Our Aryan Heritage: Learn about your real spiritual heritage

Excellent thread, I_C! I've long believed and hoped all human civilization (except the Chinese/far east, Aboriginal Australians, most Africans etc.) came from India, and the whole Sumerian-Annunaki to Abrahamic spiel was/is a cheesy, inferior ripoff. And it just makes more sense that we Westerners would come from a people who are still living; rather than from a long dead religion-language-culture that spawned the Abrahamic psychoses-pathology. Great job and keep up the great work!

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
reply to post by DangerDeath

 

Now when you say Buddhism you have to be careful what Buddhism you mean, because there are almost 30 sects of Buddhism and many braches of Buddhism which have significant doctrinal differences. Mahayana Buddhism for example does not accept the doctrine of anatman and claims Buddha never claimed this. On the other hand, the Theravada Buddhism teaches the doctrine of Anatman.

Buddha very much gets the Jesus treatment by his followers. Nobody really knows what his teachings were, his teachings were only written down after he passed away.

One thing is for certain Buddha was born with a certain Hindu culture and most of his concepts and techniques are borrowed directly from it. The eightfold path is taken from Yoga which is described in the Yogasutras and the various Upanishads. The Buddhist meditation techniques too are taken from it.

In the end it all comes to the Vedas and the original Vedic Aryans and their noble civilisation.

The above is true, but it is true for Hinduism also and there are various quite different schools of interpretation of the Vedas such as Advaita Vedanta, Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita, Shuddhadvaita, and so on, and even these contain their own sub-divisions. I personally think that you propose a certain interpretation of the Vedas, rather than "the" interpretation, because there is no one interpretation, just differing but related interpretations. Of course, you feel your interpretation is correct, otherwise you wouldn't hold it. But there are other ways to interpret the same Scriptures. However, I don't think you would really dispute this or were claiming otherwise. I just thought it should be pointed out.

My own view is that the correct interpretation of Buddhism and the correct interpretation of the Vedas, are identical. I also believe that this "correct" interpretation would be rejected by the vast majority of Buddhists and Hindus today. In rather the same way, I feel the correct interpretation of Christianity would be rejected by the vast majority of Christians (and would also be identical to the correct interpretation of Buddhism and Hinduism). Make of that what you will.

But as you say, this is a bit of a detour from the OP.

Another truly brilliant thread Indigo. Star and flag.

[edit on 26-4-2009 by Malcram]

Originally posted by DangerDeath

I am the source.

YOU do not exist!!!

Anything that follows then in a Buddhist argument falls down.

If we were in a Tibetan Buddhist debate situation I would rub my hand down my arm towards you and leave it facing you for a moment waiting for you to reply :d

There is nothing left to say from my side of the response.... however

And if you don't believe it, please do your own research, as I have done.

Good I am glad you find the truth rather than accepting it blindly.

Is this though In regard to Buddhist Societies that I questioned your statements on, and this reply is a response to my response?

If so again please show which societies you have researched to confirm what you have said.

I never took anything for granted from anyone, and sources I used only to compare my own experience.

Experiences of Buddhist societies?

So, "Come and see" - that is all you will ever get from Buddha.

Very true, but maybe with a realisation that you need to go well beyond any sense object , projections etc to get there, feel is closer but where my limited understanding is, I (lol) dare say without being enlightened that In my description of where I think the Buddha would be, he would describe it as Realise, which in itself is a description of Knowing, understanding, and living it.

reply to post by Indigo_Child

Yes even a buddhist needs to live in and contribute to society as you argued

Agreed and glad we discussed your response, but still get a feeling the above statement with others hints at an underlying current of attitude towards the Buddhist path. As I am sure maybe was displayed conversely from my side towards the Hindu pantheon etc.

PS look at my Profile on the Media part i did upload the Ved's in the best englsih translation, and have much love and respect for them, just my own personal feeling and experience is that a touch of manipulation came in, and also a little bit influenced by Shamanism and nature/spirit worship.

Which is soo close to the destination IMHO but takes a detour at the last moment, as we are captivated by Siddhi's and messengers, and invisible folk etc... in the garden if you like of God to realise all of that, but dont just knock or open the door.

