Page last updated:
Human beings share a plane of continuous creation with other forms of existence (plants, animals, different forms of consciousness, etc.). Being the most intelligent creature in their environment, humans inherently have a higher degree of responsibility for the world where they live. It is not a coincidence that human children often demonstrate a very high degree of affinity and interest toward animals, toward other humans and toward the world at large which indicates an initially high state of awareness and responsibility for the world into which they come. This natural state of human consciousness gets artificially inhibited and suppressed in order to reduce a human being into a limited servant of authoritarian social orders and those who control them.
While methods for accomplishing this could be numerous, this page specifically focuses on authoritarian book religions of Christianity and, by general similarity, Islam. These religions accomplish enslavement of human consciousness through manipulation and control of thought and perception to form a persisting abstract vision of supreme authority (God) combined with a vision of self as being a subject of such authority. The persistence of such a view is achieved through direct enforcement and indoctrination on one side and suppression of efforts to develop any alternative visions (perception models) of reality on the other.
Authority [Oxford Dictionary]
1 The power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.
Authoritarian [Oxford Dictionary]
1 Favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.
1.1 Showing a lack of concern for the wishes or opinions of others; dictatorial.
Author [Merriam-Webster Dictionary]
1a: one that originates or creates. b capitalized: God.
2: the writer of a literary work (as a book).
Christianity is based on a book called the Bible which consists of the Old and New Testaments, while Islam is based on Koran which is an Arabic appendage that follows and expands on the Biblical narrative. While both of these religions are based on ancient Judaic writings, Judaism itself is more complex and should be discussed separately to understand the multiple dimensions of its practice. Judaism is not a proselytized religion and is not a religion in the sense that Christianity and Islam is, as Judaism “encompasses the religion, philosophy, culture and way of life of the Jewish people.” [Wikipedia] Judaism, by definition, is a religious, philosophical and cultural phenomenon of the Jewish people and is limited to those that are identified as such. In effect, Christianity and Islam took a Jewish concept of God and made it applicable to everyone while completely negating and even deliberately destroying any prior cultural or philosophical constructs within cultural groups where it has proliferated.
Basic Visions of The Bible
The Bible presents an IDEA (mental abstraction) of an unseen identity (God) as OMNIPOTENT AUTHORITY who created everything including humans. The Bible itself is presented as being the word of this identity.
Man’s value to God is assessed in terms of man’s FAITH in God’s existence and power and man’s OBEDIENCE to God’s will.
Because this God is unseen and unheard, there is a need for selected men, and indeed entire institutions, to represent God, to communicate God’s will and interpret God’s word since the Bible is not an easily read or understood book and indeed has been interpreted, translated, and modified in many different ways throughout its existence.
God created a male – Adam – out of clay and created a female – Eve – out of Adam’s rib.
[Wouldn’t be more logical for God to first create a female, as a vessel of life for the human race, and then impregnate her with a seed?]
The first instance of disobedience to God is known as the “original sin” for which humanity is bearing a punishment of laborious life on Earth. Because of the “original sin,” all humans are considered to be “flawed” at birth.
The first disobedience to God (i.e. the original sin) was an act of eating the “forbidden fruit” from the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden. Adam was convinced to eat the fruit by Eve who was first convinced by a snake in the tree.
God’s general preoccupation is to watch, judge, and punish or reward humans… even though each human was supposedly granted “free will” to act at one’s own discretion. God ultimately rewards good behavior by sending a human soul, after human’s death, to a place of joy called Heaven (or Paradise) and punishes bad behavior by sending a human soul to a place of agonizing suffering called Hell – to enjoy or suffer for eternity. God also has “plans” for various humans and mankind overall.
The existing world and man’s experiences in it are viewed as something secondary and only valuable to the extent that man’s life constitutes a form of “trial” – a deciding period for whether man’s soul is sent to Heaven or Hell in the afterlife.
[Note: this makes a VISION of life after death more important than actual existence, and experiences of that existence, during man’s life.]
God, who is all-powerful, nevertheless has a nemesis called Satan that manipulates humans into “sin” and disobedience of God, as well as a denial of God’s existence or God’s omnipotent authority. When a human has difficulties with believing in God or following “God’s will” or thinking and behaving in ways not prescribed by or prohibited by the Bible (or God’s “representatives”), that human is viewed as being manipulated by Satan or possessed by demons – evil entities who act on Satan’s behalf.
Sin is generally defined as a transgression against “God’s law” or falling short of ideals set fourth in the Bible.
A selected race of humans known as Jews are considered to be God’s chosen people. God brought suffering and death onto other humans in order for the fate of the Jewish people to be fulfilled (such as in Exodus). According to the Bible, after escaping slavery in Egypt, Jews walked around in a desert for 40 years led by their leader Moses. The whole ordeal ended with Moses going up a mountain and getting a list of ten “commandments.” The final destination for the wondering Jews was the “promise land” of Israel which is actually within a few days of walking distance from the central area of Egypt (modern day city Cairo).
The New Testament of the Bible, which many Jews do not accept, describes a story of God’s only son, Jesus Christ (and his disciples), who decided to allow himself to be sacrificed to atone for all of humanity’s sins, past and future. Those who thereafter accept and embrace (worship) Jesus Christ as their savior become absolved of their sins… sort of… and through the grace of Jesus Christ, as an intermediary between God and men, get a chance to go to Heaven and/or be reborn after the final “Judgment Day” that the New Testament prophesizes. Those that through their lifetime do not accept Jesus Christ as their savior can expect to receive some form of punishment down the road (eternal suffering in Hell?).
The Bible also contains numerous stories that seem to communicate moral truths and maybe describe some historical events, but in the end they are all designed to reinforce a vision of the Biblical God as some supreme power over humanity.
There is a lot more than can be said about the Bible and its Arabic appendage – the Koran – but the bottom line is this:
Biblical “God” is a form of a mental abstraction – a shared vision, within a group, of an identity with omnipotent power and authority. This vision is further associated with visions of judgment and punishment which are reinforced by actual judgment and punishment from members within a group who embrace the Biblical view of reality. It is also imposed and imposes itself through the induction of fear: a man has an abstract idea of God (according to the Bible) and yet unable to change or discard it since such an act is associated with ideas (or visions) of something bad happening for questioning the existence and authority of this God. It is also connected to a (Biblical) vision of self as being in the sphere of God’s influence. The fear of God, “a God fearing man,” is looked upon as a virtue among those who embrace the Bible and its visions of reality.
It may not be clear who actually wrote these literary works (of visions and ideas for the programming of human consciousness), but what is clear is that they were created by some men to establish an abstract vision of omnipotent (and menacing) authority in order to establish and support their own positions of power over human societies. This realization has been very clearly expressed in a quote by one of the Founding Fathers of America, Thomas Paine, in his work “The Age of Reason”:
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.
It is indeed not a coincidence that God and Jesus are often referred to as “LORD” or “Lord Jesus Christ” – a title that means:
Lord is an appellation for a person or deity who has authority, control, or power over others acting like a master, a chief, or a ruler. [Wikipedia]
The Birth of Jesus Christ – A Shift From a Republic to an Empire
Is it just a mere coincidence that the “birth of Jesus Christ” that marks the beginning of a new era falls exactly on the time frame when the Roman Republic was transformed into an Empire with the first Emperor Augustus? Before Augustus, it was Julius Caesar who set the stage for the final transformation of the Republic into an Empire. It was also Julius Caesar who introduced a new calendar (which was later updated with additional changes). It is quite interesting that months of July and August correspond to the names of Julius and Augustus while September, October, November and December simply correspond to Latin numbers Septem (seven), Octo (eight), Novem (nine), and Decem (ten). Was there supposed to be just 10 months based on the decimal system, not 12?
BC (Before Christ) and AD (Latin “Anno Domini” – in the year of the Lord) or BCE (Before Common Era) and CE (Common Era) marks a shift from a multi-cultural and relatively diverse social construct within a Republic to an emergence of uniform social constructs under an Empire-style dictatorship, and hence also the shift from naturally developing polytheistic cultures toward the enforcement of a created religion of Christianity (and later Islam in another part of the world) which supported authoritarian, Empire-style visions of reality based on One Patriarchal God / Lord (represented in reality by emperors, monarchs, and patriarchs) and his faithful and obedient servants – “slaves of God” (everyone else).
How do you create a new story? You look over various stories that are already there and make adaptations to fit your own narrative. That’s why there can be found many similarities between the story of Jesus Christ and other stories in pre-Christian cultures (book “The Pagan Christ” by Tom Harpur is a good place to start).
