fiveelementtao

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBA7LsumNGs

Jesus and Mithra

As I understand it, yes. from what I have heard, Lucas drew from many sources of inspiration including Taoism...

@ Prince...You came on this thread calling other scriptures "bullshit." And I merely pointed out that I believe your reasons are not objective. And now you are trying to defend the Church. That is not the point. My point is that your argument that the syriac texts are bullshit is coming from biased self-referential viewpoint that is already skewed against anything contrary to accepted church dogma. I'm not trying to prove the syriac texts. I was only pointing out your lack of objectivity in your criticism. Why do you want to persecute anyone? I don't understand the point here. The romans persecuted the aryans and gnostics too. or are you saying that any abuses done by the Roman Church are somehow OK, because they were persecuted before constantine? Forgive me, but that is a child's argument... "They did it first."... Jesus taught forgiveness and turning the other cheek, not revenge or religious persecution. If you're saying that centuries of persecution made them fearful, or angry and therefore it is only understandable that they kill and perscute others, then they didn't learn Christ's lessons and are not worthy to interpret his teachings and create any dogma since they can't seem to follow the most basic of his teachings... In any case, it does not take away from the fact that the Roman church became a state sponsored religion backed by the power, wealth and military might of the Roman Empire. To overlook this fact is to overlook a major factor in their motivations for "accepted church dogma." With respect, I disagree. This is why it should not be called "textual critcism". You can't use the bible to prove the bible. That is self-referential and biased. That is not Critical thinking. the definition of critical thinking is: "purposeful reflective judgment concerning what to believe or what to do based on objective criteria" If you want to study church theology from the bible, then, stick with the church fathers and the approved texts. I have no issue with this if one knowingly wants to study the church's dogma and theology. But it cannot be used from a purely critical standpoint. If one wants to study the bible critically, then that means you MUST be willing to view it objectively. That cannot be done from a self-referential perspective. With all respect, my friend. Yes, the Jesus story has many, many similarities with other messiahs that were worshipped in the Roman Empire. This is simply historical fact. Jesus may be based on Moses according to church dogma, but there are many jewish scholars who would diagree with that interpretation. the Mithra story parallels the Matthew version of events in many ways. http://www.truthbeknown.com/mithra.htm There were other preachers in the Roman world before Jesus that are attributed with similar miracles and messages. It's in the history. It is fact. This does not necessarily detract from Jesus. As I said, I have no problem with the Jesus story. But it is a historical fact that his story and message is almost identical to many others that preceded him. I have no need to dissuade you from your faith. But, I do take issue with the knee-jerk orthodox christian tendency to monopolize the spiritual arena especially in light of historical facts. As I have said on this forum numerous times before. It is not an "either/or" scenario. Jesus can be a legitimate object of faith and worship AND the christian church can still be a very flawed human institution. Other religions seem to understand the value and holographic nature of myth. IMO, the christian church shot itself in the foot when it diverted from the power of myth and tried to squish holographic spiritual truths into linear black and white, literal historical fact and then proceeded to kill and torture those who disagreed with them.

