Feed: 5. Fifth Level of Learning - The Wes Penre Papers
Fifth Level of Learning, Paper 9: The Vedic Players and their Counterparts in Other Ancient Texts
by Wes Penre, Written on Thursday, October 9, 2014, Posted on Friday, February 6, 2015
Edited by Professor Bob Stannard
I. Syncretism
Many readers have contacted me and thanked me for breaking down all these entities mentioned in the Sumerian/Babylonian texts into the few beings who are actually relevant to these texts. I can understand these readers because I felt the same relief once it was done. Using syncretism was really the key to make this happen.
Now, when we have left Sumer and Babylon and moved down to the Indus Valley, syncretism is even more important in order to break all this almost endless number of deities down into the few in question. In Vishnu Sahasranama, there are, for example, a thousand names listed for Lord Vishnu alone!^ [1] [1] Some of these are his Avatars (such as Krishna and Rama), but most of them are just alternative names for the same deity. Most of the other deities have hundreds of names as well. I can't possibly mention them all; therefore, I need to use discernment to know when to stop.
I just want to mention to the reader what a wealth of information that is embedded in the Vedas and the rest of the Hindu texts and how confusing it is for someone who wants to read and learn from these scriptures. Fortunately, we are not too concerned about Vishnu's thousand names--I only need to work with the few, most important ones. What is more significant for us, however, is to figure out, by using syncretism, which Vedic deity corresponds with which deity in other ancient texts; such as the Sumerian, Akkadian, and Babylonian texts, as well as the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian mythologies. To compare all the Hindu deity names with the other sacred texts would be a monstrous piece of work and would take up great volumes of space. Hence, we have to be selected with all this and only compare the most common names that are mentioned. However, if I explain how I came to the conclusion, just as I did in Level IV, the readers will learn how to do it, and if a situation would occur in the future when you are uncertain about a particular character, you have learned how to work with syncretism and can do it yourself.
The reader has noticed that I have mentioned Vedic characters as we have moved on through the papers here in Level V, and I have also explained who they are--often in reference to the Sumerian texts (which are the texts we've discussed most often in previous levels of learning--therefore, these texts are the most natural choice when comparing different beings' names across the cultures). However, these entities are only the tip of the iceberg, and sooner or later, I would need to spend an entire paper just comparing Vedic deities with whom they are in relation to other ancient texts. We have now come to the point when this has become necessary, so I will focus this paper on comparing deities.
What I have decided to do is to list deities by the names that the reader is most familiar with and then add Vedic names to them, after which I'll explain how I came to certain conclusions.
I think most readers are familiar with the Mesopotamian and Egyptian names in general; therefore, I will list them under these names and then add the Vedic names to them. Once I've started, the reader will see what I mean.
II. Mother Goddess--the Queen of the Stars
The Goddess is not mentioned as much in the Vedas as, for example, Lord Vishnu, which is not so strange when we understand that the Vedas are based on Patriarchal views of the world and the Universe. As I have mentioned earlier, Goddess worship has existed in the background during all this time but has been severely suppressed by the Patriarchal Hierarchy. Nevertheless, the Goddess is mentioned occasionally under Her Vedic names, but more as side notes. The following are a few examples.
ii.i Aditi
Aditi is one of the names used in the Vedas to describe Mother Goddess as the Creatrix of the Universe. The Sages occasionally tried to suppress that fact and make her into a less significant goddess, but this is what it says in the Vedic texts:
Quote #1: In the Vedas, Aditi (Sanskrit: ????? limitless) [1] is mother of the gods (devamatar) and all twelve zodiacal spirits from whose cosmic matrix the heavenly bodies were born. As celestial mother of every existing form and being, the synthesis of all things, she is associated with space (akasa) and with mystic speech (V?c). She may be seen as a feminized form of Brahma and associated with the primal substance (mulaprakriti) in Vedanta. She is mentioned nearly 80 times in the Rigveda: the verse Daksha sprang from Aditi and Aditi from Daksha is seen by Theosophists as a reference to the eternal cyclic re-birth of the same divine Essence [2] and divine wisdom. [3] In contrast, the Puranas, such as the Shiva Purana and the Bhagavata Purana, suggest that Aditi is wife of sage Kashyap and gave birth to the Adityas such as Indra, Surya, and also Vamana.^ [2] [2]
Here we have a typical example of what I concluded: In the Vedas, Aditi was obviously described as the Mother of all things and the Creatrix of the same--She was even identified as the female Brahma. She is mentioned as many as 80 times in the Rigveda, for example. In the Pur?nas, however, she was demoted to a lesser goddess, married to the Sage Kashyap (or Kashyapa), who is the Vedic and Pur?na name for Lord En.ki, as we shall see later on. This is very similar to how the scribes described Ninhursag in the Sumerian texts--just as in the Pur?nas, she was demoted to being associated with Lord En.ki--in the Sumerian texts, She was sometimes described as his sister, who helped him create mankind. I can't think of a more intimidating statement regarding the Goddess. First, Her son hijacks Her Experiment and thereafter claims that his mother (here "demoted" to his sister) helped him with the crime. Eventually, she is even demoted to En.ki's consort. However, as we learned in Level IV, Ninhursag means "The Mountain Goddess," which was the name Prince Ninurta gave his mother, the Queen of the Stars, after he had been promoted to be in charge of the Living Library of Planet Earth. Thus, the Prince's mountain fortress was named after his mother. Ninhursag, as well as Aditi, were therefore not En.ki's sister or consort, but his mother, the Orion Queen.
More distorted information exists in the Mandala, where it says, "Aditi is said to be the mother of the great god Indra, the mother of kings^ [3] [3] and the mother of gods."^ [4] [4] Indra is, as revealed in Paper #4, the Vedic name for Marduk. Aditi is again (precisely as in the Sumerian texts) falsely referred to as En.ki's consort. However, the Vedas, for some reason, is again setting the records straight and even provides details that clearly gives reference that She is the mother of all gods and not their consorts. I am aware that incest happened amongst the gods because their rules are not the same as ours--they live for millions of years (some say forever), and under such circumstances, incest to them apparently loses its meaning. If a father, who is two million years old has sex with his daughter, who is one and a half million years old, incest is not an issue in their minds. Still, why would the Goddess have a sexual relationship with--or even marry--Her son, whom She had such serious issues with?
Quote #2: In the Vedas, Aditi is Devmatar (mother of the celestial gods) as from and in her cosmic matrix all the heavenly bodies were born. She is preeminently the mother of 12 Adityas whose names include Vivasv?n, Aryam?, P???, Tva???, Savit?, Bhaga, Dh?t?, Vidh?t?, Varu?a, Mitra, ?atru, and Urukrama (Vishnu was born as Urukrama ... She is also is the mother of the Vamana avatar of Vishnu. Accordingly, Vishnu was born as the son of Aditi in the month of Shravana (fifth month of the Hindu Calendar, also called Avani) under the star Shravana...^ [5] [5]
In this reference, it clearly states that Vishnu--even as one of his avatars--was the son of Aditi and not his consort. Wikipedia has it correct where it says: "Aditi can be defined as the cosmic creatrix, the creativity of the all-creating."^ [6] [6]
Last, but not the least, Her real status was not only acknowledged in the Vedas, but actually emphasized.
Quote #3: Aditi challenges the modern idea that the Vedic peoples were patriarchal. Aditi was regarded as both the sky goddess, and earth goddess, which is very rare for a prehistoric civilization. Most prehistoric civilizations venerated a dual principle, Sky Father and Earth Mother, which appears to be borrowed from the concept of Prithivi and Dyaus Pita. Aditi was attributed the status of first deity by the Vedic culture, although she is not the only one attributed this status in the Vedas. She is addressed, in the Rigveda as Mighty.^ [7] [7]
It does for a moment seem like the idea of a patriarchal Vedic people were challenged with this reference, and if this was the only reference there was, it would be an issue, but it's easy to see by just taking a brief examination that the ancient Indian people were patriarchal in nature. Unfortunately, that has not changed currently.
Albeit, the true status of Mother Goddess is mentioned in the definition of "Goddess" in the Vedas, this status will soon be blurred when another, much lower deity, wanted to play the Goddess of Goddesses and stole the title, making it hers. In Mesopotamia, this lower deity was called Ere?kigal, and in the Indus valley, she went by the name Kali (among other names).
ii.ii. Durga, the Mountain Goddess
Next to Devi, Durga is probably the best reference to the original Mother Goddess. I mentioned Her in detail in Paper #6, and I did it so thoroughly that I am just going to repeat exactly what I said there.
Ramaprasad Chanda (1873-1942) was an Indian historian and archaeologist from Bengal and a pioneer in his field in South Asia. He wrote the following on the development of Durga, who is the most popular incarnation of Devi (Mother Goddess) and one of the main forms of the Goddess Shakti in the Hindu pantheon--from primitive goddess to her current form:
Quote #19: it is possible to distinguish two different strata - one primitive and the other advanced. The primitive form of Durga is the result of syncretism of a mountain-goddess worshiped by the dwellers of the Himalaya and the Vindhyas, a goddess worshiped by the nomadic Abhira shepherd, the vegetation spirit conceived as a female, and a war-goddess. As her votaries advanced in civilization the primitive war-goddess was transformed into the personification of the all-destroying time (Kali), the vegetation spirit into the primordial energy (Adya Sakti) and the saviouress from "samsara" (cycle of rebirths) , and gradually brought into line with the Brahmanic mythology and philosophy.^ [8] [8]
Now it is getting pretty interesting. We can see how the Goddess in the beginning was personified by the Queen of the Stars, who came down to Earth to set up the Living Library together with Her Helpers. Chanda is talking about a "mountain-goddess," whom we referred to in Level IV as Ninhursag. This is exactly what "Ninhursag" means, and it was a title Prince Ninurta gave his mother, the Goddess, as a title of love--"The Mountain Goddess."
Later on, however, when the AIF (Vishnu, Shiva, and their cohorts) came and took over, the Goddess was transformed into "the personification of the all-destroying time (Kali)..." In other words, a change took place, when the Goddess was no longer the Goddess, and Her title was taken over by Kali.
This is how far I am going to repeat what I wrote in Paper #6. The reader already knows, I presume, who Kali is, but we are still going to bring her up later in this paper, and if the reader needs a reminder, he or she will get it there.
ii.iii. Bhuvaneshvari
Wikipedia can sometimes come in handy when a subject is well researched. When it's not, Wikipedia can be very misleading, to say the least. Hence, it's very important to be aware of this and keep in mind that it's written by ordinary people who (hopefully) have some knowledge on a certain subject--be it on the subject of Michael Jackson or the Divine Feminine. I am using Wikipedia frequently myself, but first I have the item cross-checked, and I do my best to only use material that is relevant to my story. This is not a thesis; therefore, it's not as important that I always use the most original source in the Vedas. In fact, I chose not to do that and instead refer to sources that people more easily can digest and absorb--Wikipedia being one of many such sources. On occasion, however, when I think it's necessary, I go to the Vedic original source and list that in the foot/endnote. I just want to make the reader aware of the sometimes dubious Wikipedia, and when it comes to Mother Goddess, it's overloaded with wrong information. I don't think it's always intentional, though--the writers were duped.
For example, Wikipedia provides a list for "benevolent" Goddesses, whom they say is the "real" Goddess in different form, worshipped by different cults. Although this was common at the time, the goddesses listed are not always the one and only Goddess with capital "G." Here is a good example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaktism#Principal_deities [9]. We don't need to look more than with a passing glance to see that this list is inaccurate. Sita and Radha, for example, are listed as Rama's and Krishna's consorts, respectively, and these gods are both Lord En.ki, who was not married to the Mother Goddess at any time. He had many lovers and consorts, but She was never one of them. This is a grave misunderstanding, and I just want to point out that flaws such as these are in there, in case you want to research any of this yourself.
Otherwise, Shaktism was a cult that worshipped the Divine Feminine and the Patriarchal Regime. They started out in very ancient times, before the AIF landed on Earth, and at that time, it was not worship, just an acknowledgment and gratitude for being alive and happy in a Universe created by the Goddess. This changed shortly after Lucifer and his cohorts came. These patriarchs were devoted to worship and sacrifice (as long as they were the ones who were worshiped), and shortly thereafter, the followers of the Divine Feminine started doing the same, although the original worship was directed toward the Goddess. Albeit, the sacrifice was often much milder than within the patriarchal movement, it was still worship. In Vedic time, Shaktism was still quite popular, and the patriarchs weren't displeased because they could see that worship was part of the picture. This proved to the Patriarchal Regime that the purity in the relationship between the worshippers and the Goddess was distorted and heavily reduced.
The second name used for the real Goddess is Bhuvaneshvari. She is said to be the "Queen of the Universe." In fact, Bhuvaneshvari means the Queen or the Ruler of the Universe.^ [9] [10] She is the Divine Mother and the Queen of all the Worlds. We can hardly come any closer to the terms I have used myself throughout these papers. I only wish I could see a reference to Orion in regards to Her as well, but have failed to do so. She is also known as the Lady of the Universe, Adi Shakti or Durga. She's the "unstoppable," and if She really wants to do something, it gets done.
Unfortunately, the Patriarchal Regime had to put themselves in charge instead of the Divine Feminine. It is said in some scriptures that Lingaraj, or Lord Shiva, is Her consort, which of course is nothing else but a hijack of Khan En.lil's identity. Therefore, I need to add that Bhuvaneshvari, in Her purest form, is the Queen of the Stars and the Divine Feminine. She was also "The Goddess as World Mother, or the Goddess Whose Body is the Earth/Cosmos."^ [10] [11]
The Queen of the Stars is also Brahmin, but this is something I want to explain in detail when we define Khan En.lil in the next main section.
ii.iv. Brahmin, Devi and Shakti
Devi is the absolute most important name for the Goddess in the Hindu religion! Devi is the feminine form of Deva, which is the Sanskrit word for deity. Richard L. Thompson, in his excellent book, Alien Identities, correctly states that humans are the descendants of Devi. Khan En.lil is then, of course, the counterpart of "Devi" and would be "Deva." That's when we boil it down to its absolute simplest form. However, after that, Vishnu and his demigods knocked on the door and wanted to be part of it all and started using the terms deva and devi on themselves, as well.
Overall, the Indian text, Devi Bhagavatam, is not widely used, and in it is explained that it is mainly Shakti who is the Devi (Creatrix of All). Indeed, She is the Brahmin. It is explained clearly in the following excerpt from the above mentioned text (my emphasis is in italics, as usual):
Quote #4: 6-10. It is commonly known that Brahm? is the creator of this universe; and the knowers of the Vedas and the Pur?nas say so; but they also say that Brahm? is born of the navel-lotus of Visnu. Thus it appears that Brahm? cannot create independently. Again Visnu, from whose navel lotus Brahm? is born, lies in Yoga sleep on the bed of Ananta (the thousand headed serpent) in the time of Pralaya; so how can we call Bhagav?n Visnu who rests on the thousand headed serpent Ananta as the creator of the universe? Again the refuge of Ananta is the water of the ocean Ek?rnava; a liquid cannot rest without a vessel; so I take refuge of the Mother of all beings, who resides as the S'akti of all and thus is the supporter of all; I fly for refuge unto that Dev? who was praised by Brahm? while resting on the navel lotus of Visnu who was lying fast asleep in Yoga nidr?. O Munis! meditating on that Maya Dev? who creates, preserves and destroys the universe who is known as composed of the three gunas and who grants mukti, I now describe the whole of the Pur?nas; now you all better hear.^ [11] [12]
This passage defends the Divine Feminine and states that although Brahm?, in the patriarchal world, is the Creator of the Universe, how can that be, when he is dependent on Shakti to be just that? Lord Vishnu, who is here equated to Brahm?, is highly questioned, as we can see, and the conclusion is, just as it always was, that Vishnu is not the Creator of the Universe. I know, and the reader knows, from having written/studied the previous Levels of Learning, that Shakti, Mother Goddess, has been teaching Her son Vishnu/En.ki how to become a Creator God; something he took to heart but started using for his own selfish means. Thus, Vishnu is not the Creator because he wasn't the first--Shakti/Devi was.
Let's consult Wikipedia for a moment.
Quote #5: Shaktism regards Devi (lit., the Goddess) as the Supreme Brahman itself, the one without a second, with all other forms of divinity, female or male, considered to be merely her diverse manifestations. In the details of its philosophy and practice, Shaktism resembles Shaivism. However, Shaktas (Sanskrit: ??kta, ?????), practitioners of Shaktism, focus most or all worship on Shakti, as the dynamic feminine aspect of the Supreme Divine. Shiva, the masculine aspect of divinity, is considered solely transcendent, and his worship is usually relegated to an auxiliary role.^ [12] [13]
Thus, in Shaktism, although including worship as I've stated earlier, Shiva, the masculine aspect of divinity, is considered "solely transcendent, and his worship is usually relegated to an auxiliary role."
Here is more from Devi Bhagavatam:
Quote #6: 1-26. ...Whether it be Myself, or Visnu or S'ambhu, or S?vitr? or Ram? or Um?, all are under Her control; there is nothing to be doubted here? What to speak of other high souled persons! Now I will chant hymns to Yoga Nidr?,^ [13] [14] under whose influence Bhagav?n Hari^ [14] [15] even is lying, under deep sleep, inert like an ordinary man. When the eternal V?sudeva Jan?rdana will be dispossessed by Her, He will no doubt fight with the D?navas. Thus deciding, Bhagav?n Brahm?, seated on the tubular stalk of the lotus, began to chant hymns to Yoga Nidr?, residing on the body of Visnu, thus :^ [15] [16]
27-32. Brahm? said : "O Dev?! I have come to understand on the authority of all the words of the Vedas, that Thou art the only One Cause of this Universal Brahm?nda. The more so when Thou hast brought the best Purusa Visnu, endowed with discrimination above all beings, under the control of sleep, then the above remark is self-evident.