Shortly before Augustus became Emperor of Rome, he conquered Egypt (31BC) which was already under control of Greeks for a few hundred years (since Alexander the Great invaded Egypt in 332BC). Rome had plenty of mythological story-lines to explore in creating a story of Jesus Christ – the savior and a “middle man” between humanity and the God of the Bible. It may have been the necessary “bridge” between the public at large and what has traditionally been a God exclusively of and for the Jewish people. How or why would anyone else embrace an obscure God based on some book writings before the creation and advance of Christianity and Islam that adopted Jewish literature into their own theology? There was not even a Bible back then in its traditional sense that was being disseminated to people around the world; and different cultures, Romans including, had their own gods that worked for them!
Religion in the Roman Empire encompassed the practices and beliefs the Romans regarded as their own, as well as the many cults imported to Rome or practised by peoples throughout the provinces. The Romans thought of themselves as highly religious, and attributed their success as a world power to their collective piety (pietas) in maintaining good relations with the gods (pax deorum). …
Roman religion was practical and contractual, based on the principle of do ut des, “I give that you might give.” Religion depended on knowledge and the correct practice of prayer, ritual, and sacrifice, not on faith or dogma, although Latin literature preserves learned speculation on the nature of the divine and its relation to human affairs. For ordinary Romans, religion was a part of daily life. Each home had a household shrine at which prayers and libations to the family’s domestic deities were offered. Neighbourhood shrines and sacred places such as springs and groves dotted the city.
Judaism was picked as an ideal platform for the new religion of Christianity (and then Islam) as it already provided a vision of a single omnipotent and authoritarian God that was based on a book story (i.e. words of authority) and disconnected from any observable phenomena in nature. There was no need for validation in reality. Authoritative statements – the “Word of God” – were presented as self-validating “proofs” of the existence of this “book God.” It was a complete monopoly on the vision of God and the nature of reality by the ruling elites (this obviously included an envisioned reality of human beings as being in the domain of this new God).
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
In other words, the reality is what some authority says it is, no further proof or reasoning required.
Once this principle in human consciousness was set in place, it opened the door for a complete psychological domination and control by whoever claimed to represent the Biblical God and his “Word.”
“God said,” “Jesus said,” “The Bible says” was all that was now required to invoke the power of psychological manipulation and subjugation awarded by the new religion based on some writings rather than actual experience and relationships with the perceivable realities of existence.
In this light, Christianity can be seen as an ancient form of “psychological operation” created by the militaristic dictatorship elites of the newly emerging Roman Empire.
Some works related to this subject already exist:
“Caesar’s Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus” by Joseph Atwill
– article about this book (PDF)
Christianity as a Tool of Psychological Warfare and Enslavement
How do you enslave a group of humans whose consciousness is deeply integrated with the natural world (and with the spiritual world of their ancestors) and whose greatest honor for a man is to die in battle fighting for his land, for his kin and for his freedom, both physical and spiritual? You work to destroy their cultural consciousness and through force and indoctrination “convert” such people to a religion like Christianity that demands abandonment of everything real in life in favor of an abstract vision of a utopian “eternal life” after death:
Mark 10:17-30 [New International Version (NIV)]
17 As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. “Good teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
18 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. 19 You know the commandments: ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, you shall not defraud, honor your father and mother.’”
20 “Teacher,” he declared, “all these I have kept since I was a boy.”
21 Jesus looked at him and loved him. “One thing you lack,” he said. “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” 22 At this the man’s face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.
23 Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!” 24 The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
26 The disciples were even more amazed, and said to each other, “Who then can be saved?” 27 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.”
28 Then Peter spoke up, “We have left everything to follow you!”
29 “Truly I tell you,” Jesus replied, “no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel 30 will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age: homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—along with persecutions—and in the age to come eternal life.
This is very similar to Scientology where the followers of Hubbard readily “disconnect” from their families and from their life savings in favor of a vision of “eternal life” sometime in the future.
Of course, once an individual abandoned everything, the only thing remaining is the reality of his own self, and here “Jesus” (in reality whoever authored this text) offers a similar “solution:”
Matthew 16:24-27 [New International Version (NIV)]
24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 25 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. 26 What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? 27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done.
Indeed, all the hype aside, “Jesus” sounds like a typical totalitarian cult leader. Similarly, Scientology clergy are made to sign a “Billion Year Contract” in commitment to following the aims of Scientology and the teachings of Hubbard (thus forever forgoing any personal goals or an identity of one’s choice).
Abandoning one’s own “home,” “brother and sisters,” and one’s own “self,” especially in ancient times, would usually be considered an act of treason, save for special circumstances when, for example, someone wanted to become a wanderer and go on exploring. But really, this is not necessarily the physical departure we are talking about here: Christianity actually advocates for the “disconnection” from one’s roots in spiritual and psychological sense – disconnection from the reality of self, from one’s own kin and ancestors, from one’s homeland, and ultimately disconnection from the natural world at large by prohibiting recognition and relationship with any other power outside of those established by the Bible.
Not surprisingly, Christianity is not so dismissive when it comes to serving the government:
Whether the Bible uses the terms “master,” “ruler,” “government,” or any other name for an established authority, the instruction is always the same – obey. We must remember that God created the authorities ruling over us just as He created us. As Paul wrote to the Romans, “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves” (Romans 13:1-2). Peter wrote, “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right” (1 Peter 2:13-14). Both Peter and Paul also remind slaves repeatedly to be obedient to their masters for the same reasons (Ephesians 6:5-8; Colossians 3:22-25; 1 Timothy 6:1-2; 1 Peter 2:18-20; Titus 2:9-11).
Also interesting is how “Jesus” advises to deal with enemies:
Matthew 5:43-48 [New International Version (NIV)]
Love for Enemies
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Matthew 5:38-40 [New International Version (NIV)]
Eye for Eye
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.
In other words, the thing to do is to submit to your enemies and pray for their well being (as they cut your head off, take your property, rape your wife and enslave your children? This was very much a part of the reality of existence for over a thousand years since Christianity was introduced.) Of course, the thing to do with real enemies, especially in medieval times, was to take an axe and chop some heads so that you can keep yours. And an advertised philosophy of revenge – “eye for eye” – was a good deterrent that made anyone think twice before attacking someone’s family or tribe or a general cultural group… while “turn the other cheek” serves as an invitation for hostile elements to roll in with an invasion.
It is no coincidence that the Roman Empire itself started falling apart shortly after Christianity was instituted as a state religion (followed by a period of Dark Ages), and Kievan Rus’ was overrun by Mongols [1240s AD] a few generations after the conversion [from around 990 AD].
Roman Empire: In the early 4th century, Constantine I became the first emperor to convert to Christianity. During the rest of the fourth century Christianity became the dominant religion of the Empire. The emperor Julian made a short-lived attempt to revive traditional and Hellenistic religion and to affirm the special status of Judaism, but in 380, under Theodosius I Christianity became the official state church of the Roman Empire, to the exclusion of all others. From the 2nd century onward, the Church Fathers had begun to condemn the diverse religions practised throughout the Empire collectively as “pagan.” Pleas for religious tolerance from traditionalists such as the senator Symmachus (d. 402) were rejected, and Christian monotheism became a feature of Imperial domination. Christian heretics as well as non-Christians were subject to exclusion from public life or persecution, but Rome’s original religious hierarchy and many aspects of its ritual influenced Christian forms, and many pre-Christian beliefs and practices survived in Christian festivals and local traditions.
. . .
The reign of Julian, who attempted to restore Classical Roman and Hellenistic religion, only briefly interrupted the succession of Christian emperors. Theodosius I, the last emperor to rule over both East and West, died in 395 AD after making Christianity the official religion of the empire. The Western Roman Empire began to disintegrate in the early 5th century as Germanic migrations and invasions overwhelmed the capacity of the Empire to assimilate the migrants and fight off the invaders. The Romans were successful in fighting off all invaders, most famously Attila, though the empire had assimilated so many Germanic peoples of dubious loyalty to Rome that the empire started to dismember itself.
Germanic Christianity: In the 4th century, the early process of Christianization of the various Germanic people was partly facilitated by the prestige of the Christian Roman Empire among European pagans. Until the decline of the Roman Empire, the Germanic tribes who had migrated there (with the exceptions of the Saxons, Franks, and Lombards, see below) had converted to Christianity.
It is clear that the enforced conversion to Christianity combined with suppression of all alternative beliefs (cultures, visions of reality) lead to the weakening of Roman construct of society making it incapable of assimilating other cultures and religions under its new “cultural construct” which dictated narrow and uniform beliefs under Christianity.
The similar pattern shows up almost everywhere, if you look for it. Here is one for England:
The Christianisation of Anglo-Saxon England was a process spanning the 7th century.
[Viking Age] The Viking Age is the period from late 8th century to mid 11th century in European history, especially Northern European and Scandinavian history, following the Germanic Iron Age. It is the period of history when Scandinavian Norsemen explored Europe by its seas and rivers for trade, raids, colonisation and conquest.
