• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Where is Mount Sumeru?

gnostic

The Lost One
I agree. The fact that the Sun and planets orbits a center, isn´t a scientific hypothesis, because it is an observed fact. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactic_year
I am not denying that the sun orbit around the galaxy's centre, native.

What I am disagreeing with you is this stupid Mount Sumeru of yours being the galactic centre of the Milky Way. I am saying that Mount Sumeru don't exist.

This Mount Sumeru is myth, not fact.

We are agreeing about the same things, about the solar system and Milky Way, but we are not agreeing about Mount Sumeru.

That you think I am saying there are no centre to the Milky Way, is just you attacking a straw man.

I am drawing line here, and make very clear to you that Mount Sumeru is myth and fictional, based on your twisted interpretation of Hindu myth, trying to make it into Milky Way centre.

Do you now understand what I am disagree with you now?
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Just for the philosophical fun: Isn´t it somewhat contra intuitive to put explanations on Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva as respectively the creator, preserver and destroyer of the universe, and then say they are illusions?

IMO they represent fundamental mytho-cosmological and real scientific principles and not illusions :)
Well, there are both types of views in Hinduism. Advaita believes in the mysterious Brahman and may reject Gods and Goddesses as illusions. The main-line Hindus may agree to both view points. Worshipers of particular Gods will differ. You see, Hinduism is flexible and gives freedom of various beliefs.

Milky way galaxy has a rotation period of 220–360 million years. (Wikipedia)
 
Last edited:

gnostic

The Lost One
Would you call yourself an expert on mythology?
Expert?

No, i don't have the qualification, so I am mostly self taught on mythology. I am not even amateur in Hindu myth.

But my experiences does come from my own research, with Classical Greek and Roman, Norse, Celtic, Egyptian, Sumerian and Akkadian-Babylonian, Ugaritic and Hebrew myths. I am more knowledgeable with all of the above than I am with Eastern Asian and Southern Asian myths, mainly because I have not got around to reading them.

I do my own reading and my own research, and created Timeless Myths and Dark Mirrors of Heaven websites. I've read English translations of the original works, as part of my research, and do not rely on works of other people views and interpretations (like essays, critical analysis).

But the real reasons why I read myths, is because I enjoyed ancient myths, I don't read them because that I believe in them. I loved the literary values of myths, their storytelling.

I don't have to believe in something just because I enjoyed reading them. If you want to believe in superstitions then that your problem; I don't the need the superstitious baggage.

And I can enjoy myths without confusing them with history, or in your case, I don't confuse them with science. If you are going to mix science and myths, and I think you are spinning me pseudoscience crap, then I will tell you honestly that's crap.
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
What you really need to understand is that supernova and black hole are two different things, and only supernova will explode.
You don´t have to repeat the (strange) standard cosmology hypothesis and specifics for me.
I was simply refferring to the overall standard cosmology ideas by watching this article.
What are the scientists really talking of here? The article deals with "a new stable that links various sizes of black holes", namely the electromagnetic gamma rays and "jets". They STILL speak of "black holes" according to their gravitational theories of "accretions, collisions and explosions".
I was commenting on the peculiar fact that strong magnetic activity is observed, but the fundamental electromagnetic force is ignored by the heavy-gravitation-proponents. Please read and understand before you comment.

PS: I don´t give much for the standard cosmology explanations. They are all disconnected speculations and you are just repeating these.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
You don´t have to repeat the (strange) standard cosmology hypothesis and specifics for me.
If you know, then don't confuse the black hole with supernova, because they are not the same things. And the supernova and black hole are not hypothesis, Native.
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
This Mount Sumeru is myth, not fact.
SO: When modern science states that the Solar System orbits the galactic center, then its real.

But it´s a myth when an ancient myth states the very same. That´s inconsistently funny indeed :)
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
If you know, then don't confuse the black hole with supernova, because they are not the same things. And the supernova and black hole are not hypothesis, Native.
I wasn´t even dealing with these issues at all.
I was commenting on the peculiar fact that strong magnetic activity is observed, but the fundamental electromagnetic force is ignored by the heavy-gravitation-proponents. Please read and understand before you comment.
Of course "supernova´s" and "black holes" aren´t hypothesis. They are just misunderstood by modern science and have become modern cosmological myths in your own terminology and definition of "myth".
 
Last edited:

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Expert?

