Friday, January 27, 2017
The Flood According to the Orinoco
Sigu was the son of Makunaima. Sigu was in charge of all of the animals and the birds that were on earth after Makunaima created them. This is true. Now the Agouti knew of a secret tree that was created by Makunaima, and this tree was the first tree created, and so it grew all of the plants and food that we have today. The tree was a secret because it was special, and so not even Sigu knew of it. But the Agouti knew of it, and one day he was followed by Rat. Once Rat saw the tree, he told everyone, even Sigu. So Sigu decided to cut the tree down, and then take all of the branches from the tree and plant them in the ground, so that each branch would grow its own food, and there would be food everywhere.
Sigu asked Iwarrika the monkey to help, and sent him to bring water from the stream. While Iwarriak was gone, Sigu cut down the tree, leaving the stump. The stump was hollow, you see, and so it was filled with water, and in the water were all kinds of fish. There were big fish and little fish, and they all swam around and around in the tree stump. But the water, which was kept inside by the tree, was now overflowing, and the land was going to be flooded. So Sigu took a basket and covered the stump to keep the water in, and then he left so he could begin to plant the tree branches. While he was gone, Iwarrika came back, swa the basket, and believed that there was fruit under it. He lifted the basket, but instead of fruit, there was water! Let me tell you, there was water! It flooded everything! It covered the ground, and the trees, and would have killed all of the animals if Sigu had not acted quickly.
Here is what he did: he took all of the birds and climbing animals, and put them in the tallest trees. Then he took the other animals and put them in a cave. He sealed the cave with wax, and told them that he would come get them when the water was gone. Meanwhile, he sat in the tree with the birds, and waited for the water to go away. It was very dark, and the storms were fierce, but eventually the water went away. Sigu knew this because he dropped a seed, and he heard it hit the ground instead of splashing in the water.
When the sky grew light again, Sigu and the animals climbed down from the tree. Then Sigu let out the animals that were in the cave. So this is how it happened that the world was flooded. This is also how it happened that monkeys are afraid of water.
-From the Orinoco Peoples of Middle America
Friday, January 20, 2017
It's the End of the World As We Know It: The Trumpet Judgments, Part 3
Hail. Fire. Blood. Demons. These are the fun things in store for those on earth during the first Six Trumpets. And while I believe (not claiming certainty, here!) that the blast of the Seventh Trumpets follows the Rapture, what we know for certain about this Trumpet is still pretty intense. Let's back up and put this in context:
The second woe is passed; the third woe is coming soon.
The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, which said:
"The kingdom of the world has
become the kingdom of our
Lord and of His Christ,
and He will reign for ever and
ever."
And the twenty-four elders, who were seated on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped God, saying:
"We give thanks to you, Lord God
Almighty,
the One Who is and Who was,
because you have taken Your great
power
and have begun to reign.
The nations were angry;
and Your wrath has come.
The time has come for judging the dead,
and for rewarding Your servants the
prophets
and Your saints and those who
reverence Your Name,
both small and great -
and for destroying those who destroy the earth."
Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and within His temple was seen the ark of His covenant. And there came peals of thunder, an earthquake and a great hailstorm (11:14-19).
The two witnesses have ascended, the "second woe" has finished, and the last trumpet sounds. This doesn't seem particularly bad, however, because, aside from (yet another) earthquake and hailstorm, all that appears to happen is that the elders and angels in heaven break out in song, right? What is so "woeful" about that?
Notice their song: "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ." Wait, that doesn't sound so bad either, right? Isn't that what we are all waiting for? Believers, yes, but for the world - for those who have taken the Mark of the Beast, who have set up their hopes and security in this world and it's god - the coming of Jesus is a terrible thing.
Let's take a moment and reflect on this term, "woe." It isn't one we use much in our culture today, but what it signals is a deep, relentless anguish of the soul. When Job lost his family, his wealth, his health, and his friends and wife all turned against him and tried to persuade him to disavow God, Job became woeful. He lost everything, and those he trusted tried to take God from him, too. When the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of Christ, the world will experience woe.
It's humiliating enough to be confronted with being wrong, but to be confronted by Jesus Himself, in the flesh, when you have totally rejected Him? It's the worst kind of "I Told You So" imaginable. But I think that what adds insult to injury is that it also heralds the series of events that lead up to Jesus' return and establishment of His Kingdom: the Seven Bowls of God's Wrath. Each of these bowls is specifically meant to remove power and authority from the kingdom of the Beast and bring an end to his rule. And, just like pruning a bush means cutting out part of a living organism, pruning a person and a kingdom can be very, very painful, even if that person and that kingdom deserve to fall. And of course, as we mentioned just a moment ago, it all leads to that the final moment when the heavens are torn open and Jesus Himself appears and says (much more eloquently, of course), "I told you so." But all of that - every single moment of it - begins with the blowing of the Seventh Trumpet.
The last and final Trumpet of Revelation heralds the pouring out of God's Wrath on the earth. The preceding judgments? Just the warm-up, so to speak. The global move to Satanism, the downward spiral we see beginning even today, all of these things are shaken up and interrupted by God's Seals and Trumpets, but they are utterly destroyed - and many of the people involved with them - by a sequence of events heralded by the Seventh Trumpet. So while it's "only" an earthquake, but mostly a song, don't pass over this Trumpet so quickly. Let it sink in that this is the beginning of the Day of the Lord. For those who are in Christ, it truly is an awesome, praiseworthy thing, but for the rest of mankind, it's a horrifying, terrible thing. It is, in fact, woeful.
The second woe is passed; the third woe is coming soon.
The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, which said:
"The kingdom of the world has
become the kingdom of our
Lord and of His Christ,
and He will reign for ever and
ever."
And the twenty-four elders, who were seated on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped God, saying:
"We give thanks to you, Lord God
Almighty,
the One Who is and Who was,
because you have taken Your great
power
and have begun to reign.
The nations were angry;
and Your wrath has come.
The time has come for judging the dead,
and for rewarding Your servants the
prophets
and Your saints and those who
reverence Your Name,
both small and great -
and for destroying those who destroy the earth."
Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and within His temple was seen the ark of His covenant. And there came peals of thunder, an earthquake and a great hailstorm (11:14-19).
The two witnesses have ascended, the "second woe" has finished, and the last trumpet sounds. This doesn't seem particularly bad, however, because, aside from (yet another) earthquake and hailstorm, all that appears to happen is that the elders and angels in heaven break out in song, right? What is so "woeful" about that?