. . .
In England, the beginning of the Viking Age is dated to 8 June 793 [right after Christianization of Anglo-Saxons], when Vikings destroyed the abbey on Lindisfarne, a centre of learning [Bible studies?] on an island off the northeast coast of England in Northumberland. Monks were killed in the abbey, thrown into the sea to drown, or carried away as slaves along with the church treasures, giving rise to the traditional (but unattested) prayer—A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine, “Free us from the fury of the Northmen, Lord.”
Christianity was inducing a state of ignorance (by inhibiting and manipulating the development of human intelligence and perception of reality) along with a state of spiritual / psychological submission in order to rob the host populations of their wealth while offering “solutions” in the form of “prayers” away from concepts of actual power through the development of real strength and intelligence.
Christians became easy prey for the not yet psychologically subdued “barbarians” because of the form of self-identity and a vision of reality that Christianity embraced – being submissive, a martyr, and a “slave of God” (some envisioned abstract of authority which was represented by real authority in the form of Christian Patriarchy). But of course, once the spiritual, psychological, and intellectual subjugation for the majority of diverse cultures of Europe was achieved through mass conversions to Christianity, the powers and abilities of the local populations were more or less equalized, and it was now simply a fight for power and influence between different branches of Christianity and related monarchies.
And so with Slavs following the conversion to Christianity:
According to Wikipedia: The English term slave derives from the ethnonym Slav. In medieval wars many Slavs were captured and enslaved, which led to the word “slav” becoming synonym to “enslaved person”.
Slavs – the people of word and glory before Christianity; Slavs – the slaves after the conversion to Christianity: the psychological enslavement preceded the physical one.
Christian faith may be a leisure of a civilized and orderly society where it has become limited to “Sunday church,” but it is completely impractical in the face of hardcore realities of existence the skilled use of force is commonly the deciding factor, not “morals” combined with faith in the unseen and the supernatural. It is the use of force combined with intelligence that allows men to clearly perceive the realities they are facing and to envision and implement practical solutions in creating desirable results in reality.
Man’s ability to use force and man’s ability to perceive and to reason is exactly what Christianity was designed to inhibit [and so is 1960’s Scientology] – hence, the general view of this so called religion as in actuality being an effective tool of psychological warfare in a campaign to conquer and enslave target populations. Resetting the “historical clock” and destroying cultural memory by spreading lies and disinformation about previous cultures, while suppressing true information and insight, has been a part of this psychological warfare.
Let’s look at another passage from the “New Testament:”
1 John 2:18-23 / 4 [New International Version (NIV)]
18 Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.
. . .
22 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
. . .
4 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.
4 You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. 5 They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. 6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[d] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.
The Bible reeks of psychological manipulation sentence after sentence. Anyone that doesn’t accept false teachings of the Bible is of the “spirit of antichrist.” And of course those that “speak from the viewpoint of the world” (constructing and communicating perceptions of actual realities of existence) are of the “spirit of falsehood,” while those that embrace Biblical delusions divorced from reality are of the “spirit of truth” – a very clear example of psychological manipulation to divorce man’s consciousness from contact with reality and isolate it into delusions through which it can then be further manipulated.
This is also a clear example of induced (or conditioned) psychosis which then can spill into hostile behavior such as was actually the case with executions and mass murders of anyone who did not embrace Biblical “truths.” Notice, how it suggests not to listen to anyone with an alternative and especially contradictory (disagreeable) view, but brand them right away with a negative identity label (i.e. an “anti-christ”). This is very similar to Scientology’s notion of “disconnection” and branding a disagreeable person as an “anti-Scientologist” or a “suppressive person” which is basically synonymous with someone who is viewed as being evil and an “enemy of humanity.” [In Scientology, “disconnection” is a practice of severing communication and any relationships with those deemed hostile to Scientology and anyone who may be connected to such a person or group.]
There is also a striking similarity of specifically negatively branding those that left and perhaps spoken out in disagreement, as well as a vision of doom and gloom – “this is the last hour” (paragraphs 18-19). Ron Hubbard’s version of “doom and gloom”:
The entire agonizing future of this planet – and every man, woman and child on it – and their destinies for the next billions of years depend on what you do here and now in Scientology. This is a deadly serious activity.
Methods of Enforcement
3 “You shall have no other gods before me.
4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
How can a vision of God that is not evident in existence, but which is based on book stories and words of men, be enforced over visions of reality connected to enduring relationships with actual forces/phenomena/manifestations in existence as was the case with pre-Christian religions (cultural worldviews) which were based on observations and contact / interaction with the evident forces in nature? – through lots of ENFORCEMENT (at least initially), intimidation, induction of fear and continuous repetitions in the form of regular ministries, preaching, rituals of prayer and worship, and “education” (indoctrination) on the Bible and the visions of reality that it carries. This “program” would also include continuous suppression of establishing direct contact and relationship with natural forces and attempts to form (develop) perception of the actual nature of existence to include the realities of the natural world, the realities of one’s self and of other humans – hence, the suppression of scientific work, of efforts at self-improvement and empowerment, of efforts at developing greater intellectual abilities and gaining (real) knowledge especially relating to the nature of existence and one’s ability to effect it.
These book visions would gain further “validity” or “solidity” in human consciousness by becoming interwoven with actual experiences connected to real authority figures (such as parents and priests) and interactions with other humans within a shared culture. In other words, Biblical visions of JUDGMENT and PUNISHMENT would gain in power because (in the mind) they would become connected to (associated with) actual experiences of judgment and punishment by other humans, especially when such humans use a vision of God in delivering such judgment and punishment. (Christian Inquisitions is one of the most direct example of this).
It is not a coincidence that a newborn child in many practices of Bible-based religions is “greeted” with a painful experience of circumcision to cement a sense of agonizing pain and suffering into the psyche of a new human being which is subconsciously connected to a vision of God and God’s “authoritarian representatives” who perform the rite.
In Dianetics, this would be simply known as an “engram” (a memory recording of a traumatic experience) on which other engrams and “locks” can be built in a chain of traumatic experiences and associations. A “lock” is a non-traumatic experience that nevertheless “restimulates” a chain of traumatic memories and through association becomes “locked” to them. In such a way, visions of pain and suffering presented in the Bible can be “locked” to actual experiences of pain and suffering.
For those that are not familiar with the subject of Dianetics, here is a portion of Dianetics Instructional DVD which demonstrates the general theory:
It is doubtful that a vision of a judgmental and punishing “God” would take hold if it was not so thoroughly re-enforced by actual judgment and punishment (as well as deliberate infliction of trauma in religious “rituals”) by other humans within a culture, on top of continuous indoctrination through preachings and Bible studies.
It is possible that there was an original, authentic Christianity (Gnostic Christianity?) as a practice of enlightenment for western societies that was actually “hijacked” and integrated into (appended to) the Bible in order to take control of the movement and make it subject to the false visions of God and reality established by the Bible itself. Jesus was “re-branded” into being the “son of (Biblical) God” and used as a sacrifice for that God. Perhaps, the true Jesus, if such even existed, was never meant to be worshiped or given a title of “Lord” turning him into yet another symbolic figure of authority.
There has existed a speculation that if there was such a man as Jesus Christ that most likely he would have been a student of vedic culture or teachings. In this view, the books of the New Testament should be suspected as being filled with lies and disinformation about the true character of Christ and his movement that may have actually existed back in the day. It may be the case that in order to prevent the true teachings from spreading, an alternative story of Christ was made up and disseminated as part of the Bible. But then again, the whole story may have just been made up in order to include everyone within the domain of the “distant” and judgmental God of the Bible.
[Note, “the Sanskrit word véda “knowledge, wisdom” is derived from the root vid- “to know”. This is reconstructed as being derived from the Proto-Indo-European root *u̯eid-, meaning “see” or “know”” (Wikipedia). It is the same words in modern Russian: ведать (vedat’) which means “to know with understanding” and видеть (videt’) which means “to see.”]
Russian Orthodox Church contains within its history wonderful names of Saints Cyril and Methodius. In some sense we are a Church of Cyril and Methodius. They came out of the enlightened Greco-Roman world and went to preach the Gospel to Slavs. And who were Slavs? These were vandals, barbarians, people that say nonsensical things; these are second-rate humans, almost animals. And to them came the enlightened men bringing the light of the wisdom of Christ, and they did something very important – they started to speak with these barbarians in their own tongue [language]; they created Slavic alphabet [Cyrillic], Slavic grammar and translated the Word of God into their own language [Slavic language].