No, i don't have the qualification, so I am mostly self taught on mythology. I am not even amateur in Hindu myth
I too am self taught on mythology by visions and studying comparative mythology, especially the cultural Stories of Creation - which of course deals with the cosmic creation as we humans can observe this with our own physical and spiritual senses. This is why I combine and compare the mythical creation stories with cosmology.
But the real reasons why I read myths, is because I enjoyed ancient myths, I don't read them because that I believe in them. I loved the literary values of myths, their storytelling.

I don't have to believe in something just because I enjoyed reading them. If you want to believe in superstitions then that your problem; I don't the need the superstitious baggage.

And I can enjoy myths without confusing them with history, or in your case, I don't confuse them with science. If you are going to mix science and myths, and I think you are spinning me pseudoscience crap, then I will tell you honestly that's crap.
By your very approach and by admitting your non mythical expertise, you are obviously not in the position to tell what is pseudoscience crap or not - or if any myths can be connected to the real cosmic world.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
By your very approach and by admitting your non mythical expertise, you are obviously not in the position to tell what is pseudoscience crap or not - or if any myths can be connected to the real cosmic world.
I am an civil engineer and computer scientist (programmer), so I have a background in "applied science", even though I don't considered myself as a "scientist".

My love and knowledge for myths may be self taught, my method of or how I conduct my research are not "self-taught".

And because of applied science background, verifiable evidences are important to me, so I know the difference between science and pseudoscience.

Your Meru is pseudoscience crap, nothing more, nothing less.

My "approach", as you call it, to reading and researching myths and legends have been methodical, when I have been gathering sources. I am not saying me being "methodical" that my research into myths were "scientific"; no I am saying that my "research method" was methodical.

I didn't rely on one source, but many...at least with those I can find.

You are in no position to tell me that I can't distinguish between science and pseudoscience, especially when you have no background in science.

SO: When modern science states that the Solar System orbits the galactic center, then its real.

But it´s a myth when an ancient myth states the very same. That´s inconsistently funny indeed :)
No. I am not being inconsistent. You are deliberately making straw man what I am saying, you are twisting my words as well as your own.

You are continuously trying to make the galactic centre of Milky Way and Mount Sumeru as one and the same thing. They are not the same. I am telling you that YOUR silly Meru or Sumeru is a myth, not science.

You are trying my patience and wasted enough of time. I am not going to reply to you again on this matter, because you have tick me off with your dishonesty.
 
Last edited:

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
No. I am not being inconsistent. You are deliberately making straw man what I am saying, you are twisting my words as well as your own.
I´m not twisting anything but just trying you to use analythic and logical sense, but this is impossible since you don´t accept both sides of the coin in the mytho-cosmological context of the Meru myth, which is inconsistent in itself.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
I´m not twisting anything but just trying you to use analythic and logical sense, but this is impossible since you don´t accept both sides of the coin in the mytho-cosmological context of the Meru myth, which is inconsistent in itself.
*ignores*
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Almost like "everything is sucked into a black hole and ayway",

Black Holes don't suck things in.

Most people are to busy. Yes, I´ve had some visions - http://www.native-science.net/Visions.Dreams.htm

"Too busy"? We aren't a whole lot busier than we've ever been since the Agricultural Revolution.

In any case, I'm not one to trust such "visions" as accurate representations of actual physical phenomenon.

You assume this connection to be linguistic only

No, I don't.

but if speaking of myths of creation, we have to take off in what is created, namely the common cosmological condition for all humans which of course provides the most of similarities in the ancient myths of creation.

What is this "common cosmological condition?" You say "of course" as if you assumed I know what you're talking about.

RockArt.Seth.God.Animal.jpg

Swedish Rock Art (charcoal rubbing of the rock surface) and the Egyptian god Seth

Yeah, they look nothing alike except for some elements, which could either be just coincidence or suggest cross-cultural exchange.

I don't know about Seth, but if I had to guess as to that Swedish painting's identity, the penis suggests that it's Ingvi-Freyr, but then again, there's also a Hammer, suggesting Thor. Both are fertility Gods, so depending on when that art is dated to (which I don't know, because I've never seen it), it could be a fusion of those two, or a local God long forgotten.

Either way, it's most likely that this is an Earth God, not a Sky God.

I can observe the northern contours of the Milky Way contours very clear - except from 3-4 month in the lightest season when the Sun dimms the sight of the stars and contours. At the very best, the contours looks pretty much as the Swedish Rock Art figure - Which is very similar to the Egyptian god, Seth.