Notice their song: "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ." Wait, that doesn't sound so bad either, right? Isn't that what we are all waiting for? Believers, yes, but for the world - for those who have taken the Mark of the Beast, who have set up their hopes and security in this world and it's god - the coming of Jesus is a terrible thing.
Let's take a moment and reflect on this term, "woe." It isn't one we use much in our culture today, but what it signals is a deep, relentless anguish of the soul. When Job lost his family, his wealth, his health, and his friends and wife all turned against him and tried to persuade him to disavow God, Job became woeful. He lost everything, and those he trusted tried to take God from him, too. When the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of Christ, the world will experience woe.
It's humiliating enough to be confronted with being wrong, but to be confronted by Jesus Himself, in the flesh, when you have totally rejected Him? It's the worst kind of "I Told You So" imaginable. But I think that what adds insult to injury is that it also heralds the series of events that lead up to Jesus' return and establishment of His Kingdom: the Seven Bowls of God's Wrath. Each of these bowls is specifically meant to remove power and authority from the kingdom of the Beast and bring an end to his rule. And, just like pruning a bush means cutting out part of a living organism, pruning a person and a kingdom can be very, very painful, even if that person and that kingdom deserve to fall. And of course, as we mentioned just a moment ago, it all leads to that the final moment when the heavens are torn open and Jesus Himself appears and says (much more eloquently, of course), "I told you so." But all of that - every single moment of it - begins with the blowing of the Seventh Trumpet.
The last and final Trumpet of Revelation heralds the pouring out of God's Wrath on the earth. The preceding judgments? Just the warm-up, so to speak. The global move to Satanism, the downward spiral we see beginning even today, all of these things are shaken up and interrupted by God's Seals and Trumpets, but they are utterly destroyed - and many of the people involved with them - by a sequence of events heralded by the Seventh Trumpet. So while it's "only" an earthquake, but mostly a song, don't pass over this Trumpet so quickly. Let it sink in that this is the beginning of the Day of the Lord. For those who are in Christ, it truly is an awesome, praiseworthy thing, but for the rest of mankind, it's a horrifying, terrible thing. It is, in fact, woeful.
Friday, January 13, 2017
Otos and Ephialtes
Otos and Ephialtes were two giants and children of Poseidon. Just as the gods had challenged the authority of the Titans, so the giants desired to challenge the authority of the gods on Olympus. The two of them lifted Mt. Pelion, placing it upon Mt. Ossa, in order to ascend into the heavenly realm of Olympus. But Apollo noted their efforts, and with one arrow, slew them both.
-From Greece
So let's talk about this for a moment. There are obvious "Tower of Babel" implications here, something that comes up quite a bit in world mythology. So much so, in fact, that it I would officially classify it - as if my word were ever truly "official"! - as a Global Myth. But I think this story is much more than just another Global Myth; it is, rather, the lynch-pin that holds the entire theory of Telephone Mythology together.
Telephone Mythology, if you're unfamiliar with the phrase, states that the most ancient of our stories - Creation, Flood, Babel, etc. - all have their origin in real events, and that the Tower of Babel event is precisely why we have so many different versions of these stories, and yet the stories themselves are not only common to the ancient world (spanning the globe from Australia to Alaska), but they have several common threads that link them together. The differences can be explained away, but the similarities are difficult to explain. So is the presence of these stories in hundreds of cultures around the globe. The only logical explanation for these occurrences is that, at some point in our history, the Tower of Babel actually occurred, mankind was struck with an instant change in languages, and the people, as a result, scattered and became isolated into whatever groups now existed.
And what do we do with our children? We tell them stories, of course. We tell them stories we make up, we tell them stories that are important to us - family history - we tell them the stories we grew up hearing. This is why "The Three Little Pigs" is still told. I grew up reading a version of that story, and I tell it to my daughter now. A singular event, such as the development of different cultures, would inarguably be told and retold.
But it would also change. This is why we have several versions of The Three Little Pigs. In some, the wolf eats the first two pigs, in others, he doesn't. In some, the wolf dies at the end (and even how he dies varies), in others, he runs away, angry, never to return. Sometimes the pigs buy their building materials, sometimes they find them and gather them themselves. The pig who uses straw can be either simple-minded, lazy, or just plain cheap. The story, which isn't that old, has already morphed into numerous versions.
We also see languages change rather rapidly. Here in America, we speak English. But here's the deal: someone born and raised in New York City speaks a vastly different English from someone born and raised in Mobile, Alabama. The dialects - though both of them English - are so different that many people in these areas can't even understand one another.
If we look more broadly, the English spoken in America is different from its Mother English, that spoken across the pond in England. Now, of course, the King's English has itself changed, even since the time of Shakespeare.
And then there's culture. While we originally started as (mostly) English colonies, our culture here in America is quite a bit different from the culture over in England. Much to my dismay, for example, we do not have "tea time." They regularly build multi-level bookstores.
So when met with naysayers who scoff and claim that Telephone Mythology is impossible, that "everyone knows" there was no Global Flood, the Tower of Babel is a fairy-tale, and the like, I sort of get perplexed. We see cultures changing - rapidly, at times - around us even today. We see stories that are only a hundred or so years old changing around us. We see languages and dialects changing around us. In other words, most of the main components of this idea are visible to us, even today, and what we see in this story of Otos and Ephialtes is further example of Telephone Mythology at work.
Which must inevitably lead to the conclusion that the Tower of Babel was, in all likelihood, a real event. Now, if you dismiss the Bible, you cannot do so on grounds of "science," "evidence," or "logic," for we see the evidence, the science, and the logic of it all around us. Know, then, that if you dismiss it, it's because you choose to, not because you're smart enough to figure out that it's lying. Because to assume that it must be false, you, indeed, must dismiss a great deal of this evidence and logic to which you claim to so desperately cling when building your view of reality. I cannot make you believe the Bible, but I can leave you with no choice but to either accept it, or deny reality.
And so the choice, then, is up to you. I hope - no, I actually, literally pray - that you will see this, you will open an actual Bible, and perhaps for the first time, read it for what it is: Truth.
Friday, January 6, 2017
Criticisms Regarding Flood Legends and Giants
First of all, if you've purchased either of my books, thank you. You have helped pay the bills, and I appreciate that. More than that, though, you've read them, which is, of course, the main reason for writing them; no one writes a book they don't want read. That, and it's fun to research and compose thoughts.
