Virgin Birth Myths

[Dontaskme]

Because it isn't self-evident. The difference between you and I is that I can accept that your interpretation could be true, you appear to insist that any interpretation other than your own is self-evidently not true.

Nope, that is absolute balderdash..there is simply no you because there is no other than you.

YOU is always self-evident... there is no difference between the you that is you and the you that is me except the belief in difference...the you which is just another name for awareness does not have to believe in order to be. IT IS..it doesn't depend on a belief to be, but mind does.

YOU is self-evident...to no one but itself...it has no copyright, neither does it make a claim for ownership...ownership or personhood is of the mind.

I don't think you understand the empty principle that is being pointed to here. The mind will always look at itself, the mind knows itself.. a kind of preoccupation with the thoughts...while it ignores that which is watching the thoughts.

The mind cannot know the watcher of the thoughts..it can only know the thoughts... All thoughts are watched by that which is beyond the mind of thought...and is therefore dependant on the watcher...but the watcher is not dependant on the thoughts in order to be.

The watcher goes ignored, until it is realised, recognised...by you the only you there is ...itself...watching itself come and go in itself that does not come and go.

.

The mind has artificially created a philosophy that doesn't exist except as a belief. Without the belief, philosophy doesn't exist.

Philosophy has caused an artificial divide between thought and the watcher of thought, between mind and heart, self and mind are only ever two sides of the same one awareness aka YOU.

.

[Nick_A]

I have this picture in my mind of students a hundred years from now sitting around the latest version of a cafe wondering how people back then could be so ignorant not to know how the laws of science and the laws of being interact to produce existence. They had no conception of the virgin birth and only appreciated it as a myth. They would remark how fortunate they are to be alive now and not to have lived in such obvious ignorance as our ancestors. Ivan, as a typical Russian, will say "This calls for a toast."

[Dalek Prime]

I have this picture in my mind of students a hundred years from now sitting around the latest version of a cafe wondering how people back then could be so ignorant not to know how the laws of science and the laws of being interact to produce existence. They had no conception of the virgin birth and only appreciated it as a myth. They would remark how fortunate they are to be alive now and not to have lived in such obvious ignorance as our ancestors. Ivan, as a typical Russian, will say "This calls for a toast."

Personally, I wouldn't trade places with them for anything.

[Belinda]

Dontaskme wrote:

No one knows what myth is.

That's true as every idea is ultimately interpretation of surface phenomena. However we were focusing our attentions upon the standard dictionary definition or thereabouts.

[Science Fan]

Jesus never actually existed, a completely made-up fiction, so it does make sense that in making up this person one would claim such an absurdity as a virgin birth regarding him.

[Dalek Prime]

In the realm of myth it gets more complicated but this is how Joseph Campbell summarizes the Virgin Birth metaphor...

An odd thing to express the idea of human divinity and specialness with an attribute normally found in much simpler asexual and sexually dimorphic animals.

It does appear to represent an ideal of sorts, though. Jews and Arabs weren't the only ones to embrace the idea of a divine virgin birth, and not the first either. Another oddity: that men would think of an idea like virgin births, as though the process was problematic rather than joyful. The concept to some extent seems to relate to a woman performing their physical "miracle" whilst maintaining her purity - a mother and maiden in one, the feminine ideal, an Uberfrau!

What I especially appreciate about J. Campbell, he was always rooted to reality and regarded any "literal" interpretation of myth and metaphor as abject nonsense. The power of these stories resides in its universal symbolism common to most cultures even if they never met; and because were all human regardless of when & where, its separate connotations exist as a very potent psychological power. It all amounts to "variations on a theme" the theme being universal.

In case you're interested, here's another more detailed talk with Bill Moyers.

BILL MOYERS: What about the virgin birth? Suddenly the goddess reappears in the form of the chaste and pure vessel chosen for God’s action.

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: Well, in the history of Western religions, this is an extremely interesting development. The virgin birth comes in by way of the Greek tradition. When you read your four gospels, the only one with the virgin birth in it is the gospel according to Luke, and Luke was a Greek.

BILL MOYERS: And there was in the Greek tradition images, legends, myths of virgin births?

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: All of them. I mean, Leda and the swan, and Persephone and the serpent, and this one and that one and the other one. The virgin birth is represented throughout.

BILL MOYERS: This was not a new idea, then, in Bethlehem and…

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: No. What is the meaning of the virgin birth? In India, there is this system of the kundalini, as it’s called, the idea of the centers, psychological centers up the spine. And they represent the psychological planes of concern and consciousness and action. The first is at the rectum, and this is that of alimentation. The serpent represents this, you know, a traveling esophagus going along just eating, eating, eating, eating. And all of us are — we wouldn’t be here if we weren’t eating. And then the second, the second center is at the sex organ center, and that’s the urge to procreation. The third center’s called, is at the navel, and this is where you eat and want to consume. And it’s not the alimentary eating, it’s the mastering and smashing and trashing of others, do you see? This is the aggressive mood.