I would remind you of Confirmation Bias.

Look up in the Sky - and of course people on the same hemisphere observes the same structures and motions and thus of course telling the same mytho-cosmological stories.

Which would be all well and good if they did... and, well, they don't. Even within the same cultures, there can be hundreds of variations on the same rough story.

Such is the consequence of having Oral Traditions.
 
Last edited:

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
What you really need to understand is that supernova and black hole are two different things, and only supernova will explode.

(Emphasis mine.)

Well... there is the whole idea of Black Holes evaporating in pretty large explosions... however, they are quite different from supernovas.
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Black Holes don't suck things in.
"A black hole is a region of spacetime exhibiting such strong gravitational effects that nothing—including particles and electromagnetic radiation such as light—can escape from inside it". From - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole
In any case, I'm not one to trust such "visions" as accurate representations of actual physical phenomenon
No not before you have had some visions like mine.

I wrote:
. . . but if speaking of myths of creation, we have to take off in what is created, namely the common cosmological condition for all humans which of course provides the most of similarities in the ancient myths of creation . . .
What is this "common cosmological condition?" You say "of course" as if you assumed I know what you're talking about.
Imagine we all live on the same planet Earth, in the same Solar System, in the same Milky Way galaxy and in the same local part of the Universe. These cosmic conditions are equal for all humans and the different terrestrial and celestial motions are similar for all humans and even the celestial scenario are similar for humans living under the same Sky.

These common conditions of course gives rise to the same cultural Stories of Creation and to a large extend also the similar mythical images painted or made on rock surfaces.
Yeah, they look nothing alike except for some elements, which could either be just coincidence or suggest cross-cultural exchange.

I don't know about Seth, but if I had to guess as to that Swedish painting's identity, the penis suggests that it's Ingvi-Freyr, but then again, there's also a Hammer, suggesting Thor. Both are fertility Gods, so depending on when that art is dated to (which I don't know, because I've never seen it), it could be a fusion of those two, or a local God long forgotten.

Either way, it's most likely that this is an Earth God, not a Sky God.
Are you serious? A god on the Earth?
astron.039.n.him..jpg
RockArt.Seth.God.Animal.jpg

Fig. 1 is a Star Map image of the mostly shown Milky Way contours (Sky God) on the northern hemisphere, but more countours can really be observed, as on Fig. 2 from Bohuslen in Sweden. The Egyptians have obviously observed the very same celestial imagery which is why we can find cultural similarites by doing Comparative Mythology.
Which would be all well and good if they did... and, well, they don't. Even within the same cultures, there can be hundreds of variations on the same rough story.

Such is the consequence of having Oral Traditions.
Well of course our ancestors watched the Sky - and the oral tradition works very well as long as they are connected to relevant terrestrial and celestial objects, as I´m trying to describe here.

But of course, "these oral mumbo-jumbo stories" don´t tick anything for those who are disconnected from the natural scenarios.
---------------
Regarding my paper:
...okay, I read through that, and... well, no wonder nobody will peer-review this. There's nothing to review; just a claim and no sufficient support.

But otherwise you understood the descriptions and the overall idea?
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
"A black hole is a region of spacetime exhibiting such strong gravitational effects that nothing—including particles and electromagnetic radiation such as light—can escape from inside it". From - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole

Correct... from inside the Black Hole. Outside, their gravitational effects on other objects behave just like those of other objects.

If you replaced Sun with a Black Hole of equivalent mass (that is, a Black Hole that's exactly 1 Solar Mass), the orbits of all the planets would be completely unaffected. And its Schwarzschild Radius (that is, the region inside of which there's only one direction: to the center), would only be about 3 km. In other words, a Black Hole equal to the mass of Sun would only be about as big as a small suburban town. A Black Hole with Earth's mass would only have a radius of about 9 millimeters. (BTW, neither could ever become Black Holes naturally.)

I wrote:


Imagine we all live on the same planet Earth, in the same Solar System, in the same Milky Way galaxy and in the same local part of the Universe. These cosmic conditions are equal for all humans and the different terrestrial and celestial motions are similar for all humans and even the celestial scenario are similar for humans living under the same Sky.

These common conditions of course gives rise to the same cultural Stories of Creation and to a large extend also the similar mythical images painted or made on rock surfaces.

Except, they don't.