And, overall, the books have gotten very good reviews, lots of positive feedback, some excellent questions from inquisitive readers. Every so often, I get an e-mail from an alert reader (yes, I just stole that from Dave Barry) who offers some really good insight into these topics. It's interesting that something that is so niche and so odd - comparative mythology isn't exactly mainstream - really seems to resonate with people. I mean, it obviously resonates with me, but I'm a little odd myself, so that shouldn't surprise anyone. The fact that a relatively large number of people also seem to connect with these books, however, is startling, and immensely humbling. So, for those of you who have read and enjoyed the books, thank you for sharing in my passion. I'm always excited when I uncover an old text that supports the Biblical accounts, and it appears that many of you are, as well.
Having said all of that, there is one criticism that is frequently leveled at the books, and that is that they don't mention the Gospel. I don't talk about Jesus in them; I don't discuss His life, death, or resurrection. That is true, I don't, and I think there is validity to that criticism. I spend a good deal of time on this blog talking about the fact that Jesus is everything, but then I don't mention Him in my books. Seems a little contradictory, doesn't it?
Therefore, if you'll indulge me, I'd like to briefly explain why I wrote them the way I did. With Flood Legends, my goal was never, ever to hit people over the head with the Bible. Waving it around, saying, "It's true!" doesn't actually get anywhere with people who summarily reject it before you even open your mouth. After years and years of talking with atheists, agnostics, self-proclaimed skeptics, and the like, one common theme emerged: there's nothing believable about the Bible, and in order to believe it, you must shut off your brain, shut down your intellect, and believe in magical fairy-tale coincidences that point to a pretend invisible god. So before we even get to "The Bible is the Word of God," they've already decided it can't be.
The group of people I most wanted to reach was the atheists who feel that believing the Bible is intellectual suicide. I didn't want to convince them to believe the Bible - most of them are too hardened and stubborn to just crumble like that - but I wanted them to realize that it was okay not to reject it. There are historical and scientific reasons to believe that the Bible may be true. Now, obviously, the Bible is the Word of God, it contains the revelation of God, and reveals the depths of God's love for all of us, as demonstrated through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, but, as the saying goes, you have to crawl before you can walk. Unfortunately, so many atheists are intellectual infants, and they can barely even roll over, let alone crawl. So the attempt was to give them a reason to crawl.
What most "creationist" books out there do, however, is give them just enough information to consider rolling over, and then, at the end as sort of a coda, say, "Oh, and believe Jesus." To continue my analogy, that's like saying, "Oh, you're almost rolling over. Good! Now sprint a 100 meter dash." This isn't to say that all other books are bad, or have no place, that just wasn't my aim; my aim was to help them get out of their own way, and actually learn how to think.
With Giants, I wanted to be more forceful. I wanted to demonstrate how the mythology does point back to the Scriptures, highlighting the themes presented in Genesis, I Samuel, and so forth. I wanted to show that, in spite of all of the bizarre stories out there and the differences in various cultures, there are central truths the run throughout the nations and the ancient accounts of those nations, and that these truths are found and stated in the Scriptures.
If, by the grace of God, my next two books get published, we're going to delve deeper into the Scriptures, look at archaeology and philology, and see how, over and over, the Scriptures can be trusted on numerous points. And then, because we can intellectually know that the Bible is the Word of God and can be trusted, we can then know that the Gospel can be trusted. We can know that when Jesus claimed to be God, that's because He is God. When we read that He died for our sins - when we read that we are sinful - we can honestly reflect on and admit that truth. Why? Because instead of viewing the Bible as an archaic book of fiction, we can look at it with the realization that nothing could be further from the truth.
So, while the criticism is accurate - and I believe it is fair - it's based on a lack of understanding. I did not convey my motive very well, and so it bears a little explanation. For those of you who were . . . upset by my lack of the Gospel, I am sorry. I hope you this clears it up for you. Of course, if you still have questions, you can always e-mail me at charlesmartinjrauthor@gmail.com, or send me a tweet @cdmartinjr_jr.
And, overall, the books have gotten very good reviews, lots of positive feedback, some excellent questions from inquisitive readers. Every so often, I get an e-mail from an alert reader (yes, I just stole that from Dave Barry) who offers some really good insight into these topics. It's interesting that something that is so niche and so odd - comparative mythology isn't exactly mainstream - really seems to resonate with people. I mean, it obviously resonates with me, but I'm a little odd myself, so that shouldn't surprise anyone. The fact that a relatively large number of people also seem to connect with these books, however, is startling, and immensely humbling. So, for those of you who have read and enjoyed the books, thank you for sharing in my passion. I'm always excited when I uncover an old text that supports the Biblical accounts, and it appears that many of you are, as well.
Having said all of that, there is one criticism that is frequently leveled at the books, and that is that they don't mention the Gospel. I don't talk about Jesus in them; I don't discuss His life, death, or resurrection. That is true, I don't, and I think there is validity to that criticism. I spend a good deal of time on this blog talking about the fact that Jesus is everything, but then I don't mention Him in my books. Seems a little contradictory, doesn't it?
Therefore, if you'll indulge me, I'd like to briefly explain why I wrote them the way I did. With Flood Legends, my goal was never, ever to hit people over the head with the Bible. Waving it around, saying, "It's true!" doesn't actually get anywhere with people who summarily reject it before you even open your mouth. After years and years of talking with atheists, agnostics, self-proclaimed skeptics, and the like, one common theme emerged: there's nothing believable about the Bible, and in order to believe it, you must shut off your brain, shut down your intellect, and believe in magical fairy-tale coincidences that point to a pretend invisible god. So before we even get to "The Bible is the Word of God," they've already decided it can't be.
The group of people I most wanted to reach was the atheists who feel that believing the Bible is intellectual suicide. I didn't want to convince them to believe the Bible - most of them are too hardened and stubborn to just crumble like that - but I wanted them to realize that it was okay not to reject it. There are historical and scientific reasons to believe that the Bible may be true. Now, obviously, the Bible is the Word of God, it contains the revelation of God, and reveals the depths of God's love for all of us, as demonstrated through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, but, as the saying goes, you have to crawl before you can walk. Unfortunately, so many atheists are intellectual infants, and they can barely even roll over, let alone crawl. So the attempt was to give them a reason to crawl.
What most "creationist" books out there do, however, is give them just enough information to consider rolling over, and then, at the end as sort of a coda, say, "Oh, and believe Jesus." To continue my analogy, that's like saying, "Oh, you're almost rolling over. Good! Now sprint a 100 meter dash." This isn't to say that all other books are bad, or have no place, that just wasn't my aim; my aim was to help them get out of their own way, and actually learn how to think.