It is equally possible (IMO) that he could have been a real person or fictional. The problem is that the Jesus story (virgin birth, son of God, Miracles etc..) is almost verbatim identical to numerous other messiahs that were being worshiped in the roman empire during the same period. There is little hard evidence of the existence of Jesus outside of the gospels which were ALL written long after Jesus was dead (or resurrected, depending on one's beliefs). There is no evidence for the editorial accounts of Jesus' life outside of the gospels. So, there is no way to verify any of the editorial details of his life. The argument that the Gospel of Matthew was the most likely candidate because the Church vouched for it is flawed in a couple of ways: It was written long after his death and there is just as much evidence that all of the details were either made up, exaggerated or combined with existing mythology surrounding other messiahs being worshiped at the same time. Not to mention that Rome had a political and military agenda that was best suited to the literal fundementalist version of the gospels. After Rome made Christianity the state religion, it tried to cover up all the other similar messiah religions. For me personally, I have no problem with the idea that an avatar was born of a virgin, died and was resurrected. I certainly have no problems whatsoever about his core teachings of forgiveness, Kindgom of God is within you, We all have direct access to the divine and that we are also children of God. My problem is the stuff about eternal damnation, original sin etc... One thing that many of the christian gospels that were not included in the bible hold in common is the idea that they do not preach original sin, eternal damnation, or exclusivity of belief. This is why I see the whole modern christian religion as being a construction of men. Before Constantine, the gnostics were set up to become the sect of the mainstream population and gnostic christianity was very similar to eastern mystical ideas. IMO, had Constantine not become emperor and legally sanctioned Eusebius' literal fundamentalist version of christianity, gnostic christianity would most likely become the orthodox christian sect... (Assuming it survived at all). Most likely, (IMO) gnosticism would have been absorbed into existing pagan beliefs just as buddhism in India was absorbed into hindu polytheism and now in India Buddha is seen as one of the ten avatars of Vishnu... I myself view Jesus as an avatar of Vishnu... In terms of Jesus going to India. It is as possible as anything else. He certainly preached things similar to the buddha. Many early christian mudras seen in medieval paintings are identical to Yogic meditative mudras. It is possible he learned meditative techniques in India and taught them to his disciples... But in actuality anything is as plausible as anything else..

This discussion really is better served in another thread. First, before launching into a debate involving textual criticism, it is important to remember that textual criticism is a "science" invented by imperial christians to lend credibility to it's own version of the bible. Since, the imperial bible was already established before textual criticism was even invented, it is not reliable either since it is already biased in favor of itself. It is True the Council of Nicaea was not convened to establish the canon. It was established to decide what was going to be considered the "catholic" version of christianity to be officially sponsored by the roman state. so the state sponsored sect led by Eusebius could then wipe out any "unauthorized" sect it did not like, including the arian and gnostic versions. After Constantine lent his stamp of approval on Eusebius and the resulting "verdict" of the state sponsored council, state sponsored imperial christianity launched a major attack upon gnostic, arian and any other sect of christianity which differed from the now imperial catholic version. It is well established that any bishops who disagreed with eusebius had to recant and accpet the catholic version or suffer expulsion. There was no honest debate about anything. Eventually after a couple more emperors, all those involved in other "heretical" sects could be executed for having banned texts. That is misleading and not relevant to this discussion. Trying to play the victim game in order to hide the victimization of imperial christianity is a typical diverting argument... The christian texts were not in any danger after constantine converted to christianity. When any of the christian texts were in danger ( because there was no bible yet.) would have been before constantine. We are talking about something after constantine. Once again you are operating from an assumption that says that Matthew is somehow more "valid" than any other christian text. This is again a self referential proof. NONE of the christian texts, including matthew can be proven any more valid than any other. The only proof of it's validity come from Catholic church fathers who were themselves biased and recommended that those who carried unapproved gospels be put to death. I listened to these argument for years. Christianity has made decsions based on the testimony of these same christian church fathers who were the head of the imperial roman "good ole boy club" that decided for itself what version of christian history they liked best. The bottom line is that christianity in all its modern versions are what was left over after a group of men who gained sponsorship of a religion took complete control of said religion.

In the spirit of the season. I think we can all agree on at least the core message of Jesus which was "The Kingdom of Heaven is within you." Merry Christmas!

When I was in seminary I spent alot of time in what is called textual criticism. What I learned is that the entire new testament is completely unprovable from a textual standpoint. Christian "scholars" spend huge amounts of time and energy hopscotching over facts in order to prove their own religious beliefs and disprove those that don't fit into their religious agenda. Need we have a discussion about the council of nicaea and the selection process for books of the bible? hundreds of gospels existed at the time of the canonization process. But only those that fit within the empirical sect of christianity were ultimately accepted. IT had nothing to do with any kind of scientific validity. In any case there is no more proof for the validity of the four gospels than for this. In terms of the science of textual criticism, This text is as legitimate as any other christian text.

Interesting, I just googled it. Interesting stuff.