Kind Regards

Elf

[edit on 26-4-2009 by MischeviousElf]

reply to post by Malcram


Yes, it is also true for Hinduism as well. In fact more true, because Hinduism consists of thousands of sects. You are right about the various schools of Vedanta as well, there are many interpretations indeed.

This is why I do not concern myself too much with Hinduism, but only with the Vedas and its teachings which represents something much greater than Hinduism - it represents the Aryan heritage of our prehistory. This is not the heritage of just Indians, it is the heritage of the Greeks, the Russians, the Celts, the Hitties, the Lithuanians etc etc. It is the heritage of the huge group known as the Indo-Europeans. However, it is also the heritage of humanity in general, for it is a cosmic religion that reveals the secrets of reality and is suffused with divinity all around.

The truth is not an interpretative matter. If one has to interpret truth it means they don't know the truth, but are guessing the truth. I do not at all subscribe to this postmodern philosophy of relativism of truth. There is such thing as truth - existence is true; being is true; life is true. The eternal principles are true. The Vedas are not books of interpretations of truth, they are the books of knowledge, they contain truth. They are full of declarative statements and injunctions because they are composed by superhuman intelligences which directly have perceived the truth and fathomed the mysteries of life and creation.

Let me share these declarative statement with you:

I now realise the presence of the absolute, the universal entity, the one who is self-illuminated and radient like the sun.

He is beyond all darkness, with this realization, now I fear not even death

I proclaim, this is the path, the only path to salvation, to the goal of life, eternal bliss

YV 31.18

The knower of reality is he who knows the about invisible thread running inside the visible thread

AV 10.8.37

In order to lead a blissful life
Sharpen thy intellect and enrich thy mind
With brighter vision

Sama 101

These are the words of illuminated sages who have reached their pinnacle of their spiritual development and tasted the nectar of the divine. These are not the words of men, these are cosmic truths being channeled by men.


[edit on 26-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
reply to post by Malcram

This is not the heritage of just Indians, it is the heritage of the Greeks, the Russians, the Celts, the Hitties, the Lithuanians etc etc. It is the heritage of the huge group known as the Indo-Europeans.

Yeah, I was first introduced to this idea in my teens when I was researching my own genealogy and heritage in great depth and read some of the books of Peter Berresford Ellis, who writes about the Celts of Britain and who discussed the connections between Sanskrit and the Celtic languages, as well many other connections, such as the obvious similarities in the legal systems, and so on. It's a fascinating subject.

[edit on 26-4-2009 by Malcram]

What is Aryan

As discussed earlier Aryan means noble. It refers to humans who are noble, virtuous, humble and divine in their character. However, the best way to describe what this really means is to hear the Aryan speak themselves in the Vedas:

Through thy nobility and noble deeds
Earn happiness and make others happy
- Sama 52

May thy hearts be full of generosity,
kindness and love
May it flow to the down-trodden
And make them happpy
- Sama 55

Follow the path of self-sacrifice
May you render service to humanity
- Sama 63

The supreme being abides within the inner self of all human beings
- YV 5.4

May you earn as by a hundred hands
And disburse by a thousand
When you are involved in benevolent work,
your capacity to earn multiplies
Increasing a hundredfold;
Tho who give in a good cause
Are surely blessed by the divine
- AV 3.24.5

O citizens of the world
Live in harmony concord
Be organized and co-operative
Speak with one voice
And make your resolutions with one mind
As our ancient saints and seers
Leaders and preceptors
Have performed their duties righteously
Similarly, may you not falter to execute
your duties
-RV 10.191.2

Not one of you is small
Not one of you a feeble child
All of you are truly great
-RV 8.30.1

May I become sweeter than the honey. Similarly, may my speech become tastier and delicious than the sweet yielding fruits and other things. Oh Sweetness! Let me possess that sweetness
-AV 3.24.1

May the Lord of our voice make our voice sweet and soft. We should always be soft spoken.
- YV 9.1.24

Good thoughts, alike the water of a river, are purified by the mind and heart and flow from the mouth of the great scholars.
- YV 13.38.32


Beautiful, sublime, noble and lofty thoughts. There is not a speck of ignorance, corruption, greed and power in them. They are pristine and pure cosmic thoughts dedicated only to harmony, wisdom and love.