O Thou, the Player in the minds of all beings! O Mother! I am extremely ignorant of the knowledge of Thy nature; when Bhagav?n Hari is sleeping inert by Thy power, then who is there amongst Kotis and Kotis of wise men, who can understand completely the Pastime, Leel?, full of M?y? of Thine, who art beyond the Gunas. The S?nkhya philosophers say (that the Purusa (the male aspect of S'akti).^ [16] [17]
27-50. ...O Mother! Thou, in the beginning of the Yugas, dost manifest first the Visnu form and givest him the pure Sattrik Sakti, free from any obscuration and thereby madest Him preserve the Universe; and now it is Thyself that hast kept Him thus unconscious; therefore, it is an undoubted fact that Thou art doing whatever Thou willest, O Bhagavat?! I am now in danger; if it be Thy desire not to kill me, then dost break the silence, look on me and show Thy mercy.^ [17] [18]
Here, a realization is made that Shakti, or Devi, is the real Creatrix of the Universe, and that Vishnu is merely Her offspring--something Vishnu was never very keen on admitting.
Wikipedia also provides a reference that Devi and Shakti are one and the same:
Quote #7: Dev? (Devanagari: ????) is the Sanskrit root-word of Divine, its related masculine term is Deva. Devi is synonymous with Shakti, the female aspect of the divine, as conceptualized by the Shakta tradition of Hinduism... Goddess worship is an integral part of Hinduism.^ [18] [19]
Yes, Goddess worship is part of Hinduism, but it's quite a stretch to call it "integral." However, I can see what they mean by that statement--also when it is mentioned in the same sentence as "worship." Although, if we read the ancient East Indian texts, we will soon realize that they are--almost all of them--edited by males, who were dedicated to the Patriarchal Regime.
Wikipedia continues the discussion about the Divine Feminine by having us visit the Indus Valley:
Quote #8: The Indus Valley Civilization, with its neighboring cultures of Zhob and Kulli regions in Balochistan, have yielded data on prehistoric religious practices on the Indian subcontinent dating back to 3000 BC. Some scholars suggest that the Indus Valley culture has a cult of the Great Mother or the Divine Mother, similar to such cults in Persia (Anahita), Asia Minor and the Mediterranean; and some have even speculated that this may be the earliest form of Shaktism.^ [19] [20]
It is certainly an early form of Shaktism, albeit not the earliest form. However, in this time period, and earlier, there were both worship and non-worship cults working independently, both praising the Divine Mother. In comparison, we can say that these older cults were more "on target" than the later ones during the Vedic period, for example:
Quote #9: According to the Vedas, Shakti is claimed to be Maya or illusion that casts a veil over Brahman, the Ultimate reality. Shakti and Brahman are inseparable entities that lie in a single body which reaffirms the claim that Shakti and Shiva coexist.^ [20] [21]
Here is where it becomes corrupted when it's suggested that Shakti and Shiva coexist. With that they mean that together they cast the veil over the "Ultimate reality." Suddenly, Shakti has transformed into a much darker deity, working side by side with both Shiva and Vishnu; supposedly, Her son and grandson, if everything were still in order. However, for the astute reader--what does this sound similar to? "Shakti and Shiva coexist." That sounds very similar to what happened after the biblical Deluge, when Marduk and Ere?kigal started working together--not only to maintain Maya, but as consorts, they started created a new race; the current Homo sapiens sapiens.
Another example, upon which to elaborate, has to do with En.ki's off-worldly Minions and is taken from Thompson's "Alien Identities,"
Quote #10: Um?, the wife of Lord Shiva, is also known as M?y? Dev?, or the goddess in charge of the illusory energy. She is also the Mother Goddess who has been worshipped all over the world by many different names. Since Shiva is Um?'s husband, he is the master of illusion and technology. Thus there is a natural connection between Lord Shiva, who ??lva approached to obtain his vim?na, and Maya D?nava, the master of illusion who manufactured it.
It is significant that ??lva asked for a vehicle that could not be destroyed by Devas, Asuras, Gandharvas, Uragas, or R?k?asas. These are all powerful races of humanoid beings that were openly active on the earth or in its general environs in ??lva's time, and so naturally he wanted to be able to defend himself against them.
??lva's vehicle is described as an iron city, and thus it must have been metallic in appearance and quite large. As we will see in Chapter 7, many Vedic vim?nas are described as flying cities, and one is reminded of the very large "mother-ships" that are sometimes discussed in UFO reports. Also it is described as the "abode of darkness," or tamo-dh?ma. Here "darkness" refers to the mode of ignorance, or illusion, that characterizes the material world in general and is particularly associated in Vedic literature with beings of negative character, such as the Asuras and D?navas. It refers to a lack of spiritual insight, rather than to a lack of technical knowledge.^ [21] [22]
If we read this passage carefully, we can see that something is not right. Yes, Mother Goddess is the Creatrix of Maya, the material reality--we know that from Level II and IV, where I explained how the Goddess created the physical worlds, and the Earth in particular, to have a place where she could do her Experiment. However, Shiva/Marduk had nothing to do with it and neither did Vishnu/En.ki. This is even proven in the Titanomachy, "The War of the Titans," where it clearly states that En.ki (Poseidon, Neptune etc.) are the "younger gods," i.e. they came "after"--they were the "Olympians," while Khan En.lil and the Goddess were the Titans. They were opposed to each other; therefore, they were not working together. Instead, the technology which the Titans used, was stolen by the Olympians after they had won the war. This technology was then used negatively upon the original inhabitants of Planet Gaia, i.e. the Earth--and ultimately, us!
The "ignorance" described here is merely the Olympians using technology to create the "veil of ignorance" and the darkness associated with the illusion (Maya). For Thompson's statement to make sense, all we need to do is to replace Um? and M?y? Dev? with Queen Ere?kigal--riddle solved, puzzle laid! It's easy to say that goddess worship is integral in the Vedas when the "goddess" they are talking about is not the Creatrix. I am not coming down on Thompson here--he has done an excellent job with his book, in my opinion, and he is just misled on this particular piece, as is everybody else--but there is a conspiracy against the real Goddess and her consort, which I have exposed in these levels of learning and which I am continuously exposing in this last, Fifth Level of Learning. However, the more that is revealed, the better things will be understood, and hopefully, increasingly more people will not so easily be deceived anymore. I have no guarantees how successful it will be--I just want to do my part to the best of my ability.
It is interesting to understand how these different cultures overlap. Sounds are very important, in general, in the Universe to keep things together, but also--each object and each living thing and living being has its own sound signature so that everything can be recognized and identified. Playing with words is therefore similar to playing with sounds. Thompson mentions the negative beings, such as the Asuras. Doesn't "Asuras" sound quite similar to the Egyptian name "Osiris?" Many people are still accepting things such as that as coincidences. They are not.
III. Khan En.lil--King of Orion
As a part of the Peace Agreement between Khan En.lil of the Arcturian Bird Tribe and Queen Nin (the Dragon Queen) of the Orion Empire, Khan En.lil gave his daughter in marriage to one of his stepsons--the Queen's son--to secure the Peace Agreement (See Level II). This daughter of Khan En.lil, who is still alive, has many names, but in these papers she has been presented mainly as Bau. Thus, Bau was given away as a part of the Peace Agreement to Prince Ninurta, Queen Nin's youngest son. Isis is, as we found out in Level IV, another name for Ishtar and Inanna, and Isis is the daughter of Prince Ninurta.^ [22] [23]
As explained in a previous paper, Isis was 50% Bird Tribe and 50% Dragon Tribe. I also explained that she is, in fact, Princess Isis, and ultimately, because of her heritage, she is next in line to the Throne of Orion. Whomever she marries, he will reign together with her, and if she decides to live without a consort, she will be the sole being on the Throne--the Queen of Orion will become the only Main Administrator^ [23] [24] of Orion.
Brahmin is the Creatrix of this and all other universes. Thus, if Brahmin is Shakti or Devi, then the first-born creator of the Universe would be Brahm?. Moreover, if Queen Nin is Brahmin, then Khan En.lil would be Brahman. This proves that Lord Vishnu is neither Brahman, nor Brahmin--instead, he is Brahma because he is the son of Brahmin. Also, logic tells us that if Lord En.ki is Brahma, then Lord Ninurta, his brother, is Brahma as well. Hence, there are two Brahmas, not one.
Moreover, Brahma is known to be Master of the Engineers.
Quote 11: A part of the purusha lies down within the water of the universe, from the navel lake of His body sprouts a lotus stem, and from the lotus flower atop this stem, Brahma, the master of all engineers in the universe, becomes manifest.^ [24] [25]
Engineers are builders are subordinate to Brahma(s). From what we've learned in Sumerian texts, the builders would be the Igigi, and the engineers would be the Watchers. If we translate this to the Vedic texts, the Asuras would be the builders (the Igigi), and the Devas would be the Watchers.^ [25] [26] In the Vedas, Lord Vishnu wants to make himself known as the Master of the Engineers, but in reality, he shares this title with his brother.
All these things are good to keep in mind as we move on and compare Khan En.lil and his and his consort's family.
iii.i. Brahman and Vi?w?karma
In Buddhism and Hinduism, Brahman is usually the equivalent to Lord Vishnu, but sometimes also to Lord Shiva or to Lord Krishna. In other words, one of these deities has put himself as the Highest Being in the Universe--not as the "firstborn" but as the Creator. The original Physical Universe was not a trap--it was a "playground" if we want to look at it that way (souls/Fires are playful beings when they are free), and none of the AIF members has any part in the creation of this universe. All they can do is imitate what already was created, and they did a poor job with it, compared to how the real Universe is created. The latter is a playground that we could have a lot of fun with; feel a lot of emotion in; explore; expand; interact in; leave; and come back to...the options are endless. We can still do a few of these things, but not in such a pure state or form as we used to. Some say that we, in some ways, live in a dream, and I would say that's true.
In the manner of Khan En.lil, the scriptures have been heavily altered in favor of Lord Vishnu. We could see the same thing in the Sumerian texts, where it is obvious that Lord En.ki stole the title from the Khan when he claimed the Abzu. The same thing is done in the Vedic texts. Because Lord Vishnu claims the Creator title, we would, in that sense, have two Supreme Beings--one real and one fake. Some may suggest that this would be the case even without Lord Vishnu because Khan En.lil is Queen Nin's consort and hence a Supreme Being. This is not true--something we will discuss in a moment, but first I'd like to share a good perspective of the Infinite Creator (or Creatrix), and this comes from the Vedas. No matter how we calculate it, Infinity stands alone, and if we want to assign a Being to the Infinity concept, that Being would be One, not two, three, or more.
Quote #12: ...That supreme Brahman is infinite, and this conditioned Brahman is infinite. The infinite proceeds from infinite. If you subtract the infinite from the infinite, the infinite remains alone.^ [26] [27]
When the Peace Contract was signed and Khan En.lil became Queen Nin's consort, the Universe could by some have been seen as being transformed from having one Supreme Being to having two. However, Khan En.lil is not the Creator of the Universe and has nothing to do with it. Moreover, the Orion Empire does not consider itself as a hierarchy, and although the Queen of the Stars could be said to be an incarnation of the Divine Feminine, She is not considering Herself as being in a Superior position. In this kind of incarnation--or Divine Avatar--She is a "player in this metaphoric "playground" and doesn't consider Herself above anybody else in an egotistic way. This is why it's perhaps more accurate to see Her as an Administrator who delegates opportunities and dreams to those who are open to it, but She also, of course, has Divine Powers that She can use when She thinks appropriate. When I say that She's a player, I mean that in the sense that She is following the universal laws, rules, and regulations just as is expected by other players as well. Khan En.lil has the title Khan, which is a King of sorts, but not in a definite ruling way. It's more a Title of Honor and Respect--at least that's how I see it. Lord Vishnu definitely doesn't have such a status or title--he is not a Khan and never will be.
I understand how this can be confusing for many--how can someone be a King and not to rule? Well, on Earth that is unheard of, but in Orion, the Khan title is more to ensure that the universal laws and rules are followed so that peace can become the prize. It's the title of an Overseer and not a ruler. He is in charge of the MAKH Warriors, which by some might be seen as a military force--or at least a police force--but these titles are hard to translate for me into earthly definitions. They don't really fit. The military is well trained, but these days only for defense. There is no police force as far as I know because crime is next to zero within the Empire.
Let's also take a look at Vi?w?karma and his connection to Brahman (as always, my emphasis is in italics.)
Quote #13: Vi?w?karma (Sanskrit: ?????????? all-accomplishing, maker of all, all doer; Tamil: (???????????) Vicuvakaruman; Thai: Witsawakam ;Telugu: ?????????; Kannada: ????????? ) is the personified Omnipotence and the abstract form of the creator God according to the Rigveda. He is the presiding deity of all craftsmen and architects. [1] He is believed to be the Principal Architect of the Universe , and the root concept of the later Upanishadic Brahman / Purusha.^ [27] [28]
Here we can see how the Vedas, precisely as the Mesopotamian texts, have been altered to fit the Patriarchal Regime better. If He is said here to be the "Deity of all craftsmen," and the "Principal Architect of the Universe," we are moving into the realm of Freemasonry. This is describing the Masonic God, which is the Architect of the Universe, i.e. Lucifer/En.ki. In fact, we are going to discuss Vi?w?karma in Section v.iv. of this paper.
Not much "pure" information remains in the Vedic scriptures from what I can see that portrays Khan En.lil in His real position and as his true self. That makes sense, however, because the Vedas are patriarchal texts, and as such, Lord Vishnu and his son, Lord Shiva, were fast to kick Khan En.lil out of the story and replace Him with themselves. Thus, there is not much to say about Him.
IV. Lucifer, aka Prince Ea, En.ki, Vishnu, and his Various Other Aliases
Now we are getting to deities that definitely do not lack aliases, and there is a jungle of information about them. The being with the perhaps most information written about him in the Vedas is Lord Vishnu and all the characters and avatars related to him. They are, in fact, so numerous that I have to select just a few of them and discuss only them; otherwise I'd be sitting here for a few years putting everything together. That's not my task. Ironically, most people who read the Vedas--and even many scholars--think these characters are totally separate deities. Not so at all!
There is a reason why I wrote Level IV before Level V; I wanted the reader to get used to, and be familiar with, syncretism. To use the Sumerian texts in this respect, where the characters are not overwhelmingly many (relatively speaking), was a perfect way to teach how syncretism works. You can take the name of one deity and compare him or her with another deity with a different name but with similar characteristics and analyze whether they correspond to be one and the same. It's both surprising and actually encouraging to notice that all these characters could be narrowed down to just a few beings working behind the scenes, pretending to be many. Here, in Level V, where I've taken on the mastodon job with the Veda deities, using syncretism is a must, or we will never figure out what is going on. The good thing is that now the reader is somewhat familiar with syncretism and can quite easily follow what I'm doing and understand why I am doing it.
Why, however, were Ea and Marduk trying to hide the fact that there have only been a few ETs in charge of the AIF, and these few ETs have run the planet for almost 500,000 years? Isn't this something that would have been a good idea to "brag" about--showing off their immense power, proving that only a few can control the huge masses?
In fact, it makes them vulnerable. The fact that the AIF who are many and rely on only perhaps three or four leaders make these leaders vulnerable to the masses that they are controlling. They are immensely afraid that we all are going to wake up and either refuse to follow the orders or simply create a situation where the Invaders would have to leave the planet. It is much better to pretend that there are many "gods" in charge in a well-organized hierarchal structure--that will overwhelm people who are trying to figure out the truth about their past, present, and future. They want to prove that they are strong, when in fact there is an inner turmoil within the AIF that is always an issue. We can see the same thing happen amongst members of Organized Crime here on Earth--there are a few people on top, and the rest are following orders. However, the leaders are always terrified that their minions are going to rebel and take over (which often happens), or that a conflicting organization will start a war against them and that the leadership will be taken over in that capacity.
Zechariah Sitchin actually did describe the turmoil going on within the Anunnaki hierarchy--he wrote about how the Anunnaki constantly fought each other, but he never failed to keep the Anunnaki on a level of their own and portrayed humans as merely a slave race that couldn't do much about their position at hand, more or less. So the Sitchin story, which is the story that the AIF apparently wants us to believe, does present the power struggle, but the gods are put on such a high pedestal that it feels useless to go against them--we are at their mercy.
Hence we can see that the AIF tackled their dilemma from many different angles, and that is basically what is the difference between the various myths and religious scriptures--together they are telling the truth about the AIF (if we are able to read between the lines), but usually we humans stick to one version of religion or myth and believe in that, and thus look at the gods from that angle. However, it doesn't matter which angle because the gods are always superior--it is only if we look at it from all angles that we can see their weaknesses. Apparently, the gods didn't expect that we humans would have the intellectual capability to do this; therefore, they were never concerned about it. We know how they feel an almost obsessive urge to hide the truth in plain sight, as if it turns them on, and that's what they have done in the scriptures they have left behind. On the other hand, they are not at all as confident as they once were and must, in fact, be quite nervous that the texts, by different researchers, will reveal their real value--the truth or, at least, as close to the truth as we might be able to come. I can guarantee you that there are more texts hidden out there--some are already found and are sitting in a vault, either in the Vatican or in some super-rich family's bank vault, while others are still waiting to be dug up. On the other hand, if the AIF is nervous enough about it, they may actually be digging them up themselves as we speak so that they can make sure that the remaining texts don't fall into the wrong hands. That would be unfortunate, but not unpredictable.
Let's continue our quest by examining En.ki as Lord Vishnu. We have already covered some of his Avatars, such as Krishna and Rama, but there is so much more! As I wrote, we can't cover them all in these papers, so I have selected out the ones who I think are the most prominent and are used most commonly in the Indian texts.