Yes, I looked into that. Without criticizing it, it is not wholly European. The founder apparently learned some traditional teachings on the younger futhark Runes and then he went to Japan for a long time and learned kendo and aikido. His martial art is japanese. He initially tried to pass it off as traditional nordic sword work, but it became very clear that it was not a european martial art. He has since backpedaled and acknowledges that the sword work and the aikido looking stuff is from Japan. He teaches Rune stances which IME are pretty cool. There is some controversy over whether the stances are a modern invention or not. The jury is still out on that one. But alot of people really get alot out of the practice..

There are alot of good sources. Some not so good and some so-so. As I said before alot of books deal only with runes as divination tools and IMO many of their interpretations are very superficial. I just read a book that was pretty good it's called "the complete illustrated guide to runes" by Nigel Pennick it has some good foundation and history... But, IME, the best way to work with runes is to meditate on them, chant them and see where it takes you...

Hmm... I really can't say because I am not at all familiar with his work. I have been focusing on the Pre-Christian aspects of Teutonic spirituality. If I'm not mistaken, The Qaballah was adopted into European mysticism from Jewish mysticism in the middle ages... I could be wrong about that but, in any case, I have no knowledge of it. I would be interested in anyone's thoughts about it...

Funny you should mention the vowels. I have been working with those too. I think the Five vowels are universal in pronunciation. In English we pronounce the english pronunciation of the the letters not the sounds (AY EE EYE OWE YOU) But IME experience with other languages the vowels are universally pronounced (AH AY EE OH OO). In my experiments with the vowels from a runic perspective, They are similar to the Five Elements A (AH) Aethem/Wood, E (Eh) Wind/Metal, I (Ee) Fire, O (Oh) Earth, U (Oo) Water A is like ethereal rising into the head, E feels like an expansion in the lungs, I Stimulates my triple burner, O is centered for me in the abdomen. U goes right out my heels into the Earth. It has a different quality than the Taoist five healing breaths, But I am enjoying the process of investigation... Of course there is a Rune for each letter which has it's own meaning. So, meditating on the sounds and exploring the runic symbolic meanings is alot of fun also...

Good point!

IMO (today) To learn and grow. This planet is a school. Forget about enlightenment. Forget about liberation. Don't try to escape. Embrace the pain and fear. Embrace the joy and pleasure. Abandon denial. Face oneself ruthlessly. Make mistakes. Forgive yourself and strive to improve on all levels whenever possible. Instead of the word enlightenement or freedom, I prefer the word fulfillment.

