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?