Now, the first is an animal instinct, the second is an animal instinct, the third is an animal instinct, and these three centers are located in the pelvic base, do you see. The next one is at the level of the heart, and this is the opening of compassion. And there you move out of the field of animal action into a field that is properly human and spiritual. Now, in each of these centers there is a symbolic form. At the base, the first one, there is the form of the lingam and yeni, the male and female organs in conjunction. At the heart chakra, there is again the male and female organs in conjunction, but in gold. This is the virgin birth. It’s the birth of spiritual man out of the animal man. Do you understand?

BILL MOYERS: And it happens?

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: When you are awakened at the level of the heart to compassion and to suffering with the other person. That’s the beginning of humanity. And the meditations of religion properly are on that level, the heart level.

BILL MOYERS: You say it’s the beginning of humanity, but in these Stories, that’s the moment when gods are born, the virgin birth, it’s a god who emerges from that chemistry.

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: Yeah, and you know who that god is? It’s you. All of these symbols in mythology refer to you. You can get stuck out there and think it’s all out there, and so you’re thinking of Jesus and all the sentiments about how he suffered and all; what that suffering is, is what ought to be going on in you. Have you been reborn? Have you died to your animal nature and come to life as a human incarnation?

...or go here for the whole episode...
http://billmoyers.com/content/ep-5-jose ... ess-audio/

I have all the talks on DVD. Love it, Dub.

[Nick_A]

Joseph Campbell

Now, the first is an animal instinct, the second is an animal instinct, the third is an animal instinct, and these three centers are located in the pelvic base, do you see. The next one is at the level of the heart, and this is the opening of compassion. And there you move out of the field of animal action into a field that is properly human and spiritual. Now, in each of these centers there is a symbolic form. At the base, the first one, there is the form of the lingam and yeni, the male and female organs in conjunction. At the heart chakra, there is again the male and female organs in conjunction, but in gold. This is the virgin birth. It’s the birth of spiritual man out of the animal man. Do you understand?

He is describing the potential for the transition from animal man into conscious man by rebirth. This is not the same as the virgin birth. The human condition makes the normal transition between animal man and conscious man impossible. This is why the Immaculate Conception was necessary. It was necessary that the efforts of a direct conscious influence provide the means for awakening necessary for the transition to take place.

[Dontaskme]

Dontaskme wrote:

No one knows what myth is.

That's true as every idea is ultimately interpretation of surface phenomena. However we were focusing our attentions upon the standard dictionary definition or thereabouts.

What you mean that book that no one wrote.

[Dontaskme]

He is describing the potential for the transition from animal man into conscious man by rebirth. This is not the same as the virgin birth. The human condition makes the normal transition between animal man and conscious man impossible. This is why the Immaculate Conception was necessary. It was necessary that the efforts of a direct conscious influence provide the means for awakening necessary for the transition to take place.

Very good reply.

[uwot]

Because it isn't self-evident. The difference between you and I is that I can accept that your interpretation could be true, you appear to insist that any interpretation other than your own is self-evidently not true.

Nope, that is absolute balderdash..there is simply no you because there is no other than you.

Thank you for the clarification. It is now evident that the reason you appear to insist that any interpretation other than your own is self-evidently not true, is because you do so insist. As I said, you could be right, but how did you arrive at your conviction that you and I are not separate entities?

[Greta]

DAM's egotistical attempts to portray herself as a "better person" than me do not merit a response.

The ego will always respond to itself...it's the only way it can exist.

Are we all, aside from Nick, agreed that the virgin birth of the Messiah was just a myth or are there more literalists in the room?

All conceptual language aka knowledge is a myth...in other words all known things are illusion born out of not-knowing. And that which is not-knowing is unknowable.

So yes, it's myth, myth, myth... all the way down to more myth and beyond, and beyond the beyond, and even beyond the beyonded beyond...

Dam, when we are talking about the nature of myth, and mythical thinking, that is what we are talking about. Your comment is therefore irrelevant. You have shoe-horned in your accustomed theme. You show that you don't understand what myth is.

Greta, I don't agree that the virgin birth of the Messiah was "just" a myth. It was mythological. Myths matter. Even some ancient myths may still provide insights into our psyches . If you were to reword with the more interesting definition of 'myth' I'd agree with you.

I agree that myths matter and can be instructive as to human nature, although not necessarily. I see the virgin birth as "just a myth", not valuable unless one buys into a patriarchal mindset, which is just an extra filter that interferes with clear thought.