With Giants, I wanted to be more forceful. I wanted to demonstrate how the mythology does point back to the Scriptures, highlighting the themes presented in Genesis, I Samuel, and so forth. I wanted to show that, in spite of all of the bizarre stories out there and the differences in various cultures, there are central truths the run throughout the nations and the ancient accounts of those nations, and that these truths are found and stated in the Scriptures.
If, by the grace of God, my next two books get published, we're going to delve deeper into the Scriptures, look at archaeology and philology, and see how, over and over, the Scriptures can be trusted on numerous points. And then, because we can intellectually know that the Bible is the Word of God and can be trusted, we can then know that the Gospel can be trusted. We can know that when Jesus claimed to be God, that's because He is God. When we read that He died for our sins - when we read that we are sinful - we can honestly reflect on and admit that truth. Why? Because instead of viewing the Bible as an archaic book of fiction, we can look at it with the realization that nothing could be further from the truth.
So, while the criticism is accurate - and I believe it is fair - it's based on a lack of understanding. I did not convey my motive very well, and so it bears a little explanation. For those of you who were . . . upset by my lack of the Gospel, I am sorry. I hope you this clears it up for you. Of course, if you still have questions, you can always e-mail me at charlesmartinjrauthor@gmail.com, or send me a tweet @cdmartinjr_jr.
Friday, December 30, 2016
Doomsday Prophecies
Editor's Note: This was originally published in 2012.
So I've about had it. This week, while sifting through the news, I have come across SIX articles, all claiming that we humans are going to single-handedly wipe out life on earth. Through ocean acidity, climate change, and a host of other "evils," we're the reason Wall-E is going to exist.
Enough, already.
There are many ways to view theology, but they all boil down to two essential rules of thumb: there is a Supreme Being, or there isn't.
Now, if there isn't, then you're pretty much resigned to atheism. If there is, then there's a whole host of religious options available to you. Now here's the thing, if you happen to subscribe to a particular religion - and at this point in the conversation, it doesn't matter which one - then the end of the world is spelled out for you. I'm willing to bet, dollars-to-doughnuts, that your god is scheduled to return to earth.
Let's take Christianity, for example. In Revelation, John writes:
I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on it that no one knows but he himself. . . .
Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to wage war against the rider on the horse and his army. But the beast was captured and with it the false prophet . . . The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. . . .
Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away . . . He who was seated on the throne said, "I am making everything new!" (Revelation 19:11-12, 19-20; 20:11-15; 21:1,5).
Scary stuff, some of it. Notice, though, that the earth isn't destroyed by carbon gasses, nuclear war, or a lack of Twinkies. In the Christian worldview, Jesus returns and gets rid of evil, permanently.
"But I'm not a Christian! I'm Hindu!"
No problem.
According to the Kalki Purana, "One of mud will be born" on earth. He will be the Avatar of Visnu, Kalki. Coming on a white horse, he will slay Kali, the demon-god who incites evil on earth. Thus will end the Kali-Yuga, and an age of purity will begin.
"But I'm not a Hindu! I'm Muslim!"
No problem.
In Surah Al-Furqan, we read, "The Day the Heavens shall be rent asunder with clouds, and angels shall be sent down descending (in ranks) - that day, the dominion as of right and truth, shall be (wholly) for (Allah) Most Merciful: it will be a day of dire difficulty for the Misbelievers" (24-25, trans. Yusuf-Ali).
The end of the world will be one in which the heavens are torn open and Allah reveals Himself, to the dismay of all non-Muslims.
"But I'm a Latter-Day Saint, not a Muslim!"
No problem.
In Doctrine and Covenants, the LDS church states: ". . . [Jesus] now reigneth in the heavens and will reign till he descends on the earth . . . which time is nigh at hand . . . but the hour and the day no man knoweth, neither the angels in heaven, nor shall they know until he comes" (49:6-7).
"I'm not a Mormon, but a Buddhist! What do you have to say about that, jerk?!"
No problem.
In his Sermon of the Seven Suns, the Buddha proclaimed that over the course of several years, seven suns would eventually appear in the sky. Each sun would bring with it a cataclysmic event, similar to the cataclysms outlined in other faiths. Eventually, the sheer multitude of suns in the sky will burn up the earth and cause it to explode.
"Excuse me, but I'm an atheist. I believe in a random process of evolution that has been going on for millions of years. None of this hocus-pocus religion interests me."
No problem.
Michael Chrichton penned a remarkable dialogue concerning what should be the evolutionists view on mankind and the fate of earth in his novel, Jurassic Park. While I could certainly sum it up, he does a much better job:
"'Let me tell you about our planet . . . Our planet is four and a half billion years old. There has been life on this planet for nearly that long, Three point eight billion years. The first bacteria. And, later, the first multicellular animals, then the first complex creatures, in the sea, on the land. Then the great sweeping ages of animals - the amphibians, the dinosaurs, the mammals, each lasting millions upon millions of years. Great dynasties of creatures arising, flourishing, dying away. All this happening against a background of continuous and violent upheaval, mountain ranges thrust up and eroded away, cometary impacts, volcanic eruptions, oceans rising and falling, whole continents moving . . . Endless, constant and violent change . . . Even today, the greatest geographical feature on the planet comes from two great continents colliding, buckling to make the Himalayan mountain range over millions of years. The planet has survived everything, in its time. It will certainly survive us.'"
"Hammond frowned. 'Just because it lasted a long time,' he said, 'doesn't mean it is permanent. If there was a radiation accident. . . .'
"'Suppose there was,' Malcolm said. 'Let's say we had a bad one, and all the plants and animals died, and the earth was clicking hot for a hundred thousand years. Life would survive somewhere - under the soil, or perhaps frozen in Arctic ice. And after all those years, when the planet was no longer inhospitable, life would again spread over the planet. The evolutionary process would begin again. It might take a few billion years for life to regain its present variety. And of course it would be very different from what it is now. But the earth would survive our folly. Life would survive our folly. Only we,' Malcolm said, 'Think it wouldn't.'
"Hammond said, 'Well, if the ozone layer gets thinner -'
"There will be more ultraviolet radiation reaching the surface. So what?'
"'Well. It'll cause skin cancer.'
"Malcolm shook his head. 'Ultraviolet radiation is good for life. It's powerful energy. It promotes mutation, change. Many forms of life will thrive with more UV radiation.'
"'And many others will die out,' Hammond said.
"Malcolm sighed. 'You think this is the first time such a thing has happened? Don't you know about oxygen?'
"'I know it's necessary for life.'
