Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

More about the topic at http://theguardiansofkarma.blogspot.in/

I always supposed so..

No.

Ancient Aliens :)

Houston anthropologist reveals irrefutable proof that recorded history is wrong.

http://consciouslifenews.com/houston-...

Evidence Found Across the Globe of Highly Evolved Human Species from before the Ice Age, Demand Scientific Recognition of our Past that Depicts Societies of Advanced Technology and Culture

This question can be asked of all truly ancient mythologies. I think the only truly honest answer given the available evidence is who knows. Is it possible that there were relatively advanced civilizations predating the last great glacial melt? Of course it is possible but you have to think about the term advanced. To a Neolithic people a bronze-age people would be highly advanced.

Vanessa I was thinking the same thing lol.

I have every season of that show lol

The idea of relatively advanced civilizations having risen and fallen over many millennia makes sense to me; especially if you consider advanced to be bronze or iron age levels of technology combined with significant organizational skills.

The whole pure energy/crystals/frequency argument tends to leave me cold, though. That's mainly because we've no evidence that it works, and an awful lot of people have been trying over the last half-century or more without success.

I think where we fail is by assuming what "Advanced" means. On the surface, most people think it means scientific achievement or technology. In reality, I'm positive that over the tens of thousands of years humanity has existed that we have mastered and lost interesting and fascinating knowledge about ourselves and the world which applied to and was successful for the individuals living under those circumstances. That said, if we did build pyramids tens of thousands of years ahead of schedule, I might not be surprised but I find it highly doubtful magic crystals played a role .

Another pertinent question may be - whether ideas of 'technology' and 'advanced' are only based on experiences of a species, tethered to what they actually perceive around them in their current state of intellectual growth and sensory inputs? For humanity, both terms perhaps mostly means what we've experienced over past few centuries. Could there have been another approach to technology and/or advancement in the past? Are we yet to reach such a state sometimes in future? Could there be a common thread connecting spirituality with science/technology, yet to be discovered?

I'd be highly doubtful of any claimed connection between spirituality and science. Much like I can't understand people that -want- to drag their religious beliefs into science. One is a matter of faith, the other testable hypothesis.

A convergence of the two would require someone to open their faith and spiritual beliefs to verification and testing and they would somehow have to accomplish this without bias or assumption that the fundamentals of their beliefs are even true to begin with. This is more than problematic, contrary to the definition of "faith" and frankly, this never happens. What we always see is someone assuming their spiritual beliefs are immutable truth and then forcing science to conform to them.

The history of this planet is vast and deep. Check out this book:

Forbidden archeology : the hidden history of the human race

Makes you think twice about the history you were taught in school.

It is of course obvious that blind faith that often defines religious dogmas/beliefs is unlikely to lead to the fundamental truth. Yet are't we being presumptuous to approach 'spirituality' through the prism of religions/faiths/beliefs etc alone? As we know, the Vedas and Upanishads even in their known form, were conceived ages before any known faiths or religions took shape. These ancient scriptures are not at all about faiths and they actually encourage an approach of active verification, testing and experience without any bias whatsoever in presuming the nature of truth. It is also clarified within these scriptures that 'truth and reality' can't ever be defined within any conceptual sense, but can only be experienced through action, analytical reasoning, self-enquiry and meditation. The so called faiths/religions that became fashionable during later eras were perhaps the simplified point of views of a few - probably since common humanity couldn't (and still can't) get a handle around such profound philosophical insights.

Rigorous 'empirical observations', 'analytical reasoning', 'testable hypothesis' etc are indeed the foundations of science and technology as we know it. Yet, essentially all of them are limited by our 'sensory/conceptual capabilities' and 'intellect'. Couldn't it be possible that our current 'scientific understanding' of reality is also limited by our human perspectives? After all 'testable hypothesis' and such are also just experiences within our mind-sphere alone.

Is there a realm beyond 'conceptualisation' through sensory observations and mind? Does spirituality point us towards such a realm? Can it provide us the missing pieces needed by science to approach the fundamental truth? Were we in the prehistoric past capable of doing this and therefore achieved advancements far beyond what we can even understand/perceive today?

"Is there a realm beyond 'conceptualisation' through sensory observations and mind?"

Quite possibly, but if there is, it is outside the purview of science - that much should be obvious.