Although I have already mentioned Krishna and Rama, I will begin with them because they "branch out" into deities with other names, who are just that--other names for Krishna and Rama. Therefore, I will mention these two briefly before we move on to deities that may be slightly less known. Also, Vishnu is covered in a previous paper and will not be brought up again here. We do need to keep in mind, though, that Lord Vishnu is the highest ranking deity in the Vedic pantheon, and all the other gods, based on the En.ki character, are "extensions" of Lord Vishnu.
iv.i. Lord Krishna
Lord Krishna is mentioned in Vishnu Sahasranama of the Mahabharata and the Keshava Namas as the 57^th, 550^th, and the 24^th name, respectively, as Lord Vishnu.^ [28] [29] He is also often mentioned as an avatar of Lord Vishnu, but inVaishnavism, which is a major branch of the Hindu religion, he is more than an avatar of Vishnu--he is portrayed as a full manifestation of Lord Vishnu himself, and thus One with Vishnu.^ [29] [30] This is one of the reasons why in Hinduism you can worship both Vishnu and Krishna without contradicting yourself--they are one and the same. [image 31]Fig. 1. Lord Krishna with his flute. Who else is known to play the fulte? Pan, the pagan deity!
The difference between a god who is sending down an Avatar of himself to Earth and one who is being a full manifestation of himself is that in the former, he is sending a "splinter" of his soul/fire to Earth, while he still exists somewhere else--let's say in Svargaloka, the "God Planet." It's the equivalent to what we've been discussing many times before: when a soul splits his Fire into fragments and sends those fragments to different times on the earthly timelines. The latter means that the entire soul (which is not fragmented) is sending herself^ [30] [32] down to Earth, as in Krishna's case.
Krishna is known as a "blue being" (see fig. 1), something that is often referred to in the UFO community as a particular ET race, often as Pleiadians, and I am going to dedicate a complete paper in this level of learning to the Pleiadians in relation to the Indus Valley.
I am not going to tell the entire story about Krishna's life, albeit it is quite fascinating. However, it's easy to find material to read about his life online, and we have enough material to cover here as it is. Although Krishna may be one of the most famous and renown of the Vedic gods, he is far from the most interesting character when it comes to the purpose of this level of learning.
Krishna has often been compared to the Christian Jesus character in the sense that they both came to Earth during a time period when life down here was chaotic and out of control. Krishna's purpose was to reestablish order again, although contrary to Jesus, he often did so by instigating, or participating in, warlike activities. This may not be considered as particularly "divine behavior;" therefore, Krishna is also portrayed as someone with an abundance of unconditional love. It is clearly emphasized that he treated his female lovers impeccably, although he had an ability to bi-locate so that he could be with several females at the same time. The story of Krishna seems to be particularly popular amongst women--naturally so because women can romanticize about how their lover gives them all the attention--something many women would like to experience in their own lives. The Krishna story is much about romantic love stories on a level that many women feel they want to experience but don't know how. Nevertheless, Krishna's attitude toward his women and to his friends, in general, seems to have a tendency to make up for his otherwise brutal behavior when it came to handling political and personal problems.
Krishna was also famous for his pranks and for playing the flute in a very enchanting way. This makes me think of another famous flute player, whom I have presented in previous papers is En.ki's alter ego--namely, Pan. The Pan character was also made famous, as we all know, through Walt Disney's cartoon character, Peter Pan.
At first, Krishna is portrayed as a peacemaker and a diplomat--particularly in the so-called Kurukshetra War. However, even as a young man, when assaulted, he used his soul powers, emanating from his chakras, and killed the assaulter. In other words, the message was--don't mess with Krishna, the "mediator!"
The Kurukshetra War is a "mythological" war, described in details in the epic, Mah?bh?rata. It began as a dynastic succession struggle between two groups of cousins in a kingdom called Kuru. The struggle was about the throne (of course; what else?) The location of the great battle was fought in today's state of Haryana in India.^ [31] [33]
The story states that Krishna worked as a mediator between the two groups with poor result. The solution to the dilemma was a war, which Krishna fought side-by-side with the Vedic hybrid hero, Arjuna, whom we shall talk more about later on in this paper. At first, Krishna refused to raise any weapon in the battle, but Arjuna used bows and arrows. Then, when it came to the point of confrontation, Arjuna also refused to use his weapon, but that made Krishna angry, and he manipulated Arjuna to finally decide to kill. This didn't happen, however, until Krishna himself took weapons and started killing.
To read about the life of Krishna is to read about an "unstable god." At times, he appears to be a loving and caring person, who affects everybody in his environment in a positive manner, while on the flip side, he is an impatient god and a brutal killer. This is quite the picture we have gotten of En.ki across the levels of learning, also, so Krishna fits the mold, in addition to the obvious proof that he and Lord Vishnu are one and the same. Also, just as En.ki did to the Orion Council in the Babylonian texts, Krishna broke his vow in order to win the war.^ [32] [34] Duryodhana was fighting on the opposite side of Krishna's, and when Duryodhana was going to meet with his mother, Gandhari, Krishna set him up and had the character Bhima kill Duryodhana.
The Kurukshetra War resulted in the death of one hundred sons of Gandhari, and on the night when her son Duryodhana was murdered, Krishna visited Gandhari to offer his condolences, although he was the one who instigated the killing behind the scenes by reminding Bhirma to complete the deed. Today, we would call that covert hostility and backstabbing. Gandhari felt that Krishna certainly hadn't done what he could to stop the war, so she cursed him and basically told him that he would die thirty-six years from that day.
When thirty-six years had passed, and Krishna sat against a tree to meditate, a hunter named Jara accidently mistook Krishna for a deer and mortally wounded Krishna by shooting him with an arrow. Krishna looked at Jara and told him that in a previous life as Rama (see next subsection), Krishna had taken his life, so this was a part of Krishna's karma. Hence, he told Jara that he didn't have to worry about any consequences of this accidental killing. In other words, karma was fulfilled. Thus, Krishna died.
Krishna's death noted the end of the Hindu Dvapara Yuga, which is the third out of four yugas. It lasted 864,000 years and was the age between Treta Yuga and Kali Yuga; the fourth age, which started with Krishna's demise and is the yuga we are currently living in. [image 35]Fig. 2. Jara about to mortally wound Krishna with an arrow.
iv.ii. Lord Rama and Hanuman
Rama is said to be the seventh avatar of Vishnu,^ [33] [36] so already, we know that he is an incarnation of En.ki and don't need to prove that any further. He was also a king and a protagonist in the Hindu epic, Ramayana, which is another of those epics some people who have studied the Hindu scriptures to some degree may probably have heard about. The Ramayana narrates his supremacy (so we won't forget that he is of godly nature). The interesting accepted understanding is that Lord Rama lived 1.2 million years ago(!) during the Treta Yuga, the Hindu age that lasted 1,296,000 years and preceded Dvapara Yuga--Krishna's age.
There is no evidence that we should take the length of these yugas literally, and some readers may object because En.ki and the AIF invaded Earth 500,000 years ago; therefore, they shouldn't have been here about 1,000,000 years ago, which the Ramayana claims to be the case. However, albeit the AIF invaded half a million years ago, there are sources who tell us that the "Anunnaki" were actually here over the span of many earth ages, which could very well be the case. Lucifer may have visited Earth before the invasion as well, while Prince Ninurta and his mother were here together with the Naml?'u, although this would have been before Lucifer's Rebellion, which means that Lucifer was at that time not in bad standing with Orion and could visit frequently if he wanted to. However, I'd like for the reader to see this as a side note--I personally don't think that En.ki, incarnated as Rama, was here 1,2 million years ago because at that time there was peace on Earth, and the Rebellion, as I stated, had not yet taken place. Rama, just as his later counterpart, Krishna, was quite warlike. Nevertheless, Rama is considered being the most important Avatar of Vishnu, in conjunction with Krishna, and is called The Perfect Man, Lord of Self-Control or Lord of Virtue.^ [34] [37]
Some may say that Rama was quite "tested;" therefore, his actions were justified, but I find it interesting how these deities are bringing war and death to our planet wherever they appear here. The bottom line is that they are bringing their own unresolved conflicts down here, and we are manipulated to participate in their warlike resolutions, which always remain unresolved with the effect of thousands of killed human warriors or soldiers.
The story is that Rama, his divine wife, Sita, and his human brother, Lakshmana, spent fourteen years in exile in the forest. While living there as nomads, Sita was kidnapped by Ravana, a Rakshasa monarch. This resulted in a long search, and continued with a colossal war against the Rakshasa armies. Again, we see all these slaughters and murders. Those who may justify a war, such as that one, have to consider the following, however--although it may be traumatizing for somebody to have his consort kidnapped, it's not a sign of higher consciousness to let thousands upon thousands of innocent people die in the process of getting her back. In addition--and more importantly--the Rakshasas are an ET species from another star system, so the war is between Rama and an ET species--another war that was brought down here, with the consequent death for many humans in the process. Nevertheless, Rama is called the "Perfect Man" and "The Man of Virtue"--in other words, he is someone you and I should admire and strive to replicate in our behavior, seen from an earthly imprinted point of view. Wikipedia says, "Rama is revered for his unending compassion, courage and devotion to religious values and duty."^ [35] [38] According to the same source, the Sage named Buddha (Buddhism) is an incarnation of Rama,^ [36] [39] which in that case, makes Buddha an Avatar of En.ki as well--see how the puzzle pieces almost automatically fall into place once we have crossed a certain barrier in the research. It becomes more and more effortless. [image 40]Fig. 3. Rama in exile in the forest together with his becoming consort, Sita, and his brother, Lakshmana.
Similar to Krishna, Rama came to Earth because he was called upon^ [37] [41]--this time by the "Earth Goddess." There were too many wars and too many evil kings plundering and slaughtering on Her planet (in reality, the "Earth Goddess" would of course never call upon En.ki to come and rescue Her planetary body). According to the story, She wanted Brahma (Lord Vishnu) to do something about it, so he sent an Avatar, who became Rama. Most of the Devas who were living here on Earth at the time were afraid of Ravana, the evil Rakshasa King. Vishnu promised to have Rama kill the king of the Rakshasas.
Already as a young man, Rama learned to master divine weapons given to him to help him slay Ravana, once he became a grown man. However, long before the final confrontation, Rama got the chance to learn how to kill Rakshasas, as many opportunities arose, and he was always successful with defeating them. [image 42]Fig. 4. Hanuman finds Sita in captivity.
When Sita was kidnapped by Ravana's men, Rama had no idea who kidnapped her, and the two were separated for over a year. Ravana, unsuccessfully, was courting Sita, who was always very loyal to Rama. She knew that he had to fight Ravana in order to free her, and when Rama's "right hand," Hanuman, found her and wanted to rescue her, she refused to come because Rama was supposed to be her rescuer, not Hanuman.
Eventually, this story, as most stories do, ended "happily." Rama managed to kill Ravana and free Sita, who then became his wife. In Viakuntha (Vishnu's abode), however, Sita is Lakshmi, Vishnu's consort, who often incarnated together with him when he sent an avatar to Earth. This makes sense, of course, when we know that Rama and Vishnu are one and the same.
Rama's reign lasted for 11,000 years, and the story tells us that during this period, there was complete peace and harmony on Earth, and people were healthy and happy.
Rama had many companions throughout his life, and Hanuman, the "monkey man," was one of them. His face looked like a mix between a monkey and a human (see fig. 4), but his name does not really mean "monkey man;" it stems from the Sanskrit word "Ha" which means "jaw," and "man" (or -mant) which means "disfigured."^ [38] [43] He was always loyal to Rama, and he was the one who was the most devoted to find Sita when she was kidnapped. Several texts indicate that he was the incarnation of Shiva,^ [39] [44] which of course would make him Marduk. We are used to Marduk being En.ki's son, which he is, but while on Earth, father and son every now and then were incarnated as humans and were then not always father and son in a physical manner. Some say that En.ki is about to incarnate in a human body again (or perhaps already has), and there are allegedly twelve human males who claim to be aspirants for housing En.ki's soul. I have covered that in previous levels of learning, and in the e-book, The Myth Around Supriem David Rockefeller.^ [40] [45] At this point, I only know of three people who claim to be waiting for En.ki to choose one of their bodies. The other nine--if they exist--are unknown to me--thus far.
Hanuman was also a shapeshifter, according to the Ramayana. It says:
Quote #14: In the Ramayana Hanuman changes shape several times. For example, while he searches for the kidnapped Sita in Ravanas palaces on Lanka, he contracts himself to the size of a cat, so that he will not be detected by the enemy. Later on, he takes on the size of a mountain, blazing with radiance, to show his true power to Sita.^ [41] [46]
The stories of Krishna and Rama have been rewritten many times throughout history, and the stories I've just told are the perhaps the most common ones in existence today. It was important to portray the two as saviors of mankind and not as warriors without conscience, which they were. They were, basically, two in a long line of "Saviors" who have come to Earth to help humankind in times of struggle--Jesus is just the last in line, and it's quite possibly time for another one soon. After all, that is what's been promised in the scriptures. Krishna and Rama also "helped" make war seem to be a solution to conflicts when arguments failed, and because they both were also portrayed with enormous compassion in other parts of daily life, humans looked up to them as role models. These two ETs were, of course, only two in another long line of leaders who have been depicted as warlike but also compassionate--something for mankind to mimic. It has certainly worked if we look throughout history--mankind has definitely taken after the gods, tried to be like them, and often we have been all too eager to serve them.
iv.iii. Varuna, God of the Oceans
The reader may recall from Level IV, in particular, how I referred to the Underworld as being a part of the Afterlife. I also mentioned that the same beings we now are so familiar with are in charge of that realm--in fact, they created it. The Queen of the Underworld is known as Ere?kigal in the Sumerian texts, and her consort became Nergal, another of En.ki's alter egos. We are now going to compare this information with what is primarily available in the Vedic texts. Essentially, there are two male Devas who are related to the Underworld, and Varuna is one of them. First, I will establish who the Vedic Varuna character is so that we make no mistake about it.
Quote #15: In Vedic religion, Varuna (Sanskrit Varu?a ????, Malay: Baruna) or Waruna, is a god of the water and of the celestial ocean, as well as a god of law of the underwater world. A Makara is his mount. In Hindu mythology, Varuna continued to be considered the god of all forms of the water element, particularly the oceans.^ [42] [47]
This makes Varuna the counterpart of Ea, Poseidon, Neptune, and Oannes, foremost, as all these deities are known to be related to water. In the above Wikipedia quote, it also takes into account the "underwater world," which would be a connection to Ea's Abzu (the term he stole from Khan En.lil). What connects all these beings all over the mythological spectrum, however, is that they are all gods of "all forms of water elements, particularly the oceans." There is no doubt that Varuna and Ea/En.ki are one and the same.
Here is another revealing passage from the Vedas:
Quote #16: Later art depicts Varuna as a lunar deity, as a yellow man wearing golden armor and holding a noose or lasso made from a snake. He rides the sea creature Makara.^ [43] [48]
Again, in Level IV, it was revealed that En.ki equates the Sumerian moon god, Nanna (Nannar) or Sin, as he is also called.^ [44] [49] Above is also a reference to snake, which is more En.ki symbolism--En.ki being the "Serpent of Eden."
Now, when we have established who he is, here is a reference to Varuna and his Underworld and Afterlife connection:
Quote #17: In post-Vedic texts Varuna became the god of oceans and rivers and keeper of the souls of the drowned. As such, Varuna is also a god of the dead, and can grant immortality.^ [45] [50]
These are En.ki characteristics, congregated in one place. We have the oceans, rivers, "keeper of souls," and a "god of the dead" who can grant immortality (referring to his scientific skills in genetic engineering).
iv.iv. Yama, God of the Afterlife
Once more, let us start with establishing that Yama is actually a Vedic counterpart of En.ki.
Quote #18: His Greek counterpart is Hades and Thanatos. His Egyptian counterpart is Osiris.^ [46] [51]
In Level IV, we discussed both the Greek god Hades and his Egyptian counterpart, Osiris. They both turned out to equate to En.ki. With that said, let's go over to death and the afterlife. This is what Richard L. Thompson, the expert in the Vedas, has to say about Yama:
Quote #19: Vedic Lord of Death. Those familiars of Yama are charged with the conduction of timeThe latter are functionaries equipped with mystic powers that enable them to regulate the process of transmigration of souls. Yama supervises the process of transmigration.. The familiars of Yama have exert control over their subtle bodies.^ [47] [52]
This statement is telling us many things! It even teaches us that Yama and his cohorts exert control over our avatars.^ [48] [53]In addition, it tells us all we need to know about who Yama is and how extremely well it corresponds with the Sumerian Nergal character, who also was proven to be En.ki. This is a perfect cross-reference of similarities between two different mythologies. In addition, we have his Greek counterpart in Hades, and we can go on and on, researching other mythologies around the world, and I guarantee we will find the same kind of evidence there.
iv.v. The ?dityas of the Zodiac
It's now time to look a little bit at the Sun gods in the Vedic texts. We've already identified En.ki's connection to the Moon in both the Vedas and the Sumerian scriptures.