"'It is now,' Malcolm said. 'But oxygen is actually a metabolic poison. It's a corrosive gas, like flourine, which is used to etch glass. And when oxygen was first produced as a waste product by certain plant cells - say, around three billion years ago - it created a crisis for all other life on our planet. Those plant cells were polluting the environment with a deadly poison. They were exhaling a lethal gas, and building up its concentration. A planet like Venus has less than one percent oxygen. On earth, the concentration of oxygen was going up rapidly - five, ten, eventually twenty-one percent! Earth had an atmosphere of pure poison! Incompatible with life!'
"Hammond looked irritated. 'So what is your point? That modern pollutants will be incorporated, too?'
"'No,' Malcolm said. 'My point is that life on earth can take care of itself. In the thinking of a human being, a hundred years is a long time. A hundred years ago, we didn't have cars and airplanes and computers and vaccines. . . . It was a whole different world. But to the earth, a hundred years is nothing. A million years is nothing. This planet lives and breathes on a much vaster scale. We can't imagine its slow and powerful rhythms, and we haven't got the humility to try. We have been residents here for the blink of an eye. If we are gone tomorrow the earth will not miss us.'"
Now, I'm not advocating evolution, or any other religion, for that matter. Jesus claimed to be Lord and God, He raised Himself from the dead to prove it, and when He says He's coming again, I believe Him. But the point, folks, is this: no matter what you believe, no matter what faith you follow, no matter what god you believe in (or don't believe in), human beings are not going to be responsible for the end of the world. To assume that we have the power to wipe out all life on earth is simply arrogant. I am not suggesting we dump oil in our oceans, stop recycling, or waste resources. What I AM suggesting is that we relax a little bit on all of this nonsense that we're ultimately going to destroy this planet. No major religion suggests it, and evolution renders our planet hardier than we think.
So why are we so worried? Oh, and, if you want another bright spot, we can now safely rule out the Mayan predictions. There you go, one less thing to worry about, right? :-)
So I've about had it. This week, while sifting through the news, I have come across SIX articles, all claiming that we humans are going to single-handedly wipe out life on earth. Through ocean acidity, climate change, and a host of other "evils," we're the reason Wall-E is going to exist.
Enough, already.
There are many ways to view theology, but they all boil down to two essential rules of thumb: there is a Supreme Being, or there isn't.
Now, if there isn't, then you're pretty much resigned to atheism. If there is, then there's a whole host of religious options available to you. Now here's the thing, if you happen to subscribe to a particular religion - and at this point in the conversation, it doesn't matter which one - then the end of the world is spelled out for you. I'm willing to bet, dollars-to-doughnuts, that your god is scheduled to return to earth.
Let's take Christianity, for example. In Revelation, John writes:
I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on it that no one knows but he himself. . . .
Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to wage war against the rider on the horse and his army. But the beast was captured and with it the false prophet . . . The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. . . .
Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away . . . He who was seated on the throne said, "I am making everything new!" (Revelation 19:11-12, 19-20; 20:11-15; 21:1,5).
Scary stuff, some of it. Notice, though, that the earth isn't destroyed by carbon gasses, nuclear war, or a lack of Twinkies. In the Christian worldview, Jesus returns and gets rid of evil, permanently.
"But I'm not a Christian! I'm Hindu!"
No problem.
According to the Kalki Purana, "One of mud will be born" on earth. He will be the Avatar of Visnu, Kalki. Coming on a white horse, he will slay Kali, the demon-god who incites evil on earth. Thus will end the Kali-Yuga, and an age of purity will begin.
"But I'm not a Hindu! I'm Muslim!"
No problem.
In Surah Al-Furqan, we read, "The Day the Heavens shall be rent asunder with clouds, and angels shall be sent down descending (in ranks) - that day, the dominion as of right and truth, shall be (wholly) for (Allah) Most Merciful: it will be a day of dire difficulty for the Misbelievers" (24-25, trans. Yusuf-Ali).
The end of the world will be one in which the heavens are torn open and Allah reveals Himself, to the dismay of all non-Muslims.
"But I'm a Latter-Day Saint, not a Muslim!"
No problem.
In Doctrine and Covenants, the LDS church states: ". . . [Jesus] now reigneth in the heavens and will reign till he descends on the earth . . . which time is nigh at hand . . . but the hour and the day no man knoweth, neither the angels in heaven, nor shall they know until he comes" (49:6-7).
"I'm not a Mormon, but a Buddhist! What do you have to say about that, jerk?!"
No problem.
In his Sermon of the Seven Suns, the Buddha proclaimed that over the course of several years, seven suns would eventually appear in the sky. Each sun would bring with it a cataclysmic event, similar to the cataclysms outlined in other faiths. Eventually, the sheer multitude of suns in the sky will burn up the earth and cause it to explode.
"Excuse me, but I'm an atheist. I believe in a random process of evolution that has been going on for millions of years. None of this hocus-pocus religion interests me."
No problem.
Michael Chrichton penned a remarkable dialogue concerning what should be the evolutionists view on mankind and the fate of earth in his novel, Jurassic Park. While I could certainly sum it up, he does a much better job:
"'Let me tell you about our planet . . . Our planet is four and a half billion years old. There has been life on this planet for nearly that long, Three point eight billion years. The first bacteria. And, later, the first multicellular animals, then the first complex creatures, in the sea, on the land. Then the great sweeping ages of animals - the amphibians, the dinosaurs, the mammals, each lasting millions upon millions of years. Great dynasties of creatures arising, flourishing, dying away. All this happening against a background of continuous and violent upheaval, mountain ranges thrust up and eroded away, cometary impacts, volcanic eruptions, oceans rising and falling, whole continents moving . . . Endless, constant and violent change . . . Even today, the greatest geographical feature on the planet comes from two great continents colliding, buckling to make the Himalayan mountain range over millions of years. The planet has survived everything, in its time. It will certainly survive us.'"
"Hammond frowned. 'Just because it lasted a long time,' he said, 'doesn't mean it is permanent. If there was a radiation accident. . . .'
"'Suppose there was,' Malcolm said. 'Let's say we had a bad one, and all the plants and animals died, and the earth was clicking hot for a hundred thousand years. Life would survive somewhere - under the soil, or perhaps frozen in Arctic ice. And after all those years, when the planet was no longer inhospitable, life would again spread over the planet. The evolutionary process would begin again. It might take a few billion years for life to regain its present variety. And of course it would be very different from what it is now. But the earth would survive our folly. Life would survive our folly. Only we,' Malcolm said, 'Think it wouldn't.'
"Hammond said, 'Well, if the ozone layer gets thinner -'
"There will be more ultraviolet radiation reaching the surface. So what?'
"'Well. It'll cause skin cancer.'
"Malcolm shook his head. 'Ultraviolet radiation is good for life. It's powerful energy. It promotes mutation, change. Many forms of life will thrive with more UV radiation.'
"'And many others will die out,' Hammond said.
"Malcolm sighed. 'You think this is the first time such a thing has happened? Don't you know about oxygen?'
"'I know it's necessary for life.'
"'It is now,' Malcolm said. 'But oxygen is actually a metabolic poison. It's a corrosive gas, like flourine, which is used to etch glass. And when oxygen was first produced as a waste product by certain plant cells - say, around three billion years ago - it created a crisis for all other life on our planet. Those plant cells were polluting the environment with a deadly poison. They were exhaling a lethal gas, and building up its concentration. A planet like Venus has less than one percent oxygen. On earth, the concentration of oxygen was going up rapidly - five, ten, eventually twenty-one percent! Earth had an atmosphere of pure poison! Incompatible with life!'
"Hammond looked irritated. 'So what is your point? That modern pollutants will be incorporated, too?'
"'No,' Malcolm said. 'My point is that life on earth can take care of itself. In the thinking of a human being, a hundred years is a long time. A hundred years ago, we didn't have cars and airplanes and computers and vaccines. . . . It was a whole different world. But to the earth, a hundred years is nothing. A million years is nothing. This planet lives and breathes on a much vaster scale. We can't imagine its slow and powerful rhythms, and we haven't got the humility to try. We have been residents here for the blink of an eye. If we are gone tomorrow the earth will not miss us.'"
Now, I'm not advocating evolution, or any other religion, for that matter. Jesus claimed to be Lord and God, He raised Himself from the dead to prove it, and when He says He's coming again, I believe Him. But the point, folks, is this: no matter what you believe, no matter what faith you follow, no matter what god you believe in (or don't believe in), human beings are not going to be responsible for the end of the world. To assume that we have the power to wipe out all life on earth is simply arrogant. I am not suggesting we dump oil in our oceans, stop recycling, or waste resources. What I AM suggesting is that we relax a little bit on all of this nonsense that we're ultimately going to destroy this planet. No major religion suggests it, and evolution renders our planet hardier than we think.
So why are we so worried? Oh, and, if you want another bright spot, we can now safely rule out the Mayan predictions. There you go, one less thing to worry about, right? :-)
Friday, December 23, 2016
The Giants of the Coast
Across the sea, they came. Their boats were light, like canoes, but
large, like the Spanish ships. The men aboard the ships - white men
without beards - were so large that an average man only reached their
knees. The wealthy among them dressed in animal skins, while the rest
wore nothing at all.
They were skilled architects and built sturdy, strong houses. They also dug great wells out of the rock of the land, drawing sweet water from deep underground. The wells were lined with handmade bricks, so as to last many, many years. To dig these wells required great strength, and we were much amazed to see it accomplished.
They had no women with them, and in congregating with our own, the women were killed. For this we were angry, and rose up against them. They did violence to us men, as well, and though our warriors were valiant, because of their strength and size, we were unable to overcome them. So they remained for many years, and the two peoples did not get on well.
Because of their inability to take wives from among us, the men practiced detestable acts with each other. They showed no humility towards us or towards the gods, and they were duly punished for their crimes. One day, a bright fire came out of the heavens, and the giants were all consumed, their bodies burnt up. Only a few bones remained, and this we know to be true, because we can see the burnt up bones for ourselves, just as we can see where their houses and wells once stood.
-From an Incan legend, as told to Pedro de Cieza de Leόn
They were skilled architects and built sturdy, strong houses. They also dug great wells out of the rock of the land, drawing sweet water from deep underground. The wells were lined with handmade bricks, so as to last many, many years. To dig these wells required great strength, and we were much amazed to see it accomplished.
They had no women with them, and in congregating with our own, the women were killed. For this we were angry, and rose up against them. They did violence to us men, as well, and though our warriors were valiant, because of their strength and size, we were unable to overcome them. So they remained for many years, and the two peoples did not get on well.
Because of their inability to take wives from among us, the men practiced detestable acts with each other. They showed no humility towards us or towards the gods, and they were duly punished for their crimes. One day, a bright fire came out of the heavens, and the giants were all consumed, their bodies burnt up. Only a few bones remained, and this we know to be true, because we can see the burnt up bones for ourselves, just as we can see where their houses and wells once stood.
-From an Incan legend, as told to Pedro de Cieza de Leόn
Friday, December 16, 2016
The Yaksha
One day, a brahmin was distraught to find that he could no longer perform tapas,
as his tools had become entangled in the horns of a stag. So he
enlisted the help of the warriors of the Pandava clan to pursue the
animal and retrieve the churning stick. The warriors - who were all
brothers - chased the stag through the forest, but to no avail; it was
too quick for even them.
They sat beneath a tree to rest, ashamed and confused as to why they were unable to capture the animal. For surely their experience in battle had proven their might and worth tenfold? Yet they were unable to defeat a common beast. One of the brothers, whose name was Yudhishthira, instructed another brother to climb a tree and see if any water could be found. The brother, who was named Nakula, spotted a grove of trees nearby, around which were many water cranes. So he set off to fetch the water.
Nakula came to a beautiful lake, clear as glass, and surrounded by flowering trees, spreading vines, and birds of lovely colors. Overjoyed, he descended to the water and began to draw it out of the lake in a vessel. Before he could finish, however, a voice spoke to him.
"My son, do not draw the water until you have answered my questions."
Nakula, who feared his mind was stretched to the limit with exhaustion, ignored the voice. He drank the water, and immediately died.
Meanwhile, the others noted that he had not returned. So Yudhishthira sent Sahadeva to see what was the matter. He arrived at the lake and saw Nakula dead, and would have done something about it had the lake not looked so inviting. So he went to the edge and drew some water, so as to refresh himself, when the same voice spoke up. He too ignored it, drank, and died.
Mighty Arjuna went, armed with his bow, Gandiva, and was dismayed to see both of his brothers dead. He also noted how inviting the water was, and so went to drink, when the same warning echoed around him. He did not ignore it, but instead challenged the speaker to reveal himself, and so take part in a battle. When the voice did not answer, Arjuna fired an arrow into the surrounding woods. The voice issued a second warning. Arjuna declared that nothing could stop him, and so drew water, drank, and died. Some time later, the brothers sent Bhima to see what had happened, and he, too, drank and died.