Patriarch Kirill is the “Pope” of Russian Orthodox Church which is supposedly responsible for the spiritual enlightenment and well being of a large expanse of Slavic populations. His words demonstrate quite clearly the actual nature of Christianity – a culturally and psychologically subversive movement designed to disconnect human consciousness from reality and displace authentic, nature based cultures with a delusional world-view and a philosophy of submission to authority (Christian patriarchy). Destruction, vilification, and suppression of pre-Christian cultures has always been an integral part of Christian movements.
The “saints” Cyril and Methodius came to Slavs from no other place than the Roman Empire or what was left of it in the from of “Byzantine” or the “Eastern Roman” Empire. These two terms are “historiographical terms created after the end of the realm; its citizens continued to refer to their empire as the Roman Empire or Romania, and to themselves as ‘Romans’.” [Byzantine Empire]
So who were Slavs prior to Christianity?
English word Slavs in Russian is СЛАВЯНЕ
which comes from the word СЛАВА
meaning GLORY (or fame) which in turn is based on the word СЛОВО
meaning WORD. So Slavs literary means “people of the word” or those who dealt in language(s). A concept of “being famous” or “being glorified” ultimately comes out of a concept of “being spoken of.”
[Some word pronunciations were provided where a little “play” icon appears next to a word. You can also use Google translate or this website – https://forvo.com/languages/ru/ – to hear pronunciation of Russian words.]
English word “pagans,” which is a derogative (lessening, belittling) term invented by Christians, in translation to Russian is ЯЗЫЧНИКИ
which comes from the word ЯЗЫК
meaning language or tongue. So an obscure word “pagans” in English is a revealing word in Russian to mean “people dealing in language(s).”
It should be noted, that the notion of language in ancient times was much deeper than it is today which is more “distant” and superficial based more on associations with abstract concepts rather than perceptions of actual realities – this is a result of book based education where humans, for years, are rendered to sit motionless and forced to memorize and regurgitate concepts out of books while being deprived of direct interaction with the actual realities of existence. Language in ancient times was a thoughtful way to construct, retain and communicate complete perceptions, to form a process of reasoning (logical connections), and provide the means of direct and meaningful interaction with the surrounding environment.
A Swedish artist demonstrates a form of “ancient linguistics” – using her voice to call a herd of cows.
Talking (or rather communicating) with animals and the natural world at large (including trees and other plants) is not just some “fairy tales” (and was not just accomplished through verbal sounds but also through the language of feelings and telepathic communication). It was an integral part of the past Vedic cultures.
Here is another video where a woman demonstrates telepathic communication with a panther:
Russian word for a “fairy tale” is СКАЗКА
which comes from the word СКАЗАТЬ
meaning “to tell” or a longer word СКАЗАНИЕ
which means “a telling.” It is unclear how the word “fairy” got attached to “a tale” in English which must have also been derived from the word “a telling.”
Of course, the extent of someone’s ability to connect with and understand the natural world would depend on that person’s level of interaction with and immersion into the natural world. In Russian there was a special word for a person who lived in the woods and was an expert on the natural world – ЗНАХАРЬ
– which is derived from the word ЗНАТЬ
meaning “to know.” This was basically a herbalist, a doctor, a guide through the woods, an adviser on the ways of nature… etc.
Understanding and interacting with the surrounding world (including animals) through the skilled use of language was a common characteristics among many, if not all, pre-Christian cultures.
In fact, Slavs worked together with Scandinavians, and Vikings specifically, to establish and expand control over parts of the modern day territories of Belarus, Ukraine and Russia. Kievan Rus’ which is believed to have been the first major epicenter of Slavic people was ruled by Rurik Dynasty founded by a Viking prince Rurik. Modern day Ukrainian Coat of Arms is nearly an identical trident that was also a seal (with some variations) for the various ruling descendants of Rurik Dynasty. It would indeed be surprising not to find at least some common words or roots between Scandinavian and Slavic languages. Even though they are quite different in general, they still came out form a single general group of Indo-European languages based on a theorized ancestor language: Proto-Indo-European. Interestingly enough, according to ancient.eu:
It is highly probable that the earliest speakers of this language originally lived around Ukraine and neighbouring regions in the Caucasus and Southern Russia, then spread to most of the rest of Europe and later down into India. The earliest possible end of Proto-Indo-European linguistic unity is believed to be around 3400 BCE.
It is very safe to assume that Scandinavian and Slavic people back in time had basically interchangeable cultures and ways of looking at the world and probably shared some aspects of language. Slavic language itself was not as diversified as it is today (into Ukrainian, Russian, Belorussian, and so on), and language vocabulary back in the day was quite limited in comparison to modern times. There was also no nations or clear national identities, no “citizenship” or visa requirements, no statewide forms of communication or standard education to establish and “solidify” a common culture and a group-identity within a given nation. It was people living in relatively autonomous tribal settlements that may or may not have been organized under some general ruler (depending on the settlements).
How did different groups of people identify themselves and others in terms of each other when there were no clear boundaries or set national identities? They probably looked at and compared physical appearances, “gods” embraced within a culture, ways of thinking and perceiving different realities in the world, traditions, overall feelings (intuition) they experienced toward the people they met, etc. There was probably not even a rigid differentiation along the lines of us-Scandinavians and them-Slavs especially when the term “Slavs” simply meant “people of glory” – a concept which could have very well applied to Vikings as well. Or did the modern designation of “Slavs” even exist back in those times? They probably thought of (identified) each other in terms of settlements and ways of living – the kind of environments a given group occupied and their predominant occupation (worriers, farmers, traders, etc.) – and thought of ways they could interact with each other either through war, trade, some form of cultural exchange or joint ventures.
It was a long way through the emergence of larger provinces, dynasties, monarchies, city-states and empires, and then onto nations with continuous language and culture diversification to result in “thicker” barriers in the perceived realities of each other among different groups of people to eventually have an ability for one group to agree with a notion of themselves as being a “master race” somehow inherently superior to others – as was the case with the misguided race ideology in Nazi Germany. One can only wonder what information did the ruling Nazis rely upon in making such a wild claim when it should have been a common knowledge that different people moved around and criss-crossed each others paths with relatively interchangeable cultures before they were segregated into more defined group-language-culture constructs. … as if such a misguided race ideology was inserted on purpose to psychologically / spiritually isolate the Germanic people from a spiritual connection to other groups. In this way, it seems as if Nazi Germany was set-up for disaster from the very beginning.
If Hitler and his associates truly wanted a better world for the German people, it would make a lot more sense to develop and advertise a shared and inclusive vision of a better life for all the “Aryan” races of Europe as an alternative to a sprawling communist takeover which already brought so much suffering and devastation to Slavs within the former Russian Empire which was overthrown by the communist Bolshevik revolution in 1917. Why spread a lie that it was only the Germanic people that were the true “Aryans” and a “master race” on top of it? What are the valid basis for such an assertion? It can, in fact, be easily demonstrated to be false with the most basic overview of language and culture developments as well as migration patterns of different human populations. This is something to think about…
Let’s transition back to our discussion about ancient Slavs with a paragraph from Encyclopedia Britannica on the word Aryan:
Aryan: name originally given to a people who were said to speak an archaic Indo-European language and who were thought to have settled in prehistoric times in ancient Iran and the northern Indian subcontinent. The theory of an “Aryan race” appeared in the mid-19th century and remained prevalent until the mid-20th century. According to the hypothesis, those probably light-skinned Aryans were the group who invaded and conquered ancient India from the north and whose literature, religion, and modes of social organization subsequently shaped the course of Indian culture, particularly the Vedic religion that informed and was eventually superseded by Hinduism.
In order to explain the common features shared by Sanskrit and other Indo-European languages, the Indo-Aryan migration theory states that the original speakers of what became Sanskrit arrived in the Indian subcontinent from the north-west some time during the early second millennium BCE. Evidence for such a theory includes the close relationship between the Indo-Iranian tongues and the Baltic and Slavic languages, vocabulary exchange with the non-Indo-European Uralic languages, and the nature of the attested Indo-European words for flora and fauna. [original citation: Masica, Colin (1991). The Indo-Aryan languages. Cambridge New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 36–38. ISBN 0-521-23420-4]
So Sanskrit in which Vedas where authored belongs to the Indo-European language group which came out from a single theorized ancestor language: Proto-Indo-European. As was already stated above, according to ancient.eu:
It is highly probable that the earliest speakers of this language originally lived around Ukraine and neighbouring regions in the Caucasus and Southern Russia, then spread to most of the rest of Europe and later down into India. The earliest possible end of Proto-Indo-European linguistic unity is believed to be around 3400 BCE.
— end of citation —
Interesting. So the people that spoke a language which served as a foundation for basically all the European languages (and beyond) lived on the territories of modern day Ukraine, at least according to migration theory.
Let’s pull up a brief historical summary on Ukraine (prior to conversion to Christianity):
Neanderthal settlement in Ukraine is seen in the Molodova archaeological sites (43,000–45,000 BC) which include a mammoth bone dwelling. The territory is also considered to be the likely location for the human domestication of the horse.