A pertinent question in this context may be - How do we decide the preview of science? Doesn't putting constraints or bounds based on the limits of our current understanding sound too much like faith?Admittedly, till date we've barely scratched the surface of science within the known cosmos itself. May be in future when science gets more mature and enable us to verify, measure and hypothesise what we've only been vaguely aware of till now (or what we've conveniently ignored as spiritual), humanity would go beyond many self imposed bounds. It is well known that even Einstein had to go beyond the preview or limits of established Newtonian science, when he propositioned the radically different theory of relativity.

Incidentally, the theory of relativity made us aware that reality can only be properly understood after factoring in the observer's physical frame of reference. Uncertainty principle of sub atomic particles behaviour indicate that every thing in science needn't be neatly measurable or verifiable in precise terms. Even the very act of measurement can influence the event itself.

May be someone in future would help us realise that conceptual/mental/sensory frame of reference or the very act of conceptualisation itself are mere variables to be factored in while attempting to understand reality. A reality that transcends human limits of intellect or perception. Just a thought..

"A reality that transcends human limits of intellect or perception."

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with this idea, but, to be clear, you've left the boundaries of science behind when you start speaking of things we can't observe.

Sure, you can devolve things into questioning reality and saying things like we have to have faith in what we observe ergo science requires faith so why not throw unobservable, "spiritual" things in with science too. Such an argument however is purely philosophical and not scientific.

Sure, Einstein developed a new theory, tested it, verified it and the scientific community came to accept it, however that does not mean he departed from the purview of science in any way. In fact, most every observation he made was backed with not simple thought experiments but hard data and experiments. True, some of his theories were left for future generations to confirm but that doesn't equate to a mystical transcendence of scientific principles.

Do I feel hard data and experiments will ever capture spirituality? Absolutely not. Quantifying the unquantifiable is a fool's errand and would only lead to the enslavement of an unlimited concept.

Do I feel science will ever move beyond the "observable". No. When it does it will cease to be science and be something else entirely. We can speculate whether such an event will happen, but the point is IF it ever does, we no longer have science - a rational ordered idea of observable phenomenon that can be tested and verified.

Trying to imply that such a thing as unobservable, unverifiable spiritual phenomenon CAN BE a part of science only allows for abuses such as Creationism and Quantum Consciousness to exist on that raggedy, completely unverifiable edge of true scientific understanding. Science necessarily operates within set boundaries or else the method ceases to function.

My apologies for being so adamant about this but I live in Texas where school board members have actually fought to try to teach my child absurdities such as the earth being 10k years old all because they have made the exact assumptions - that science is this malleable thing formed by a being outside of our limits of perception and thus they can bend it to their own spiritual assumptions.

Not gonna happen. :)

Will science will ever move beyond the 'observable/perceivable' or will 'unmeasurable' ever become 'measurable'? Will we ever be able to understand reality beyond the limits of our sensory capabilities(of observation/measurement) and intellect? If yes, we shouldn't be comfortable to consider them scientific? Will rational scientific analysis of philosophical concepts that many of us conveniently classify as 'unexplainable', 'spiritual', 'mystical' etc ever happen? Indeed difficult to speculate. Yet, we only need to look at past two centuries or so to realise the number of times humanity has breached 'boxed and deterministic point of views'. How many time the concepts that were considered unscientific by many - eventually become perfectly explainable through science? How many times neat, rational, 'ordered ideas of observable phenomenon that can be tested and verified' proved to be over-simplistic assumptions? Even theory of relativity by Einstein was first conceived as a concept (vehemently objected by many as unscientific analysis), followed by mathematical analysis(mostly reverse engineered) and verified many years later when we had instruments sophisticated enough to do so.

Perhaps one day someone would(or already had in distant past and philosophically articulated so in our ancient scriptures like vedas and upanishads) also attempt to scientifically analyse - what 'observable' 'measurable', 'quantifiable' etc actually mean. Do we all live our conscious lives in a single common frame of referential perspective or do we all carry our own private conceptual worlds (with separate referential sensory/mental perspectives) around us? To explain this point further a simple thought experiment - do we all really 'perceive' the universal colour blue as 'BLUE'? Is it possible that one person perceives it as blue yet another perceives the same colour as red? Is it possible that even though we actually perceive the same colour differently, we all observe/measure(a form of communication of experience) it as same (blue), simply because we've been conditioned to express it such, since we became concious for the first time during early childhood? Are the foundations of our seemingly common scientific experiences built upon our respective/relative conditioning? Food for thought..

