Deconstructing Shinar

One of the reasons that I prefer reading the Democratic Underground to watching the television, in terms of looking for interesting analysis of current events, is because I believe that there are more honest, intelligent, and insightful people here. There are rules here which give these discussions structure, and which attempt to reduce the unproductive quarreling, but these are not as restrictive as the corporate rules that keep the truth from being presented too often on network and cable news shows.

Yet, at the same time, there are too often harsh arguments here, that appear almost unavoidable. I'm not implying a “right vs wrong,” or even a “right vs left,” context. Rather, it has to do with – of all things – the meaning of words. Or the meanings that we, as individuals and groups, give to words, and thus take from words. There are many times when it appears that good and sincere people here are speaking different languages.

I'm reminded of one of my favorite Mesopotamian myths. Those of us familiar with the books known as the “Bible” know it as the Tower of Babel. Variations of this myth are found in various parts of the world; indeed, the Irish historians here already know what I'm talking about.

Now, I'm aware that any discussion of this includes some risks. First, I'm not talking about “religion” here. This is a discussion intended specifically for General Discussion. It's about human nature, both in the individual and group sense. When one addresses anything that may be found in the Bible, or similar books, a common response on this forum is, “but that's a myth.” Of course it is: for mythology, along with certain other types of art, present the higher lessons that human beings can only grasp in symbolic ways. And that is a biological reality that is the result of our brain structure.

The other day, I spoke of the higher language, and one friend here noted that many forum participants are not familiar in the art of translating it. This is not surprising, of course, because the “religious” institutions in this country do not promote serious examination of mythology. Maybe it would interfere with their concentration on the collection plate. Maybe there are unfamiliar with that language themselves, and like a person who only speaks English, lack the ability to teach Chinese. In my own experience – and I've been in many, many Christian churches – it has only been those Jesuits who tend to get kicked out of the church who encourage people to consider these realities.

Now, let's take a look at the book of Genesis's chapter 11. It reads: “And the whole world was of one language and one speech. And it came to pass, as they journed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And they said to one another, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime they had for mortar. And they said, Go to, let us build a city, and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven.”

There are, of course, people who sincerely take this as a literal story. They search for a land of Shinar, usually in Iraq, and try to imagine what two cities on what two rivers this story identifies as the outer boundaries of the plain of Shinar. They search for a brick foundation to the “tower,” much as others search for Noah's ark. They err in the boundaries between a literal history, and an esoteric script.

All esoteric and sacred writings use levels of symbolism. In the bible, specifically, there are three levels: stone, water, and wine (speaking, signifying, concealed Truth). Hence, what other groups of people around the globe refer to as “the Original Instructions,” or some variation, are “written” as the Ten Commandments on stone tablets. And there are those who inhabit a lower level of understanding who honestly believe that these stone tablets existed.

As Joseph Campbell documented, there are many global and near global images and symbols used in mythology. We will encounter a few as we translate this story. It begins with the description of a time when human beings “spoke” one language. That does not mean that everyone spoke English, or any other single language. It refers to an earlier time, when the tribes of mankind put Good first. It's not a fable of some “golden age” that never existed, but rather, an early description of of what anthropologists refer to as communalism among hunter-gatherers. There was less room for conflict within groups, or between groups. Hence, one person might hold this point of view, and another person hold that point of view, but because they both put Good first – the good of the group and the goodness of truth – there were much lower levels of conflict.

Then a group moved to the west. In almost all esoteric writings, especially from that era, the “East” signifies the Universal Truth. Or, if you are religious, “God.” Now, we all have an idea what Martin Luther King, Jr., meant when he spoke of going to “the mountain top.” It's not a literal mountain; it's that mountain of humanity. Likewise, the plain in this sense means the group moved from the East to a lower level of being. They have moved away from the understanding that humans are part of the Earth's life force, and instead view their relationship to all around them in terms of their own selfish needs. We witness this today, no less than at any other time in human history.

They begin to build – symbolically – a tower to reach to “heaven.” In other words, they seek to exhalt themselves. They are committing – literally – the spiritual act of theft. They do this by substituting “brick” for “stone.” In esoteric literature, “stone” represents those Original Instructions, or Universal Law. They begin to replace that law, with their own “law” (brick) …. which, as we see in Washington, always benefits their group, and as individuals, they do not feel the need to obey even that law. And they substitute “slime” for “mortar,” and in this instance, the concept of human slime works best.

The “tower” they seek to build represents what we see in every instance when self-righteous, arrogant, and greedy fools attempt to raise themselves, and their group, about the rest of humanity. It has happened time and time again, whenever and wherever “empires” rise up. Those walls come tumbling down, and there is confusion among various groups of people. We see this today, when people such as Sarah Palin insist that their words do not mean exactly what she absolutely said; when George W. Bush used 1984-Speak to lie to this country's citizens; when racists use “code” words to incite; and when Washington steals tax dollars to pay for the sins of Wall Street. We hear it every time some preacher uses their own twisted belief system to justify the denial of the human right to marry the person they love to a specific group within the population – black people yesterday, gay & lesbian people today. I say that is their slime, not Universal Law.

