Notes on Mythology

Here are some notes for an article I'm working on. It's not quite finished, but I'll be editing it in this space.

Notes on Mythology

by B.V. Mahayogi

(Michael Dolan)

“Myth” normally refers to fantastic stories or even untruths.  A more generous meaning includes the national or ethnic histories tht describe characters and events that transcend common sense and experience with gradations of literal or metaphoric reality. Myths are often preserved in an oral tradition or written as scriptures.

Mythic cycles are often thought by the cultures who support them to have been divinely inspired. Mythological or scriptural traditions include  dead cultures and religions like the ancient Greeks, Romans, Norse, or Egyptians.  Mystical and supernatural stories of miraculous nature are essential for many living religious traditions as well: Budhhists, Christians, Jews, followers of Islam,  Hindus,  as well  those  considered “pagans,” by the so-called civilized society.

 One man’s myth is another man’s religion. We have no problem believing the fantastic stories of our own tradition and culture. The stories  we learned from our fathers and our mothers is God's truth, not myths. The animist, or for that matter the Hindu, the Jew, or the Buddhist, however, might reasonably call the Christian story of Jesus Christ’s resurrection a  myth: according to common sense and experience people do not rise from the dead. By the same token, the Night Journey of Mohammad from Mecca to Jerusalem on a flying horse can reasonably be considered a myth, as can the Jewish story of the Passover, or the story of the Buddha’s conception by way of a white elephant in a dream.

What, then, is the relation of myths to reality? How are myths alive--even true and not false—wherever their origin?

Myths have always had the power to move people. Indeed, many societies have defined themselves by their national stories. The have committed themselves to a systematic belief system based on a mythology, and have even been willing to kill or be killed in support of their myths.

The Aztecs who confronted the Conquistadores believed in Quetzalcoatl while the Spanish believed in Jesus Christ. Their worlds collided to the detriment of the Aztecs. Fundamentalists in all religions insist on the literal reality of their myths and are determined to die rather than re-interpret their meaning.

Still others see in their sacred narratives not literal truth, but metaphorical and symbolic power. Deep readers of mythological symbol and story realize a significance without which their lives would become meaningless.

Perhaps the best way to understand mythology is to probe the human psyche itself. Aristotle defined mythos, as a story where the hero’s journey has a beginning a middle and an end. In a sense of us are in a sense heroes on a journey to through life’s path from birth to death.

Our awareness of that journey develops into stories, our unconscious journey evolves in dreams. One’s personal experience of mythology is a mystical and artistic journey evolving through story. The most powerful and lasting mythology evolves through the experience of those who enter into its secrets.

Mythology may also be experienced as a kind of cultural dream, a synthetic revelation of the collective unconscious. And insofar as we experience the mystical world of mythology, we see the expression of conscious and unconscious dream in story narrative as metaphorical or symbolic constructs that contain truths about the dreamer.

 If myth is seen as cultural dreams, or expressions of the collective consciousness of humanity, they may also be seen as revelations of the inner spirit. Picking up where St. Anselm left off, we can apply the ontological argument to the collective consciousness of Jung and say that if something can be imagined by all human souls, if we all dream the same dreams, the archetypes present in the dream state must have some expression in reality. 

Even if we are unable to locate this experience in the concrete plane, it must have some reality in the super-subjective plane of higher conscious reality.

At the very least we can take the most profound of myths seriously as sources of information about the inner workings of the spirit, the collective psyche of a culture. At the very best, a mythological system may prove to hold deep truths about the very nature of reality. The greatest of these have true transcendental power to transform the human soul and so have been accepted as religious and scriptural truths about the greatest metaphysical realities.

It may be said that mythology is man’s attempt to explain god’s thinking, or as Milton put it, “to justify the ways of God to man.” The difference between holy scripture and mythology is the difference between my religion and yours. Mythology refers to the “other’s” religion or beliefs.  But where science and philosophy fail to take up the big questions,  mythology steps in to solve the riddle. How does God dream the world? How did the world of consciousness evolve into the world of exploitation? Who are we? How did we get here? What does it all mean?