Modern human settlement in Ukraine and its vicinity dates back to 32,000 BC, with evidence of the Gravettian culture [stone tools] in the Crimean Mountains.
By 4,500 BC, the Neolithic [farming] Cucuteni-Trypillian Culture flourished in a wide area that included parts of modern Ukraine including Trypillia and the entire Dnieper-Dniester region [the largest settlements in Neolithic Europe].
[The name Cucuteni-Trypillian comes from the names of modern day geographic locations of Cucuteni in Romania and Trypillia in Ukraine where the artifacts of this ancient civilization were first discovered.]
A short video about Cucuteni-Trypillian Civilization:
Cucuteni videos and pictures from Romania
[A large part of Ukraine was also inhabited by Yamna culture and predecessor cultures collectively called Kurgan who are believed to have been the carriers of the initial Proto-Indo-European language. One theory for the demise of Trypillian culture is that it was overrun or absorbed by the expanding Yamnas. An alternative or additional theory is that primarily agrarian Trypillian culture demised due to climate change! This could have been the very factor that also motivated members of the neighboring Yamna culture to set-off in different directions in search for better conditions. Members of the Trypillain culture may have simply been forced to abandon their way of life and convert into a nomadic culture.]
Demise of Trypillian culture: In the 1990s and 2000s, another theory regarding the end of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture emerged based on climatic change that took place at the end of their culture’s existence that is known as the Blytt–Sernander Sub-Boreal phase. Beginning around 3200 BC, the earth’s climate became colder and drier than it had ever been since the end of the last Ice age, resulting in the worst drought in the history of Europe since the beginning of agriculture. [Anthony, David W. (2007). The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-05887-0.] The Cucuteni-Trypillian culture relied primarily on farming, which would have collapsed under these climatic conditions… — end of citation —
During the Iron Age [around 1200 BC to 600 BC], the land was inhabited by Cimmerians, Scythians, and Sarmatians.
Between 700 BC and 200 BC it was part of the Scythian Kingdom, or Scythia [considered Iranian].
Beginning in the 6th century BC, colonies of Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome and the Byzantine Empire, such as Tyras, Olbia and Chersonesus, were founded on the northeastern shore of the Black Sea. These colonies thrived well into the 6th century AD. The Goths [Germanic people] stayed in the area but came under the sway of the Huns from the 370s AD.
In the 7th century AD, the territory of eastern Ukraine was the centre of Old Great Bulgaria. At the end of the century, the majority of Bulgar tribes migrated in different directions, and the Khazars took over much of the land.
Kievan Rus’ was founded by the Rus’ people, who came from Scandinavia across Ladoga and settled in Kiev around 880 AD. Kievan Rus’ included the central, western and northern part of modern Ukraine, Belarus, far eastern strip of Poland and the western part of present-day Russia. According to the Primary Chronicle the Rus’ elite initially consisted of Varangians [Vikings] from Scandinavia.
During the 10th and 11th centuries, it became the largest and most powerful state in Europe. It laid the foundation for the national identity of Ukrainians and Russians. Kiev, the capital of modern Ukraine, became the most important city of the Rus’. …
— end of Wikipedia citation —
Ukraine indeed has quite a bit of history with a continuous development and clash of different cultures and civilizations. It is a wonder as to what kind of history and migration theories did the Nazis rely on in formulating their race ideology. How was the view justified that it was the Germanic people specifically that were the “master race” when there was not even a Germanic language group just a few thousand years ago? In fact, according to Encyclopedia Britannica on Germanic Languages:
The earliest historical evidence for Germanic is provided by isolated words and names recorded by Latin authors beginning in the 1st century BCE. From approximately 200 CE there are inscriptions carved in the 24-letter runic alphabet.
It is a similar picture when looking at Nordic language group in general:
Proto-Norse (also Proto-Scandinavian, Primitive Norse, Proto-Nordic, Ancient Nordic, Ancient Scandinavian, Old Nordic, Old Scandinavian, Proto-North Germanic, North Proto-Germanic, Common Scandinavian), was an Indo-European language spoken in Scandinavia that is thought to have evolved as a northern dialect of Proto-Germanic over the first centuries CE. It is the earliest stage of a characteristically North Germanic language, and the language attested in the oldest Scandinavian Elder Futhark inscriptions (runic alphabet), spoken ca. [circa] from the 2nd to 8th centuries (corresponding to the late Roman Iron Age and the Germanic Iron Age). It evolved into the dialects of the Old Norse language, at the beginning of the Viking Age about AD 800, which later themselves evolved into modern North Germanic languages.
And what about Proto-Germanic which preceded Proto-Norse?
Let’s compare this to Proto-Slavic:
Proto-Slavic is divided into periods. One division is made up of three periods:
– Early Proto-Slavic (until 1000 BC)
– Middle Proto-Slavic (1000 BC–0 AD)
– Late Proto-Slavic (1st–6th century)
[original citation: Savel Kliachko (1968). The sharpness feature in Slavic. Dept. of Slavic Languages and Literatures. p. 57.]
So Slavic language group was earlier than Germanic? Perhaps the most direct evidence to that could be a striking similarity of many root words between Sanskrit which dates to at least 1,500 BC and even modern day Russian (and other Slavic languages) who all came out of the theorized ancestor language, Proto-Indo-European.
Here is an interesting article from an Indian source discussing similarities between Russian and Sanskrit while trying to slide in an implication that southern tribes spread their culture up North, while a deeper research and analysis seems to indicate otherwise – that Northern tribes spread South, instead of the other way around. It should be noted, that it would be much easier for a developing human consciousness to adopt going from North to South than going from South to North where the climate is colder and more cyclical requiring the development of specialized knowledge to survive during cold periods of four season environment (requiring knowledge for special clothing, housing, food preservation, etc.). [Here is a blog post with similar information and a more extensive word list.]
The first scholar to reject the Baltic and Slavic unity (and, thus, the assumed proto-language, Balto-Slavic) was the famous linguistic genius of France, Antoine Meillet. At the beginning of this century, Professor Meillet, in several of his epoch-making publications proclaimed the notion that the few apparent similarities between Baltic and Slavic are simply either mutual, or one-way, influences upon each other, and that other similarities are simply results of parallel but independent developments whose primary origins most probably go back to the very Proto-Indo-European itself.
. . .
b) Meillet understood one basic fact: since both groups — Baltic and Slavic — are quite conservative and archaic, they both have preserved, even until the present day, many a feature inherited directly from Proto-Indo-European, features which most of the other living Indo-European languages have lost. Let us mention in this connection a simple example.
When someone who is not a trained historical linguist sees that in Lithuanian the words “when” and “then” are kada and tada and that these same words are in Russian kokda and togda (pronounced: kagda, tagda), he usually jumps to a hasty, but perhaps understandable, conclusion: „Gee whiz, Lithuanian and Russian are very similar, and they sound alike.” But this person usually does not know that in Old Indie (Sanskrit) the very same words are also kada and tada! And one can find hundreds of similar examples.
. . .
Meillet was the first to point out that there never had been one common ancestor, “Proto-Balto-Slavic,” but that Baltic separately and Slavic in its turn, also separately, developed directly from Proto-Indo-European. The few similarities which Meillet believed could be found between Baltic and Slavic were to him either a) inherited (or preserved) from Proto-Indo-European or b) parallel, but separate developments.
Slavic languages expanded and diversified to cover “over 50% of the territory of Europe” [Wikipedia] while Sanskrit remained in obscurity to serve as a “sacred language” of Hinduism. This points toward a good likelihood that the Vedic teachings were brought down into India from Northern cultures that recorded the teachings in a form of language that was native to them.
As opposed to “vandals and barbarians that said nonsensical things,” Slavs may have been the carriers of an authentic Vedic culture and teachings which Christianity then suppressed. Vedas proceeded Christianity by more than a thousand years, and that was when something was written down in India. How long could have Vedic cultures been in existence and development before that? Were there texts other than Vedas that may have perished with time or deliberately destroyed or hidden from the public? Unlike with much of Europe and Russia, Christianity did not make it to India and Asia so these territories were spared from the campaigns of cultural destruction and suppression of knowledge perpetrated by Christian movements.
[It should be noted that the concept of “vedic culture” on this page refers to a culture based on true awareness and understanding of the various aspects of existence, not to a culture based on the volumes of writings in Sanskrit collectively known as the Vedas which, in some way, could be considered yet another form of a “book religion.” The true knowingness comes from an ability to see the truth of something, and not necessarily from an ability to memorize and recite profound concepts and follow ritualistic instructions. The Vedas were brought up here as an object of historical record proving the existence of spiritual truths long time before Christianity, but whether Vedas themselves were meant to closely mirror and preserve “vedic insights” or to specifically create a religion that in actual fact departed from an authentic vedic culture is subject to question and detailed analysis of Vedic writings which was not performed for this project.]