A non-religious person is as likely as anyone else to grasp the higher meaning of these esoteric teachings. Certainly, a large segment of church-goers doesn't have a clue. Thus, again: I am not writing this as a religious essay; rather, I'm interpreting an ancient mythological story that applies to our nation, today.

Peace,
H2O Man

(in Hindu mythology) and Vishnu were challenged by Shiva to find either end of a tower of light that stretched without any end in sight.

Vishnu took the form of a boar, and dug and dug to find the bottom, but eventually gave up. Siva took the form of a swan and flew upwards, until he too gave up.

Upon returning, Vishnu confessed in his humility that he had failed. Brahma, thinking no one could know what he had seen, out of his arrogance and desire for supremacy, told Shiva that in fact he had found the top.

Shiva knew that the column of light was limitless, and flew into a rage and cursed Brahma for his lie.


This is why Brahma is not worshiped in more than a few temples in India today.

for this!

So the Babel story would really have worked in reverse, with the workers coming from different places speaking different dialects. It would seem that when they all came together they would invent a polyglot common language that would work for them. So I find the tale is actually backwards.

With our common electronic media, movies and other venues that use a common language, I am actually surprised that we still have pockets of different meanings of the same words in our nation. So code words seem to be a deliberate invention of various sects to create a symbolism that appeal to their initiates. This is what comes to mind for me anyway.

alone does not have the capacity to remedy this.

in spite of centuries of English scholars' attempts to standardize it and our modern culture's coast to coast exposure to language that should make us all sound and think the same, but we don't.

The Rebel Girl (memoir of her years as a labor organizer for the IWW), was her description of workers' meetings where the speakers and the audience were comprised of humans speaking a half a dozen or so languages, and despite not being able to understand each others languages, they understood the cause.


(edited to clean up grammar.)

Thanks for this.

As usual, I am smarter and even more handsome having read your post.

:)

exactly why -- but your response reminded me of something from a couple of years back. My son and I ran into a guy who had boxed me brother in 1975. The guy had been an undefeated prospect back then, and my brother, who had lost his last fight, was considered to be little threat to him. But my brother won every round on all three judges' cards.

Thirty-three years later, this fellow recognized me .... I had worked my brother's corner, but hadn't seen this guy since. Yet he still wanted to argue the decision.

"I came out of that fight looking a hell of a lot better than your brother," he insisted.

"True," I said. "But you went into the fight looking a hell of a lot better than my brother. What the heck has happened to you?"

He laughed, and we became friends.

Happens to me all the time.

:)

My mind works in curious ways, sometimes. I have to ask myself where some of these thoughts come from. Left field, I suppose.

I hesitated to post it, unsure if people would read it or not. I appreciate that you took the time to read it and respond.

I'm just a fan! :)

the description "good friend & co-worker," rather than "fan."

Much appreciated, Brother David. I also really enjoyed your OP tonight.

I'll thank you for kicking me.

For something I want to read that I just found which I will do later as after a quick perusal this doesn't seem to be a scanning type of piece

to hearing what you think.

"when self-righteous, arrogant, and greedy fools attempt to raise themselves, and their group, about (sic? should this be above? could go either way) the rest of humanity"

One obvious group that thinks it is better than the rest of humanity is the Jets. The Jets being my metaphor for the liberal tribe. Dozens of times a day, we proclaim how much worse the other tribe is.

This line reminds me of another contradiction. "They have moved away from the understanding that humans are part of the Earth's life force, and instead view their relationship to all around them in terms of their own selfish needs."

You seem to say that a more natural existence would have less selfishness. I noted the opposite in my dogs. I have a family of dogs - a spayed father, a mother, and their daughter. Whenever I make toast I always share a piece of the edge with them. It takes great care, though, to make sure that each one gets a piece. The daughter would be quite happy to eat all three pieces and leave her father and mother with nothing. Likewise the father and mother would also be quite happy to eat all three and leave their daughter and their lifelong companion with nothing. They have no concept of either fairness or sharing. Yet those are higher concepts taught to most children in our western civilization.

I guess if they were in the wild, there might be more sharing of the spoils of the hunt, but the wolves are certainly going to put their needs (or hunger) ahead of the deer or other prey's desire to live a few more years.

There's a bit of difference between the altrustic potential in most animals versus most humans.


There are numerous well-documented accounts of "providing for the general welfare" in very primitive cultures:

*stores of food portioned to all during famine or drought

*young hunting for the old

* collective agriculture, child rearing and elder care

*feasts, where those celebrating notable events gave gifts to the entire community rather than receiving gifts themselves

Now, if you think early humankind can be likened to wolves, that is a very curious thing.

simply following a compulsive need to post that type of nonsense. It is best not to take it seriously.

But you know me...I had to correct the nonsense for anyone reading who might actually take it seriously.