Of course, it is common practice to treat myth as primitive science; explanations of phenomena that humans of earlier civilizations could not otherwise explain. To some extent, of course, this is true of myths such as that of the Aztec creation myths or the Greek myth about Persdephone, that perhaps once explained the seasons. But mythology serves a much deeper purpose than mere explanation, as we have seen.

Ironically, science today assumes much of the role of mythology by promising to  answer some of the same questions without resorting to fantastic stories.

 Is modern science a form of  mythology? Much of it clearly is. Astrology, Phrenology, Homeopathy, Magnetism, Brain lobotomies and electric shock therapy, Thalidomide, radiation therapy, many of these have been discarded as unscientific. Racial  stereotypes were presented as science quite recently by the inventor of the transistor, Nobel Prize winner William B. Shockley, who was notoriously refuted.Social engineering experiments were considered to be cutting edge science by the Germans in the  940s but their ideas about population control  and "eugenics" constituted genocide. The Nazis considered their ideas about homosexuality to be "scientific." Today their views are abhorrent.  In their day so many different scientific ideas have been accepted and discarded and now they are outmoded. While they are not classed as mythologies, the scientific “myths” they promoted or served have been debunked.

Thomas Kuhn wrote on the need for an occasional paradigm shift. Ptolemy's flat world gave way to the Copernican revolution. No one living would try to infer that the world is flat. And yet, before the discovery of the Americas, the Ptolemaic world of Aristotle and Plato was considered good science.

Sir Isaac Newton established the laws of thermodynamics, and gravity. His theories held for almost 200 years. But 20th-century physicists like Einstein, Niels Bohr, and Erwin Schrodinger turned the Newtonian world inside out with relativity theory and quantum physics.

Science attempts to explain the world with fascinating stories, just as does mythology. Science claims to have the answers to so many of our questions. Unfortunately some of the big questions are considered taboo. Certain questions bring us into the world of metaphysics, and so are discarded by objective scientific observers. Physicists like Stephen  Hawkings for exampe, like astronomers, refuse to speak of the origin of the universe before the so-called "Big Bang." Because this phenomena is impossible to observe it has no mathematical model. If it is impossible to observe there's no need to discuss it. This doesn't prevent physicists from speaking in riddles about enigmas or mysteries.

It’s hard to consider “science” as mythology, since science claims to be a point of view about reality based on observation of real facts. And yet, science presents us with fantastic stories, just as does mythology. When I was a kid, I loved science fiction. And yet much of what science reports as hard reality may later turn out to be fiction. For example, life is said to have evolved from complex carbon and nitrogen molecules born from the Big Bang. Primitive organisms became more organized over millions of years and gave rise to a multitude of species. The miracle of life remains a secret. But evolutionary biologists like Richard Dawkins say they are working overtime to unravel the mysteries of evolution.

These stories, like the ancient myths of the Mayans and Aztecs, have its own internal logic. Proponents of these stories like Richard Dawkins challenge theists to provide evidence for the existence of God. In the absence of concrete proof for supernatural reality they claim their explanation must stand.

But where is t he always he evidence for these fanciful stories or mythologies that are continually circulated as if they were gospel?  If science is based on observation of real facts, who has observed the Big Bang? Of course mathematical models exist that seem to bear out the latest astronomical theory about the Big Bang; and yet, there are always differences

of opinion about the correct interpretation of the facts. It may be quite possible to draw the conclusion that the universe is expanding on the basis of an explosion that took place billions of years ago. But how or where the explosion took place, and what initiated the explosion is still a mystery. What force or energy caused the initial explosion? Physicists tell us that this question is not important one for science, since science relies on observable facts, and

since the origin of the universe defies normal observation. This is a salient point. But if the reality is that science is uncertain about the origin of the universe, why promote facile mythologies in an attempt to provide a theory of everything?

Not only are our observations about astronomical events imperfect. In fact all our observations of reality are based on very imperfect senses. And just as our understanding of the origin of the universe is obviously flawed, so is our understanding of the origin of life.

If in fact it is true that life is a consequence of the correct mixture of inorganic compounds, it should be a simple matter to combine the correct proportions of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, and amino acids to create life forms. Unfortunately, no amount of scientific knowledge suffices to create organic life from inorganic matter. While the most primitive one celled organisms have the capacity to reproduce life, not even the most advanced technology can create organic life from inorganic compounds. Why should we believe that the generation of organic, conscious life could be the byproduct of a random inorganic process?