Normally, we are used to connecting Marduk with being the Sun god--particularly in his forms as Marduk Ra and Utu ?ama? (Shamash) in the Egyptian and Babylonian texts, respectively. However, in the Vedic literature, Vishnu and Shiva (En.ki and Marduk, also respectively) are sometimes intertwined, almost as if they were one deity, and one deity alone. As we shall see, En.ki is ultimately connected with being the Sun god in the old Indian texts through his connection with ?dityas. Let me explain you what I mean:
Quote #20: In Hinduism, ?dityas (Sanskrit: ??????, pronounced [?:d?it?j?]), meaning of Aditi, refers to the offspring of Aditi. In Hinduism, Aditya is used in the singular to mean the Sun God, Surya. Bhagavata Purana [1] lists total 12 Adityas as twelve Sun-gods. In each month of the year, it is a different Aditya (Sun God) who shines. All these 12 Adityas are the opulent expansions of Lord Vishnu in the form of Sun-God.^ [49] [54]
We learned in Section ii.i. that Aditi is the Queen of the Stars--the Mother Goddess. In Quote #20, it says that ?ditya is the offspring of Aditi, which means he is the son of Aditi, the Star Queen, aka Queen Nin. We also know that Queen Nin had at least two sons, En.ki and his younger brother Ninurta (Prince En.lil). Ninurta is not involved in this story so that leaves En.ki, whom we now suspect may be ?ditya. Now, we are going to prove it, but not only that--through En.ki's incarnation as ?dityas, we are going to learn some interesting things that correlate with what we discussed in Level IV. The Vedas are so rich with information that if the researcher is patient and concise, he or she can find the correlation he or she is looking for.
In Rigveda, Aditi has seven sons, whom all are Asuras. They are:
1. Varuna
2. Mitra
3. Aryaman
4. Bhaga
5. An?a or Am?a
6. Dhati
7. Indra
8. Vaya or M?rtanda^ [50] [55]
I don't want to confuse the reader here, but the name ?ditya can also be a term, ?dityas, which means "Sun-gods." In the Rigveda there are obviously seven Sun-gods, whereof, Varuna (En.ki) is the one listed first. However, in the Bh?gavata Pur?na, there are twelve Sun-gods, and that's when it's getting interesting.
1. Varuna
2. Mitra
3. Aryama
4. Bhaga
5. Amshuman
6. Dhata
7. Indra
8. Parjanya
9. Tvashtha
10. Vishnu (the Head of all ?dityas)^ [51] [56]
11. Pushya
12. Vivasvan^ [52] [57]
Quote #21: In each month of the year, it is a different Aditya (Sun-God) who shines.^ [1] [58] As Indra, Surya destroys the enemies of the gods. As Dhata, he creates living beings. As Parjanya, he showers down rain. As Tvashta, he lives in the trees and herbs. As Pusha, he makes foodgrains grow. As Aryama, he is in the wind. As Bhaga, he is in the body of all living beings. As Vivasvana, he is in fire and helps to cook food. As Vishnu, he destroys the enemies of the gods. As Amshumana, he is again in the wind. As Varuna, Surya is in the waters and As Mitra, he is in the moon and in the oceans.^ [53] [59]
Here, it tells us that Vishnu is not only one of these twelve Sun-gods, but he is also the Head of all ?dityas! Varuna is mentioned here as well, being one of Vishnu's Avatars, so apparently, those counted as well. Thus, we can't say that Aditi had twelve sons with any certainty because a son's Avatar also was mentioned in the equation. Indra, who equates to Marduk, is also mentioned amongst the twelve, which makes sense.
The AIF, just as Mother Goddess does, has this thing with the number 12--sometimes with number 13 as the additional number. Universes are built around these numbers, and thus is the zodiac. The zodiac, of course, has everything to do with the Sun; therefore, it also has everything to so with the Sun-gods, as we know, and that's where it's getting interesting.
In Level IV, we were discussing the 12 signs of the zodiac and how beings "jumped" from one sign in the zodiac to another when the signs changed, in order to be in charge of the new sign. It seems that being in charge of a zodiac was either a competition between the gods, or each sign of the zodiac was meant to be assigned to one god so that they could rotate their power. Maybe the latter once was true, but it evolved into being a competition, and it concluded with En.ki and Marduk taking possession of all the twelve signs, and it has been this way for eons. Some say that there is a thirteenth sign, from which En.ki and Marduk run the other twelve.
All this may or may not correlate with what I have stumbled onto here with the twelve ?dityas, but it definitely is food for thought. In Quote #21, we can see some backup to my earlier statement in Level IV. Also, it is interesting how the Vedic gods can shapeshift and take on anything they want--they can even be in the wind and decide how the winds will blow; they can be in the fire and help to cook food; they can be in the waters, the moon, and in the oceans, etc. The reader may argue that these gods can do these things through technology, and that may very well be true, because their power as "gods" would not be as extensive if they didn't have their "devices" that could help them achieve certain, for us, unobtainable goals. It's not only the Vedas that are telling us about the gods being one with the elements, however--it's all over the Sumerian texts and in the Bible. It's also mentioned in most other ancient scriptures. We know that these beings can shapeshift--once we know how they do it, it's not a big deal--but in this case, some of it may be done with technology. As Bhaga (see Quote #21 again), the Sun-god is even able to be within "every living being," which probably means that he is merging with the Grid and the Mass Consciousness of Planet Earth or maybe the Akashic Records.
Now, I'd like for the reader to be very observant and read Quote #21 one more time. I don't know about you, but to me it almost seems and sounds as if it's the same Sun-god taking on the identity of all the other eleven Sun-gods. If this is true, it certainly backs up what I stated in Level IV, but even if it's not the case, it seems as if I have the backup anyway--so it works either way. It's not that I am particularly looking for backup on this subject--I know that what I stated in Level IV is true--but it is always nice for the reader to get extra verification as well sometimes.
There is another logical aspect for Shiva and Vishnu to change places in the Pantheon and confuse everybody. It has to do with the takeover of Queen Aditi's identity at one point. I want to explain that, too, but I think it's more appropriate to explain this when we discuss Queen Ere?kigal's alter egos later in this paper. The ancient mythologies never seem to stop amazing me, though, because once one has learned how to put these things together, the whole story is told between the lines, and very little seems to be left out. In other words, it gets easier and easier to find what I'm looking for, as if I were just looking things up in an encyclopedia, and there it is!
iv.vi. Agni--another Schizophrenic God?
Agni is another deity in the Vedas with a "personality disorder." He is sometimes depicted as En.ki and sometimes as Marduk; the two taking on each other's attributes.
In the next paper, we will go into more details about which god in the Vedas is associated with which star or star system. Now, however, in order to explain who Agni is, I will reveal that Brahma (in form of Lord Vishnu) is the Lord of Heaven--his own version of Heaven--and this Heaven is located in the star constellation of Taurus, the Bull, which also is the constellation where the Pleiades are located. Vishnu's main Vedic abode is alpha Tauri, which has a second name--in the Vedas it's not called alpha Tauri but Rohini, which means "the red one;" a name of the red giant star, Aldebaran! Rohini is also known as br?hm?.^ [54] [60] Thus, Aldebaran is Lord Vishnu's star! I also exposed Aldebaran in my 2009 e-book, The Myth Around Supriem David Rockefeller, Chapter 10,^ [55] [61] as being the star system from where the "Anunnaki" are, to a large degree, residing.
We discussed in a previous paper that Satyaloka is the highest and topmost loka within this material universe, and it is located in the star system of Aldebaran, 65 light-years from Earth.^ [56] [62] The Vril Ladies around the Nazi Germany era channeled the Anunnaki, who were said to reside in Aldebaran, and there is a long and interesting story around that, which was partly told in The Myth Around Supriem David Rockefeller, but we are going to dig into that much deeper and in much more accuracy in a future paper. Regardless of what some people have had to say about the "Supriem book," it holds up and thus far tells a marginal story, which can, if the AIF decides to, move from the margins into a proper place in the "Book of Planet Earth--the Real Story," which could be said to be the papers I am now writing. [image 63]Fig. 5. Orion is aiming at Taurus with his bow and arrow, showing they are not the best of friends
Now we know that Lord Vishnu, aka En.ki, is in charge of Aldebaran, but what about Agni? In Hinduism, Krittika is an old name for the Pleiades, where Agni, the "God of Fire" rules.^ [57] [64] Here we see that Agni is not necessarily just in charge of Aldebaran, but also of the Pleiades in general--including the so-called Seven Sisters. Normally we are used to relating the God of Fire to Marduk and his counterparts because Marduk Ra is the Sun-god, but here it seems as if the Sun-god title is transferred to Vishnu/En.ki. For now, just hold on to this thought while we continue.
On Crystalinks.com, the webmaster says, "The Pleiades are called the star [s] of fire, and their ruling deity is the Vedic god Agni, the god of the sacred fire,"^ [58] [65] and in Wikipedia's list of Hindu deities, Agni is "the god of fire, and acceptor of sacrifices."^ [59] [66]
The more I look into Agni, I have concluded that he can be both Vishnu and Shiva, depending upon which time period, but also depending upon what is convenient and seems appropriate at the time. Here is an otherwise clear reference to Marduk, as the ram is mentioned, but he is also depicted with two heads, which could be a layered symbol, also meaning that he is two deities in one (Vishnu and Shiva).
Quote #22: Agni, the Vedic god of fire, has two heads, one marks immortality and the other marks an unknown symbol of life. Agni has made the transition into the Hindu pantheon of gods, without losing his importance. With Varuna and Indra he is one of the supreme gods in the Rigveda. Due to the link between heaven and earth, and deities and humans, he is associated with Vedic sacrifice, taking offerings to the other world in his fire. In Hinduism, his vehicle is the ram.^ [60] [67]
Also, Agni has three forms: fire, lightning, and the Sun.^ [61] [68] All three of these attributes point toward Marduk. However, as I stated, it is dependent upon which scripture we are looking at. For example, in Ayurveda,^ [62] [69] he is the one responsible for the sustenance of life,^ [63] [70] which would make him Vishnu/En.ki. Also, in the Rigveda, it states that Agni "arises from water and dwells in the waters,"^ [64] [71] which would make him En.ki/Oannes/Poseidon, and so on.
This is not the first time we see this apparent confusion--it's also in the Bible, where we have the schizophrenic Jehovah/YHWH, who acts this way because he is a composite of at least two beings--En.ki and Marduk. Therefore, I am going to assign both En.ki and Marduk to Agni as well.
There are a myriad of other Hindu deities who would fit the profile of En.ki, and as mentioned before, these six deities mentioned thus far are only the tip of the iceberg. I chose them, although research has been done on quite a few more of them because these six are, in my opinion, the most important ones for the purpose of these papers. Therefore, we will end the research on En.ki's counterparts here and turn our attention to his son, Lord Marduk Ra, to see what we can find on him.
V. Marduk Ra--Lord of the Sun and the Earth
Marduk Ra is not an ounce better than his father, En.ki, when it comes to having an astronomic number of aliases. One really has to keep one's mind straight to be able to separate them all from the thousands of names, literally, mentioned in the ancient literature. The Vedas, and the Hindu texts in general, are certainly the richest gold mine of information there is, in this respect, and here one really has to be careful. Fortunately, it gets easier the more one digs; otherwise, the job would be almost unbearably tedious.
We have already, in previous papers, identified certain beings in the Hindu texts that are equated to Marduk, so I'm not going to go over these again--we have other characters we need to examine now instead. Before we start, I will list the ones I have already cross-checked and presented to the reader in previous papers. Hence, I will list Hindu names for Marduk, in alphabetical order, and in which paper I exposed them. This list I think may be helpful for the reader.
The names below are all Hindu names for Marduk Ra.
1. Garuda, Paper #6.
2. Hanuman, Papers #8 and #9.
3. Indra, Paper #4.
4. Ketu (Both En.ki and Marduk), Paper #6.
5. Rahu, Paper #6.
6. Rudra, Paper #7.
7. Shiva, Papers #1 and #3.
In addition, we have also discussed (and I have provided evidence of) that the Greek god, Apollo, is Marduk's counterpart (see Papers #3 and #8), as well as Horus (Paper #8).
Now, let us uncover what else we can find out about Marduk Ra and his Vedic counterparts, and you, the reader, if you so wish, can add those names, one by one, to your own list, starting with the 1-7 above.
v.i. Surya--Lord of the Chakras
We already know that we are being heavily controlled, both while we are in the flesh and in the spirit world. Some may think that we know what we need to know by now, and that is it! It may feel like more than enough.
Unfortunately, I need to fill your brains some more, so please make room! There is still much more we need to grasp about ourselves and the controllers who keep us imprisoned. Although I am very well aware that a considerable part of all this could be viewed as "bad news," I am still very happy that I started walking this path--eating from the Tree of Knowledge, as it were. I think it does protect me, and the knowledge leads to so [u]lutions I can work with. Without comprehension, I would, as do so many others on this planet, try to fly but always end up falling flat on the ground. I hope and assume that the reader will think similarly.
In New Age, channeling, and spiritual research, we tend to discuss chakras to a large extent. I have mentioned them, too--especially in the earlier levels of learning. We have seven of them that are connected directly with our bodies, plus an additional five that are also connected to us, but are more far reaching--stretching way out in the galaxy and further out in the Universe. Let us understand how our seven chakras, foremost, are related to the AIF, and to Marduk in particular. To successfully be able to do so, we need to begin by looking at the Hindu god, Surya. Here's the astrological aspect of him (my own additions are within these kind of brackets [ ]):
Quote #23: In Vedic astrology Surya is considered a mild malefic on account of his hot, dry nature. Surya represents soul, will-power, fame, the eyes, general vitality, courage, kingship, father, highly placed persons and authority. He is exalted in the sign Mesha [Aries], is in mulatrikona in the sign Simha [Leo] and is in debilitation in the sign Tula [Libra].^ [65] [72]
Let's continue and learn more:
Quote #24: Surya is the chief of the Navagraha, the nine Indian Classical planets^ [66] [73] and important elements of Hindu astrology. He is often depicted riding a chariot harnessed by seven horses which might represent the seven colors of the rainbow or the seven chakras in the body. He is also the presiding deity of Sunday. Surya is regarded as the Supreme Deity by Saura sect and Smartas worship him as one of the five primary forms of God.^ [67] [74]
[...]
Surya as the Sun is worshipped at dawn by most Hindus and has many temples dedicated to him across India.^ [68] [75]
Here we see that Surya is a Sun-god, and Sunday is actually dedicated to him. More serious is the mentioning of him representing the seven chakras. This is something to bear in mind because we are going to follow up on the chakras in much more detail as we move on. As it is, we think we are in charge of our own chakras--at least when we are "awakening," but I would say we are not--not until we have awakened to the truth about the chakras as well. Can the readers see what kind of "beginners" we all have been (and still are), but at least we are now quickly getting use of more and more of our brain power, and we are getting more access to our dormant DNA. The reader might, or might not, realize this, but by learning what is in these papers, our brain and DNA capacities are increasing manifold.
In Quote #25, we have the proof that Surya indeed is Marduk, when we learn that Surya's Egyptian counterpart is Ra (my emphasis in italics):
Quote #25: Like some other deities, such as Shiva, who are worshiped by saints, normal worshipers and demons, Surya too has a following of the same types of beings. Group of Raksasas known as Yatudhanas were the followers of Surya and wandered with him. [6] It is also mentioned that Bhauvana the Daitya offered a prayer to Surya with the Rathantara saman and was immediately turned into an elephant. [6] His Greek counterpart is Helios and his Egyptian counterpart is Ra.^ [69] [76]
Now, when we know who Surya is, let us continue looking at the chakras and the Kundalini.
Quote #26: Suryas seven horses also represent the seven chakras in the chakras or spiritual centers in our subtle body, the blossoming of which leads to the rising of the power of Kundalini or the serpentine energy residing within us.^ [70] [77]
[image 78]Fig. 6. Lord Surya on the Seven Horse Chariot.
We learn that the Seven Chakras are equated to seven horses, and the Kundalini is "serpentine energy," i.e. serpent being on En.ki's nature. From here, we have the term "horseman" or "horsemen." To see the link, let us turn to ancient Egypt (I know this is a long quote, but please bear with me and read it all).
Quote #28: The Uraeus (/j?'ri?s/; [1] plural Uraei or Uraeuses; from the Greek o?ra?os, oura?os, on its tail; from Egyptian j?r.t (iaret), rearing cobra) is the stylized, upright form of an Egyptian cobra (asp, serpent, or snake), used as a symbol of sovereignty, royalty, deity, and divine authority in ancient Egypt.
The Uraeus is a symbol for the goddess Wadjet, who was one of the earliest Egyptian deities and who often was depicted as a cobra. The center of her cult was in Per-Wadjet, later called Buto by the Greeks. [2] She became the patroness of the Nile Delta and the protector of all of Lower Egypt. The pharaohs wore the Uraeus as a head ornament: either with the body of Wadjet atop the head, or as a crown encircling the head; this indicated Wadjets protection and reinforced the pharaohs claim over the land. In whatever manner that the Uraeus was displayed upon the pharaohs head, it was, in effect, part of the pharaohs crown. The pharaoh was recognized only by wearing the Uraeus, which conveyed legitimacy to the ruler. There is evidence for this tradition even in the Old Kingdom during the third millennium BCE. Several goddesses associated with or being considered aspects of Wadjet are depicted wearing the Uraeus also.
At the time of the unification of Egypt, the image of Nekhbet, who was represented as a white vulture and held the same position as the patron of Upper Egypt, joined the image of Wadjet on the Uraeus that would encircle the crown of the pharaohs who ruled the unified Egypt. The importance of their separate cults kept them from becoming merged as with so many Egyptian deities. Together, they were known as The Two Ladies, who became the joint protectors and patrons of the unified Egypt.
Later, the pharaohs were seen as a manifestation of the sun god Ra, and so it also was believed that the Uraeus protected them by spitting fire on their enemies from the fiery eye of the goddess. In some mythological works, the eyes of Ra are said to be uraei. Wadjets existed long before the rise of this cult when they originated as the eye of Wadjet as cobra and are the name of the symbols also called the Eye of the Moon, Eye of Hathor, the Eye of Horus, and the Eye of Ra--depending upon the dates of the references to the symbols.
