Wednesday, October 26, 2022

Maha-makara whiteboard telepathy

I've been occasionally dipping into Mission des juifs by Alexandre Saint-Yves d'Alveydre, and today I read a passage in which he mentioned the similarity between the names Abraham and Brahma, and between those of Abraham's sister/wife Sarah and Brahma's sister/wife Sarasvati. Once this idea had been brought up -- to look for Sanskrit names in the story of Abraham -- it made me think of the "First Facsimile from the Book of Abraham." This was an incomplete Egyptian funerary papyrus, "restored" and "translated" by Joseph Smith in a way that is very obviously incorrect by the standards of modern Egyptology. For example, the four canopic jars representing the four sons of Horus (Imsety, Duamutef, Hapi, and Qebehsenuef) were said by Smith to represent four otherwise unknown pagan gods called Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmachrah, and Korash.


There have been various fanciful attempts by Mormon apologists to make these names archaeologically respectable. Elkenah must be derived from El-Cana, meaning the Canaanite god El (who of course was not one of the sons of Horus, didn't have a falcon's head, and was not worshiped in Egypt); Libnah is connected to a Hebrew (not Egyptian!) root meaning "white," and it is said that that particular son of Horus was associated with the color white; that sort of thing.

Well, if we're going to go Sanskrit on the Abraham story, isn't it obvious that Mahmachrah must be Maha-makara, the Great Makara? Makara is a Sanskrit name for, among other things, the crocodile, and a crocodile appears in Facsimile 1. Perhaps Smith just misnumbered the figures, and it is the crocodile that he intended to call Mahmachrah. I'm not proposing any of this seriously, of course; it just popped into my mind when I read about the supposed Sanskrit derivation of the names Abraham and Sarah.

Makara doesn't just mean "crocodile," though. It is also the Sanskrit term for the zodiac sign of Capricorn and refers to a sea creature which is variously depicted, but one of the most common forms it takes is that of a huge fish with the trunk of an elephant.


I hadn't said or written any of this; I had only been thinking about it, and picturing the elephant-nosed makara in my mind -- a very distinctive image, I think, and not one that comes to mind very often -- when I walked into my classroom and found that one of my students had drawn this on the whiteboard:


I still find this whole phenomenon baffling. It's happened enough times, and with such weirdly specific content, that I would ordinarily dismiss "coincidence" as an explanation -- but on the other hand, seemingly impossible coincidences are pretty much an everyday occurrence in my life!

If it's not just another manifestation of "synchronicity" -- that infuriating non-explanation! -- I do tend to think it must be some sort of subconscious telepathy on the kids' part rather than precognition on my own. My mental images in these cases don't just pop into my head inexplicably; the train of thought can be traced back with little effort. When I ask the kid why he happened to draw an "elephant fish," though -- or a king holding an apple, or whatever the image may be -- there's never any explanation. I think they just cast about in the ether for something to draw and sometimes "pick up" something from my mind without realizing that that's where it came from.

I never tell the kids about these incidents, and they are none the wiser. As far as this young artist knows, he just happened to think of an "elephant fish" for no particular reason. Likewise, if some of the random ideas or images that pop into my head were actually pilfered from the private thoughts of other people, I would normally have no way of knowing that. I wonder just how common this sort of thing is.

8 comments:

Eleventeen said...

I never tell the kids about these incidents, and they are none the wiser.

How do you know your students don't read this blog? If they read it, this event can be sufficiently explained by precognition.

Wm Jas Tychonievich said...

They don't read this blog.

But even if they did, the precognition explanation would be pretty paradoxical. The only reason I posted about the makara was because of the whiteboard drawing -- and the only reason the kid made the whiteboard drawing was because he foresaw the makara post?

cae said...

I think a case could definitely be made that these whiteboard 'incidents' really are a form of subconscious telepathy by your students.

It stands to reason, since children have been shown to be somewhat psychically 'receptive' (any parent can tell at least one story of a child 'picking up' on info they couldn't have known)...

...and in your case - the kids are all in the classroom anticipating your arrival, so probably in a state of mind reflecting general 'thought of teacher' and the sort of 'waiting' state which can be a bit 'trance' like, thus predisposing certain of the children to 'receive' images related to your thoughts.
Carol


Eleventeen said...

Maybe they never tell their teacher about reading his blog, and he is none the wiser…..

Or they will read this blog post when they are older……

Retrocausality is about future events causing past events. Maybe the two past events (your student thinking about a fish-elephant, and you thinking about a fish-elephant) were caused by the ultimate future cause of you writing this blog post. Alexandre Saint-Yves d'Alveydre writing about the fish-elephant was caused, in part, by you thinking about the fish-elephant. And the ancient Hindus coming up with the fish-elephant zodiac sign was caused, in part by Alexandre Saint-Yves d'Alveydre writing about the fish-elephant.

Ever read All You Zombies by Robert Heinlein?

Ra1119bee said...



William,

IMO, when we transcend the illusion of linear time, Everything is known as Everything is connected.

Our Soul (which I personally believe is connected to God) holds ALL of the knowledge of the Past (including Past Lives) ... The Present AND the Future.

That's why Telepathy is possible, because it's not subjected to linear time.

Our Soul transcends the illusion of this duality dimension and linear time through our REM sleep, as it is the Soul which holds all the answers that we need to know how to navigate through this wilderness/jungle dimension, much like a blueprint/map.

Out of the Mouths of Babes is a saying that rings true because young children have not yet been tainted or fully anchored by the Ego.

It is the Ego and its false reliance upon so called' logic ' that prevents us from seeing through this duality dimension's illusion.
Logic i.e. the so called facts, has no place and means nothing outside of this illusion.

We see truth and we see best (far and wide, Past, Present and Future) when our I's
(meaning: me, myself and I) are Closed.

Our EGO controls our I's as our Ego pleasures and protects the physical body only.
For example : I want, I need, I think, I am, I have.


all IMHO,of course

No Longer Reading said...

Telepathy makes sense. As a teacher, you are already trying to impart thoughts into your students minds and as students, they are already trying to receive them. It is reasonable that they would be attuned to receiving your thoughts through a less ordinary means as well.

a_probst said...

TEACHER [using a common catchphrase]: I can't teach you by osmosis!
STUDENT [after reading this blog]: Have you tried telepathy?

lea said...

The establishment of 'childish' as a diminishing word is almost certainly part of a much wider range of descriptions and terminologies that serve as a form of programming by repeated association and other methods. English has alot of these, but this particular case can be found in quite a few languages. It is clearly intended to reinforce 'all the negatives of a childish state' while omitting all other aspects of what that is. I wonder if Confucius ever imagined that 'spelling' would turn out to have quite as deep a double meaning as it currently does.

While i have entertained countless 'random' thoughts about this subject, and written pages of notes about it, an extremely summarized version of where i stand on 'effective communication' right now is that telepathy is the only thing that really approximates it, and it seems very likely that we were variably capable of it at some point in the past. This might even be the essence of the Babel story itself.

Sabbatical notice

I'm taking a break from blogging for a bit, exact timetable undetermined. In the meantime, feel free to contact me by email.