Notwithstanding the above, I do totally agree that ideas around unobservable/unverifiable phenomenon should only be experimented with and brought into the realm of science very carefully. Otherwise science (which is indeed a solid foundation based on which all of us across the world can relate to without prejudices) as we know it, may become vulnerable to misinterpretations on the basis of personal faith etc..

I'm an archaeologist.

Maybe I can help out.

I've read Forbidden Archaeology. It had some interesting ideas. Unfortunately, most of his "evidence" was based on work done in the 1800's before there really was a science of archaeology. Cremo also jumps the shark when he starts talking about artifacts millions of years old... dated in the 1700's before radiocarbon dating, tree ring dating, or even a good basis for stratigraphy.

I can tell you that there is no conspiracy to hide "the truth" from people.

Science is built on the principle of theories backed by empirical evidence.

Most anthropologists and archaeologists I know are willing to accept the possibility of pre-ice age civilizations.

There has been a lot of work done in the Middle East which does prove that the domestication of some plants occurred as early as 26,000 years ago, much earlier than previously thought.

Better books to read for ancient archaeology would be Fingerprints of the Gods: The Evidence of Earth's Lost Civilization and Underworld: The Mysterious Origins of Civilization by Graham Hancock

On topic, I happen to be a big of the Vedas. J. Robert Oppenhiemer (father of the atomic bomb) made several references to the Vedas. Before the first bomb, when asked if he thought it was possible, he answered "man has done it before, we can do it again" and more famously "I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds." quoting Shiva from the Vedas. He also said that "access to the Vedas is the greatest privilege this century (20th) can claim over previous centuries."

Do I, personally, think we could have had an advanced civilization in the past. Absolutely. Do I have any proof? None at all.

And a side note to the ancient alien people: it is insulting to attribute humanities greatest achievements to aliens. We are very clever apes, and quite capable of figuring out things on our own. Thank you.

Modern science has become a religion like any other. Physical reality is illusion and ancient religions of a more transcendent nature are attempts to return to a state of mind where true reality becomes evident to the seeker.

Daniel wrote: "Modern science has become a religion like any other..."

I hear that a lot from certain quarters. But science still strives to test and disprove its own theories.

Religions don't.

As soon as science tells me "This is the Truth, and looking for any other answer is not only a waste of time, but blasphemy," I will call shenanigans on any such statement.

I get that. But the foundations of science take certain undefined unknowns (space, matter and time) as given and proceed from there, insisting sensory perception based on these undefined elements of physical reality are accurate, thus excluding anything else, purely empirical. There are too many logical inconsistencies for me despite scientific theory. It would be a long debate if we pursued the arguments for my line of reasoning. However, I will say that transcendental philosophies don't offer anything but a "way," the conclusion of which can only be known to the individual who may or may not find truth for himself, and no one else. Science is the "way" for mankind as a whole, but mostly for purely practical purposes in the end.

Theories beyond the established 'bounds' of science need not be automatically classified as religious, simply because they can't be explained/proven based on certain assumptions or points of perceivable reference(e.g reality of space and time). I guess we must leave enough space for intellectual analysis beyond the bounds of both science and religion/faith. Examined logically it is easy to note that either/both are incomplete concepts within the perceptive 'limits' of human mind.

Science is based on what we perceive(observed or sensed) outside(including our own body & mind) of ourselves. So are we (observer) also part of what we perceive? Could one of either be an illusion based on mental projection alone? If yes, what is more likely to be real? The self that perceives or that which is perceived(cosmos)? Is it not usually logical that anything real is permanent but anything that could be an illusion, temporary by its very nature? Now, what scientific evidence do we have of either observer or observed (self or cosmos) being permanent? We know for sure(scientifically speaking) that what we perceive(cosmos) is impermanent. About self - well I guess the subject is beyond the bound of science so its permanence or otherwise is speculative. Logic however dictates that both can't be either real or illusion at the same time. So what is more plausible to be real?

It is perhaps correct that by way of transcendental philosophies, truth can only be arrived at by self. But if it is indeed the truth that is arrived at, then by the very nature of 'truth' it must apply for everyone and everything including the self. The challenge however remains as to how this can be explained away within the 'perceptive limits' of science or any other form of known logical communication.

Mohan wrote: "Theories beyond the established 'bounds' of science need not be automatically classified as religious, simply because they can't be explained/proven based on certain assumptions or points of perce..."

