On Oct 2, 1:13=A0am, Day Brown <daybr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Chiron wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 02:40:34 -0500
> > Day Brown <daybr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >> cisco2...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >>> Given all the Darkness they preach and teach, such as WAR, HATE,
> >>> BIGOTRY, and THEFT. I "might" be inclined to believe it. Yet I don't
> >>> believe in such racial profiling to begin with. We all have souls at
> >>> birth, and every soul starts with the same flicker of light. It's
> >>> what comes later that can snuff it out.
> >> Like all languages, Tocharian as words for "men" and "women". But it
> >> also has a special suffix, "-os", which denotes a sentient being. In
> >> the Bagavad Gita, Arjuna is told that some of what he sees are
> >> divinely created and animmated forms which only exist as a challenge
> >> to the fulflilment of his kharma.
>
> > Would you please tell us exactly where it says any such thing in the
> > Bhagavad Gita? =A0I know that book intimately. =A0I do not find any
suc=
h
> > sentiment in it. =A0Possibly I am missing something, or perhaps you're
> > relying on a particular translation. =A0So would you please identify
> > where the Bhagavad Gita makes this claim?
>
> I dunno of any copy in Tocharian, I just mention the nomenclature as
> indicative of the idea. Nor do I recall where Arjuna is told about
Avatar=
s.
>
> > Krisna does tell Arjuna that all beings have God within them, but
> > that's a far cry from what you're claiming.
>
> Oh, I dunno. This notion of the divine in everything is the flip side
> of what Saint Ramprasad says- that everything you see is part of a
> "projected matrix" out of the mind of Kali. The Mother Goddess, or
> whatever you want to call her. So its not only all beings, but every
> thing you can perceive.
>
> He also says you can have whatever you want in your Matrix. Mine is a
> bit different; if you want one in which Arjuna is some manifestation of
> Krishna, I dont have a problem with it. Ramprasad says there are a
> myriad worlds. And yes, I prolly saw a different translation of the
> Bagavad Gita as well. There were a myriad of Vedic texts, with no
> Vatican to say which were to be regarded as divine word.
Yes I brought up that point myself actually, this fella lives to argue
with everything, and is more often wrong than right. Comparing the
countless copies of the Bagavad Gita is like Comparing the countless
copies of the Christian Bible, when one would do better referring to
the source instead.
>
> I expect we will be reading about some variations now that China has
> found it politically and economically expedient to open up the area of
> the Ancient Silk Road to more expeditions. China and the Brits have a
> plan to post 100,000 jpgs of artifacts and do***ents written in Sogdian,
> Tocharian, Sanskrit, Chinese, Persian, and other ancient languages that
> are just a small ****tion of what they have. Never mind what's been in
> the cellars of French and German museums all these years.
>
> I expect we'll find variations of the Bagavad Gita among them as well as
> Vedic, Buddhist, Taoist, Zoroastrian and other works we never knew of. I
> am also sure a lot of other works still lay well preserved by the arid
> conditions of the Kara Kum and Taklamakhan deserts. Bandits no doubt
> tossed a lot of do***ents aside after raiding caravans. One indication
> is a mail bag found in the Kara Kum, with letters written on paper, but
> dated in 331 AD. We didnt even know paper existed that long ago.
>
> No doubt there are other Vedic scholars like yourself in my Matrix who
> are eagerly awaiting re****ts now that satellite radar has traced the
> ancient Silk Road routes, and more expeditions are planned. I read the
> Chinese stumbled across a graveyard in the Taklamakhan. So, they know
> there's a city somewheres nearby that was buried by the sand dunes 2500
> years ago. The Egyptians are ecstatic when they find a single tomb, and
> in the Central Asian deserts, there are whole damn cities.
>
> Perhaps you know of Xuan Zang, sent by Emperor Tang Tiazong in the 7th
> century to retrieve original Buddhist texts, which he did, going all the
> way to monasteries in India. I dont think he was the only dude to ever
> do this, so there will be many other collections of this, and other
> spiritual traditions yet to be discovered, translated, and presented to
> us. Naturally, this will shed light on the original meaning of the texts
> we now have, like the Bagavad Gita.
>
> So- I wont challenge your interpretation of what you have, but simply
> note we can expect a much broader range of ideas and principles that
> went everywhere the Silk Road merchants went.
It doesn't do any good to, best to cut it off while you can!
But I figure you probably know that.
Cheers..
;-)
|