Thanks Z00se, I did not feel you were trying to be critical. I do understand the limitations of keyboards and I am not perfect there either. something about message forums seems to encourage left brain black/white type of responses even from those of us who in person would probably be more circumspect. I do appreciate your input. Since you asked my experience of Runes outside of books, I will share some. The original 24 Runic symbols of the Elder Futhark, I believe are very ancient keys to human divinity through sound. The written symbols were probably adapted from other early alphabets early in the first century A.D. but I am convinced that the symbols are from a much older oral tradition. I spent alot of years working with sanskrit mantra and lots of years working with some Taoist mantra. But I was very impressed with the power of the six healing breaths in Taoist energy work. (many call them 'sounds' but the original text called them 'breaths' and were meant to be chanted silently with breath as whispers) When I began investigating the Teutonic tradition, I began using that same technique with Runic sounds and was blown away with the power of them ('Rune' means 'whisper'). I found I had to be very careful when whispering each Rune, because all kinds of stuff began happening in my life. I learned very quickly that these were not arbitrary sounds. This began an even deeper investigation into the power of the English language. I found that when I applied runic understanding to normal everyday english words, THEY became powerful mantras. Because I saw that the Runes were an energetic template for the Teutonic languages. I THEN discovered that all language in it's original context was a means NOT just for verbal communication but actually a magical tool to manifest reality. All that was needed was to infuse them with breath power. As of now, my belief is that all languages in their original root sounds are gifts for humans to use to CREATE reality. Roman historians wrote that Teutonic tribespeople used runic staves for divination as is still done today. So, that is one tradition that has survived. BUt I believe that this kind of divination was a layman technique. I believe that there was a deeper mystical tradition of breathing life into them and using them for manifestation and powerful meditation and even internal alchemy. When I was studying sanskrit mantra, one of my teachers believed that there were certain languages that were energetic languages. He cited Sanskrit and Hebrew. The unspoken message was that English was not an energetic language good only for verbal communication. After this, I revisited his comment and realized that Hebrew and Sanskrit have an uninterrupted history of being used as magical. English on the other hand has 1400 year history of religious suppression by christianity to destroy the idea of magic in language. So, no wonder we in the West seek out other traditions with an unbroken history... And rightfully so, we need them to remind us of the magic in our own history and apply it to the present... So, my experiment with Naught is one of many that the runes have introduced me to. Anyone interested in experimenting with this kind of runic breath meditation, can use the technique I teach in the Huul video That same technique of silently chanting while splitting breath between both nose and mouth will result in similar power in the chant... I found it can be used with many words. IME, the closer the word is to the older versions of english, the more powerful they are which tells me that the older version of Teutonic languages are closer to the original root of sacred sound... I believe that working with each rune sound individually may 'activate' that sound which then can be used in combination with other rune sounds to create specific energy equations. So, the possibilities are endless. I think words are actually runic equations that when chanted properly actually CREATE the idea originally intended by the word. So, I think words were not arbitrarily created for communication but were discovered as pre-existing sound principles... @cat, That was a cool experience with Fire. Sounds like you are a Shaman! I am really finding a heretofore undiscovered level of personal fulfillment working with shamanic techniques. I believe shamanism is an integral part of spiritual practice that has been lost to many cultures over the years. It is as though it activates aspects of my DNA that were dormant... Very exciting stuff.

Hi Z00se, You make some interesting observations. I find some of them quite insightful. However, on the whole, it felt like a criticism of my experience. Kind of a bummer... There's those value comparisons again... "Perfection... Better" I am not seeking perfection. Nor am I competing with anyone... Taoism to me is very inclusive. Words like perfection and better tend to exclude. I don't see Taoism as a practice of judging experience... We are drifting again into comparisons. I'm really not interested in comparing religions or paths to see whose is better. I have no interest in going there. But fundamentally, even from a Taoist perspective I would disagree with you on a few different levels. Traditional Taoism is a polytheist religion that uses many magical and mystical tools. One such tool is mantra. Another example is Talismanic Fu's. So, if I were simply to replace the word Rune in your posts with Mantra or Fu, (since Runes are indeed both mantra and Fu) you could be saying that Fu's and mantra are not valuable in Taoism. While you can certainly be a Taoist and hold on to that idea, you would be in the minority when it came to traditional Taoism. As you point out, Runes are indeed Talismans. The written symbols are somewhat arbitrary symbols. But, the symbols are first and foremost symbols of actual sounds which are directly connected to eternal principles in the Universe. By chanting Runes (IME) it is much more than applying arbitrary qualities to a symbol. Just as the Six healing sounds in Taoist energy work stimulate different organs in the body regardless of whether we are consciously aware of them or not, Runes are sacred seed sounds that connect to infinite principles within the Universe... I'm a little disappointed with some of these responses. I was really hoping for more discussion about emptiness, Wuji and the Void. I wasn't really looking for criticisms of my experiences. (sigh) Such is the "either/or" world of Taobums forum discussion... Something else I would add is that I have been moving away from intellectual experiences for some time in favor of other types of mysticism. I woudl consider the idea of emptiness being void of emotion or sensation as being an intellectualized projection onto emptiness. This is why I love shamanism and mysticism in general. I find that alot of Westerners adopt eastern religions in an attempt to avoid negative feelings. I think that many have misunderstood emptiness from a skewed modern western perspective. For the traditional Taoist mystics I have trained with over the years, the idea of the Void was one of immense power. not one of stale emptiness, but one of indescribable experience... The emptiness of it makes it indescribable in words, but it is not stale unconsciousness Anyway, I'm really not asking for critical analysis of my experience... I would however be VERY interested in hearing any others' experiences with the power of void in whatever spiritual context...