The answer is simple: we believe that life has been produced by random inorganic process because we been told so. The stories told by modern mythology have been repeated thousands of times by scientists everywhere: in high school, on documentary programs on TV, in science fiction movies, and by the experts. I believe the stories told by modern mythology because I've seen them again and again. Is there any real evidence that consciousness is a product of matter? I have been told by neurobiologists that the mind is a creation of the brain, a kind of computer. But isn't the mind function of the living self? What exactly is the living self? Who are we really? And is there any purpose to life?

Science is unwilling to take up these questions. It appeared to be the domain of philosophy. But philosophers are loth to consider these questions as well. This may have more to do with politics than with any genuine quest for knowledge. Philosophy wants to present itself as a hard science. As such, it relegates these questions to the antiquated field of metaphysics. No one wants to be associated with metaphysics, since to do so is to brand oneself as a kind of weirdo crackpot, anathema to any academic. 20th-century philosophy in particular, including Bertrand Russell and his disciple Wittgenstein, scrupulously avoid questions of metaphysics. And yet somehow these questions do not disappear. One would think that

the greatest minds of the generation would dedicate themselves to solving the ancient riddles. One might think that great scientists might take up the question of the origin of life, the origin of the universe, or the purpose of life. We see tremendous focus on technology; fortunes are spent and made developing new methods of transportation and communication. And yet, our civilization faces a number of crises. Fossil fuels are obviously an unrenewable energy source, and yet thousands of new cars are sold every day. We are just as addicted to petroleum as we are to the different recreational drugs that fuel the epidemic of narco violence spreading throughout Latin America and other parts of the world. In addition to the energy crisis, the drugs crisis, and increasing crime and violence,

new forms of disease challenge our way of life. But is this way of life really the best? One would think that the greatest minds of the 21st century might be dedicated to a proper search for right living. But these questions are waved aside for so-called "practical" considerations.

Perhaps there is a great deal of truth in the stories that drive the mythology of science. Perhaps these stories serve a profound purpose. But do they get us closer to the truth about who we are? Do they get us closer to the proper path for living? Or is there something to be said for the metaphysical and the mythological?

According to the creation stories supported by popular science, life originates long ago in some mysterious way too complex for ordinary people to understand; it replicates itself by an enigma of science we have yet to comprehend. Once life has arrived on earth it continues replicating itself in a myriad number of forms until becomes the impossibly complex entity known as human life. Scientists do not completely understand how this took place, but in the future scientific discoveries will explain more. In the meantime we can enjoy the latest technological developments based on discovery.How do these creation stories differ from ancient mythology?Mythology itself appears ridiculous on its face. A Western visitor upon arriving in India immediately feels superior upon encountering the different manifestations of Hindu mythology. "How can you worship so many gods? What a silly mythology you have," He says, appalled by the fantastic stories of the Hindus. And yet, when our visitor is confronted with his own biblical traditions of Adam and Eve, Noah and the ark, Jonah and the whale, the parting of the Red Sea, he has nothing to say. One man's religion is another man's mythology.

On the other hand, it is curious to note that while the British Raj spent over 200 years colonizing India and preaching Christianity in an attempt to convert souls, there are precious few Indian Christians today. Normally, when two different cultural systems collide the superior one emerges victorious. Why then did Christianity make a such small impression after such a great effort. Why is it that yoga, a spiritual-mystical cultural system from India has had such a great impact in the West? It may be said that India's mythological traditions promote superstition; why then are so many of the worlds top physicists and scientists citizens of India?

What makes Indian mythology and spiritual belief in particular so compelling? Why is it that these traditions have withstood invasion and cultural challenge from the Gupta kings who established Buddhism 25 centuries ago,  the hegemony of the Islamic moguls in the 12th century, and 200 years of British commercial and colonial dominance? If the ideas, stories, traditions, and mythology of the ancient Indian world were nothing more than superstition, why were they so fascinating to physicists like J Robert Oppenheimer?

What can we learn from ancient stories like the Mahabharata?