Great and informative thread. Stars and Flags.

Still reading - there is a lot of information to digest.

reply to post by Indigo_Child

Still waiting for your reply to challenge posted here.

Let's face it, the performance of both junior wannabe Aryans who replied on your behalf was entirely adolescent and unsatisfactory.

And as long as I'm at it, I'll take issue with something else you've managed to offend my sensibilities with -

You said :
What is Aryan

As discussed earlier Aryan means noble. It refers to humans who are noble, virtuous, humble and divine in their character. However, the best way to describe what this really means is to hear the Aryan speak themselves in the Vedas:

You've got it wrong.

Here's what an Aryan is, and you can quote me -

An Aryan is 96-98% Chimpanzee ( depending on which of the four commonly accepted methods of genome comparison is used ) just like all other people on this unfortunate planet.

*Mod Edit: Please keep it civil. Cheers -alien

[edit on 27-4-2009 by alien]

reply to post by Indigo_Child


Great thread!Star and flag......I see you are busy on ATS,essp. for a new member.I am glad you decided to post all this for members to see.

reply to post by visible_villain


Whats with the flaming??? seriously you need to chill out, Just because Hitler took the Aryan thing and twisted it for his own purposes does not mean it is a negative thing.That attack on the op is seriously unwarranted.If you don't\understand what the op is saying then you are free to leave..

Well, you are part of the way there but Aryans didn't originate in India. They came from somewhere else. Find out where that is and you will have more answers to your questions.

And I'm not talking about some fictional place like Atlantis...

Something else.
It is interesting, Serbian (Slavic) language is one of the most closely related to Sanskrit.

In Serbian, "vedeti" (not in use anymore) means "knowing", and the verb "videti" (to see) is directly derived from it. In Sanskrit "vidya" is knowledge.

webapps.uni-koeln.de...

There is a phrase in Serbian folklore "Indian books", referring to certain very old, prehistoric knowledge (but maybe also to the Codex of Mani, which is from historic times). Still, the usage of "Indian" rather than Persian, indicates much older tradition.

"Budan" in Serbian means "awake" = Buddho in Sanskrit. Practically the same word.

It is only interesting if you don't know that the original Aryans came from this area precisely. Otherwise, it is matter of fact.


[edit on 26-4-2009 by TheComte]

reply to post by thefreepatriot

My issue is quite simple and I have stated it very concisely, not that I owe you an explanation. Check into it before you jump into something you don't understand ...

you said :
If you don't\understand what the op is saying then you are free to leave..

I think you are free to butt out ...

I have one question:

Why should one's spiritual heritage be a derivative of one's biological ancestry?

Good evening Indigo_child
Very interesting thread here, I would like to ask about musical notes and instruments that may have been used to help with meditation. I am curious because some of the sounds I have heard that may originate from instruments in that part of the world strike me in a unusual way on a very personal level.
I am trying to put my finger on a type of long horn that is very deep and and I have "seen" being used. Any ideas?
I have read of sound notes having extraordinary effects on both animate and inanimate objects. Do you have any insight on this being discussed in the Vedas?
I would like to try meditation myself, it seems like a very natural thing to do.
Thanks.
C

reply to post by Indigo_Child


Your "What is Aryan" post is great,I trully believe those words come from our extraterrestrial brothers and sisters.I think ALL need to head them.

Originally posted by huckfinn
The Shah of Iran also possesses the title Aryamehr, which means Light of the Aryans.

His son Reza Pahlavi claimed his father's Titles publicly in 1981, does this mean that you are a supporter of Reza Pahlavi?

If so, why has your clique declared war upon the Western world, which has done you no wrong?

So what if he has that title ? Maybe is some title given to all the rulers over there. It does not matter.
He is not a god to bow down to or something like that, that happens only if people twisted every teaching and start inventing "gods" to worship. There is no "God" like the one invented in Christianity.