It seems rather simple for me to establish which is illusion, the external world of matter as percieved by the physical senses which conform to the categories of three-dimensional space and linear time or the internal metaphysical mind that transcends all that very much as a sensory organ, a sixth sense or third eye, that "sees" and "touches" the external world as it truly is, pure consciousness. A simple analysis of sensory perception and the faulty physical concepts derived from it are very revealing. Nothing very complicated about it if people can strip themsleves of all their preconcieved notions about their conception of reality. I did this long ago and easily explained the thought process to others, a process that's been taught and discussed since ancient times but which has been misunderstood in modern times. I'm amazed people don't question their conceptions. I began at 15.

Mohan wrote: "Theories beyond the established 'bounds' of science need not be automatically classified as religious, simply because they can't be explained/proven based on certain assumptions or points of perce..."

As far as advanced civilizations, I am doubtful. I believe the Vedas are a "way," one of many others lost to us or distorted in time, to return to the source of our being in absolute perfection which, in truth, is who we are. And I believe such a way is like a road few will ever find or even know exists, and which can only be walked by a solitary few.

Ancient Aliens anyone?

Vanessa Eden wrote: "Ancient Aliens anyone?"
:-)

Daniel wrote: "Mohan wrote: "Theories beyond the established 'bounds' of science need not be automatically classified as religious, simply because they can't be explained/proven based on certain assumptions or p..."

Most people find it difficult to believe that the ego or 'own personality' that they are so proud/fond of, is nothing but an illusion formed by past memories, habits and conceptions (or what can be termed a karmic vestiges). Questioning own conceptions(including religious ones) is often most difficult since it challenges the very idea of who we are?

If we logically conclude that our self is not our petty ego, and also that our self is the only permanent reality, then the only answer has to be - we are nothing/everything and now/forever. As per ancient scriptures of Vedanta, genuine and permanent arrival of our consciousness into such a state of pure and intense awareness (which is beyond the realm of mind/intellect or science) as the ultimate human goal of self-realisation. This is also considered to be the perfect state defined by the sanskrit term sat-chit-ananda(truth-consciousnesses-bliss). Truth because it is in perfect alignment with what we are and bliss because there is no barrier(ego or desires nurtured by it) that keeps us away from our original nature - that of pure happiness/bliss. Love (affinity towards anything associated with self) then becomes universally directed (towards everything and everyone) and there is no reason(limitations of own body-mind/ego-fear complex) for suffering.

Chapters 11 and 31 of the subject book attempts to scientifically/logically analyse (as best as intellectually feasible) some of these ideas..

Daniel wrote: "Mohan wrote: "Theories beyond the established 'bounds' of science need not be automatically classified as religious, simply because they can't be explained/proven based on certain assumptions or p..."

With regards to the plausibility of advanced ancient civilisations, the attempt is to question the very idea of linear progression of human advancement. Most Indian scriptures define technological/scientific advancements to be cyclical. Now, whether any cyclical crests happened on planet Earth itself or any other planets - is pure speculation, since we're not aware(yet?) of any archaeological evidence.

This fictional concept expands on the probable reason for many of the SF like descriptions within Indian mythology. It also makes one wonder as to why many of such ideas described within the ancient scripture match so closely with modern scientific concepts like relativity and quantum mechanics. Our objective universe is just a relative perspective of the consciousness, observed through the double slits of past memories and habits.

Are we destined to once again realise in future that all scientific and technological advancements eventually converge upon spiritual path as well(like in the past)?

Hi, my name is Richard Gradner. I have recently published my first indie novel, Return To Lemuria. It's an exciting cross-genre (fictional) story about the descendants of an ancient civilisation. I thought it pertinent to mention it here on this thread. If anyone is interested in some holiday reading, I am happy to gift some digital copies in return for a review. Just inbox me your details...

Happy holidays!

Rich

The knowledge conveyed through veda, puran, gita gives clear hints that they were the remnants of a much wiser, matured civilization, not the soul searching of a young civilization!

Richard wrote: "Hi, my name is Richard Gradner. I have recently published my first indie novel, Return To Lemuria. It's an exciting cross-genre (fictional) story about the descendants of an ancient civilisation. I..."

Mohan wrote: "Daniel wrote: "Mohan wrote: "Theories beyond the established 'bounds' of science need not be automatically classified as religious, simply because they can't be explained/proven based on certain a..."

Richard wrote: "Hi, my name is Richard Gradner. I have recently published my first indie novel, Return To Lemuria. It's an exciting cross-genre (fictional) story about the descendants of an ancient civilisation. I..."

It can be a very interesting read!