As the Uraeus was seen as a royal symbol, Horus and Set were also depicted wearing the symbol on their crowns. In early mythology, Horus would have been the name given to any king as part of the many titles taken, being identified as the son of the goddess. According to the later mythology of Re, the first Uraeus was said to have been created by the goddess Isis, who formed it from the dust of the earth and the spittle of the then-current sun deity. In this version of the mythology, the Uraeus was the instrument with which Isis gained the throne of Egypt for Osiris. Isis is associated with and may be considered an aspect of Wadjet.^ [71] [79]
From this long quote, we can make a link from Uraeus to the goddess Wadjet, with links to Marduk Ra, Hathor, and Horus. Uraeus/Wadjet have a link to the Sun-god Surya via the Kundalini and the "Spirit Horses," the chakras. Thus, Spirit Horses have a link to Surya. In Egyptian mythology, we see a similar motif with Ra, who is sometimes referred to as Horus (Sun-god). Hence, we can see that these Horses are controlled by the Sun-god Ra and his Hindu counterpart Surya, and in some respect, also Horus.
Thus, the Seven Horsemen (who are mentioned in the Bible) equal the seven chakras, and the eighth that controls the seven is the Sun-god, if we take the symbology about the Horsemen into consideration.
Quote #29: Maha Shivratri...is the celebration of the Hindu God, Shiva. On this day, devotees fast, practice meditation and yoga in reverence of Shiva. Shiva means, "auspicious one" and he is usually depicted in meditation with a third eye at the brow, crescent moon, snake coiled around his neck, while holding a trident and a drum.^ [72] [80]
Thus, Shiva, who is another aspect of Surya and Ra, can be associated to one of the chakras (Horsemen), namely the sixth, which is the Third Eye. This is a beginning to explain to the reader that the Seven Horsemen are the symbols for the seven chakras, and when we open the chakras in all our ignorance, who is in control of the energy that is exchanged during a meditation, for example? If someone is "in control" of something, and someone else isn't, and is even ignorant that someone is in control at all, it means that the one in control can use his power however he wants to. More important; the energy that suddenly is available when someone is opening his or her chakras can be harvested by the one in control.
We may also want to ask ourselves: who is in control of the "spiritual movement?" Even if many want to distance themselves from New Age, are they really? Just because we say we are in control doesn't necessarily mean we are. There is no doubt that man is evolving, but evolving into what, under whose hidden control, and under which conditions? Does the AIF let us evolve because they want us to, and if so, why? This might be something to think about very hard. More about this later, of course.
v.ii. Ganesha, the Elephant Man
Although many people have never heard his name, I think Ganesha is still a well-known Hindu god amongst people. The reason for this is that he is the "Elephant Man"--he has a human torso but an elephant head with trunk and everything. This is a common picture (see fig. 7 below) that we often see in relation to the Hindu religion.
My purpose with exposing all these gods and comparing them is not only to prove that the gods are the same all over the world--I think I have already proven that--but for each god I am exposing, I want the reader to learn something new about the Alien Invader Force (AIF). This is also true with Ganesha. First, however, I want to do a small presentation of the god. [image 81]Fig. 7. Ganesha, the "Elephant Man," depicted with his four arms and elephant head.
Ganesha is still a widely worshipped deity in the Hindu pantheon. He is known as the remover of obstacles, the patron of arts and sciences, and the Deva of intellect and wisdom.^ [73] [82] He is also the god of beginnings and is honored before starting ceremonies and rituals.
Here is an interesting thing; Ganesha is also invoked as patron of letters and learning during writing sessions.^ [74] [83] If he is Marduk (which I intend to provide evidence of), this statement is remarkable because Marduk was the one who often dictated what came to be written into the scriptures, while the Sages were the ones who actually wrote it down. It's like someone would say that Josef Mengele was the master scientist when it came to twins, and then stop there. Those who have done their research know that Mengele mapped the human brain using what he learned from identical twins (usually through torture and sexual abuse)--research that later became known as MK ULTRA and Monarch Mind Control. I believe the statement that Ganesha was the patron of letters and learning during writing sessions because that statement definitely hints at him dictating what was to be written into the historic records. Some may think it's harsh to compare that with Josef Mengele, but the effects were quite similar, as were the intentions.
Now, let us discover what the Ganesha's name means.
Quote #30: The name Ganesha is a Sanskrit compound, joining the words gana (Sanskrit: ??; IAST: ga?a), meaning a group, multitude, or categorical system and isha (Sanskrit: ??; IAST: ??a), meaning lord or master. [15] The word ga?a when associated with Ganesha is often taken to refer to the ga?as, a troop of semi-divine beings that form part of the retinue of Shiva (IAST: ?iva).^ [75] [84]
We are obviously back to Lord Shiva again, and we know that Lord Shiva is the equivalent with another Lord--Marduk. If we continue on this trail, some commentators interpret the name "Lord of the Ganas" to mean "Lord of the Hosts,"^ [76] [85]or "Lord of Created Categories," such as the elements.
Lord of the Hosts is an expression which can be found elsewhere, namely in the Bible--in Yahweh Sabaoth. Some say that, too, means Lord of the Hosts and identify Yahweh Sabaoth as a God of War. Now, who was the main War God? Ares.
Let's revisit Babylon again.
Quote #31: In the late Babylonian astral-theological system Nergal is related to the planet Mars. As a fiery god of destruction and war, Nergal doubtless seemed an appropriate choice for the red planet, and he was equated by the Greeks either to the combative demigod Heracles (Latin Hercules) or to the war-god Ares (Latin Mars) hence the current name of the planet. In Assyro-Babylonian ecclesiastical art, the great lion-headed colossi serving as guardians to the temples and palaces seems to symbolise Nergal, just as the bull-headed colossi probably typifies Ninurta.^ [77] [86]
Now we can see that there is a link between Ganesha, Nergal, and Ares across the different mythologies. Even Apollo has links to Nergal and the Underworld:
Quote #32: The Hebrew term Abaddon (Hebrew: ??????????, ??add?n), and its Greek equivalent Apollyon (Greek: ?pollyon, Apollyon), appear in the Bible as a place of destruction and an angel, respectively. In the Hebrew Bible, abaddon is used with reference to a bottomless pit, often appearing alongside the place ????(sheol), meaning the land of the dead.^ [78] [87]
My point here is that all these deities can be traced up and down and back and forth, and we still end up with Marduk. Very few people have made such connections before, but they need to be made because the gods, if they appear, may refer to themselves as one or more of these old deities in order to make themselves look good! The reader is now smarter than to swallow their propaganda.
However, I know there are well-known researchers out there who are currently trying to connect Apollo with very benevolent forces by making incorrect associations. These researchers and the associations they make can sound very credible at first, but they will not be able to prove their claims. If the reader ever stands before something like that, try to remember what I said here. The evidence is in these papers.
Now, for those who were surprised over the AIF's control of our chakras and Kundalini, here is another reference, directly referring to Ganesha, aka Marduk (my emphasis is in italics):
Quote #33: According to Kundalini yoga, Ganesha resides in the first chakra, called Muladhara (m?l?dh?ra). Mula means original, main; adhara means base, foundation. The muladhara chakra is the principle on which the manifestation or outward expansion of primordial Divine Force rests. [94] This association is also attested to in the Ganapati Atharvashirsa. Courtright translates this passage as follows: [O Ganesha,] You continually dwell in the sacral plexus at the base of the spine [m?l?dh?ra cakra]. [95] Thus, Ganesha has a permanent abode in every being at the Muladhara. [96] Ganesha holds, supports and guides all other chakras, thereby governing the forces that propel the wheel of life.^ [79] [88]
This is another thing that I certainly haven't been "sitting on." I didn't know this until I started researching the Vedas, but it certainly means that an additional thing we need to do is to get back to be in charge of our chakras. We will discuss this in Paper #16. This is very important, as the reader most certainly understands, so bear with me until we get to that paper. The reader may see now why these levels of learning can be quite massive (many pages), but we have a lot to cover.
v.iii. Skanda and the Seven Sisters of the Pleiades
Skanda, who also goes under other names, such as Kartikeya and Murugan, is another interesting deity, or Avatar, which probably would be a better term. Most of these deities are Avatars--that's what they really are; Avatars of the "higher" gods.
Skanda is the Commander of the Gods--at least outside of the Highest Lokas, and especially here on Earth. His "brother" is Ganesha, whom we discussed in the previous subsection, and his vehicle is the RAM (a clear association to Marduk).
In the Pur?nas, Skanda is the son of Shiva (Marduk), but at the same time brother of Ganesha. This, of course, doesn't make sense on an analytical level. However, what they often did in the Vedic literature was to refer to an Avatar as their "son," just as Jesus could be said to be an Avatar of En.ki. Thus, being a "brother" of Ganesha and a son of Shiva and an Avatar of Shiva would make Skanda the counterpart of Marduk. This also makes sense when we read the whole complicated story of Skanda, which we don't have time to go into here, but it is easy to find online for those who are interested.
Let's instead examine the most fascinating aspects of Skanda/Marduk. The ancient texts tell us that Skanda as Murugan was raised by six sisters, known as the "K?ttik?." We're taught the following:
Quote #34: In Hindu mythology, the god Skanda was raised by the six sisters known as the K?ttik? and thus came to be known as Kartikeya (literally Him of the K?ttik?). According to the Mah?bh?rata, Kartikeya was born to Agni and Sv?h?, after the latter impersonated six of the seven wives of the Saptar?i and made love to him. The Saptarshi, hearing of this incident and doubting their wives chastity, divorced them. These wives then became the K?ttik?.^ [80] [89]
Just to clarify; the "Saptrarshi" mentioned in the above quote are the "Seven Rishis" (Sages), who are mentioned frequently throughout the Vedas. They are basically regarded as the "patriarchs of the Vedic religion."^ [81] [90] What Quote #34 actually says is that the Seven Rishis (said to be very wise) are doubting the wives' morality when it comes to sexual relationships. In other words, the K?ttik? are immoral. However, who are the K?ttik?? (My emphasis in italics.)
Quote #35: The star cluster K?ttik? (Sanskrit: ????????, pronounced [kr?t?t?ik?:], popularly transliterated Krittika) sometimes known as K?rtik?, corresponds to the open star cluster called Pleiades in western astronomy, it is one of the clusters which makes up the constellation Taurus.^ [82] [91]
Here we have a direct link between the K?ttik?, the Pleiades, and the Constellation of Taurus. The Rishis are also saying that the Seven Sisters of the Pleiades are sexually immoral, which makes much sense. The reader may or may not recall, but we discussed in Level IV how the Pleiadians came down to Earth as the "Fallen Angels" and impregnated the gorgeous looking human females just for the sexual sensation of it. This was most certainly done by the Pleiadians becoming "walk ins" in existing human males and manipulating human females to have sex with them--in many cases, they literally raped them. Then they used the Pleiadian Giant genes and mixed them with human DNA (all with En.ki's consent), and the offspring became Giants. I am not making this up; it was admitted to by the channeled group of Pleiadians, who are hosted by Barbara Marciniak's body. Hence, we can definitely say that the Pleiadians were "sexually immoral" to use a mild term. In reality, they broke every universal law they could in regard to not interfering with an evolving group of humanoids. Moreover, they broke every rule under the Law of Free Will. These crimes do not go unnoticed, and supposedly, the Pleiadians who are now lecturing through Marciniak's vessel are here to make amends for what their ancestors were doing to Homo sapiens ages ago. Apparently, these Pleiadians can't continue evolving until they have made amends for what their ancestors did. Mind you; this is their version of why they are here now, but from having listened to them, and with the knowledge base I have, I can see that there is a much bigger agenda behind their being here. To understand this concept, please read The Third Level of Learning, which goes into depth about channeling.
There is one thing, however, which I need to introduce regarding the Pleiades before we move on. The Pleiades, which are a part of the Constellation of Taurus, were also where En.ki as Lucifer took refuge after the Rebellion War, and Aldebaran became perhaps his most important outpost in Sector 9--our sector of the Milky Way Galaxy. This is more or less backed up by Marciniak's Pleiadians as well. Although they admit that En.ki has his flaws, similar to the rest of the Anunnaki, En.ki is the one who has been the Pleiadians' mentor during the Nanosecond. Hence, they often put En.ki in a good light. As the reader can see, there are very few sources we can trust, although there are good sources here, believe it or not. However, there's not much they can do if we humans don't come to our senses, wake up to the reality that we live in, and stop agreeing with being manipulated. Not until then--if we ask for it--can we get some help from beings who have been on our side since the beginning of our imprisonment. This means that we could have lessened our suffering and decreased our prison time here if we had used more of our smarts and not been so comfortable with the toys that have been handed to us.
Nevertheless, after these important side notes, let's return to where we were. We now know that Skanda was raised by six of the Seven Sisters, but what happened then, when Skanda grew up?
Quote #36: In Hindu astrology, K?ttik? is the third of the 27 nak?atras. It is ruled by Kartikeya.^ [83] [92]
Now we know that Marduk is a ruler of the Pleiades. Now read the following quote (no need to understand this entire quote, just take in the concept of it.)
Quote #37: The first elaborate account of Kartikeyas origin occurs in the Mahabharata. In a complicated story, he is said to have been born from Agni and Sv?ha, after the latter impersonated the six of the seven wives of the Saptarishi (Seven Sages). The actual wives then become the Pleiades. Kartikeya is said to have been born to destroy the Asura Mahisha. [9] (In later mythology, Mahisha became the adversary of Durga.) Indra attacks Kartikeya as he sees the latter as a threat, until Shiva intervenes and makes Kartikeya the commander-in-chief of the army of the Devas. He is also married to Devasena, Indras daughter. The origin of this marriage lies probably in the punning of Deva-sena-pati. It can mean either lord of Devasena or Lord of the army (sena) of Devas. [citation needed] But according to Shrii Shrii Anandamurti, in his master work on Shiva [10] and other works, Kartikeya was married to Devasen? and that is on the ground of his name as Devasenas husband, Devasen?pati, misinterpreted as Deva-sen?pati (Devas general) that he was granted the title general and made the Devas army general.^ [84] [93]
I agree that this is a complicated story, but we can understand how Shiva, the main "god soul," is intervening with his own avatar and helps him become a general of the Deva army. More importantly, it looks as if, at this point, due to wars and intrigues, there is some kind of migration from Ursa Major to the Pleiades by some gods. Or because of conflicts, some are cast out of Ursa Major and relocate to the Pleiades. It looks as if Marduk is finding refuge in his father's domain in Taurus!
Finally, regarding Skanda, again we can see the direct link between him and Marduk:
Quote #38: Like most Hindu deities, Subrahmanya is known by many other names, including Senthil, V?la?, Kum?ran (meaning prince or child or young one), Swaminatha (meaning smart or clever), Sarava?a, Arumugam or Shanmuga (meaning one with six faces), Dandap?ni (meaning God with a Club), Guhan or Guruguha (meaning cave-dweller)^ [85] [94]
We are back to the Underworld and "cave-dweller" again. It seems as if whenever we research these beings, it comes back to the Underworld and the Afterlife. They have made sure that that particular reference is there, in the open, or halfway hidden.
Now, let us make some more Vedic association with Marduk, and then we'll move on to portray the infamous "Queen of the Underworld," thus far mostly known as Ere?kigal.
v.iv. Tvastar and Vi?w?karman
Tvastar (or Tva???) was born from the navel of the invisible Vi?w?karman, known in the Hindu text as the "blacksmith" of the Hindu gods--the being who designed and created all the Vim?nas, tools, and weapons for the gods, to use in daily life and in devastating wars.^ [86] [95] Tvastar is also known as the "visible" creator, while Vi?w?karman is the "invisible one," working more behind the scenes. This is, as we will see, only another way of describing Avatars. I will prove to the readers that Vi?w?karman is the equivalent to the "invisible" Marduk and is just another name for Shiva. Tvastar, on the other hand, is one of Vi?w?karman's Avatars, and is thus an incarnation of Marduk.
However, this "duo," Vi?w?karman and Tvastar, is an interesting one because the two elevated themselves as the "Architect of the Universe." From there, it becomes quite fascinating.
v.iv.i. Vi?w?karman--Blacksmith of the Hindu Gods
Vi?w?karman, whom I've decided to present side by side with his Avatar, Tvastar, has, according to the Rigveda, the following characteristics:
Quote #39: Vi?w?karman is the personified Omnipotence and the abstract form of the creator God according to the Rigveda. He is the presiding deity of all craftsmen and architects. [1] He is believed to be the Principal Architect of the Universe , and the root concept of the later Upanishadic Brahman / Purusha.^ [87] [96]
Most readers who have reached the point where they are ready to absorb material such as these papers already know about the Illuminati and the Freemasons. If there is somebody out there who has missed it, I'll quickly let you know that Freemasonry is worshipping a "God" that is the "Great Architect of the Universe." This is the being they call God, period. Well, Christians, and even many people subscribing to other religions, attack Freemasonry and say that their God is not the God of the Old Testament, but in fact is an occult term for Lucifer, the "Lightbearer." (I am not going to provide any proof for all this here because it's very simple to find the evidence just by googling it--there is sufficient evidence out there. I also created a gigantic website database, updated between 1998-2009, http://illuminati-news.com/ [97], which more or less exclusively discusses these subjects.) The lower-level Freemasons, in turn, defend themselves and say that this is nonsense--that they are not Satanic worshippers and that the Christians and others have it wrong. [image 98]Fig.8. Vi?w?karman.
