Interesting and Humour - page 4199

[СанСаныч Фоменко]

Aleksandr:

I don't have a last name. I had to delete the made-up one - the Chekists made me do it.

For those who believe in global warming - forget it, get your valenki ready

[[Deleted]]

I have no idea why you had to quote my last post and what it has to do with global periodic climate change on this planet... :)

[Aleksey Ivanov]

Aleksandr:
I have no idea why you had to quote my last post and what it has to do with global periodic climate change on this planet... :)

You, like Sherlock Holmes, should solve this riddle.

[СанСаныч Фоменко]

Aleksandr:
I have no idea why you had to quote my last post and what it has to do with global periodic climate change on this planet... :)

Sorry on the wrong button.

[ILNUR777]

transcendreamer:

I would also like to remind you that according to the ancients, the world spontaneously arose out of chaos,
or rather, first out of chaos came the original deity who created the original world and then the new gods,
then the new gods kill the first deity and create the world as it is now.
(see Enuma Elish, Heliopolitan cosmogony, Greek myths, Germanic-Scandinavian, Hinduism and almost any cosmogony of any nation) -
the plot is almost the same, everywhere there's water, the primordial ocean, chaos, as the primordial essence out of which everything spontaneously emerges,
it's an intuitive idea of the ancients about the origin of life,
later religions simply retold the same story, including the Bible,
it also says that "the spirit of God hovered over the water",
and that generally these savage notions correlate with the scientific view of the emergence of life from water,
but in a symbolic, poetic way, of course,
it's very important to note that in the ancient myths there are marshes or springs of some kind,
This can reflect the fact that civilization developed in the vicinity of rivers and fertile soils (Nile, Mesopotamia, Indus...)
also a very important point in any myths practically -
the killing of a primary deity - and by his own offspring,
often in the form of a dragon or a giant,
the killing of Tiamat by Marduk in Sumerian mythology, the killing of Ymir in Germanic mythology, Purushu in Hinduism, etc.
is a symbolic sacrifice, then the dismemberment of the primary deity and the creation of the world from his body,
then the new gods suffer the same fate before the next generation of gods,
it's a titanomachy plot - the massacre of the Titans in Greek, the Jotuns in Germanic mythology, the Fomorians in Celtic...
but sometimes murder is not understood as murder, but as imprisonment or overthrow,
we can conventionally divide two eras in mythmaking:
1 - the age of ancient chaos - the kingdom of the dragon and the giants
2 - the era of a new order - the kingdom of new gods.
of course new gods are killed each time and replaced by newer ones ))))
perhaps this is a symbolic retelling of the victory of some nations over others...
but the defeated dragon pops up from time to time:
it's also the serpent Apop, who devours the Sun every night,
it's even the biblical Leviathan and even the dragon of the Apocalypse,
these plots seem to say, or hint, that the age of chaos is never gone forever,
and there's a kind of periodic or episodic cyclicity,
there is even a plot of confrontation with the dragon of chaos on the coat of arms of Moscow,
I won't describe it here in detail, but it also goes along these lines,
in short, the ancient chaos is not completely defeated, it's still present in the world,
and it's probably not defeated as a matter of principle,
you could make a parallel and call chaos evil and the other side good,
but that's too simplistic an approach, suitable only for monotheism with its dichotomous classification,
it's much more interesting to see it as a fundamental confrontation between two archetypes:
chaos is self-organisation and freedom, and the deity with the spear (usually the thunderer) represents royal power,
that is, it is a confrontation between decentralized and centralized power, democracy and despotism,
in this vein, it is clear why "chaos" cannot be defeated, and the cyclical return and departure is a change of historical epochs...
it's also interesting to note the consistently permanent sacralisation of royal and generally any centralised power,
it's reflected in the symbols that are exploited and they're of course taken from ancient mythology,
I won't go into it too much, but there are parallels that are better left uncovered...
in a nutshell, centralized power often constructs its myth to "mentally structure" its subjects,
the sacralization of the source of power and its "divinity" or "chosenness" is a central theme of official mythology,
it's easy to see why considerable effort is put into sacralisation -
because usually no rational explanation can be found for the established order,
and if you can't do it on the rational level, you have to do it on the irrational level,
because the irrational component is always present, both in ancient times and now...