The word RA was related to LIGHT (which also symbolized the Sun) in ancient Slavic (Indo-European?) culture as it was in ancient Egypt. Is it just a coincidence? Also, the name for an Egyptian goddess Maat sounds like “mother” in Slavic (МАТЬ
in Russian; МАТИ
in Ukrainian). Just another coincidence? Could there have been some connection between Vedic cultures of the North and the Egyptian civilization? This would definitely be an interesting area to explore.
Of course, the formal theories surrounding language development and migration patterns could be questioned, but this is way beyond the scope of this article which relies on already formulated conclusions by experts in the field.
Slavic Languages – The Key to Unlocking Ancient Spiritual Wisdom
Let’s see what we can learn about the nature of existence and our spiritual connection to it by simply looking at some modern Russian words. [Reading in Russian is relatively easy because each letter corresponds to one sound (http://masterrussian.com/blpron.shtml) which usually doesn’t change from word to word, with some exceptions. The only difficulty, once someone knows sounds for letters, is in knowing where to place stress / emphasis in a word. You can use this website to hear pronunciations of Russian words: https://forvo.com/languages/ru/]
Note: dash has been inserted into Russian words to separate word components.
|Rainbow||Ра-дуга||ДУГА stands for “bent line” so a rainbow in Russian literary means “a bent line of light.”|
|Sunrise||Ра-свет||СВЕТ is another word for light so “the light of Ra” – the Sun.|
|Culture||Культ-у-ра||literary “a cult of light.”|
|Vedas||Веды||comes from the word ВЕДАТЬ which means “to know with wisdom.” ДАТЬ also means “to give” so the word ве-дать could also mean “to give knowingness or wisdom.” It is also related to word ВИДЕТЬ which means “to see.”|
|Faith||Ве-ра||literary “to know light.”|
|Express||Вы-ра-жать||literary “to push out light.” ЖАТЬ means “to push.” ВЫ is a prefix meaning “out.” For example, word ВЫ-НОСИТЬ means “to carry out” (of some place) where НОСИТЬ means “to carry.”|
|Be happy||Ра-дуйся||literary “blow light from within.”|
|To make someone happy||Ра-довать||literary “to give light.” ДАВАТЬ means “to give.”|
|Paradise||Рай||Paradise in decoded Russian means “a place of light” (not “streets of gold” as commonly believed the place to be).|
|Samurai||Сам-у-рай||“propelling self into the place of light.” САМ means “by self” (such as doing something by oneself). “У” means “in” or “into” in Ukrainian (in Russian, it is “В”). Evidently, the original “Samurai” practice may have had something to do with a path of spiritual “enlightenment” or literary an act of suicide as in Samurai’s practice of “harakiri.”|
|Wise mind||Ра-з-ум||literary “light with mind.” УМ is a word for “mind” and is a word that can be used for any form of mind, but РАЗУМ is more specifically used for a state of aware and understanding (wise) mind. It’s light, which can also be understood as the essence of consciousness and awareness, expressed through mind resulting in wisdom. Even in English words like “illuminate” or “enlighten” are used to mean “to bring something into the light of consciousness.”|
|Develop||Ра-з-вить||literary “light with weaving.” ВИТЬ means “to weave” so to develop something means “to weave light.”|
|To rule||П-ра-вить||“to weave light” – “to rule” comes out of the same concept as “to develop.” Everything was seen to be a manifestation of Light (energy of life) so when someone ruled over something, in a way they directed or “weaved” the direction (expression) of “light” into a certain form of creation such as a certain form of social order. The first letter П may have been shortened from ПАПА meaning “father.” So initially the modern word ПРАВИТЬ may have evolved from a combination concept phrase applied to father’s commands ПАПА-РА-ВИТЬ.|
|Hurrah||Ура||The common cheer of joy and victory is also related to light and probably means “with light” or something along the lines. УРА may actually be shortened spelling from УР-РА.|
|Aura||Ау-ра||Obviously the word “aura” also has something to do with light. The original word may have been Я-У-РА meaning “I in light” or “the light of I” symbolizing the light/energy form of self rather than the physical form – i.e. the “energy body” of self.|
Could have been derived from words combination of РА-БЫТЬ meaning “light to be” or “to be light” – a designation that was probably applied to an enlightened person, a person who carried Light into the world.
Could it be that the original concept of a “slave” in Vedic culture meant something very different such as the one who is “being Light” or perhaps someone who “dwells in the Light” or someone how “carries” or “follows” the Light (follows and obeys are close concepts) as opposed to someone who is subdued by and obeys other men? In this sense, within Vedic tradition, “a slave of God” would mean something very different from being a submissive subject to some vision of a remote man-like authority figure (but in reality to men and institutions that claim to represent such a figure). There was no known practice of actual slavery in Slavic cultures.
In this view, it is very easy to see that the modern day Bible could actually be a perverted and inverted teaching of ancient Vedic cultures (especially when translated in languages with words of very different meaning and derivation). Could it be that there was an ancient (original) Bible [like the Vedas] that was very different from the one presented and “translated” to humanity in more modern times?
Also, the word AРАБ (Arab) is a near identical word that could have been given to people – Arabs – that lived in sunnier areas. They could literary have been viewed as “light / sun dwellers” by northern cultures that didn’t experience as much continuous sunshine.
|Work||Работа||Work was viewed to be an act of directing light (living energy) from within oneself to manifest some form of creative activity into the world.|
|Equality||Ра-венство||“Rule by light” or the Sun. “Everyone is equal under the Sun” may have been the original understanding as the light shines on everyone in the same way.|
“Rule by head.” ГЛА is short for ГОЛОВА meaning “head.” Also, Russian word for an “eye” is ГЛАЗ. There was probably one word for a head – ГЛА – which then diversified into “head” and “eye” as separate terms. This is probably the very reason that a symbol of an eye is used to symbolize man rule through a man-made concept of an authoritarian God of the Bible, and is a symbol that can be found in many Christian cathedrals. An eye is a human organ; formless consciousness gains awareness through pervasion.
Also, an archaic Russian word for “to speak” is ГЛАГОЛИТЬ from which comes a Russian word (still in use) for a “verb” – ГЛАГОЛ. Men rule other men through WORDS so the “word of God” is actually words of men to rule over other men. God, as an energy of life and creation, “communicates” through filling a human being with “light” causing visions, epiphanies, and realizations – a rise in awareness and intelligence where someone gains an enhanced ability to SEE – ВИДЕТЬ (videt’) and to KNOW – ВЕДАТЬ (vedat’). In Christianity, this experience may be associated with being filled with the “holy spirit” or the “spirit of Christ.”
|Russia||Россия||The modern word РО-ССИЯ may have ultimately been derived from words РА-СЕЯТЬ meaning “to sow light” and was probably initially applicable to a form of culture (cult-of-light) rather than a specific geographical location. There is also a combination of РА-СИЯТЬ meaning “the glow of light” (or the Sun). It may have also been derived from the word Rus’– РУСЬ – which may have been pronounced as Russiya – РУССИЯ – at some point by some people. In this case, the original derivation of word Rus’ must also be questioned in its connection to some perceivable reality which would have served as the basis for formulating this word.|
Language evolved as a PROCESS OF SYMBOLIZING AND COMMUNICATING PERCEPTIONS with sounds and other ways (such as pictures or hand gestures – sign language). People symbolized different realities they perceived and then in turn combined those symbolic units to form more complex symbols which could describe a phenomenon through an analogy. For example, the world for PRIDE in Russian is ГОРДОСТЬ and probably was an initial combination of words ГОРА-ДАСТЬ literary MOUNTAIN-GIVE or “to give a mountain.” Mountain was viewed as a big and unmoving object so when people encountered a “big and unmoving” character or disposition (or attitude) in someone, they had a perceptual association with a “mountain.” As it is hard to work through climbing a mountain so it can be hard to work through someone’s “pride” to accomplish something that you want with that person, such as getting some message across. And so people conceptualized that the person was “giving a mountain.”
There is a field called ETHNO-LINGUISTICS: “a field of linguistics which studies the relationship between language and culture, and the way different ethnic groups perceive the world.” – a perfect definition from Wikipedia.
Depiction of Slavs before Christianity:
The True Meaning of God and Polytheism
Russian word for a powerful worrier is БОГАТЫРЬ
. The first three letters of that word – БОГ
– is also a Russian word for GOD. [Russian word for “wealthy” is БОГАТ
as wealth is ultimately associated with power.] It’s interesting to note the similarity of this word with the English word BIG.