Testimonies from insiders and whistleblowers amongst high-level Freemasons, however, prove that their organization indeed worship Lucifer, and that it's he who is the "Great Architect of the Universe." According to some of them, the eye on the capstone of the Great Pyramid of Giza, portrayed on the back of the American One Dollar Bill as well, is, in fact, the "Eye of Lucifer," (see fig. 9 below). Others say it's the "Eye of Horus," which would indicate Marduk (Osiris is En.ki, and Horus is En.ki's and Isis' son, which makes him Marduk). As the reader can determine, we have two beings claiming to be the "Great Architect;" En.ki and Marduk. In Freemasonry, they are depicted as Lucifer and Horus, or Osiris and Horus. Hence, the Eye on top of the pyramid can symbolize both En.ki and Marduk. [image 99]Fig. 9. The "Eye of Lucifer/Horus" on the back of the U.S. One Dollar Bill (see left).
This entire matter proves that at one point in time, the roles of Queen Nin and Khan En.lil were taken over by "lesser" gods, who since then have pretended to be the Creators of the Universe. If the reader goes back in the text and reviews Quote #39, you will see that it states that Vi?w?karman is the Architect of the Universe, and consequently, also the Brahman. These titles, as has been proven earlier, belong to the Queen of the Stars, and above Her, the Divine Feminine--the Multiversal life force that is in everything in this universe and all others, from what we understand. Quote #39alone is good evidence that En.ki and Marduk, in liaison with their partners in crime, not only took over the Earth but also the titles of the real Creatrix of the Multiverse and Her consort.
However, it would not be surprising in the end, when En.ki and his son are standing trial for what they have done that they defend themselves and say that when they stated that they were the Architect and the Brahman, they meant that these titles were implying the holographic universe he had created for humanity to live in (the 4%), and not the Universe which the Queen of the Stars had created. I think it's quite na?ve if he thinks they would get away with that, but you can't know exactly how these beings are thinking.
v.iv.ii. Hira?yagarbha [image 100]Fig. 10. Hira?yagarbha. This is one of many material universes, Brahm???a, which expand from Mah? Vi??u when he breathes.
Now, let us study the Hira?yagarbha--one of many material universes (fig. 10). Again, Marduk in the guise of Vi?w?karman, is taking on the role of the Creator of the particular universe we live in.
Quote #40: Hira?yagarbha (Devanagari: ??????????? ; literally the golden womb or golden egg, poetically rendered universal germ) is the source of the creation of the Universe or the manifested cosmos in Indian philosophy, [1] it finds mention in one hymn of the ?igveda (RV 10.121), known as the Hira?yagarbha S?kta, suggesting a single creator deity (verse 8: yo deve?v ?dhi dev? eka ?s?t, Griffith: He is the God of gods, and none beside him.), in the hymn identified as Praj?pati The concept golden womb is again mentioned in Viswakarma suktha Rg 10-82.
The Upa?i?ad calls it the Soul of the Universe or Brahman, [2] and elaborates that Hira?yagarbha floated around in emptiness and the darkness of the non-existence for about a year, and then broke into two halves which formed the Svarga and the P?thvi.
In classical Pur??ic Hinduism, Hira?yagarbha is a name of Brahm?, so called because he was born from a golden egg (Manu Sm?ti 1.9), while the Mah?bh?rata calls it the Manifest.^ [88] [101]
This is another very interesting reference. Again, we have the egg-shaped universe, which is the predominant hypothesis behind Life Physics Group California's (LPG-C's) metaphysical and quantum mechanical "Working Model;" something they claimed was not a hypothesis,^ [89] [102] but a proven fact.^ [90] [103] I am not disputing that the Universe is egg-shaped (there are other scientists saying the same thing), but in the sense of LPG-C, they received much of their information directly from the AIF.
The Sages are making very bold statements in the Pur??as, the Rigveda, and in other scriptures, when they make the claims included in Quote #40. They are basically elevating Vishnu/Vi?w?karman to become the Prime Creator. This is not coming as any kind of surprise, of course, as this has been done many times over, but in these scriptures, it makes it very "solid" and is not open for any kind of interpretations.
v.iv.iii. The Golden Grounding Cord
Now, let me make the reader aware of something else concerning the Hira?yagarbha:
Quote #41: Post-classical yoga traditions consider Hiranyagarbha as the originator of yoga.^ [91] [104]
I am introducing this here just to make sure the readers don't think that yoga is something really bad because it is originating with the Hindu texts and Lord Vishnu. If you are a yoga practitioner, or a teacher, I would advise you to continue and not stop because of what is revealed here. However, I think it's very important that you create the golden cord and the golden aura around yourself before you start practicing. If you have forgotten how to do it, it's simple: imagine yourself creating a robust golden cord that reaches all the way to the center of the Earth, and at the bottom of this cord you create a giant diamond, or any other precious stone that you are particularly fond of. Then you create a golden aura around yourself, and this aura should be connected to the cord and reach from side to side and front to back so that your whole body is covered. Make this aura, let's say five inches outside of your visible body. By doing this, you not only ground yourself, but also demonstrate to non-physical beings that you are serious, and that you are a strong person who knows what it's all about, and you are claiming your sovereignty; telling everybody that no one is allowed to mess with you.^ [92] [105]
This is actually something I suggest that everybody does several times a day--when you have done it for a while, it becomes a routine, and you can do it in a couple of seconds. Do it first thing in the morning when you wake up and then throughout the day, until it's time to go to bed. Finally, do it one last time before you go to sleep (very important). Believe it or not, but this will make a big difference and will keep entities away.
Can I prove it? Although the results are subjective, I believe I can assure a positive result if it is done properly. Do it, and you will notice a difference! Also, if you teach yoga (or any other metaphysical classes), make sure you include the "Golden Grounding Cord Practice" in the classes--please! Also equally important as I have stated many times--do a breathing exercise before and after the yoga class! If you incorporate these two practices, you may get astonishing results, and your students will be happy and stay with you.
I had some problems in the beginning to remember to implement the Golden Grounding Cord practice several times a day, but now it occurs naturally, and it's quite rare that I forget to do it. I'm sure that those who take this seriously will gain quite a lot from it.
v.iv.iv. Tvastar
Last, when it comes to Marduk and his counterparts, let us move over to Vi?w?karman's Avatar, Tvastar, and prove beyond a doubt that he really is Marduk, which in turn, also proves that Vi?w?karman is Marduk as well because the former is the latter's Avatar.
Quote #42: Tva??? is a solar deity in the epic of Mah?bh?rata and the Hariva??a. He is mentioned as the son of K??yapa and Aditi, and is said to have made the three worlds with pieces of the Sun god Surya. The surname of south indian goldsmiths Thattar (Tamil: ??????) is probably derived from the term Tvoshtar.^ [93] [106]
As we discussed in Paper 6 under the section, "How the Vedic Gods Set up their Manipulative System," K??yapa is the equivalent of En.ki, and earlier in this paper, I explained that Aditi, who originally is another name for Queen Nin, can also be many different deities; in this case, K??yapa's consort. Nonetheless, it explains that Tvastar is the son of K??yapa, i.e. En.ki, which makes Tvastar the equivalent to Marduk. In Quote #42 he is also presented as a Sun god (solar deity).
Generally, "everybody knows" that in the New Testament of the Bible, Jesus is a carpenter, which basically means he is a "builder," or a "creator god." I have earlier given hints that Jesus and En.ki are one and the same, which in many ways makes sense. Nevertheless, in the Vi?w?karman/Tvastar story, the two present themselves both as Queen Nin (Creator of the Universe) and Lord En.ki, respectively, the same mix back and forth appears in the New Testament. Be very careful not to always make clear distinctions between En.ki and Marduk because if we do, we're going to create some serious contradictions. The two intentionally took each other's roles at times, and it was not always to confuse the masses. Such is also the case with the biblical god Jehovah and his schizophrenic behavior. En.ki sometimes was, as we discussed a few sections ago, the "King of Sun gods," despite our knowing that Marduk is the typical Sun deity. Even Jesus was a typical Sun god, which is clearly demonstrated by his halo.
Quote #43: With it not being found in the Bible, the halo is both pagan and non-Christian in its origin. Many centuries before Christ, natives decorated their heads with a crown of feathers to represent their relationship with the sun god. The halo of feathers upon their heads symbolized the circle of light that distinguished the shining divinity or god in the sky. As a result, these people came to believe that adopting such a nimbus or halo transformed them into a kind of divine being.
However, interestingly enough, before the time of Christ, this symbol had already been used by not only the Hellenistic Greeks in 300 B.C., but also by the Buddhists as early as the first century A.D. In Hellenistic and Roman art, the sun-god, Helios, and Roman emperors often appear with a crown of rays. Because of its pagan origin, the form was avoided in early Christian art, but a simple circular nimbus was adopted by Christian emperors for their official portraits.^ [94] [107]
This is highly symbolic and would indicate that Jesus could have been either En.ki or Marduk, or both (or even better--their Avatars). All these alternatives could potentially be correct, but Jesus, too, was demonstrating both En.ki's more controlled behavior and Marduk's outbursts, as demonstrated when he tipped over the table in wrath at the marketplace because he was upset with the merchants (the bankers). However, I want to return to the carpenter subject and provide an interesting reference to Tvastar. Michael Jordan, in "Encyclopedia of Gods," writes the following:
Quote #44: Tvastar, carpenter, is a Hindu creator god, mentioned in the Vedas, and referred to as the divine builder who fashions living creatures on earth ... He is an aditya, or sun god, and father of Saranyu. His attributes are the homajakalika, an uncertain fire device, ladle, and two lotuses. A.G.H.^ [95] [108]
Tvastar, just as Jesus, is said to have been a carpenter, so there are definitely things that associate the two, as well as there are things that associate En.ki with Jesus.
In this paper, I have given the reader a few things to ponder in regards to En.ki and Marduk, as presented in the Vedas. As usual, I have only scratched the surface, and this is not only because of space limitations. I also want the readers to be able to look up other deities in the ancient Hindu texts, do the research--including using syncretism--and see which Sumerian/Egyptian/Greek/Roman god or goddess they come up with. I am convinced that whomever the reader decides to research, there is a counterpart in the other mythologies, in other parts of the world.
VI. Isis, Inanna, Ishtar, Lilith, and Aphrodite
Establishing that these five female deities are one and the same takes care of many headaches when researching the different deities. Albeit all five of them, mythologically, have traits that are quite similar to each other, they are also made different because it may have "pleased" the Sages of old--or rather Marduk or En.ki, depending on which one was dictating a certain story. Also, we should not forget that Ere?kigal, Queen of the Underworld, is connected to these five counterparts as well--particularly Isis and Inanna.
These conflated goddesses have of course their counterparts in the Hindu religion, too, and in the effort to find them, we can also establish further evidence of the conflation. To do so, interestingly, I am even going to present some African mythology, stemming from the Nigerian region.
vi.i. Lakshmi, the Goddess of Fertility, Love, Beauty, and Wealth
Sometimes, the easiest and best way to find out if two deities--in this case goddesses--are counterparts is to look at their characteristics. Amongst other characteristics that are sovereign to a specific goddess, the five goddesses mentioned above also have characteristics that they all share. Such traits are fertility, love, beauty, and wealth, as we discussed in Level IV. Hence, let us look for these and see if we can find a goddess in the Vedas, or in any other Hindu scripture, who matches at least two, if not more, of the four characteristics.
After some search efforts, I found a goddess named Lakshmi. Let's review some data on her:
Quote #45: Lakshmi (Sanskrit: ??????? lak?m?, Hindi pronunciation: ['l?k?mi]) is the Hindu goddess of wealth, love, prosperity (both material and spiritual), fortune, and the embodiment of beauty. She is the wife of Vishnu. Also known as Mahalakshmi, she is said to bring good luck and is believed to protect her devotees from all kinds of misery and money-related sorrows.^ [96] [109]
Bingo! Lakshmi has all of these characteristics. Here is also a reference to being the consort of Vishnu, which is another thing I brought up in Level IV concerning the five goddesses and which is now also evident in the Hindu religion. For those who recall, Isis, being Prince Ninurta's (Prince En.lil's) daughter, was raped by his brother, En.ki/Nergal and "forced" to stay in the Underworld with him and create his offspring. Ere?kigal and Inanna are said to be sisters, and Ere?kigal takes over the role of Isis/Inanna when the latter flees, to En.ki's surprise and annoyance. A new branch of Homo sapiens, usually called Homo sapiens sapiens, is then created by Nergal and Ere?kigal, and later, yet another branch of mankind is created by Marduk and Ere?kigal, when En.ki loses his manhood, as a consequence after Prince Ninurta confronted him in the Rigel star system and chopped off En.ki's phallus in revenge for raping his daughter. Ninurta also puts a curse on En.ki so that he can never reproduce again. [image 110]Fig. 11. Lakshmi
Just to compare Lakshmi with the other counterparts, let's revisit two of them that we just discussed--Inanna and Ishtar; both mentioned in the same reference.
Quote #46: Inanna (/?'naen?/ or /?'n?:n?/; Cuneiform: ?? (Old Babylonian) or DINGIRINANNA (Neo-Assyrian) DMU?3; Sumerian: Inanna; Akkadian: I?tar; Unicode: U+12239) is the Sumerian goddess of love, fertility, and warfare, and goddess of the E-Anna temple at the city of Uruk, her main centre.^ [97] [111]
As we can see, Inanna/Ishtar is the goddess of love and fertility, according to this reference, but also of warfare. Now, by researching Aphrodite, we get an even broader picture of the traits of this particular combined goddess:
Quote #47: Aphrodite (Listeni/aefr?'da?ti/ af-r?-dy-tee; Greek: ?froditi) is the Greek goddess of love, beauty, pleasure, and procreation. Her Roman equivalent is the goddess Venus.^ [98] [112]
Thus, we can add pleasure and procreation to the list. It doesn't really matter which religion or mythology we look at--this goddess is portrayed as the goddess of love and sexuality. The way I see it, "love," in this sense, has very little to do with deep caring for another being --something we connect with love--instead, love and sex are more or less the same thing.
Although my main focus in this level of learning has been the Vedas and the Hindu religion in general, it's inevitable to now and then stumble upon other mythologies and religions as well when researching a certain deity. So was the case with Lakshmi and Aphrodite. Level V has very little to do with African religions per se, but when I see a reference that includes those religions, I'd very much like to include the reference because it proves that the AIF really were spread out all over the planet, and the records of them can be found in all four corners of the world, as it were. The Yoruba religion is practiced in southwestern Nigeria,^ [99] [113] and still we'll find the same deities there.
Quote #48: Oshun, or Ochun (pronounced [???n]) in the Yoruba religion, is an Orisha who reigns over love, intimacy, beauty, wealth and diplomacy. She is worshiped also in Brazilian Candombl? Ketu, with the name spelled Oxum. She should not be confused, however, with a different Orisha of a similar name spelled Osun, who is the protector of the Ori, or our heads and inner souls. Ochun relates mostly to woman but also man.
??hun is beneficent, generous and very kind. She does, however, have a horrific temper, one which she seldom ever loses. When she does, it causes untold destruction. Oshun is said to have gone to a drum festival one day and to have fallen in love with the king-dancer Shango, god of lightning & thunder. Since that day, Shango has been married to Oba, Oya, and Oshun, though Oshun is said to be considered his principal wife.^ [100] [114]
Oshun, carrying the same characteristics as the other goddesses, was also married to a god named Shango, according to the above reference--and what do we know?! Shango is the god of lightning & thunder. Who else is always related to lightning and thunder? Zeus, aka Marduk! Then again, who "married" Isis when En.ki lost his infamous sexual abilities? Marduk did, albeit Ere?kigal eventually took over the role of Isis. Regardless, we can see how myths "travel" to the most distant places.
Speaking of distant places--interestingly enough, Oshun is also worshipped in Brazil. That's not even the same continent! Words travel in mysterious ways, don't they? Or did the gods just tell the Sages what to write down?
From Brazil, let us travel a little bit north until we come to Cuba. According to Quote #48, Oshun became Oxum in Brazilian mythology. Not so in Cuba, albeit the two locations can be said to belong to the same continent. In Cuba, this goddess is worshipped under the same name as in Africa--Oshun! With the risk of sounding like a broken record--words travel in mysterious ways!
Let's see what Cuban mythology has to say about Isis/Oshun.
Quote #49: In Cuban Santer?a, Oshun (sometimes spelled Och?n or Ochun) is an Orisha of love, maternity and marriage. She has been syncretized with Our Lady of Charity (La Virgen de la Caridad del Cobre), Cubas patroness. She is associated with the color yellow, metal brass, [1] peacock feathers, mirrors, honey and anything of beauty, her principal day of the week is Saturday and the number she is associated with is 5. She is the river goddess.^ [101] [115]
Although Inanna has "calmed down" here and has become more traditional in the sense that her hyper-sexuality is removed, there is no doubt that we are still reading about the same deity but in another part of the world. Here she is related to Saturday, which is the day of Saturn, i.e. En.ki; so the connection is still there. In Nigeria, however, Oshun/Inanna is still a very sexual goddess as relayed in the following part of the African Oshun tale: "The dance of Oshun is the most sensual one. She laughs as Yemaya and shakes her arms to sound her bracelets. Oshun raises her arms over the head to emphasize her enchantments. While she dances, she makes sexual movements and asks for sex to the men with her extended hands and abrupt movements of her hips."^ [102] [116] She is also sometimes depicted as a vulture,^ [103] [117]which indicates her Bird Tribe ancestry.
I am not the only one who has found the link between Oshun and Isis. Jide Uwechia, the owner of the website Rasta Livewire,^ [104] [118] makes the same discovery:
Quote #50: Like Egyptian Isis and later Greek Diana, Osun is the goddess of love and is widely beloved. She is known for healing the sick, cheering the sad, bringing music, song and dance, as well as bringing fertility and prosperity.^ [105] [119]
I also wanted to include the Cuban version here for a particular reason--it says here that she is the "river goddess." I would like the reader to keep that in mind for the next subsection. Likewise, the river might, on a superficial level, refer to the river that flows close to where the goddess is worshipped, but on a deeper level, the river refers to the Universe itself. The Universe is symbolically called the "Ocean" on a metaphysical level, and the "River" is therefore the flow of energy through the Universe. In due time, I will present to the reader why I bring this up in this particular circumstance.
vi.ii. D?nu, the River Goddess
As mentioned at the end of the last section, there is another Hindu reference to Isis et al., which includes the river. Her name is D?nu.