You should be writing books, not sitting on the forex)))). But it was interesting, honestly. Even agree on a number of key points. I also wonder how it was possible to run the same record around with deities in different sauces, and keep so many people with it, while dividing them on that ground for management. Before that, of course, there were few sources of information, and they were written under control, not to mention that something could get to a mere mortal - I'm not even speaking about that. But now the age of information. Although the rapid exchange of information is not the way to protect yourself from the technology fools. The principles are the same as in ancient times, only the speed and presentation have changed.

The question is how does this all fit into the concept of esoteric knowledge? Or is it an analogue of creation of religious myth on the background of reality, only here the creation of myth of secret knowledge on the background of usual psychological abilities of a man? I think that a simple mortal, both in ancient times and now, though he is stupid, but even he needs some sacral confirmations, without which it is impossible to hold a belief in him long enough. Moreover these confirmations should be made periodically, the story about a miracle 300 100 and even 50 years ago will not work. Because a new generation of people is being born who also have their own perception of reality, which is closer to the body than past stories. Therefore, this new generation must be given a portion of sceptical, real-life events that could not possibly have happened, but did, which can be run at the right angle and passed off as a miracle within the framework of an already told myth. It's like miracles of healing. occur not because of an object of faith, but because of the very power of human belief in that object. If people are massively accustomed for centuries to believe in a stone, there will inevitably be a percentage of those who are cured by the stone. Not only will self-hypnosis (a medically proven effect) play a role, but there is simply a percentage of people who in medical chronicles are not understandably cured of incurable disease, while being an atheist. There is simply a religious imprint on these statistics, if they had kept records of the miraculous healings of atheists, there would (probably) have been no less. But only religious cases are always brought to the surface.

But other inexplicable things cannot be denied. It is clear that it is easier and more profitable to put a religious veil over them and call them miracles.

Nevertheless (again I took my mind off what I wanted to ask), since you have studied the question more thoroughly, there are some abstract things that have taken place throughout history on a par with religion. Such as shamanism for example. Naturally they were not presented as a subject of scientific knowledge, with the possibility to practice it by everyone. But as a part of the same religion and presented as a miracle, which is granted by God and one cannot become a master of that.

So, the trace of such knowledge is not studied, it is not talked about, not presented in practice (I am referring to older sources). Meanwhile a person could learn all this during his life irrespective of the technology and religion of that time and place where he lived. So there were such people then and now in all religions. But why only Asian and Hindu religions talk about such things at least a little (though they too have not passed over the temptation to put their religious connotation of being at that time, investing their mythology with an enormous number of characters and worlds))))). In the other religions, however, these stories were only descriptive, describing the fact of the event rather than the process. As I said above. Without such events there would be nothing to sustain the faith of ordinary people. Even Gref, who has no talent, is aware that there was more practical knowledge in all this mythological nonsense.

So what sources for this information have you studied? And are there any at all. Except the Jewish Kabbalah, in which, as usual, the aim was to create more pathos, emphasizing its exclusivity, without revealing the real knowledge and practices. Just like current books of our guru-traders like Wilms, who have results and wrote books, but the whole truth is not presented, and without a complete picture of understanding, which they had, what is in the book does not work))))). And except of course Asian practices, which are also not without flaws and are mostly bodily bias. And there is no mentioning of working with consciousness or at least the OS. Although it is very valuable, because it allows experiencing the practical experience directly, without intermediaries and religious connotations. Meanwhile, sources with such knowledge could not have existed in antiquity. For man is inquisitive, and the probability of becoming acquainted with the practice, even accidentally, is so high that such people could have existed at any time. Nevertheless then it was prevented by church (or other religious canons), which undoubtedly had some knowledge itself, but in masses it gave only what was necessary, because at all times it served rather under the authority and was undoubtedly a tool. But the sources could not help but remain. Why are they not being disclosed now, if they are there. Are there any?

I have not been thinking clearly enough, sorry.

[СанСаныч Фоменко]

ILNUR777

transcendreamer:

I read your clever musings and do not even know how to react: it would seem educated, not deprived of intelligence and have some bullshit that has no relation to the subject at all, having no relation to Christianity in particular.

It would seem that what could be easier for educated and intelligent people to take the primary source and read at least the first few pages. After all, no one hides the essence, this essence is available to anyone: Adam and Eve lived in paradise, and then tasted the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The rest of the text, worshipped by several billion people, deals ONLY with good and evil. And there is nothing else in these texts!

PS.

In the Sermon on the Mount: blessed are the poor in spirit.