A “god” in ancient Vedic times simply meant a (form of) POWER. Many “gods” referred to the many powers (or forces, or phenomena, or manifestations) that people perceived in existence: the power of love and fertility, the power of war, the power of wisdom and intelligence, the power of air and storms… etc.
The various powers (or phenomena) in nature were envisioned as man-like entities as a form of meaningful “perception constructs” and the relationships between them – hence the emergence of complex polytheistic mythologies.
The formal term for assigning human traits to non-human entities is Anthropomorphism which is quite clearly defined on Wikipedia:
Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human traits, emotions, and intentions to non-human entities and is considered to be an innate tendency of human psychology.
Personification is the related attribution of human form and characteristics to abstract concepts such as nations, emotions and natural forces like seasons and the weather.
Both have ancient roots as storytelling and artistic devices, and most cultures have traditional fables with anthropomorphized animals as characters. People have also routinely attributed human emotions and behavioural traits to wild as well as domestic animals.
As an example, even in modern times Santa Claus in Russian culture is referred to as Grandpa Cold (Дед Мороз) who walks around with his granddaughter Снегурочка – a female name derived from the word “snow.”
So of course the Sun is the “Father in Heaven” who creates life by “impregnating” “the Mother” – Earth – which gives birth to life [evidently the concept of “Mother” was dropped from the Patriarchal vision of reality under Christianity]. This would be especially noticeable and clearly perceivable in places with four seasons and abundance of life where people observed life “receding” during Winter and springing (no pun intended) back to life during Spring when the days where becoming longer and warmer with the Sun being up in the sky longer and higher. They saw the sun-light brought life or caused life to appear so it is a very simple logical step from there to conclude and to view themselves as “children of the Sun” (children of “God”), as having being created by the (light of the) Sun as all the other life forms. This is where the original concept of “enlightenment” comes in as well – being “filled” with light which was literary experienced as a surge of life energy that gained in volume and intensity with advance of the Sun into Spring and Summer months. And of course people marked and celebrated these different periods with various festivities.
The observation and reasoning about seasonal cycles would also easily lead to a more abstract idea that all of existence with everything in it might undergo similar cycles but on a much longer time span, as well as contemplation on the existence of more encompassing forces or powers than those immediately visible or experienced – a concept of breathing cycles of “Brahman” that was expressed in Vedic teachings recorded in Sanskrit. “If the Sun creates life on Earth, what could have in turn created the Sun (and lights in the sky)?” – would be a very easy wonder to form for a developing human consciousness immersed in the natural world – hence, the existence of hierarchies among the “gods” within a polytheistic model of reality. For example, from observations of the Sun causing life on Earth, a developing mind could then easily theorize or envision that there may be a bigger Sun – the “Cosmic Sun” – that may be powering the existence of the entire world (universe).
In fact, these “Vedic truths” were probably so self-evident within authentic Vedic cultures of the time, that no one even bothered writing it down for themselves; they may have been written down as ready “thought constructs” for other cultures to absorb such as, to some extent, may be the case with Sanskrit Vedas. Now after over a thousands years of Christianity and book based, abstract “education” that is largely divorced from direct contact (experience) with actual realities of existence, human consciousness in Western societies is so disconnected from such simple realities of nature, that these concepts can indeed seem “profound.” Or perhaps these truths were written down and the writings were lost to time or deliberately destroyed. After all, Christianity did not make its way into India as much as it dominated much of Europe with its culturally destructive campaigns.
Vedic people used visions (perception constructs) of gods in order to perceive, connect to, invoke, create or generate a power (force, manifestation) associated with a given god. How else would you envision a power that is behind some perceived manifestations such as the emergence of life from Earth during Spring or an emerging feeling of love? To say that there is ONLY ONE GOD is to actually occlude perception and meaningful interactions / relationship with the different powers and phenomena that comprise the reality of existence. It would be analogous to trying to enforce an idea that the human body as a whole is the “only one organ” and no other organs should be recognized, understood, or interacted with. Getting indoctrinated into an existence of some “god” that is yet unknown to a member within a polytheistic culture could actually open up that person’s perception of the related phenomenon – a “god” simply representing a concept of some force or some phenomena in existence. Having gained a new concept of something, an individual would them be more likely to perceive a form of reality that is linked to such a concept.
Also keep in mind, that humans prior to Christianity and its “sibling” Islam did not view themselves as being somehow separate from nature or view existence at large as being somehow “alien” to them; they viewed themselves as a part of nature filled with powers (or forces) within themselves that were reflected in one way or another in the world around them. There was no concept of “nature” apart from some other form of existence, because existence in nature is all there was… until that relationship was severed by the enforced conceptual abstractions in Christianity and Islam that branded the natural forces, including those within oneself, with concepts or perceptions of some kind of wrong or evil.
The so called “demonic possessions” – a concept so popular among adherents of Christianity is simply a form of a nervous or psychotic breakdown (a period of insanity) due to oppression, suppression, and repression of the natural impulses within the bio-psychological construct of a human being. Females repressed in sexual thoughts and desires having been literary brainwashed into believing that such natural forces are a product of “demons” or some evil forces would simply deteriorate into episodes of insanity and delusional visions of “demons” within themselves that were actually caused by the naturally occurring sexual urges pushing against psychological repressions into freedom of expression. Virtually any form of connection to nature (including forces within oneself) was subjected to forms of suppression and vilification under Christianity (and then even more so under Islam). It is no wonder then that there would be so much confusion, ignorance, and insanity in Western cultures on the subject of self and the connection of self to the rest of existence – to the actual and ongoing creation as opposed to abstract Biblical fantasies which can inevitably result in delusions.
A DELUSION is a vision of some reality divorced from its actual state in existence. Perception, in any form, is a construct of consciousness to represent (model or envision) the nature of reality that consciousness is trying to view or understand. A delusion is not so much a matter of the (developing) quality of perception that is used – it is a question of whether the perception is being formed (developed, constructed) and modified in accordance with actual contact (interaction) with the subject of perception. A delusion is a persisting perception (model) that is divorced from contact with the actual subject of perception. It is usually based on some form of severance of contact between formation of perception and the actual subject (target) of perception which can often be combined with reinforced visions (perception constructs) being fed from another source such as other humans, books and, in more modern times, tele-VISION or other “active” and interactive media. A book is a form of “passive” communication (as an individual has to make an effort to read and to construct the visions of what (s)he is reading) – such a form of “passive” communication usually needs to be reinforced with “active” forms of communication such as communication from another human, especially when it is delivered in a forceful, authoritarian manner and/or from a source who is seen to be a “trusted authority” of some kind.
The True Purpose Behind the Concept of “One God”
ONLY ONE GOD as an abstract vision in Christianity (and Islam) simply means A SINGLE POINT OF AUTHORITY, and it represents an effort to limit and trap human consciousness under a vision of one (authoritarian) power along with a uniform worldview that is based on it, at the exclusion of all others.
3 “You shall have no other gods before me.
4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
The vision of the Biblical God is that of a slave owner who commands his subjects expecting absolute obedience with a threat of harsh punishment for disobedience while also promising potential rewards at his own discretion. Through numerous stories in the Bible it is made quite clear that reward should not be expected, but faith and obedience should always be delivered. This is a set-up for slavery which has nothing to do with the concept of an underlying power (energy, force) of creation that manifests and expresses itself through various forms of existence including that of a human being (or any other form of perceivable manifestation such as a flower, or the Sun, or some natural cycle, etc.).
One world government with one world leader – a Christian Patriarch – is a Christian vision. Christian so called “prophesy” (the book of Revelations) is actually a long term plan for the vision of reality to manifest in subjugating the entire human race under a mind-numbing, authoritarian social construct with one world leader. But of course, this is rather difficult to achieve in the real world since there will always be more than one “patriarch-wanna be” and so the movement diversifies into many “flavors” and separate groups. This is on top of the natural urge of the consciousness of life to diversify into different ways of being and expression.
In reality, there cannot even be “other gods” when contrasted to a concept of One God (power) as an ultimate creator, since any form of manifested power could in turn be viewed as a manifestation of one underlying power of creation. Recognizing and transcending different powers of existence is the way to “know God” through its many forms of expression. By denying recognition and contact with the different powers or aspects of existence (“gods”), human consciousness has been limited to a narrow identity attached to one’s transient body where as it can be as wide as the universe and beyond into other realms and dimensions… to say nothing of it being as wide as some forest or some other immediate environment where one lives. The multiple “god” system allowed humans to regulate their scope of consciousness and to selectively focus on different forms of manifestations and pick out their priorities depending on their cultural settings, environmental conditions, or some given circumstances. This system also provided the means for humans to understand the cultural consciousness of a different group by connecting to the “gods” embraced within that culture. There was no need for abandoning or enforcing anything as one could simply transition between different “gods” (as if between different languages) to operate within different cultures.