Quote #51: D?nu, a Hindu primordial goddess, is mentioned in the Rigveda, mother of the Danavas. The word Danu described the primeval waters which this deity perhaps embodied. In the Rigveda (I.32.9), she is identified as the mother of Vrtra, the demonic serpent slain by Indra. [1] In later Hinduism, she becomes the daughter of Daksha and the consort of Kasyapa.
As a word for rain or liquid, d?nu is compared to Avestan d?nu river, and further to river names like Don, Danube, Dneiper, Dniestr, etc. There is also a Danu river in Nepal. The liquid word is mostly neuter, but appears as feminine in RV 1.54.^ [106] [120]
The "Ocean" is the metaphor for the Universe as a whole--all 100% of it, and it symbolizes energy. The Ocean is what we call Mother Goddess or the Divine Feminine. The "River" is the currents in the Ocean, which can perhaps be best explained as the movement of energy. A Goddess, who is not the real Mother Goddess, might be of such nature that she can control some Rivers in the Divine "Waters." The children and grandchildren of the Orion Queen would, as I see it, be in control of some Rivers because they have learned how. En.ki, however, is associating himself with the Ocean rather than the River because he thinks of himself as being able to create universes. After all, he might reason, he was able to create the holographic universe that we are manipulated into believing is the real universe. He is just as much a Creator God as the Goddess Herself, he might think, because he created the "Matrix." Isis, however, is the River Goddess, and supposedly Khan En.lil's favorite--something Sitchin recognized as well, albeit he called Khan En.lil by the title, Anu--Heaven the Orion Empire.
There is another reference to Isis or Inanna in the Vedas, but I have already included her in Paper #7. Her name is Atargatis, and she was discussed under the "mermaid" section, which I called, "IV. What Did All The Sailors See? Were They All Just Drunk, or are Mermaids for Real???" For those who are interested, or need a reminder, I strongly recommend that the reader returns to that section for a review.
VII. Ere?kigal--the Goddess of Death
Perhaps, the most important goddess for the AIF is Ere?kigal, the Queen of the Underworld. Just because she is a goddess of the world below doesn't mean that she is always dwelling there, just as En.ki is not always dwelling in, and under, the oceans because he's associated with them. It only means that the Underworld and the oceans are Ere?kigal's and En.ki's domains--respectively. En.ki, for example, has many domains, and the Underworld is another domain that he shares with the Queen of Death, when he's known as Nergal.
There is an elderly woman that I have been in contact with, who claims to be Ere?kigal in a current human incarnation. I have no way of proving whether she is or is not, but she is very insistent about it. She also claims that she was born into the House of Windsor, which doesn't surprise me at all, however.
If it fits the purpose, whether they are "for real" or "Intelligence Agents," they try to take on a friendly and caring approach--in this woman's case, she is even working on exposing her "own kind" (the Anunnaki) because she claims that she was thrown out of the Windsor family at some point! Her exposure, however, shouldn't be taken too seriously because she is exposing it from a Sitchin point of view, which is the "safe" way of doing it because that version was meant to be published--I'm convinced that the AIF supported Sitchin.
Funny also is that when I exposed Ere?kigal in my papers, together with all the "Anunnaki" she associated with, she was quick to agree with me, saying that this evil agenda must stop (and she was not referring to me as the one with an "evil agenda"). Later, I discovered that she is continuing to "expose" things from a Sitchin perspective.
Why am I mentioning this? Because I want to caution the reader about what is out there. This woman contacted me shortly after I'd been contacted by Utu ?ama?, aka Marduk, and she referred to him as her brother, which would have been correct if I'd followed Sitchin's presentation. Instead, I would say that Ere?kigal currently is Marduk's lover and consort. In her relationship with me and the general public, she is acting like a cozy mother, or a grandmother, and there is apparently nothing that I say or write that can shake her stable grandmother attitude. She continues her friendly approach even when proven wrong but does not change her viewpoint on things. This is either mind control or the real thing--people such as her, Supriem, James Casbolt (aka Michael Prince), and others are not doing what they are doing "for fun." They believe who they are, which means that there is more to the picture than meets the eye.
With this, let us leave present time for a while and return to the mythological world of the old Hindu religion. Let us meet with Kali, the most vicious female goddess in the Vedic scriptures.
vii.i. Kali--Shiva's Consort
We have discussed Shakti a few times in this level of learning. For the main part, I have associated Shakti with Devi, the Mother of all Creation, i.e. Mother Goddess, the Divine Feminine. However, if we continue researching, we will find other aspects of Shakti as well--a much darker concept of the term, which does not seem to fit with Mother Goddess at all.
I will present what I mean in the following reference, which also gives us an introduction to Kali (or K?l?).
Quote #52: The first appearance of K?li in her present form is in the Sauptika Parvan of the Mahabharata (10.8.64). She is called K?lar?tri (literally, black night) and appears to the Pandava soldiers in dreams, until finally she appears amidst the fighting during an attack by Dronas son Ashwatthama. She most famously appears in the sixth century Devi Mahatmyam as one of the shaktis of Mahadevi, and defeats the demon Raktabija (Bloodseed).^ [107] [121]
Here it says that she appears as one of the shaktis--not as the Shakti. Wikipedia has a fairly good definition of Shakti, and I want to bring this up because it is important to distinguish the Shakti (Mother Goddess) from shakti as a general term.
Quote #53: Shakti (Sanskrit pronunciation: ['??kt?]) (Devanagari: ?????; from Sanskrit shak, to be able), meaning Power or empowerment, is the primordial cosmic energy and represents the dynamic forces that are thought to move through the entire universe in Hinduism. [1] Shakti is the concept, or personification, of divine feminine creative power, sometimes referred to as The Great Divine Mother in Hinduism. On the earthly plane, shakti most actively manifests through female embodiment and creativity/fertility, though it is also present in males in its potential, unmanifest form.^ [108] [122]
As we can see here, the word really stands both for the Goddess of All, but on the earthly plane, "shakti most actively manifests through female embodiment and creativity/fertility, though it is also present in males in its potential, unmanifest form." Everything is of the Divine Feminine, and shakti therefore also refers to when someone uses female creativity and fertility, for example.
Kali is maybe the one character of the AIF that I appreciate writing about the most, only because she is such an obvious AIF character, the way I depict them. How she is described in the Vedic texts is quite revealing, in my opinion. Let us continue with some important characteristics of this charismatic "goddess."
Quote #54 K?l? (Sanskrit: ????, IPA: [k?:li:]), also known as K?lik? (Sanskrit: ??????), is the Hindu goddess associated with empowerment, shakti. She is the fierce aspect of the goddess Durga (Parvati). The name Kali comes from k?la, which means black, time, death, lord of death, Shiva. Since Shiva is called K?la--the eternal time--K?l?, his consort, also means Time or Death (as in time has come). Hence, K?li is the Goddess of Time and Change. Although sometimes presented as dark and violent, her earliest incarnation as a figure of annihilation of evil forces still has some influence. Various Shakta Hindu cosmologies, as well as Sh?kta Tantric beliefs, worship her as the ultimate reality or Brahman. She is also revered as Bhavat?rini (literally redeemer of the universe). Comparatively recent devotional movements largely conceive K?li as a benevolent mother goddess. [1] K?l? is represented as the consort of Lord Shiva, on whose body she is often seen standing. Shiva lies in the path of Kali, whose foot on Shiva subdues her anger.
K?l? is the feminine form of k?lam (black, dark coloured). [3] K?la primarily means time but also means black in honor of being the first creation before light itself. K?l? means the black one and refers to her being the entity of time or beyond time. K?li is strongly associated with Shiva, and Shaivas derive the masculine K?la (an epithet of Shiva) to come from her feminine name. A nineteenth-century Sanskrit dictionary, the Shabdakalpadrum, states: ???? ???? ? ???? ??????? ???? ? k?la? ?iva? ?tasya patn?ti k?l? Shiva is K?la, thus, his consort is K?li referring to Devi Parvathi being a manifestation of Devi MahaKali.
Other names include K?lar?tri (black night), as described above, and K?lik? (relating to time). Coburn notes that the name K?l? can be used as a proper name, or as a description of color. [4]
K?lis association with darkness stands in contrast to her consort, Shiva, who manifested after her in creation, and who symbolises the rest of creation after Time is created. In his supreme awareness of Maya, his body is covered by the white ashes of the cremation ground (Sanskrit: ?ma??na) where he meditates, and with which K?li is also associated, as ?ma??na-k?l?. It is said that aspirants who wish to offer Bhakthi should approach under the proper guidance of a Siddha or equivalent. Chanting her mantras from anywhere would cause unknown effect.^ [109] [123]
[image 124] V0045118 Kali trampling Shiva. Chromolithograph by R. Varma. Credit: Wellcome Library, London. Wellcome Images [125] [127]
Here, we learn that Kali has a definite connection with Shiva/Marduk and that she is the goddess of death and time, and her personality includes a good portion of anger and rage, which can only be stilled if she symbolically puts her foot on Shiva's body.
Moreover, compare the above quote with the one below, and we start seeing a certain motif.
Quote 55: Additionally, the myth may be described as a union of Inanna with her own dark side, her twin sister-self, Ereshkigal, as when she ascends it is with Ereshkigals powers, while Inanna is in the underworld it is Ereshkigal who apparently takes on fertility powers, and the poem ends with a line in praise, not of Inanna, but of Ereshkigal. It is in many ways a praise-poem dedicated to the more negative aspects of Inannas domain, symbolic of an acceptance of the necessity of death to the continuance of life. It is in many ways a praise-poem dedicated to the more negative aspects of Inannas domain, symbolic of an acceptance of the necessity of death to the continuance of life.^ [110] [128]
Inanna's dark side is often referred to as Ishtar, but who took over Innana's/Isis' role after she had descended to the Underworld? It was Ere?kigal! Thereby, the praise was of her, not Inanna.
As we know, Shiva is the Sun god, equivalent to Marduk in En?ma Eli?, the Babylonian Creation Myth. Shiva is Kali's male counterpart, also called Kala. This proves that Shiva and Kali were consorts, just as Marduk and Ere?kigal became consorts in the Sumerian texts. We know that Kali most certainly is not Inanna because her attributes do not equate to those of Inanna, but on the other hand, they do equate to those of Ere?kigal. Thereby, we have a clue already as to whom Kali might be.
Earlier in this paper, we discussed Aditi as being one of the Vedic counterparts of Mother Goddess. At one time, Aditi's character must have been hijacked, and now it becomes quite obvious that it was done by Kali, who, at first, was presented as a benevolent figure, and she was even mentioned as being Divine. I am primarily thinking about this reference: "Various Shakta Hindu cosmologies, as well as Sh?kta Tantric beliefs, worship her as the ultimate reality or Brahman," from Quote #54 above. It sound as if, at one time, Kali was another name for the real Mother Goddess, but with time, after the potential hijack was done, about 500,000 years ago, her character descended into darkness, and instead of being the Goddess of the Heavens, as Aditi was, she became the goddess of the Underworld. This is indeed a big leap, but in the wrong direction. People living in those times supposedly saw these changes as allegories with layers of meanings, but when we, in these times, examine the mythology and understand what it really says, it tells us a whole different story. It becomes inevitable to look at Kali as something other than dark, bloodthirsty, warlike, and a patroness of death--not of life.
Speaking of warlike and blood thirst, some readers may recall how we compared Marduk with the Vedic god, Rudra. In a revisit, I will put the reader's attention on the following quote from Srimad Bhagavatam:
Quote #56: There are some types of living entities in the form of human beings whose living conditions and eatables are most abominable. Generally they eat flesh and fermented blood, which is mentioned in this verse as kshatajasavam. The leaders of such degraded men known as Yakshas, Rakshasas, bhutas and pisacas, are all in the mode of ignorance. They have been placed under the control of Rudra. Rudra is the incarnation of Lord Siva and is in charge of the mode of ignorance in material nature. Another name of Lord Siva is Bhutanatha, meaning master of ghosts. Rudra was born from between Brahmas eyes when Brahma was very angry at the four Kumaras.^ [111] [129]
Thus, we have Rudra, aka Shiva, aka Marduk, married to Ere?kigal in Sumer, and Kali in India. Studying Quote #56above, we undeniably see Rudra being heavily involved in black magick and being associated with ignorance, Yakshas, Rakshasas, fairies, Jinns, Fallen Angels, fairy beings like Nagas, and much more. All of these beings are depicted in ancient texts as demonic and dark. At one time, Rudra and his father, Vishnu aka En.ki, were associated with both Ursa Major and Ursa Minor--the latter which they took over completely. However, later in time, they became more associated with the Pleiades for a reason, and the reason is because they were cast out--not only from Orion's Belt, and star systems related to the constellation of Orion, but subsequently also from other constellations under guardianship of the Orion Empire, such as Ursa Major. Together with En.ki and Marduk, who basically were cast out due to their perverted sexual behavior in combination with practicing Black Magick, a matriarch with similar tendencies was cast out as well. Yes, we're talking about Ere?kigal. Since then, these three Fallen Angels have been stuck together like flies to glue, and they constantly plotted in solitude and in unison to create more power for themselves. Their best bet is to suck the energetic power out of humanity--here, they have an entire planet full of beings they can use for their hideous purposes. In addition, they have plenty of other worlds under their control, populated by beings they may have a similar use for. Moreover, they have their Minions, who are not from this world, who are also using the energy of beings they have captured, and in summary, they are building a strong and powerful army, which they think will be strong enough in the near future to take on the Orion Empire.
It's quite interesting to see where a "change" was taking place in the sense of the AIF taking over the role of the Goddess, and Khan En.lil. Kali, Shiva, and Vishnu had everything to do with it. That in itself doesn't come as a surprise after having read these levels of learning--the surprise is rather that no one seems to have noticed it before. Look at this, for example:
Quote #57: In the Vedas, Aditi (Sanskrit: ????? limitless) [1] is mother of the gods (devamatar) from whose cosmic matrix the heavenly bodies were born. As celestial mother of every existing form and being, the synthesis of all things, she is associated with space (akasa) and with mystic speech (V?c). She may be seen as a feminized form of Brahma and associated with the primal substance (mulaprakriti) in Vedanta. She is mentioned nearly 80 times in the Rigveda: the verse Daksha sprang from Aditi and Aditi from Daksha is seen by Theosophists as a reference to the eternal cyclic re-birth of the same divine Essence [2] and divine wisdom. [3] In contrast, the Puranas, such as the Shiva Purana and the Bhagavata Purana, suggest that Aditi is wife of sage Kashyap and gave birth to the Adityas such as Indra, Surya, and also Vamana.^ [112] [130]
If we go with my hypothesis that Aditi is Mother Goddess, she was the first to be recognized as the Creatrix and the first to be worshipped. She is associated with space (akasa--read aKAAsa). She is seen as the feminized form of Brahma--the first living soul in the Universe. Then we have Daksha showing up, seemingly competing with her about being the One Creator. Now, the question is, who is Daksha? It's easy to find out: "According to Hindu legend, Daksha is one of the sons of Lord Brahma, who, after creating the ten Manas Putras, created Daksha, Dharma, Kamadeva and Agni from his right thumb, chest, heart and eyebrows respectively."^ [113] [131] Note that this reference says "Lord Brahma," which indicates a male. Lord Brahma can therefore be no one else but En.ki in this circumstance. Daksha is evidently the son of Brahma/En.ki. Although four sons are mentioned, they are just different aspects of the same being--Marduk. Remember that Marduk was the one, according to the legend, who defeated Mother Goddess and blew the planet Tiamat in pieces. That was the exact point, mythologically speaking, when the takeover happened. In reality, Marduk had very little to do with it--it was mainly En.ki's work--but Marduk was the one who manipulated the records eventually, when he was the King of Babylon. Thus, this is what Quote 57 is all about, if we really study it carefully--the takeover, where we went from a feminine universe to a masculine--from matriarchy to patriarchy; Daksha versus Aditi. From thereon, the new owners of planet Earth--the new trinity, consisting of En.ki, Ere?kigal, and Marduk--could change things around to their own liking.
The reader may argue that if this is the case, why do we think that any of what the ancient scriptures say, is true? It's a fair question, and hypothetically, the answer could be that nothing really is true, but I wouldn't agree with that. We do have physical evidence that some of the things described in the texts did happen, and when we start connecting dots, we are likely to be quite close to what actually occurred. Another thing to bring into the picture is our own intuition. Do we feel that it's wrong, or do we feel that it's right? This is where one's own judgment must come into place. The hypotheses presented in these series of papers put together is my version of truth because regardless of the evidence, it rings true. That these beings existed is self-evident--I do not believe at all that humans wrote the ancient texts. How would we explain that they are almost identical in totally different parts of the world? Humans supposedly didn't have the means to travel around the world to the extent that they must have done in order to "make up" all these stories, and the varieties of them. Also, what about the pyramids? People are going on about the Pyramids of Egypt, but what about all the pyramids in other parts of the world--parts of the world that never communicated with each other? They had pyramids, too. How could the Bronze Age people draw airplanes, helicopters, and other technical devices that we recognize as modern technology, or better? The evidence goes on and on, even if we would exclude the syncretism, which we of course can't do. Thereby, I believe we can establish the validity of many, if not most, of the ancient text. I dare say that these papers are very close to telling the real history of Earth. Not only that--for the first time, our history is told in one place and in a modern language, and it's told without metaphors, analogies, or poetic symbolism. Our history is told in plain language the way it happened. I believe we can rest assured that this is the case.