Your spirit is filled with a huge pile of rubbish. Free your spirit from the rubbish, become beggars and you will have the ability to at least understand the meaning of mankind's greatest literary monument dedicated to GOOD AND Evil. At the very least.

[ILNUR777]

СанСаныч Фоменко:

ILNUR777

I read your clever musings and do not even know how to react: it would seem educated, not deprived of intelligence and have some bullshit that has no relation to the subject at all, having no relation to Christianity in particular.

It would seem that what could be easier for educated and intelligent people to take the primary source and read at least the first few pages. After all, no one hides the essence, this essence is available to anyone: Adam and Eve lived in paradise, and then tasted the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The rest of the text, worshipped by several billion people, deals ONLY with good and evil. And there is nothing else in these texts!

PS.

In the Sermon on the Mount: blessed are the poor in spirit.

Your spirit is filled with a huge pile of rubbish. Free your spirit from the rubbish, become beggars and you will have the ability to at least understand the meaning of mankind's greatest literary monument dedicated to GOOD AND Evil. At the very least.

Don't you think it's strange to ask educated people to have a substantive conversation on completely non-substantive and generally anti-scientific topics. As if religious topics have become science. For those who manipulate the masses with it, it is possible, but it is obviously not within your power. The division into good and evil is anti-science in itself. It is a matter of social contract on the limits of what is acceptable and what is not. Otherwise very subjective concepts. In all other cases, the power to define the limits of these notions is nothing else but governance. Because the limits of these notions are not established democratically, but by the power through religion. It is as if the majority does not participate at all with its opinion, which will be taken into account in defining these frameworks.

[ILNUR777]

And in general, more interesting about some specific aspects of spiritual practices from these religions. Their descriptions and descriptions of feelings from them from the concept of psychology. And I myself, as well as a myth or theory, can sum up the experience of these practices. Meanwhile, I believe that some points from religions (different ones) can be used as a guide for practical existence in everyday life. For example, such as separate territories in the house of husband and wife)))), what not to do in order not to be tormented with remorse later, and so on. So it does not mean that if you will do so, then avoid trouble, but the probability of avoiding them for your inner equilibrium-higher. It also does not mean that full compliance with these instructions-grail, does not promise 100% success in achieving inner equilibrium.

But again, these are purely psychological issues + observations from the life experiences of past generations. Why to put them in such a frame and make dark myths out of it is not clear.

Just Adam, with his evil shows that religion is rather a tool. He was told not to touch-this is not allowed or evil, he disobeyed-he was punished. No consideration of why and what is evil, where it came from and why it was created at all is allowed. The presumption of innocence is not allowed, since it was created in the image and likeness, and the likeness has created sin, so its generating essence is not ideal. And to blame him for what is inherent in his nature (whether it is a psychological aspect of curiosity or other) is at least not consistent. The idea is that Adam, as part of God himself, is essentially equal, but at the same time a priori has no right to establish what is evil. He is forbidden to even think about it. The analogue of power and people.

[ILNUR777]

Oh, this forum. Thought I'd just reply and I was stuck for an hour.

[Yuriy Zaytsev]

СанСаныч Фоменко:

ILNUR777

I read your clever musings and do not even know how to react: it would seem educated, not deprived of intelligence and have some bullshit that has no relation to the subject at all, having no relation to Christianity in particular.

It would seem that what could be easier for educated and intelligent people to take the primary source and read at least the first few pages. After all, no one hides the essence, this essence is available to anyone: Adam and Eve lived in paradise, and then tasted the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The rest of the text, worshipped by several billion people, deals ONLY with good and evil. And there is nothing else in these texts!

PS.

In the Sermon on the Mount: blessed are the poor in spirit.

Your spirit is filled with a huge pile of rubbish. Free your spirit from rubbish, become beggars and you will have the ability to at least understand the meaning of mankind's greatest literary monument to GOOD AND Evil. At the very least.

Are you referring to the ancient tales of the shepherdsas the original source ?

If Adam and Eve are the first people on earth - then we are all Jews. Including the entire population of Africa and the Northern Eskimos. "Adam and Eve lived in paradise and then tasted the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil" - do you, as an educated person not lacking in intelligence, believe in this beautiful nonsense?

All religions are assembled like a construction set from the same elements.

A virgin with an immaculate conception is usually found everywhere. Usually the son of God does a lot of wonderful things, including raising the dead. Slandered and betrayed this man dies a martyr's death.

And who ascended to heaven to his own father at his father's call .

Try to guess who I was just talking about ?