Editing Sacred Scriptures

I thought I'd try my hand at editing. I mean, how hard could it be especially seeing as no formal qualifications seem to be required? This should be a walk in the park.

But anyway, not wanting to run the risk of ruining any important literary masterpieces, I figured a nursery rhyme like "Baa Baa Black Sheep" was a good place to start. All I had to do next was choose the obligatory pen-name...

I settled on "Dried Waiter" (real name withheld to avoid likely incrimination... "any similarity to persons living or dead is purely coincidental and is in no way intended".) So here goes:

Baa baa black sheep Bleat bleat dark ovine

"Bleat bleat dark ovine,
Hast thou a fibre quantity?
Aye gent, aye gent,
Triple sacks replete.
A single unit for the head honcho,
Another for his lady true,
The last for the juvenile
Who resides on the avenue."

Bonzer! Ripper! No harm done at all! That was much easier than I thought it would be. What a terrific improvement I've made! Now I'm truly inspired..

Next, I will re-write the lyrics to the entire Beatles catalogue of songs. After that, who knows...? Maybe, I dunno, Newton's Law of Gravity, Einstein's Theory of Relativity... and seeing no-one is preventing me, I think The Adventures Of Superman could do with a bit of colour. Clark Kent would become Bill Gates. I could replace Lois Lane with Germaine Greer and Jimmy Olsen with Tiger Woods. Perry White has gotta be Donald Trump. This'll be a certain hit.

Indeed my 'pièce de résistance' will surely be my revised edition of The Holy Bible, Dried Waiter version. I can't wait. It will be completely rewritten to keep up with modern times. No more celibacy and strict discipline - out with tradition, in with political correctness. Married priests, gay priests, gay marriage, gay married priests, the list goes on - - - oh, I'm frothing at the mouth just thinking of the possibilities! No-one can stop me now, I'm on a roll...

[authorised and written by Bhakta Sam for the Australian Lullaby Party]

Learning Hyperlinks?

Learning how to do hyperlinks in html. I can do:

<*a* href="https://plus.google.com/+samtreloar">'insert linkword here'<&/&a&>

which looks like (without the asterisks and ampersands!)

*
'insert linkword here'

But +samtreloar

...?

"Marriage" reform?

(subtitled: An Etymological Viewpoint)

Now that Equal Rights for Gay Marriage is being scrutinised, why stop there? Polygamy is a tradition in many diverse cultures all over the world. It is largely Christianity that stands apart as the last bastion of refusing to sanctify or recognise the practice of taking more than one partner or spouse. Now, what could be the ramifications of the Church modifying its stance sometime in the future?

This would open the door to a multitude of scenarios. Combine the two and next we could have Bisexual Polygamy, an obvious result of mixing Gay and Heterosexual Polygamy. Again I say, why stop there?

Animal Rights activists could have bestiality legalised and have Polygamous Bestial Marriages. Ageist activists could have sex with minors legalised resulting in Paedophile Marriage. Eugenic activists will refuse to breed outside their bloodlines, giving rise to Incestual Marriage.

GABBIP. Gay And Bisexual, Bestial, Incestual, Paedophile marriage.

Time to go back, back to the word "marriage". It supposedly comes from French for marry but ultimately, the Latin maritus , husband, as in "marital", of the husband. But it's not essentially Latin - maritus is translated into husband for lack of another word. "Husband" is a contraction of the feudal housebonder (house + bond are of Nordic and Gothic origins, not Latin) meaning the titleholder of farming property (presumably male at the time) which is where we get "animal husbandry" from. Conversly, nuptial refers to the wife, and matrimony, to the mother. It is only when we enter into the terms betrothal, wedding (from wedlock) and espousal that we find no gender-specificity. Essentially these words refer to making pledges, taking vows, ie to plight one's troth.

The argument that marriage is between a man and woman, or husband and wife, stems from Holy Matrimony which denotes a sanctified union for the bearing of child offspring. This is the literal meaning of marriage. A Civil Union can only be correctly called a wedding, a betrothal or an espousal, but never a marriage, because regardless of whether or not there is any offspring, it isn't sanctified.

Leaving all that aside, let's now consider progeny. If "marriage reform" keeps going in this way, what on Earth are we going to do with all the inbred mutant bastards? 

History of Mankind

I still remember my first history lesson in Secondary School over 40 years ago. The teacher's name was Miss Blount – an eloquent, tall, slim young woman with short mouse-blonde hair. We were taught that the "Cradle of Civilisation" was Mesopotamia, the area around the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers, which equates to modern day Iraq, or the biblical Babylon, or something like that. 

Instinctively and intuitively I knew this was a lie. I don't know why or how I knew this, I just knew. It turns out that European scholars had connected the dots using chinese whispers to come up with a 'version' of history that promoted their Eurocentric 'Christian' view of the World. They purposely advanced by several millennia the dating of the Vedas and fabricated a mythical 'Aryan Invasion' to make everything synchronize with The Flood to fit in with their narrow-minded theology...  to quote:

 “The Aryan invasion theory thus turned the "Vedas", the original scriptures of ancient India and the Indo-Aryans, into little more than primitive poems of uncivilized plunderers. This idea - totally foreign to the history of India, whether north or south - has become almost an unquestioned truth in the interpretation of ancient history. Today, after nearly all the reasons for its supposed validity have been refuted, even major Western scholars are at last beginning to call it in question.”   http://controversialhistory.blogspot.com.au/2007/04/myth-of-aryan-invasion-of-india.html

The familiar saying "a little learning is a dangerous thing" could never be more applicable in this instance. 

Protoplasmic Crud by Michael Cassidy https://youtu.be/7VaE33TTgZ4

Precedents and Subsequent Plagiarisms

Baudhayana provided the first documentation of what was later to become known as the "Pythagorean" Theorem about 300 years before Pythagoras travelled to India and studied the Vedas in the course of learning yoga. Even though the knowledge predates Baudhayana it was orally transferred without writing it down, which is why his Śulba Sūtra is the earliest record of the theorem.

There is no evidence that Pythagoras claimed authorship and this was most likely ascribed to him by the Greeks in promoting their nationalistic fame and fortune. As a humble ascetic he opened a monastery and accepted disciples to spread the teachings of ancient Vedic wisdom that he brought back with him.  

This is just one of many incidences dotted throughout European history where credit was never given to the actual original source of knowledge, but instead was claimed by plagiarism. Always, there is a gap of a hundred, perhaps two or three hundred years - even millenia sometimes - between the original "discovery" and the European authorship. The famous early Greeks Hippocrates, Plato, Euclid, etc all sourced from the Indian Subcontinent and the later Europeans Fibonnaci, Newton, Pascal, Bell, etc were notoriously slow off the mark.

All of the "dicoveries" that made these people famous were preceded by examples. There is virtually not a single Art, Philosophy, Science, Law, Theorem, Proof or Doctrine that is purely their own work. The newly formed empires and sovereign states of Europe were devoid of the ancient history and culture of established civilisations of not just India but China and even Meso-America. Their plundering didn't stop at physical property - the wealth of intellectual riches was also mined.

Table of Precedents and Subsequent Plagiarisms:

Many Western "discoveries" can be traced directly to Eastern origin.

Dates for the various Vedas vary due to disputation by Western "authorities". In many cases they were passed down orally for centuries if not millenia. Written scriptures are a more 'recent' addition to the Vedas - only a few thousand years ago!