The gospel of Thomas was not included in the bible:

"Rather, the Kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living Father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty"

"It is I who am the light which is above them all. It is I who am the All. From Me did the All come forth, and unto Me did the All extend. Split a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find Me there."

"There is neither Jew nor Greek [i.e. Gentile], there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

Somehow people managed to invent this crazy religion of today. Fear hell, desire to go to heaven ! Evil teachings to teach this to a child. Must escape fear and desire.

reply to post by Smack


I completely agree with your assessment and I agree with you on religion and spiritualism in general. I consider myself a rationalist thinker, somewhat of a scientist, and a believer in a higher power in some form. But that belief in a higher power does not necessarily imply God as any manifestation of intelligence or consciousness (especially one that any human could possibly conceive). All religions and cultures have names for their different God(s) but if there really is a god then it's (god's) true identity and reality would transcend any name we could ever give it. I believe that all these religions, all these cultures are all referring to the same thing. The bigger question is "What is god?". It could simply be the manifestation of our own collective consciousness (or unconsciousness). Or maybe what people "feel" as god is just the energy of the universe and the information within it (we are all encoded information right down to the DNA in our bodies).

Since people seem to be biologically hard-wired to believe in a higher power then maybe God really is just energy and information that exists throughout the universe. Maybe this "energy" force is simply some kind of undiscovered "god energy" that simply makes us believe a higher power exists when it really doesn't. Or maybe we are the higher power and we just don't know it yet.. I just think that anytime people go to great lengths to fill in all the details they are doing so without really rationalizing/considering what truly might exist out there and/or within ourselves. What results when people don't see eye to eye on said details? Sometimes it results in war and immense human suffering. It could almost be said that Religion will always result in death and human suffering just depending on the timeline you're talking about and how long you give people to tear each other apart. You can't really put it past human nature to destroy itself over these kinds of things. It could still happen.

My point is that there is a reason we all look up at a clear, moonless, night sky and feel something greater than ourselves. It's just still a complete mystery what "that" is. But I think the answer is much simpler than most people normally make it just as you have pointed out. There is no reason we can't believe in a higher power and simply be content/happy with that without having to be religious or spiritual in any way. I do believe that we exist as both physical beings and energy. IMO, That only makes sense anyway since we are biological entities that interact with our environment and the universe in general through electrical impulses being sent to and from our brains and nerve centers. I also believe in the paranormal which implies that human energy can remain on earth long after our bodies are gone.

But this is where it gets a little rocky sofar as human interpretations of god.

Personally, my belief is that religion and human spiritualism is all artificial and man-made and have been created to fulfill specific purposes both individual and sociological. I also think the creators of the earth's religions and spiritual ideaologies are they, themselves, human beings whom don't/didn't necessarily have any understanding of god that we do not possess ourselves. An unbiased, completely rational thinker looking at all the earth's spiritual beliefs and different takes on God in general knows that they are not all correct.. At least not sofar as the specific details. But some are so different that they could never both be "correct".

Is there one religion that is correct when all the others are wrong? Or are they all correct even though they are so different from one another? I believe that noone has it right. How could they? Especially since we're dealing with a supreme being here that we could never conceivably understand with our limited, tiny, little, human brains. But I think the fact that these religions all exist shows that people really do believe in a higher power in some form and that perhaps we are almost hard-wired to do so at a subconscious level. Religion acts to fill in the details to make things more believable and understandable for people willing to listen to it. I believe that you CAN believe in a higher power without being religious or spiritual and that you can view your higher power separate from all this man-made spiritualist nonsense regardless of what our ancestral origins are and what aren't.

On a side note.. What about Aryan DNA? If some of us are descendant of this ancient Aryan society then the DNA should still be there. It would be interesting to see what a "pureblood" Aryan would really look like. Just a thought.

-ChriS

[edit on 27-4-2009 by BlasteR]

indigo im really curious you speak or should i say type? with such conviction with such "knowingness" i guess you can say... that this is all true and 100% truth.

my questions to you is... how do you know this is true? how do you know it as 100% truth? where are you getting your info from? the aryan's themselves? because i see it says "child of god aryan" right under your name.

not saying its all bs or i dont believe you.. just like to know where you coming from.

