Re: Firmament and the Water above was [asa] Re: Slug

Glenn wrote,
<<OK, I will amend my statement. In relation to this question of EVERYONE (as you said) believing in a domed universe, you only looked at Western sources. If you had looked at Eastern sources you would have seen that NOT EVERYONE believed in a domed universe and that makes it an interesting question where the domed universe came from.

But let's look at your citations of the Rig Veda in your 1991 paper. I will contend that if you were not reading it looking for that dome you wouldn't find it. Indeed, there are some verses that say precisely the opposite of what you say it says. First your quotation from your 1991 paper:>>

Since you looked at my paper, you should have seen that I dealt with Japan, China, India, Mesopotamia and Egypt. So, I did look at Eastern sources, though trusting some authorities rather than always trying to do primary research. Even with the Rig Veda which I did examine, I appealed to W. N. Brown, who was a professor at the U. of PA and had a particular interest in the creation views of the Rig Veda.

Rather than go through each example and tell why I do not find your interpretations compelling and thus make a response necessary when the thread is meant to end, I will say that it is possible that I have misunderstood something in the Rig Veda. I do not claim to be an authority on the Rig Veda and I would hope that you would agree that you are not an authority on the Rig Veda either. So, since your response lays out both my interpretations and yours, if you really want to know whether your arguments stand up better than mine, I suggest you present them to one or more experts on the Rig Veda. I would be interested in any answers you might get even if they correct me.

In the meantime I will stick with the experts that I know of. W. N.Brown in the same paper I cited said "The universe, as the Rigvedic man saw it, was in two parts. One, being that in which the gods and men live, consisted of the earth's broad surface, the vault of the sky over it, and the atmosphere between the two." (W. Norman Brown, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 62, No. 2 (Jun., 1942) , p 85.)

A folKlorist and college professor, Peter Metevelis, in a paper called "The Lapidary Sky over Japan" [Asian Folklore Studies 59:1 (2000) 70-88,] says, "The Japanese sun-hiding myth implies that the early Japanese believed the sky was made of stone. Comparative studies show that such a belief was common throughout the world prior to the advent of modern science." And somewhere in the body of the article Google Scholar found "However, it, too, has been from Vedic times a solid vault or firmament."

As to the views of the Jews before Aristotle, as the writer above said, a belief in the solidity of the sky was common throughout the world before the advent of modern science. This conclusion is also found in the writings of other folklorists and anthropologists. As I said in my paper, "...it [a flat earth with a solid dome sky] is generally regarded by scholars as "the usual primitive conception." ( P. Freund, Myths of Creation (New York: Washington Square, 1965) 204. Cf. Levy-Bruhl, Primitive, 353, and Feldman, African, 40) One scholar goes so far as to call it "a general human belief." (G. Hatt, Asiatic Influences in American Folklore (Copenhagen: I Kommission hos Munksgaard) 50). Since it is a very widespread well-documented human belief among people not exposed to modern science (and I know of no exceptions except the Chinese c. AD 200), it is probable that it was the view of the Jews long before Aristotle, and I would not expect Indians in Vedic times to be any different. But, I am open. Present your arguments to authorities and see what they say. I will be interested in their response --even if they prove me wrong.

Paul

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jun 21 19:16:15 2006