Chick - ChickeeBoom!

Hi Stig, Nice vid! I have had to simplify my manifestation ideas of late... For me, the key to power in manifestation is directly linked with my surrender to my destiny... Sometimes that can be frightening... Usually when people talk about manifestation, they mean money or success. All good things definitely... For me, any success or prosperity is directly linked to me surrendering to my destiny and then taking action based on that destiny as I understand it. So, I have to get out of the idea of earning money for the sake of money... In other words, if I am investing my energies that are not linked to my highest service to my fellows, no matter how much action i take, I usually only manifest roadblocks. If however, I am investing energy into surrendering to my destiny and then take action toward that destiny however scary that is, then I find, I am able to manifest prosperity and success more powerfully. Just my experience. I am sure it is different with others...

Spoken like a true scholar and gentleman. I have had some bad history on this forum so I am very skittish sometimes. Thanks for your kind words and I hope you have a wonderful holiday season!

Hi Aaron... Thanks for the advice... Very lofty stuff there... Also a little over my head for me... I'm not sure where your consensus is coming from. If you are referring to philosophical taoism, then we are in different camps. I come from traditional mystical, poytheist taoism. Traditional polytheist Taosim uses mantras ALOT. So, I am in good company there. So, I don't agree with your assertion that mantras are somehow beneath Taoism or Taoist meditataion. Also, I am not sharing a Taoist exercise, this is Teutonic shamanism, which may be different than what you practice. As this is also an ecclectic syncretic discussion forum, you will find alot of people sharing different spiritual practices and integrating them into their taoist practice. This is what I am sharing here... You started your response with the idea of sharing your experience, which sounded very cool to me, because I love sharing experiences, but then you launched right into giving me advice... Which isn't experience... and sounded more like a judgement than a sharing of experience, and that was a let down... I'm not trying to explain Tao. Nor am I trying to attain Tao. Nor am I trying to compete with anyone else. My focus here was on the concept of WuJi and my very limited experience of it. Wuji is a subject that many taoists do speak about and share about... Since, I am not trying to achieve perfection, enlightenment or any other idea of perfection, I give myself the right to have any feelings and experiences that occur without judgement. Since I am not trying to understand, master or explain Tao, I now have freedom to have any experience and I don't spend any time wondering if I have attained Tao or not. I would volunteer the idea that judging someone as having or not having achieved Tao is in itself also not attaining Tao... Since as you put it, Tao cannot be named or described. Since you offered me some advice, I will offer some to you in the spirit of reciprocity. I suggest against comparing yourself to others and I suggest against trying to compete with others. Allow them their own experiences and see if you can learn from them. If in fact, you find that you are indeed superior to them in spiritual understanding, perhaps allow them their limited experiences, seek some common ground and may be someday they will be able to rise to your level of understanding...

Thanks Tao Apprentice! Yes! I just finished a new podcast a few minutes ago. http://thunderwizard.podbean.com/ It is ready on the podbean site but it will probably take a little while before it shows up on the thunder website or on itunes... Hope you like it, Mike

I have nothing but good wishes for you

Hmmm,... until I make you react... interesting... Still alot of personal judgement in your post toward me. Y'know, Little1, usually when people attack me on this forum I tend to take it personally. But in your case something different happens. I get this picture in my mind of a little kid who was constantly belittled and minimized by some male authority figure (I'm guessing your dad.) I see this little boy standing there with his arms crossed and furious because no one takes him seriously. I'm willing to bet that whenever that little boy tried to express himself or stand up for himself, instead of listening to him, this authority figure would shame the boy and hurl personal insults to get him to be quiet. I can imagine how frustrating and painful that would be... So, whenever you say hurtful things to me, Little1, instead of reacting in kind, I am going to imagine picking up that hurt and angry little boy and giving him a big 'ol bear hug, kissing both sides of his cheeks and then I give him a big grin and say... I have nothing but good wishes for you

Awesome!