Stephen wrote: "This question can be asked of all truly ancient mythologies. I think the only truly honest answer given the available evidence is who knows. Is it possible that there were relatively advanced civil..."

I too have this suspicion, especially after knowing about atlantis. why are these stories revolving since beginning about much advanced society destroyed by natural calamity or human nature.

If we read the mythological stories and think that the weapons those Gods used actually existed, or their power to teleport, shape-shift- that will be one advanced civilization!

Though very little is known as we go farther back into our past, all agree that there was a global level catastrophe in the form of volcanic eruptions as well as ice-melt induced inundation around the time the last major ice-age came to an end. It is possible that 99 percent of humanity was wiped out of existence during this time. The remaining humanity that escaped with just their lives were forced to revert back to the level of cave-men over next few generations. Yet few stories of the glorious past remained. Many centuries later these stories were penned down but obviously the authors found it difficult to relate to the advanced technologies that they heard about in stories into what they actually experienced around them. So a missile of the Mahabharata or Ramayana became mystical arrows. Vimans became flying chariots. Technologies they didn't understand became magic. The philosophical depth of human nature and spiritual-self remained in partially hidden metaphoric form within Vedas, Upanishads etc..

What an interesting discussion!

Mohan, are you referring to the Toba event around 70,000 years ago ? It was a volcano in Indonesia. That was the setting for the climax of my latest book (I'm happy to share a free copy in exchange for honest review, just message me). During that time, stone tool using hominins like Neanderthals, Homo Floresiensis, Homo Erectus, and Homo Heidelbergensis lived interacted with Homo Sapiens. We weren't the only humans around. The Neanderthals even had a method of melting birch tree sap into an adhesive for fastening spear tips to their binding and shafts.

I am fascinated by the difference between magic and technology. I think one uses the label "magic" when they can't understand the science behind a phenomenon.

I think that "truths" outside of scientific observation are a personal affair. I find it more gratifying to challenge myself with spiritual questions rather than believing "truths." I wonder if an organism whose physical body responds positively to physical stress (in moderation like weight training, cold exposure, etc) would feel satisfied in a state of complete acceptance. I think much of the beauty in life results from our struggles.

Book of Enoch anyone ? Would be a great start for a fiction.

Background theme of the new book titled 'Ancients of Greater Bharat' now available at http://a.co/bepcseE, as under please:-

Ancient scriptures of almost all cultures across the world describe of an extinction level event of great floods (also known as Pralay, per Indian mythology) in the distant past (possibly due to heavy tectonic/volcanic activity followed up with extensive ice-melt across the globe, towards the end of ice age), with very few survivors. Fictional story of this book is from a time period of around one millennium before Pralay.

Maybe this was the same floods that initially inundated mythical cities like Dwaraka, Atlantis etc and later over next few millennia, obliterated all traces of an advanced pre-historic civilisation? According to Indian scriptures like Matsya Purana in Sanskrit and Sangham Literature in Tamil, our ancestors used to live towards far South and escaped from great floods or Pralay in boats/arks, and settled later in the northwest parts...Could it be possible that the survivors of this event migrated to existing settlements across the world like Indus valley? Over the course of next few generations, all knowledge about their glorious past was lost, except for few cultural traditions and languages like Sanskrit, at around Indian subcontinent.

Perhaps Vedas and epics like Ramayan and Mahabharat are actually the legacy of a highly advanced civilisation before Pralay? Maybe most of such pre-historic records and scriptures were destroyed during that cataclysmic event. Possibly, the conflicting references to advanced technology like aircrafts and genetic engineering within a primitive agrarian society, or the seemingly impossible application of rudimentary weapons like bows to launch powerful missiles etc, are part of what got modified, while sages like Valmiki and Vyasa reconstructed them few millennia later.

Context of Pre-Historic Advanced Civilisation:-

While imagining 'advanced civilisation', we tend to automatically visualise materials (especially metal, polymers and concrete), infrastructure and devices built by us over past few centuries. However, if we attempt to predict our progression into far future, there may eventually be a time when technology would be so subtle that it’s perfectly and invisibly ingrained within the very fabric of nature around us. Once we understand the laws and intricacies of nature fully, artificial construction of infrastructure or devices may no longer be necessary. Progress would be defined by how well humanity could co-exist with nature in its most basic form, yet retain the capability of complete mastery over it. The next level of advancement of our species over coming millennia may inevitably be beyond the frontiers of our limited senses and intellect.

From the context of this story, such advancements might have already happened during ancient times, long before the event of Pralay.