Consciousness of a human does not at all need to be limited to human form. Being a “human being” is a form of created identity (a vision of self). In fact, it was not uncommon for humans to impersonate various animals or other forms of life, forms of power, or forms of consciousness as part of rituals, plays, arts, fighting styles, or real education [explained in a different section below]. Humans could practice embodying consciousness of some animal, for example, in order to be able to better understand it, to communicate with it and/or use its abilities.
Suppression of Female Influence
In order to subjugate the consciousness of men (males), it had to be “disconnected” and controlled away from all other potential sources of powerful influence such as one’s own culture and ancestral ties, the land (natural environment) where he was born as well as his more direct relatives. But one of the most powerful and attractive sources of influence that could engage man’s consciousness away from Patriarchal control is an attractive female, especially with a developed consciousness. The force of attraction between a man and a female is one of the most direct manifestations of the force that brings life into existence – the force of creation. This natural and powerful connection between a man and a woman had to be suppressed and controlled in order to subjugate humans under Patriarchal authority. The suppression was accomplished by vilifying and blocking a sense of sexual attraction in man toward a female and by vilifying and blocking the sexual attractiveness AND intelligence in a female [it was a common theme to deny females education under Christian Patriarchal orders and is still a common theme under Islam].
Once the free and natural gender expression toward each other was suppressed, it was then allowed a controlled and narrow expression through the ceremony of marriage, approved (blessed) by a Church representative, and surrounded with all kinds of “rules of engagement” – rules for proper interaction and relationship including in the action of sex. Burqas under Islam is simply a more direct and explicit expression of the underlying intention that was already in place under Christianity.
Let’s look at a sample from Christian gospels:
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
. . .
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.
31 “It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Where is the compassion and understanding that is usually associated with Jesus Christ? Who came up with these “rules?” So what if some man finds a married woman sexually attractive? An experience of sexual attraction is just that – an experience. It is not at all abnormal or unnatural for a man to feel attraction toward an attractive female, regardless of whether she’s married or not. It can simply be acknowledged for what it is without any need to repress or express it. Stigmatization of a natural experience simply creates a problem where there doesn’t have to be one. Having women wear Burkas in Islam is simply a “solution” for this created “problem” that was already presented in Christianity based on this irrational idea that sexual attractiveness of a female can be a source of some “wrong” and lead to “God’s punishment” for a male. This also goes back to an “earlier similar” idea of a female (Eve) being at fault for man’s supposed “downfall” by seducing (convincing) a man (Adam) to eat “the fruit of knowledge,” whatever that was.
So if a relationship isn’t working, then two people must stay together and suffer for the fear of breaking “God’s law” and getting punished? Marrying a divorced female is committing adultery? – punishable by agonizing suffering in hell for eternity? How can such a belief produce anything but resentment, hate, and confusion, or some form of insanity in the end?
Females in Vedic Culture
The word for a WITCH in Russian is ВЕДЬМА
: a feminine word for a female who “knows” – a Vedic female. A masculine term for this word (no longer in use) is ВЕДУН
with another feminine alternative ВЕДУНЬЯ
. Also, an alternative meaning of this word is “that who leads (with wisdom)” To take it even further, МА at the end of the word could be a shortened from МАТЬ
which means “mother.” So the original Vedic word for a “witch” may have been ВЕД-МАТЬ to mean “a mother of knowledge (or wisdom)” – a woman who knew and taught wisdom and who used that knowledge/wisdom to help others within a tribe.
The vision of “witches” as being ugly and evil (or beautiful for the purpose of seducing and deceiving) is a product of vilification propaganda by Christianity against female carriers of Vedic culture. The destruction of “witches” by the early Christian movements was a part of the general program to destroy Vedic (wisdom, knowledge) based cultures and replace those cultures with a mind-numbing, authoritarian construct of society (Christian Patriarchy).
However, Christian visions for a “witch” may not have all been false. As nature itself is diverse so were human cultures very diverse with different forms of expression and views of reality. Vedic knowledge and abilities could be used in different ways depending on the one who wields them. But in the end, light shines on everyone in the same way, and anything that exists is ultimately powered by the same fundamental forces of existence. Judgement, concepts of good and evil, right and wrong, are products of human consciousness, not objective reality. To see something as good or evil is a form of perception that may or may not be warranted and may or may not be useful depending on the realities involved and one’s relationship with them. To embrace “objectification” of thought would be to limit one’s own ability to form different thoughts and perceptions and to be able to understand and transcend different viewpoints that can exist across diverse forms of human consciousness.
In Ukrainain, the word for a young female is ДІВЧИНА and is related to word ДИВИТИСЬ meaning to “watch” (to look) which in turn is related to word ДИВО meaning a “wonder” or a “wondrous sight” which also showed up in Latin as DIVA. In Russian there is also a word ДЕВА for a wondrous (wonder-ful) female, and it is also the same word for constellation Virgo. However, the word for “to watch” in Russian sounds completely different – СМОТРЕТЬ – which suggests that it came from elsewhere (other than from within the original Slavo-Vedic culture).
Another interesting note, and perhaps an indication of how Christian Patriarchy was perverting the meaning of words is the change in meaning for the Russian word УРОДИНА – in post-Christianization times meaning an offensive word “ugly” for a female (УРОД for male).
РОД is a root word and an actual word meaning KIN that is used to form numerous other words such as the word “homeland” – РОДИНА – which can often be combined with word “mother” – МАТЬ – to form РОДИНА-МАТЬ meaning MOTHERLAND. Examples of other words: birth – РОДЫ; give birth – РОДИТЬ; parent – РОДИТЕЛЬ; native, dear – РОДНОЙ; relatives and close friends – РОДНЯ; aggregation of people within one race, village, country, etc – НАРОД; nature – ПРИРОДА.
Russian word for “birth giving” is РОЖАТЬ which probably was initially a combination of terms РОД-ЖАТЬ literary meaning “to push kin.” It is the same thing in Ukrainian where Д was preserved РОДЖАТИ, but with “modernization” of Ukrainian language the word was also perverted in modern times to “народжувати” where a Ukrainian word ЖАТИ – to push – was substituted with ЖУВАТИ meaning “to chew.” These are all good demonstrations of how an initially very sophisticated language can be perverted in its original construct and meaning.
Coming back to the Russian word УРОДИНА – it must have initially meant something very positive as literary meaning “with kin,” “of kin,” or “in kin” and in Ukrainian – ВРОДЛИВА – still means BEAUTIFUL! Also, a Russian verb version of this word УРОДИЛАСЬ still means that “she came out fine” as in “high quality.”
РОД as a concept was also represented with / as a supreme god – a creator of all things (including other gods) and may have served as a model for the formulation of a very narrow vision of “the only one” God in the Bible.
Sample depictions (by modern artists) of РОД in Slavo-Vedic culture:
Subversion of True Education
The word for EDUCATION in Russian is ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ
and would literary translate as VISIONSHIP which in view of Vedic culture could be defined as:
THE CRAFT OF DEVELOPING, RETAINING, AND SHARING VISIONS ABOUT REALITY
-ВАНИЕ is a Russian suffix similar to English -ship.
means vision, image, appearance (in a way something appears), an abstract, a manner (such as of thinking or acting), character or identity (usually used when talking about an assumed identity or role such as in film or theater), and a few other meanings. It is basically a very useful word that can be used to form numerous words and concepts. In addition to “education,” ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ can also mean a “formation” of something (such as a formation of culture) though there is also an exact equivalent word for “form”– ФОРМА – which is commonly used for that purpose.
Ideally, a human being needs to be able to freely form (develop, construct, formulate) visions (or perceptions) about various aspects of existence in line with one’s own observations, reasoning and experiences. This is virtually the very purpose for having and developing the mind to begin with (see page UNDERSTANDING THE MIND). Man’s very sanity (healthy operation of the mind) depends on the ability to form visions of reality (perception) in line with observations (communication, contact, interaction) and sound reasoning (page SANITY AND INSANITY).
The goal of authorities behind Christianity was to restrict human consciousness to a certain set of visions about reality and to a form of controlled reasoning that would support it. The method was to substitute the natural way of constructing perception based on direct contact and experience with the “word of God.” Formation of visions (perceptions) based on contact with actual realities of existence was replaced by formation of visions based on “the word” – the written and spoken words of religious authorities. And this has been the model of “education” for hundreds of years under Christian rule: humans getting isolated and restricted from (open and meaningful) contact with nature and each other and instead are forced to memorize and recite (reproduce) prepackaged ideas from books and teaching authorities (ministers).
It should also be noted that under Biblical view of reality, “laborious” human existence on Earth is a form of punishment by “God” for the “original sin.” There is no place for celebration and understanding of the consciousness of nature and the consciousness of self in relationship to it.