My issue is that virginity only tends to matter to conservative patriarchal traditionalists, the superstitious, and those engaged in exploiting and selling off virgins? Can you think of one thing about virgins that is better than non-virgins, warranting such special reverence? I would argue that the value of virginity is only to certain men, and that is because a virgin can still be fully possessed by one man only.


uwot, I fully agree with your "you may be right" comment. So many people claiming X IS TRUE - no qualifiers or appropriate uncertainty, no room for argument of questioning. It's like being back in high school.

[Nick_A]

Greta wrote:

My issue is that virginity only tends to matter to conservative patriarchal traditionalists, the superstitious, and those engaged in exploiting and selling off virgins? Can you think of one thing about virgins that is better than non-virgins, warranting such special reverence? I would argue that the value of virginity is only to certain men, and that is because a virgin can still be fully possessed by one man only.

A typical misguided secular interpretation of a universal concept. This reminds me of the time I attended a talk on the Gospel of Thomas where I knew there would be a lot of angry feminists. I wanted to hear how the speaker would deal with the dreaded #114

(114) Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life."
Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."

He danced around it with a skill that would have put Baryshnikov to shame. It was priceless but he got out alive so I guess it was worth the dance.

[Dontaskme]

uwot, I fully agree with your "you may be right" comment. So many people claiming X IS TRUE - no qualifiers or appropriate uncertainty, no room for argument of questioning. It's like being back in high school.

The only truth I've ever proclaimed is that there isn't any. We're all right because there cannot be anything wrong in our own worlds... we all know ourselves, that's what I'm talking about, when I said there is no you because there is no other than you...everything is inclusive, no ones right or wrong, we're just our own experiences unique to each of us as the individual expression of the whole.

No one has truth over any one else, you are the truth, that's all I've ever talked about...disagreeing or agreeing is all part of the interaction between two players....it's not personal...you take this far too personally all the time....criticism can be very productive...but you prefer to twist what I write round to your own interpretation of what I'm saying ...and then play the victim card by repeating the same old worn out cliches like it's like being back at school, well just in case you forgot, being out of school is about having the matured experience to ignore idiots like me and not engage with them at all, but you obviously love the sound of your own authority yourself, it takes two to tango.... the nature of the beast...is still alive and kicking and screaming and making awkward crunching grinding noises same as it ever was, same as it ever was, same as it ever was....

.

.

[Dontaskme]

but how did you arrive at your conviction that you and I are not separate entities?

I've explained why in nearly all my threads....you obviously don't read them or have any interest in them for you are still asking the question...so be it.

.

[Belinda]

The ego will always respond to itself...it's the only way it can exist.



All conceptual language aka knowledge is a myth...in other words all known things are illusion born out of not-knowing. And that which is not-knowing is unknowable.

So yes, it's myth, myth, myth... all the way down to more myth and beyond, and beyond the beyond, and even beyond the beyonded beyond...

Dam, when we are talking about the nature of myth, and mythical thinking, that is what we are talking about. Your comment is therefore irrelevant. You have shoe-horned in your accustomed theme. You show that you don't understand what myth is.

Greta, I don't agree that the virgin birth of the Messiah was "just" a myth. It was mythological. Myths matter. Even some ancient myths may still provide insights into our psyches . If you were to reword with the more interesting definition of 'myth' I'd agree with you.

I agree that myths matter and can be instructive as to human nature, although not necessarily. I see the virgin birth as "just a myth", not valuable unless one buys into a patriarchal mindset, which is just an extra filter that interferes with clear thought.

My issue is that virginity only tends to matter to conservative patriarchal traditionalists, the superstitious, and those engaged in exploiting and selling off virgins? Can you think of one thing about virgins that is better than non-virgins, warranting such special reverence? I would argue that the value of virginity is only to certain men, and that is because a virgin can still be fully possessed by one man only.


uwot, I fully agree with your "you may be right" comment. So many people claiming X IS TRUE - no qualifiers or appropriate uncertainty, no room for argument of questioning. It's like being back in high school.

I too liked what uwot wrote.

Greta, your pointing to the idea of virgin as unaltered until some male once and for all alters her made me think. Unwilling to relinquish my liking for the myths I thought of the following which rebuts your objection.

Actual female virgins of all species are physically altered once and for all time when they have undergone pregnancy, birth ,and lactation.

But mythical virgins are timelessly virgins , timelessly post-virgins , and timelessly mothers, all simultaneously because not temporal. A male cannot be a mythical virgin, except analogously, because a male is not permanently altered by pregnancy, birth, and lactation. Any myth has to be based in phenomena and events to mean anything at all, so the myth of the eternal female is based in phenomena and events around reproduction.

The politicisation of women's biological needs of pregnancy, birth, and lactation so that women are permitted less power than men is not caused by myths of the eternal female but by ordinary human greed ("My issue is that virginity only tends to matter to conservative patriarchal traditionalists, the superstitious, and those engaged in exploiting and selling off virgins? ") . Males can so they do. Myths of the eternal feminine tend to empower women and girls.