If what you say is true, I would expect that these stories would have remained the same (that is, EXACTLY the same) throughout history. And yet, there's already massive diversity by the time history started getting recorded.

Are you serious? A god on the Earth?

I can name several Earth Gods from Germanic cultures alone.

Nerthus
Ing
Gerd
Folde
Sif
Sheaf
Shield Sheafson
John Barleycorn

And, of course, Earth Herself. And let's not forget the famous Son of Earth, Thunder Redbeard. ;)

astron.039.n.him..jpg
RockArt.Seth.God.Animal.jpg

Fig. 1 is a Star Map image of the mostly shown Milky Way contours (Sky God) on the northern hemisphere, but more countours can really be observed, as on Fig. 2 from Bohuslen in Sweden. The Egyptians have obviously observed the very same celestial imagery which is why we can find cultural similarites by doing Comparative Mythology.

That picture of the Milky Way looks NOTHING like either picture.

Well of course our ancestors watched the Sky - and the oral tradition works very well as long as they are connected to relevant terrestrial and celestial objects, as I´m trying to describe here.

But of course, "these oral mumbo-jumbo stories" don´t tick anything for those who are disconnected from the natural scenarios.

I've told you before: I don't regard them as "mumbo-jumbo". Nor, by the way, has the tradition entirely died. Many of our stories are still being told and retold orally, evolving with the changing needs of the cultures in which they're told. Even when we can't see most of them, we still wish upon the Stars.

And at the same time, new stories are told and retold. New Gods and new monsters are born all the time, some of which actually spread to wider awareness.

---------------
Regarding my paper:


But otherwise you understood the descriptions and the overall idea?

It doesn't matter whether I do or not. On their own, ideas are scientifically worthless.
 
Last edited:

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
@Riverwolf;
It doesn´t seem that we can come to any common conclusions regarding the mytho-cosmological issues, so I´ll just focus on this matter:
It doesn't matter whether I do or not. On their own, ideas are scientifically worthless.
I´ve earlier stated the paper as temporary as in "abstract", which shortly describes the content. The prime precondition for reading the abstracts in a paper is the genuine interest of reading this. The second is trying to understand the descriptions. The third is to ask into its contents if not understanding this.

Did you read and understand this abstract description?
 

niru9669

New Member
Excellent Debate ! Took some time reading all the content on this forum.
Did I land on this page randomly (or) was I destined to join a group who is on the same boat finding The mythical Meru ? ;)

Well, this is what I believe where 'Mount Meru' really is;
1) It is not a physical mountain which can be touched & felt by the lesser mortals.
2) Does exist, but in a different realm / dimension. It's outer boundaries probably defined by the circumventing stars at the Northpole (check the image attached)

big_dc87c3562e99d30d48c506a6d7bd2cee583cd263.jpg


4) Bhuloka (of which Earth is a part - Jambudwipa) is immediately followed by Bhuvarloka which is 1 lakh yojanas (8,00,000 miles) above earth.
5) Himalayas are the foothills of Mount Meru. Mount Meru exists within Bhuvarloka. Height of Mount Meru is 80,000 Yojanas (6,40,000 Miles), present within Bhuvarloka. Peak of Meru is beyond Moon, and is referred as "Swargaloka" where gods reside.
6) Bhuvarloka contains our Planetary system including our dear Sun, Moon (2,38,000 Miles from Earth), Big-Dipper constellation and the Pole Star which circumvent Mount Meru with respect to Axis of Earth.
7) The Sun nevers sets on Mount Meru, in the same way that it doesn't set on the North pole for 6 months.

home3.jpg



Lokas..PNG

Image & content courtesy (& for more reading): http://decodehindumythology.blogspot.in/2012/04/lokas-planets-of-advanced-aliens.html

This is also my personal belief here :) ! Expecting some nasty responses.

Cheers !
 
Last edited:

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Hello Niru9669,
Welcome indeed:)
his is alsomy personal belief here :) ! Expecting some nasty responses.
Always expect nasty questions when you/we puts the nose into a Forum, for instants this nasty one:
7) Sun never sets on Mount Meru (quite possible)
How do you think this is possible?

(Shaking of fear getting another nasty question from you :eek:)
 

niru9669

New Member
@Native,

Appreciate your feedback on my belief on location of Mythical Meru :).

Sun set on Mount Meru (swarga loka) can be another day's debate. Im more keen on understanding the location of Meru :), its relation with Auroras and revolving star constellation up at North pole.

Cheers !
 
Top