Now, if we return to Vedic times, I also think it's beyond a reasonable doubt that Kali and Ere?kigal are one and the same--their personalities fit, and in the scriptures, they were married to the same male deity. She was the one who turned Mother Goddess and the Divine Feminine to something dark and horrendous. Her spirit was certainly all over the show when the "witches" were burned at the stake in the Dark Ages. We have a lot to "thank" Kali for--many good people have died and got brutally murdered because of her. I wouldn't make a mistake about it.
We have now covered the Goddess, Khan En.lil, and the four AIF leaders in exile. Before I put a close to this paper, there is one additional thing I want to cover, and it's an important one in the Vedic stories. It's about a first generation of human hybrids, depicted as a hero in the stories--his name is Arjuna. It's a story that will reveal to us what kind of ethics and moral codes the gods have worked on gluing into the human minds for thousands of year, and still do up until this very day. Please read carefully.
VIII. Arjuna, the Ultimate Hero
Arjuna is indeed the metaphor of the "ultimate hero" as told in the Bhagavad Gita. The central part of the Arjuna story circles around the Kurukshetra War. This piece of the mythology is considered very holy by the Hindus, and Arjuna is looked upon as a person of ultimate morals and righteousness. This is quite astonishing when we hear about what happened during the battles, where Arjuna is portrayed as a ferocious warrior and an immense killer. However, similar to humans in the Bible, who were forced to murder by an angry and insane "God" called Jehovah, Arjuna was likewise manipulated to kill against his will by another blood-thirsty "God" named Krishna. However, once he fell for Krishna's manipulation, he became a merciless warrior and slaughterer.^ [114] [132]
Arjuna was a human hybrid, born to a human mother and a lofty father--in fact, his father was Indra, aka Marduk, so he was what we would call a "First Generation Hybrid." Although the Vedas are filled with different stories, I would not have brought up the one about Arjuna if it didn't have some relevance to what we are discussing.
I am going to make a long story short here, or we'll spend another fifty pages discussing the Arjuna story. All I really want to introduce is the sense of morals in the story--or the lack thereof. The irony is that when we really study it, there is not anything unusual with it--all we need to do is to watch a Hollywood movie and we get the same twisted sense of morals and ethics. For a movie to be good--or so we're told--there has to be a hero in it, who is usually treated badly by his or her adversary (I will use "he" from here on for simplicity). At first, the hero tries to get away from the situation, but when he notices it doesn't work, he starts fighting his adversary, and an incredible war breaks out that involves perhaps most of humanity. In the end, our hero manages to kill his adversary, but the consequences from the conflict are devastating. Regardless, the audience just loves their hero and thinks he is extraordinarily brave and just. It's all manipulation, and before I started thinking for myself sometime in the past, I used to be the same. Now, I can see how amazingly easy it is to brainwash an entire population. There is hardly anyone walking out from that theatre who doesn't think the hero was admirable.
In this case, the Bhagavad Gita is as holy to the Hindus as the Bible is to the Christians. I am not even going to explain the background to the war here, as I consider war being an extremely poor solution to any problem. It doesn't matter how we twist and bend the subject of war--the reason for it, behind the scenes, is always that someone gains from it at the cost of the lives of thousands of people who have to do the job so that the few can gain. We can sit and discuss that for hours, or for days, and even if it, on occasion, looks as if the reason for a certain war today or in the past can be justified, we just haven't looked far enough behind the scenes. If we do, we're going to find that what I said here is correct. Instead, I'm going to bring up the moral side of the story.
Arjuna is talked into participating in a war because "those behind the scenes" think that he is the one who can win the war so that certain forces can gain from it. At first, Arjuna agrees to participating, but then changes his mind. He starts having second thoughts about the moral aspects of the war. However, when Arjuna refuses to continue, Lord Krishna (En.ki's Avatar) steps in and begins to manipulate Arjuna and convince him how important it is for Arjuna to use his bow and arrows to kill the enemies.^ [115] [133] After much arguing back and forth, Arjuna decides to listen to Krishna and regains his motivation to kill.
At first, Arjuna fights well, but after a while, it indicates that he has a very hard time defeating one of the enemies called Bhisma. This has to do both with Bhisma's terrific skills and Arjuna's reluctance to fight. This makes Krishna very frustrated with Arjuna, and therefore Krishna himself takes up arms against Bhisma, although Krishna earlier had taken a vow of non-aggression (but in his mind, it is perfectly okay--and even expected--for others to fight for the cause). Arjuna, however, does not want history to blame him for forcing Krishna to break his vow. He manages to talk Krishna down and once again takes up arms against Bhisma.^ [116] [134] After some fighting, Arjuna, of course, manages to defeat and kill Bhisma.
The battles continue, and Arjuna now fights with full vigor and finally confirms what an incredible warrior he is. He kills people left and right and furiously beheads his enemies, one after the other.
Just as in most Hollywood movies, this story (which would be a great subject for a Hollywood movie itself) ends "well." Thanks to Arjuna, he and his warriors win the war. Arjuna also becomes a King!
After Krishna's death (which came much later), and the onset of the Kali Yuga--the Age we are living in now and which is soon about to end--Arjuna retires and leaves the throne to his grandson, Parikshita, who is the only descendent of Arjuna's who has survived the war (will how devastating it was). Giving up all their belongings, he and the Pandavas, whom Arjuna fought together with during the war, make their final journey of pilgrimage to the Himalayas.^ [117] [135]
Only one of the people who joins the pilgrimage, survives the long and tiresome trip. Arjuna is the fourth of them who falls along the way. Thereby, the life of someone who is considered a real hero, ends.
There are no limits to the extent that Arjuna was made into a hero. Here is a great example:
Quote #58: The character of Arjuna is described as one whose mind is spotless and clean of all impurities. Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita refers to Arjuna as Anagha, which means pure of heart or sinless. Arjunas nobility is manifested in his magnanimity in victory and compassion towards adversaries. He bears all the injustice of the Kauravas with stoicism and yet hesitates to kill them just before the war.^ [118] [136]
Thus, we can see how the ultimate morality of mankind was shaped thousands of years ago. This is one of the main reasons why it is so easy to pump up young men's testosterone and have them go to war and fight for something they have no idea what it is. They are told to fight for "King and Fatherland," when indeed, they are fighting to increase the wealth of a few already super-wealthy people beyond belief and/or to decrease the population; instigate fear and uncertainty in the mass consciousness; arrange a mass human sacrifice to feed the gods, or to simply satisfy the bloodlust of the AIF.
If the majority of mankind would sit down and read these papers with an open mind, there would be no more wars, and there would be no more slavery or separation. However, we are not there yet. Unfortunately, anyone of us could put the papers on the desk in front of the majority of the population, and they would either not even continue after have read the first paragraph, or they would immediately throw them in the garbage bin and turn on the TV. Thus, we will, unfortunately, see much more suffering before things drastically start to change. However, perhaps a majority of the souls who are currently incarnated on Earth today are so stuck in the manipulative mindset that they will not change in thousands of years. Their future will be to live as cyborgs--half human hybrids and half machines.
Moreover, before they know it, they will be stuck in such a body for a very long time. They will be tempted by the AIF to gain immortality if they just follow the path of the AIF, but what is really happening is that the AIF are creating Artificial Intelligence, which has its own kind of energy, and the souls that are attached to run these beings, who no longer can be called "human," will be stuck in artificial bodies that cannot die, unless you utterly destroy them. This is the kind of "immortality" the gods will give to mankind, and in their already mind controlled state, they don't understand what they are getting themselves into. The only comparison is to the Atlantean Era, when the gods tried to do the same things. However, most of the Earth was drowned in a Deluge before that reality became true. This time, the gods know better, and they will not make the same mistakes twice... [image 137]Fig. 13. Arjuna
Disclaimer!
The purpose for this series of papers, as with anything and everything I have been writing, is to express my own conclusions, based on the research I have done. It must in no way be considered the ultimate truth and must not be considered anybody else's truth until that person has thoroughly thought these things through and decided that he or she may agree with what I have concluded, in part or as a whole. If somebody does not agree, it must be that person's right to individual thinking.
Moreover, I do not want any religion, cult, secret society, or followers to be created out of my material. Also, I am not a guru or a leader of any kind, and I refuse to be treated or viewed as such. At the most, I am a student of the unknown and the mystics who wants to teach and share my experiences and the knowledge I think that I have gained.
Thank you, [image 138]
^ [1] [139] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishnu#Thousand_names_of_Vishnu [140]
^ [2] [141] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aditi [142]
^ [3] [143] Mandala 2.27, op. cit.
^ [4] [144] Mandala 1.113.19, op. cit.
^ [5] [145] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aditi#Motherhood [146]
^ [6] [147] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aditi#Creativity [148]
^ [7] [149] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aditi#Might [150]
^ [8] [151] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durga#Origins_and_development [152]
^ [9] [153] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhuvaneshvari [154]
^ [10] [155] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaktism#Tantric_deities [156]
^ [11] [157] Devi Bhagavatam, 6-10, op. cit.
^ [12] [158] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaktism [159]
^ [13] [160] Yoga nidra or yogi sleep is a sleep-like state which yogis report to experience during their meditations. Yoga nidra, lucid sleeping is among the deepest possible states of relaxation while still maintaining full consciousness.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoga_nidra [161]
^ [14] [162] The 650^th name of Lord Vishnu, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hari [163]
^ [15] [164] Devi Bhagavatam, 1-26 (excerpt), op. cit.
^ [16] [165] 27-32 (excerpt), op. cit.
^ [17] [166] 27-50 (excerpt), op. cit.
^ [18] [167] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devi [168]
^ [19] [169] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devi#Indus_Valley [170]
^ [20] [171] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devi#Vedic_period [172]
^ [21] [173] Thompson, 1995, p. 215, op. cit.
^ [22] [174] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishtar#Characteristics [175]
^ [23] [176] Administrator is a better word than Ruler in this case. Ruler is more connected with ultimate power over others, which is not the case in Orion. She is an "Overseer," who makes sure, as soon as it's possible, that members of the Empire are thriving.
^ [24] [177] Srimad Bhagavatam 1.3.2.
^ [25] [178] The Devas would loosely translate to the Orion Royal Family, while the Igigi are the "working class." The Igigi may include other races than those of the Orion Empire; Lord En.ki picked them up from different star systems if they were (or later became) loyal to his rebellion.
^ [26] [179] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman [180]. Originally taken from the Isha Upanishad, which is about the nature of the Supreme Being.
^ [27] [181] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishvakarman [182]
^ [28] [183] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna [184]
^ [29] [185] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna#Worship [186]
^ [30] [187] The soul (Fire) is always feminine in nature--choice of physical gender is secondary.
^ [31] [188] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurukshetra_War [189]
^ [32] [190] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna#Kurukshetra_War_and_Bhagavad_Gita [191]
^ [33] [192] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rama [193]
^ [34] [194] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rama [193]
^ [35] [195] Ibid., op. cit.
^ [36] [196] Ibid.
^ [37] [197] Isn't it interesting how these beings were "called upon," and then they appeared? Where have we heard that before? Didn't the Ra People in Carla Rueckert's The Ra Material say the same thing? They only come when they are "called upon." In Level III, I made connection between Ra and En.ki's AIF--not without merit!
^ [38] [198] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanuman#Etymology_and_other_names [199]
^ [39] [200] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanuman [201]
^ [40] [202] http://supriemrockefeller.wordpress.com/ [203]
^ [41] [204] Goldman, Robert P. (Introduction, translation and annotation) (1996). The Ramayana of Valmiki: An Epic of Ancient India, Volume V: Sundarakanda [205]. Princeton University Press, New Jersey. 0691066620. pp. 45-47.
^ [42] [206] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varuna [207]
^ [43] [208] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varuna#In_the_Vedas [209]
^ [44] [210] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin_%28mythology%29 [211]
^ [45] [212] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varuna#In_the_Vedas [209]
^ [46] [213] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yama#Hinduism [214]
^ [47] [215] Thompson, 1995, op. cit.
^ [48] [216] Remember that I spell "avatar" with a small "a" when I refer to the human "light-body," which survives body death. "Avatar with a capital "A" refers to the Avatars of the gods--the splits of their souls into different beings.
^ [49] [217] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%80dityas [218]
^ [50] [219] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%80dityas#Vedas [220]
^ [51] [221] Bhagavad Gita 10.21: adityanam aham vishnur meaning Of the Adityas I am Vishnu
^ [52] [222] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%80dityas#Bhagavata_Purana [223]
^ [53] [224] Ibid., op. cit.
^ [54] [225] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nakshatras [226]
^ [55] [227] http://supriemrockefeller.wordpress.com/category/10-chapter-x/ [228]
^ [56] [229] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldebaran [230]
^ [57] [231] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nakshatras [226]
^ [58] [232] http://www.crystalinks.com/pleiades.html [233]
^ [59] [234] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hindu_deities#List_in_alphabetic al_order [235]
^ [60] [236] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni [237]
^ [61] [238] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni#Etymology [239]
^ [62] [240] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayurveda [241]
^ [63] [242] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni#Legends [243]
^ [64] [244] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni#Vedas [245]
^ [65] [246] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surya#In_astrology [247]
^ [66] [248] The seven "Classical planets" are (one for each day of the week): Sunday-Sun; Monday-Moon; Tuesday-Mars; Wednesday-Mercury; Thursday-Jupiter; Friday-Venus; and Saturday-Saturn. Ref.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_planet#Week-day_names [249]
^ [67] [250] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surya [251]
^ [68] [252] http://www.academia.edu/3761831/Hindu_god_and_its_imagery [253]
^ [69] [254] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surya#Religious_role_and_relations [255]
^ [70] [256] http://www.dollsofindia.com/library/hindu_vahanas/ [257]
^ [71] [258] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uraeus [259]
^ [72] [260] http://www.spiritvoyage.com/blog/index.php/shiva-and-kundalini-yoga/ [261]
^ [73] [262] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganesha [263]
^ [74] [264] Ibid.
^ [75] [265] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganesha#Etymology_and_other_names [266]
^ [76] [267] The word ga?a is interpreted in this metaphysical sense by Bh?skarar?ya in his commentary on the ga?e?asahasran?ma. See in particular commentary on verse 6 including names Ga?e?vara? and Ga?akr??a? in: ??stri Khiste 1991, pp. 7-8.
^ [77] [268] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nergal#Attributes [269]
^ [78] [270] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abaddon [271]
^ [79] [272] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganesha#First_chakra [273]
^ [80] [274] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%E1%B9%9Bttik%C4%81 [275]
^ [81] [276] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saptarishi [277]
^ [82] [278] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%E1%B9%9Bttik%C4%81 [275]
^ [83] [279] Ibid.
^ [84] [280] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kartikeya#Hindu_epics [281]
^ [85] [282] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kartikeya#Other_names [283]
^ [86] [284] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishvakarman#In_the_Vedas [285]
^ [87] [286] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishvakarman#In_the_Vedas [285]
^ [88] [287] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiranyagarbha [288]
^ [89] [289] Past term. LPG-C was dissolved shortly after their Chief Scientists, Dr. A.R. Bordon, died in the summer of 2013. The group members are allegedly still working together to continue their research, but this time they are working "underground" and are not a public group. I personally don't know anything about them, or who took over after their top scientist died. After Dr. Bordon's demise, I lost contact with the group--they didn't exclude me, I just didn't have time to find out what actually followed upon Dr. Bordon's death
^ [90] [290] See Wes Penre: "The First Level of Learning, Science Paper #1: Exploring the UnumThe Building Blocks of the Multiverse (February 16, 2011)," Section 6, "Regions of the Unum." https://wespenre.com/exploring-the-unum.htm [291]
^ [91] [292] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiranyagarbha [288]
^ [92] [293] This is something I learned from listening to Pleiadian lectures. I implemented it, and it turned out to work very well.
^ [93] [294] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tvastar [295]
^ [94] [296] http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-halos.html [297]
^ [95] [298] Jordan, Michael, Encyclopedia of Gods, New York, Facts On File, Inc. 1993, p. 269, op. cit.
^ [96] [299] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakshmi [300]
^ [97] [301] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inanna [302]
^ [98] [303] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphrodite [304]
^ [99] [305] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoruba_religion [306]
^ [100] [307] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshun [308]
^ [101] [309] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshun#Santer.C3.ADa [310]
^ [102] [311] http://cubanyoruba.blogspot.com/2007/04/oshun.html [312] "Dances of Oshun."
^ [103] [313] Ibid., "Who is Oshun?"
^ [104] [314] http://www.africaresource.com/rasta/ [315]
^ [105] [316] http://www.africaresource.com/rasta/sesostris-the-great-the-egyptian -hercules/oshun-the-african-goddess-of-beauty-love-prospertiy-order-and-fertilit y-by-jide-uwechia/ [317]
^ [106] [318] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danu_(Asura) [319]
^ [107] [320] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali#Origins [321]
^ [108] [322] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakti [323]
^ [109] [324] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali [325]
^ [110] [326] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inanna#Interpretations_of_the_Inanna_de scent_myth [327]
^ [111] [328] Srimad Bhagavatam 4.18.21., op. cit. http://vedabase.net/sb/4/18/21/en1 [329]
^ [112] [330] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aditi [331]
^ [113] [332] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daksha [333]
^ [114] [334] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjuna#Kurukshetra_War [335]
^ [115] [336] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjuna#Bhagavad_Gita [337]
^ [116] [338] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjuna#Battles_fought_at_Kurukshetra [339]
^ [117] [340] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjuna#Death [341]
^ [118] [342] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjuna#Character_of_Arjuna [343]
Links:
