Harimedia Forum

I am first time on this forum, and very glad that such forum exists. I offer to discuss mythology, by the term "mythology" I mean collective conception about things, that are out of usual, conceptions about holly reality. Maybe I idealize, but in the time of heathenism the myths helped one to feel himself like a part of spiritual reality. There were no ordinary things for ancient man. The myth was the only reality, it was a habitat for him. Many scientists have come to such conclusions, and I think this attitude to the time of heathenism is correct. Now the people of the west culture do not have the mythology to unite them. The common things and the mystic things are on the different poles. What happens? Maybe now the new mythology arises. The mythology that corresponds with science. There is a term "neoheathenism" in fantastic literature. How to educate children not having uniting mythology? How to give them ideas about spiritual reality and not damage their social adaptation. I do not wait the finished solution, but I very eager to know what do You think about it. At ancient time the myth helped people to understand the nature deeper, to receive the power from it. For example, for ancient man the bear was not only an animal, but it was personification of wisdom and strength. Can we use the ancient mythology now?

This is an interesting question. I find it interesting since I have often though about the different myths we lived with when we were previously engaged in spirituality and how these myths formulated our values and modus operandi.

Let us examine, for a moment, how some classes of ancient people functioned. In the literature connected with early pre-Christian people, we see that many of them were, what we sometimes call in a demeaning way, "Pagans." If you know something about them, you will see that many of them were in close touch with their environment and directly perceived and interacted with the mystical nature of the elements, nature, life in all its forms, and the etheric energy which was the home to nature spirits and other living beings. These were forces they could feel, tap into, and gain benefit from when they were in harmony with them, or who would destroy them when they were in disharmony with them.

Putting aside for a second our prejudices with these ‘primitive’ people and accepting the good in this, we can see that there is something to be learned here. I see a direct parallel between the ideal of living in harmony with nature, one’s own energy and the extended energy of all life around us, and my own suggestion that we accept all that is connected to us as an expression of our spiritual energy. I see the harmonic resonance of our physical energy as a direct manifestation of our internal spiritual resonance. I see our creations and the consequences of them as a direct manifestation of our spirit. I see that there are multiple sources of spiritual energy and these can and do manifest in manners we cannot directly perceive with our eyes unless we are trained to do so through opening our spiritual awareness and sensitivity. Therefore, there are many parallels between the pagan ideals and my own. I love the plethora of personality within all existence as it gives so many opportunities for connection to others. Nothing in this ideal prevents one from connecting to the Divine Sources of all things and seems to point towards such a power by implication.

I do not consider my perceptions as mythology just because someone else labels them as such and neither would I consider offering people a mythology as a central point in their lives. Even though I am well aware that having a centralized belief system and an awesome beyond visible reality as the glue that holds society together, it would be counter-productive to base societal ease on a myth. In the case of the pagan peoples, their view of life and the philosophy they lived by was not a product of a myth but of their direct perception; in other words, they did not have to be told to believe it for they considered it as largely self-evident. Certainly they were taught things and accepted them, but the power of this kind of naturist life style is in the direct perception of the validity of it, not in a faith in it.

I could consider modern forms of religion, shall we call them post-pagan religious idealists?, as based on a myth to the extent they depend on leaps of faith and belief more than direct experience. That which depends on belief to be accepted is more of a myth than that which one can perceive. If you can perceive or feel it it becomes an experience that is almost always labeled as reality, indeed, it is an observable reality that can be shared by other witnesses and reproduced with the proper methodology. That which you do not directly perceive is something you believe because you should or you want to, or you strongly wish it be true. Many people believe something because it gives them strength to get beyond a problematic situation in their lives and gives them hope for a better future. In many respects, this search for utopia is myth.

I think one can be very mystical and very connected with something ‘other-worldly’ and not be caught up within the label of myth and not blackballed as irrational. If one feels comforted by a centralized mythical belief, then consider that an awareness of and connection to the personalized and individuated etheric energy around us is similar to what we now label as mythology, namely the gods and so on that have been recognized in Greek, Roman, Nordic, Celtic, Hindu or other religious traditions. After all, as you said, the people who lived in these cultures did not think what they did was part of a myth, they really believed it. Their true belief led them to have many experiences in their daily lives. The modern people who accept such beliefs on the basis of faith do not have the same connection as their ancient predecessors.

The word myth really only applies to people who are outside a particular culture looking in and judging the way the natives of that culture lived. Therefore present day adherence to any mythological belief system can never be useful to anyone.

My conclusion is that you can have all the benefits you want to have without reference to a mythological structure by having a real experiential connection to those energies of life that do exist eternally and that grant enormous social, psychological and emotional benefit through seeing the universal spirituality that connects all of them.

Now to answer your question more specifically: yes, I do think the presently glorified left brain rationality has basically ruined the more elegant aspects of the human being and that children are suffering because of this. Therefore I am trying to replace the mythological structures with something that relates well with logic, reason and a good sense of the here and now. In other words, I wish to facilitate the balancing of the left and right brains and the balancing of the male and female archetypical energy and force within life. It is only through such balancing that the mystical and rational meet in a divine union. If I have not answered you completely or you want to explore this further, please feel free to continue this thread!

Hari wrote:
I could consider modern forms of religion, shall we call them post-pagan religious idealists?, as based on a myth to the extent they depend on leaps of faith and belief more than direct experience. That which depends on belief to be accepted is more of a myth than that which one can perceive. If you can perceive or feel it it becomes an experience that is almost always labeled as reality, indeed, it is an observable reality that can be shared by other witnesses and reproduced with the proper methodology. That which you do not directly perceive is something you believe because you should or you want to, or you strongly wish it be true. Many people believe something because it gives them strength to get beyond a problematic situation in their lives and gives them hope for a better future. In many respects, this search for utopia is myth.

Can we base only on the experience of direct perception? We can lose our way or stick in the details, the modern science is an example. Must there be some direction in our researches? The mythology have been giving such direction. The архетипические truths, the same in all mythologies, have been expressed through the myth. There is no архетипы of ancient mythologies in modern religions. May be it is a cause of their problems?

Hari wrote: The modern people who accept such beliefs on the basis of faith do not have the same connection as their ancient predecessors.

Why can’t they have the same faith? Is the cause that they trained out of tradition or it is not enough have only the faith to receive direct perception? It have not been always so?

Hari wrote:

The word myth really only applies to people who are outside a particular culture looking in and judging the way the natives of that culture lived. Therefore present day adherence to any mythological belief system can never be useful to anyone.

Dear Hari, please clarify it. This statement puts me in confusion. What about Radha-Krishna, Sita-Rama, Nrisimha etc? I remain devoted to Vedic beliefs, and it is not indifferently to me all that attached with these sacred images. Is it possible that the connection with mythology can not give me the benefit? Is it useless to utilize something not accepting the belief system wholly?

Hari wrote:
Now to answer your question more specifically: yes, I do think the presently glorified left brain rationality has basically ruined the more elegant aspects of the human being and that children are suffering because of this. Therefore I am trying to replace the mythological structures with something that relates well with logic, reason and a good sense of the here and now.

How great that You do such things and share with us Your discoveries. I also want to take part in it.

Hari wrote:
In other words, I wish to facilitate the balancing of the left and right brains and the balancing of the male and female archetypical energy and force within life. It is only through such balancing that the mystical and rational meet in a divine union.

Dear Hari, if You have something to add to all You have said in this quotation, please share it, because it is very interesting.

Your answer is very interesting. Thank You.

I split off your last post from this topic and created a new one. If you write after a text it makes it impossible for me to easily quote and reply to you. Therefore, either wait to continue a discussion or create a new one. Or else just let me do some administration and fix it! Either way...

Adhishthitam wrote: Can we base only on the experience of direct perception? We can lose our way or stick in the details, the modern science is an example. Must there be some direction in our researches? The mythology have been giving such direction. The ?????????????? truths, the same in all mythologies, have been expressed through the myth. There is no ???????? of ancient mythologies in modern religions. May be it is a cause of their problems?

I am not sure what the Russian words mean and my word processor cannot maintain the Russian letters, sorry. When I spoke about experience, I did not mean to imply the ideal of observable reality which is often stated as direct perception by the scientific community. I meant the very subjective and individual spiritual and esoteric experiences of divine energy and relationship which cannot be quantified. I do not consider experiences as details, I consider them the substance of what we are and the foundation of our belief system borne of these experiences. When you speak of mythology, I assume you are speaking about an esoteric belief system. Yet such a system without personal experience is nothing but a belief to one who believes but has not verified their beliefs in a significant manner. When I speak about experience, I refer to that which we perceive within us to be the truth which rules and determines what we value spiritually. This is contrasted by what we have accepted, often on what is more or less blind faith although one is reluctant to admit it, because someone has told us it is the truth.

Surely we need direction in life, but why must it be a direction given in terms that are overly specific and demandingly limiting? If you are allowed to find out the particular means by which you can connect with your own esoteric experience and simultaneously provided the tools to discover your unique connection with the divine, this seems more relevant than imprinting upon you that which a mythology or tradition has formulated over time. Again, I do not mean to say the traditions are in any way defective; rather, I am pointing out the need to spiritually evolve in ways which provide modern people a compatible environment for growth.

I accept that the histories of most religious traditions hold truths that are eternal, relevant to all people at all times, and which facilitate spiritual experiences. However, due to the manner in which they are written, they often cannot convey this important information to modern people in an optimal way. When I say the languages, concepts and analogies used to present the histories are based on a culture and time essentially foreign to the modern mind, it does not imply that the traditions are useless, wrong, foolish or whatever, . Even eternal truth has to be phrased in a way that people can understand it. Those who lived in an ancient agrarian society understood things in a different way than those whose lives are ruled by wires and chips. If you could transplant an evolved ancient and ask them to instruct modern people, they would enter into a severe culture shock. When they adjusted enough to attempt to function in this society, they would have an intolerably difficult time to relate their spiritual understanding to the modern world. They would be essentially aliens. The ancient texts are products of ancient minds and thus are in many ways alien to us. When we wish to, we can adjust to many aspects of ancient cultures, but most of the deeply mystical and esoteric experiences integral to the people of those times, would be hidden by virtue of our inability to capture that which was obvious to them. The only way to recover the essence of what they experienced is to discover it again through our own experiences using the facilities and circumstances of our society.

This does not mean we accept the modern society as good or even that we have to judge it in any manner. It means that we go on with our lives in however they are presented to us and find our own essence and energy and re-claim our power. As this is usually done within some preexisting spiritual framework, we can be affiliated with some ‘mythology’ (to use your word) or some tradition, yet not bound by any aspect of it. As most traditions demand total acceptance of all that has been stated, this is a difficult thing to do. Therefore I am doing what I do.

In conclusion, modern people lack a similar cultural or experiential context to the historical statements of sacred texts which makes it harder for them to benefit from the historical descriptions and concepts in the same manner as the ancients. We moderns can have similar experiences, develop the same kinds of capacities and have the same kind of connections to the Supreme and divine beings, but ultimately we must develop this through the context of our world. Having the freedom to find the same things the ancients found without having to go through the ancients or be stuck to them and what they wrote or said, is not a luxury, it is required. Intelligent people build on past learning and experience, but when one is bound to the past ways as the fundamental means for spiritual advancement without integrating our own experience and cultural context, ancient belief systems and value structures can act as chains. I do not think the ancients would have wanted this.

What about Radha-Krishna, Sita-Rama, Nrisimha etc? I remain devoted to Vedic beliefs, and it is not indifferently to me all that attached with these sacred images. Is it possible that the connection with mythology can not give me the benefit? Is it useless to utilize something not accepting the belief system wholly?

Hold on there! You are reading into my words something I did not intend. Please do not forget the limitations of the written word. I remain devoted to all the personalities you state. I do not remain devoted to beliefs. There is a big difference. These personalities are the essence and they are the reason for all devotion and love. Connecting to them (or others, according to the tradition) is the essence of the ancient’s documented belief system. However, their words, statements, rules, disciplines, social customs, legal customs, accepted norms of behavior, unstated values and so on, underlying their presentations do not necessarily relate to me in my present situation. Therefore, I was attempting to explain that adherence to something which may not be useful to your development is not required and if you bind yourself to a system which is not optimally designed to your present state of consciousness in the here and now, you have effectively limited your evolution. Again, I do not believe the ancients wished to limit us.

By careful examination of all the available literatures in various traditions, including the Indian ones, we observe a continuous development of conception through time. The original culture was one of the mother, of the nature and of the innate connection between all things. Over time, this was transformed by scholars (sages) who developed an alternative presentation of the prevalent thoughts that ruled the intelligentsia. Then came other literatures which pointed in other directions and this constant updating and clarification of particular schools of thought continues even today. People have always influenced traditions with their motives, their limitations, and their desires for what they feel is best. The appearance of Lord Caitanya established the unique and primordial connection between the male and female divinity which was lost when the mother was set aside as a dangerous obstacle to certain groups. The discussions in the Caitanya era were in many ways different from the past. A good example of how a cultural context can influence the presentation of ideas is seen in the writings of Bhaktivinode. The fact that you are writing in this forum is a departure from the traditions of the past. Yet, the point of it all is to connect with the divine in pure love. It is that point I wish to amplify, not the tradition within which the statement was first learned.