintain the current dating methods & resultant world/human self-understanding ... for conspiratorial reasons ... I certainly do not suggest that this is the case for most scientists & religious thinkers. Rather, it's simply the upset that would be caused if we were forced to re-evaluate our self-understanding (world history) from square one.

    Ahhh, back to the topic. Yes, I suppose you're right. Never thought of it that way! :p But certainly, yes. If we were 27 feet tall at one point, that height clearly diminished over time ... and perhaps was much closer to today's average human height even a million years ago or more. I don't know - needs more research. But there are varying descriptions, from clairvoyant investigations. I'm afraid you'll have to settle for that now, if it's of any interest to you at all. One can certainly compare such investigations to the various world scriptures (the real topic of this thread, I guess) ... and that's as objective as we can be. Anything purporting to come "from the Akash" - I tend to approach with a huge chunk of salt :rolleyes: ... but this is where the vivekha (spiritual discrimination) comes in. And as you say, it's not good to generalize, and cast suspicion on an entire means of inquiry, just because it isn't easy to verify.

    A mystery that is well explained, for one interested enough to make serious study of the subject. The Sanskrit word for such abilities, is siddhis. These describe both the occult, mystical powers such as clairvoyance & clairaudience, as well as those Higher and more permanent spiritual abilities that enabled Shakyamuni Buddha to ascertain his own former existences ... as well as those of anyone he met or inquired about. Yes, it seems mysterious to us, and even Edgar Cayce could not fully account for his unconscious abilities. I recommend reading the accounts of actual (or purported) sibyls, in order to learn more about how their knowledge is ascertained, and how one goes about developing such abilities (dangerous, even disastrous, without proper guidance).

    Valid only insomuch as one is willing to temporarily suspend disbelief. In order to verify one single word of what I, or anyone else, puts forth ... it is required that one embark upon a personal journey - be it brief, as of an instant ... or a lifetime endeavor. Some make the latter effort, in order to get to the truth of such accounts as are related in the Holy Bible, or Buddhist Sutras, or Hindu Vedas. Likewise, there are earnest investigators who are interested in out-of-body experiences, or rather the accounts of such experiences as provided by firsthand experiencers. I myself have only had perhaps a handful of such experiences, though one, with vivid enough recall, is enough to convince me entirely of another world or worlds ... and everything else becomes academic as I begin my investigation & journey of (self-) discovery.

    It is my opinion, that if we are so determined, we can either confirm or discount any given proposition ... given enough time, patience, determination, and effort (science, no?). It just becomes rather silly if I say there are four rocks in a certain arrangement on a certain remote planet in an obscure solar system in another galaxy altogether, halfway across the known Cosmos. :rolleyes::p As Shakespeare, via Hamlet, put it, "There are more things under Heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

    Neat! I'm envious; would like to go!

    Sure they do. See John Anthony West about it. Of course, they may have stopped allowing it. That would be most unfortunate. A true cause for lament.

    Yep. Little by little. Schoch is helping to open a door. As yet, there is but a crack. But ... the light is already shining through! ;) In time, it will be as radiant as the noonday sun - and through that gate, all shall pass. :) (yeah, yeah, I know - the drama! :p )

    Nahhhh. There's a skeptic in all of us. And a believer. You seem pretty level-headed. Much more so than me! :p

    I don't. But I'm making an educated guess. Nope, I ain't no geology expert. But's let's think about this. The Sphinx is ... waaaaaay over there. I do some damn good scientific study. Under me now, there ain't nuthin'. So what do I do? I dig. I do this very carefully. I do not throw caution to the wind. I go down far enough, and go over, toward the chamber under the Sphinx's paw. Now what do I do? Well, I do my research, so I know at this point, just exactly how to make contact with that chamber. I will use lots of high-tech, newfangled equipment. I will maybe punch a little hole into the corner of the chamber first (?), and capture the gases & dust/debris that comes out. I will probably try to do it right, and I will not hire "Joe's Ditch-Digging Company" to do it. :rolleyes:

    Once I got a tiny hole (carefully) knocked into the bottom portion of one wall of the chamber (preferably the one closest to where my instruments detect contents for that chamber) ... I can poke in my handy-dandy camera, and take a peek. It pretty much doesn't matter what I see at that point. It's likely to be of interest, likely to be worthy of further investigation, and if it looks like there's any remote chance that it could contain, or be, some sort of record(s) - hell, I don't care if they're even old 78's - I'm gonna get 'em outta there.

    If the whole damn Giza Plateau suddenly destabilizes, and everything gets sucked through the Sphinx's left paw, down into that little chamber, and kills me in a flash (!) ... well ****, I screwed up. :p You think that's gonna happen? lol

    BTW, I submit that there are fossil remains (which I might guess would be a valid comeback & challenge to all of this) ... for Lemurian man, et al (Atlantis, airships/vimanas, etc.). Presently, they are carefully guarded, but will be accessible, in time. Perhaps that time is near? I hope so. :) (And if I read somehwere that this museum has been opened to the public, I will certainly post a link to that article here! ;) )

    cheers,

    andrew
     

Share This Page