Is there one religion that is correct when all the others are wrong? Or are they all correct even though they are so different from one another? I believe that noone has it right. How could they? Especially since we're dealing with a supreme being here that we could never conceivably understand with our limited, tiny, little, human brains. But I think the fact that these religions all exist shows that people really do believe in a higher power in some form and that perhaps we are almost hard-wired to do so at a subconscious level. Religion acts to fill in the details to make things more believable and understandable for people willing to listen to it. I believe that you CAN believe in a higher power without being religious or spiritual and that you can view your higher power separate from all this man-made spiritualist nonsense regardless of what our ancestral origins are and what aren't.

Buddhism is not a religion and Buddha was just a man. Not a "god" to worship. His name was not Buddha, Buddha means "Enlightened".
If you concentrate your worship on Buddha you miss the idea of his teachings, same thing Bruce Lee said "if you concentrate on the finger that points to the Moon you can't see the Moon".

Here are some things Buddha said. If this is not good advice, to seek and see for yourself, then what is ?

Believe nothing on the faith of traditions,
even though they have been held in honor
for many generations and in diverse places.
Do not believe a thing because many people speak of it.
Do not believe on the faith of the sages of the past.
Do not believe what you yourself have imagined,
persuading yourself that a God inspires you.
Believe nothing on the sole authority of your masters and priests.
After examination, believe what you yourself have tested
and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto.

Believe nothing merely because you have been told it.
Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher.
But whatever, after due examination and analysis,
you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings -
that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.

Buddha

[edit on 27-4-2009 by pai mei]

Originally posted by MischeviousElf

Originally posted by DangerDeath

I am the source.

YOU do not exist!!!

* I do not exist!

Anything that follows then in a Buddhist argument falls down.

* Everything is impermanent.

If we were in a Tibetan Buddhist debate situation I would rub my hand down my arm towards you and leave it facing you for a moment waiting for you to reply :d

* But we were NOT. And if we WERE, I'd hit you before you asked such a stupid question!

There is nothing left to say from my side of the response.... however

* Exactly why I would have hit YOU.

And if you don't believe it, please do your own research, as I have done.

Good I am glad you find the truth rather than accepting it blindly.

* I was born with it.

Is this though In regard to Buddhist Societies that I questioned your statements on, and this reply is a response to my response?

* There is not such thing as "Buddhist societies".

If so again please show which societies you have researched to confirm what you have said.

* I'm showing you NOTHING - but you still see?

I never took anything for granted from anyone, and sources I used only to compare my own experience.

Experiences of Buddhist societies?

* The place where I was left alone...

So, "Come and see" - that is all you will ever get from Buddha.

Very true, but maybe with a realisation that you need to go well beyond any sense object , projections etc to get there, feel is closer but where my limited understanding is, I (lol) dare say without being enlightened that In my description of where I think the Buddha would be, he would describe it as Realise, which in itself is a description of Knowing, understanding, and living it.

* Buddha would describe your speculation as - speculation.

reply to post by Indigo_Child

Yes even a buddhist needs to live in and contribute to society as you argued

Agreed and glad we discussed your response, but still get a feeling the above statement with others hints at an underlying current of attitude towards the Buddhist path. As I am sure maybe was displayed conversely from my side towards the Hindu pantheon etc.

* Buddhist does not NEED to live.

PS look at my Profile on the Media part i did upload the Ved's in the best englsih translation, and have much love and respect for them, just my own personal feeling and experience is that a touch of manipulation came in, and also a little bit influenced by Shamanism and nature/spirit worship.

* Even the translation itself is a manipulation.

Which is soo close to the destination IMHO but takes a detour at the last moment, as we are captivated by Siddhi's and messengers, and invisible folk etc... in the garden if you like of God to realise all of that, but dont just knock or open the door.

* Destination is right here and now - no need to open door or go anywhere.

Kind Regards

Elf

[edit on 26-4-2009 by MischeviousElf]

We can play the "mondo" game, but this is not the thread for that. Please start one for that purpose.