Yudhishthira himself came this time, and was horrified to see four of his brothers dead. He sat beside them and mourned, for he had no one to help him in his fight to win back his kingdom. He noted that there were no footprints, nor any sign of a struggle. He concluded that the being that killed his brothers must be supernatural, and so descended to the lake so as to draw water for the last rites due his brothers. The voice spoke loudly to him, and said, "It is I who killed your brothers."
Yudhishthira looked around, but so no one. The voice continued: "I will kill you unless you answer my questions."
Yudhishthira asked, "What are you? You must be a mighty being to slay men whom neither the gods nor demons can slay. So I ask again: what are you?"
"I am a Yaksha, mighty Yudhishthira. May you have prosperous fortune."
As Yudhishthira watched, a massive figure began to form. Its eyes burned like the sun, and its voice was the thunder in the heavens. It said, "I warned your brothers, but they heeded me not. This water is my water, and those who touch without my consent must die, as your brothers did."
The warrior replied, "I will answer your questions as I am able, for I have no desire to take that which does not belong to me."
So began the questions, and Yudhishthira answered them. In so doing, he led himself from darkness into light, and became full of wisdom.
What is heavier than the earth?
Mother
What is taller than the sky?
Father
What is more swift than the wind?
The mind
What is more plentiful than the grass?
Thoughts
Who is the traveller's friend?
A companion
Who is the householder's friend?
A spouse
Who is the invalid's friend?
A doctor
Who is the dying man's friend?
His charity
What must we renounce to become loved?
Our pride
What must we renounce to become free of misery?
Our anger
What must we renounce to become wealthy?
Our desire
What must we renounce to become happy?
Our greed
What is our greatest treasure?
Skill
What is our greatest wealth?
Education
What is our greatest gain?
Health
What is our greatest happiness?
Contentment
What defines a man?
His offspring
Who is a man's God-given friend?
His wife
What is his life's support?
Rain
What is his purpose?
Charity
What causes the sun to rise?
Brahma
Who moves around Brahma?
The gods
What causes the sun to set?
Dharma
What holds him firm?
The truth
The tendency here would be to offer commentary on every question. Rather than do that, however, I want us to explore the fundamental philosophies behind the myth as a whole, because these philosophies form the very basis of Hindu thought. Therefore, if we can demonstrate accuracy (or fallacy) in the very basic heart of these philosophies, we can move in a direction of believing (or disbelieving).
The general thrust of Hinduism is the belief that we must restore our relationship to God, who is kept at a distance from us by our own greed, pride, anger, desire, and so on. How do we accomplish this? The third question addresses that: we must keep our minds under control.
Now, it should only take us a moment to realize that this is nearly impossible, for even the second question notes that our minds can travel to a thousand different places in a mere instant. Benjamin Franklin, in his autobiography, made a list of virtues that he tried to practice each and every day until, after thirteen weeks' time, he would have attained perfection. In his own words: "I fell far short of it." Our minds can only, with great effort, be partially controlled, our desires only partially squelched.
Ever had a tune stuck in your head that you couldn't get out? Ever had a craving for a type of food thay wouldn't go away until you had that particular food? Ever been in a bad mood you just couldn't shake?
So here's the deal: the basis of Hindu thought is founded on an impossibility. Now - and please listen carefully - this is not an anti-Hindu rant. This is not a call to gather up your torches and pitchforks and storm the homes of your Hindu neighbors. I am not advocating a trade embargo on India. Please don't vandalize local Hindu temples.
My point is that this myth sets forth a mode of thinking that is impossible to fulfill, without any guidance as to how to accomplish these goals. What does that mean for the accuracy of the myth?
It gives it credibility.
Assuming that Yudhishthira existed (and there's no reason to assume he's fictional - that is, there's no scroll somewhere with author's notes charting out the character development), in order to take a difficult (impossible) philosophy as truth, something must convince you that this thing has authority. Dead brothers, unharmed by any weapon, would do it. A being that can turn itself invisible would do it. A being whose eyes blazed like the sun and who, when compared to a large warrior, was considered massive would do it.
Yudhishthira saw this being and believed what it said, in spite of its impossible assertions. The Yaksha, in other words, persuaded a trained warrior to listen to him. Not too many men in that day would be able to do that.
So what is the Yaksha? Clearly, he is supernatural. He's also, clearly, lying. Most cultures believe in evil spirits, even our modern-day science-oriented culture. We are largely a materialistic society who has pushed God to the fringes, and yet our bookstores have shelves devoted to "true" tales of ghostly horrors.
Because it remains a universal myth, then, and because this particular myth seems to point us in the same direction, we can suspect that the Yaksha story recounts a collaboration between a warrior and an evil spirit. The Bible calls Satan "The Father of Lies," but his deceptions are rarely outright lies, but are rather lies mixed with a bit of truth (c.f. Genesis 1-3).
The Yaksha states that the mind is powerful; this is true. With it, we invent and create, we make decisions that impact our lives and the lives of people around us, and we delve into our own deepest thoughts and emotions.
The Yaksha states that the mind needs to be controlled and tamed; this is true. If left unchecked, those decisions, thoughts, and emotions of which we are capable can descend into some very, very dark places. If left unchecked, our darkest thoughts turn into darker realities. Wars and crime are proof of that.
The Yaksha states that we are capable of controlling our own minds; this is the lie that has been artfully mixed in with truth. As we have established, our minds are - on the best of days, with the sun out of our eyes and the wind in our favor - barely under our control. As we also established, only a few moments of thought would reveal that to us. What control we can accomplish, is rarely maintained, and control in one area always - this is what Franklin discovered - leaves a vacuum and a failure in another.
Why, then, would this stalwart warrior believe in what he learned that day? Because the Yaksha was a real entity, and because what it conveyed was a classic example of an old theme: lies become more believable when mixed with truth.
They sat beneath a tree to rest, ashamed and confused as to why they were unable to capture the animal. For surely their experience in battle had proven their might and worth tenfold? Yet they were unable to defeat a common beast. One of the brothers, whose name was Yudhishthira, instructed another brother to climb a tree and see if any water could be found. The brother, who was named Nakula, spotted a grove of trees nearby, around which were many water cranes. So he set off to fetch the water.
Nakula came to a beautiful lake, clear as glass, and surrounded by flowering trees, spreading vines, and birds of lovely colors. Overjoyed, he descended to the water and began to draw it out of the lake in a vessel. Before he could finish, however, a voice spoke to him.
"My son, do not draw the water until you have answered my questions."
Nakula, who feared his mind was stretched to the limit with exhaustion, ignored the voice. He drank the water, and immediately died.
Meanwhile, the others noted that he had not returned. So Yudhishthira sent Sahadeva to see what was the matter. He arrived at the lake and saw Nakula dead, and would have done something about it had the lake not looked so inviting. So he went to the edge and drew some water, so as to refresh himself, when the same voice spoke up. He too ignored it, drank, and died.
Mighty Arjuna went, armed with his bow, Gandiva, and was dismayed to see both of his brothers dead. He also noted how inviting the water was, and so went to drink, when the same warning echoed around him. He did not ignore it, but instead challenged the speaker to reveal himself, and so take part in a battle. When the voice did not answer, Arjuna fired an arrow into the surrounding woods. The voice issued a second warning. Arjuna declared that nothing could stop him, and so drew water, drank, and died. Some time later, the brothers sent Bhima to see what had happened, and he, too, drank and died.
Yudhishthira himself came this time, and was horrified to see four of his brothers dead. He sat beside them and mourned, for he had no one to help him in his fight to win back his kingdom. He noted that there were no footprints, nor any sign of a struggle. He concluded that the being that killed his brothers must be supernatural, and so descended to the lake so as to draw water for the last rites due his brothers. The voice spoke loudly to him, and said, "It is I who killed your brothers."
Yudhishthira looked around, but so no one. The voice continued: "I will kill you unless you answer my questions."
Yudhishthira asked, "What are you? You must be a mighty being to slay men whom neither the gods nor demons can slay. So I ask again: what are you?"
"I am a Yaksha, mighty Yudhishthira. May you have prosperous fortune."
As Yudhishthira watched, a massive figure began to form. Its eyes burned like the sun, and its voice was the thunder in the heavens. It said, "I warned your brothers, but they heeded me not. This water is my water, and those who touch without my consent must die, as your brothers did."
The warrior replied, "I will answer your questions as I am able, for I have no desire to take that which does not belong to me."
So began the questions, and Yudhishthira answered them. In so doing, he led himself from darkness into light, and became full of wisdom.
What is heavier than the earth?
Mother
What is taller than the sky?
Father
What is more swift than the wind?
The mind
What is more plentiful than the grass?
Thoughts
Who is the traveller's friend?
A companion
Who is the householder's friend?
A spouse
Who is the invalid's friend?
A doctor
Who is the dying man's friend?
His charity
What must we renounce to become loved?
Our pride
What must we renounce to become free of misery?
Our anger
What must we renounce to become wealthy?
Our desire
What must we renounce to become happy?
Our greed
What is our greatest treasure?
Skill
What is our greatest wealth?
Education
What is our greatest gain?
Health
What is our greatest happiness?
Contentment
What defines a man?
His offspring
Who is a man's God-given friend?
His wife
What is his life's support?
Rain
What is his purpose?
Charity
What causes the sun to rise?
Brahma
Who moves around Brahma?
The gods
What causes the sun to set?
Dharma
What holds him firm?
The truth
The tendency here would be to offer commentary on every question. Rather than do that, however, I want us to explore the fundamental philosophies behind the myth as a whole, because these philosophies form the very basis of Hindu thought. Therefore, if we can demonstrate accuracy (or fallacy) in the very basic heart of these philosophies, we can move in a direction of believing (or disbelieving).
The general thrust of Hinduism is the belief that we must restore our relationship to God, who is kept at a distance from us by our own greed, pride, anger, desire, and so on. How do we accomplish this? The third question addresses that: we must keep our minds under control.
Now, it should only take us a moment to realize that this is nearly impossible, for even the second question notes that our minds can travel to a thousand different places in a mere instant. Benjamin Franklin, in his autobiography, made a list of virtues that he tried to practice each and every day until, after thirteen weeks' time, he would have attained perfection. In his own words: "I fell far short of it." Our minds can only, with great effort, be partially controlled, our desires only partially squelched.
Ever had a tune stuck in your head that you couldn't get out? Ever had a craving for a type of food thay wouldn't go away until you had that particular food? Ever been in a bad mood you just couldn't shake?
So here's the deal: the basis of Hindu thought is founded on an impossibility. Now - and please listen carefully - this is not an anti-Hindu rant. This is not a call to gather up your torches and pitchforks and storm the homes of your Hindu neighbors. I am not advocating a trade embargo on India. Please don't vandalize local Hindu temples.
My point is that this myth sets forth a mode of thinking that is impossible to fulfill, without any guidance as to how to accomplish these goals. What does that mean for the accuracy of the myth?
It gives it credibility.
Assuming that Yudhishthira existed (and there's no reason to assume he's fictional - that is, there's no scroll somewhere with author's notes charting out the character development), in order to take a difficult (impossible) philosophy as truth, something must convince you that this thing has authority. Dead brothers, unharmed by any weapon, would do it. A being that can turn itself invisible would do it. A being whose eyes blazed like the sun and who, when compared to a large warrior, was considered massive would do it.
Yudhishthira saw this being and believed what it said, in spite of its impossible assertions. The Yaksha, in other words, persuaded a trained warrior to listen to him. Not too many men in that day would be able to do that.
So what is the Yaksha? Clearly, he is supernatural. He's also, clearly, lying. Most cultures believe in evil spirits, even our modern-day science-oriented culture. We are largely a materialistic society who has pushed God to the fringes, and yet our bookstores have shelves devoted to "true" tales of ghostly horrors.
Because it remains a universal myth, then, and because this particular myth seems to point us in the same direction, we can suspect that the Yaksha story recounts a collaboration between a warrior and an evil spirit. The Bible calls Satan "The Father of Lies," but his deceptions are rarely outright lies, but are rather lies mixed with a bit of truth (c.f. Genesis 1-3).
The Yaksha states that the mind is powerful; this is true. With it, we invent and create, we make decisions that impact our lives and the lives of people around us, and we delve into our own deepest thoughts and emotions.
The Yaksha states that the mind needs to be controlled and tamed; this is true. If left unchecked, those decisions, thoughts, and emotions of which we are capable can descend into some very, very dark places. If left unchecked, our darkest thoughts turn into darker realities. Wars and crime are proof of that.
The Yaksha states that we are capable of controlling our own minds; this is the lie that has been artfully mixed in with truth. As we have established, our minds are - on the best of days, with the sun out of our eyes and the wind in our favor - barely under our control. As we also established, only a few moments of thought would reveal that to us. What control we can accomplish, is rarely maintained, and control in one area always - this is what Franklin discovered - leaves a vacuum and a failure in another.
Why, then, would this stalwart warrior believe in what he learned that day? Because the Yaksha was a real entity, and because what it conveyed was a classic example of an old theme: lies become more believable when mixed with truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)