ABOUT
WHY THE YEAR 2000
SHOULD BE COUNTED AS
2753
by
T.H.E.
Servant
"...to be put
into effect when the times will have reached
their fulfillment--to bring all things in heaven
and on earth together under one head, even
C."
(Holy
Bible Ephesians 1:10)
Abstract
Since we as
westerners and world citizens have to learn from
our history, in fact our year should be 2753 AUC
after 2000 years of christian education (Ab Urbe
Condita; from the foundation of the city). The
fact that hardly anyone knows of this origin
sets the problem of our discussion as being one
of the ignorance and the psychology of our own
time and time-system. This article proposes for
a non repressive almost secret approach with the
duality of an alternative classical calendar,
that does restore our original belief and
culture of timerespect.
Contents:
Dear
fellow Romans of the Year
2000,
The
History of Modern
Time
The
millennial
problem
A
New Calendar for a New Era
References
Dear
fellow Romans of the Year 2000,
I address you
with Romans because for the year 2000 of our
Lord we have to remind ourselves of who we are.
This also applies to non westerners living in
the Pax Romana of the roman calendar. Without
answering the perennial question of meditation
'who am I' or 'who are we' we westerners and
world citizens are doomed to fail of ignorance
in maintaining our peace and civilization. 'Know
thyself' is our dictum ever since greek
philosophy (see e.g. 'P.')
explained it as the essence of our honor and
conduct. We should know our self and history and
thus make for an authentic present and have a
healthy belief, hope and love for our future.
This at the year 2000 is essential for our
mission: the mission of filognosy; the
restoration of our original love for knowledge
without repressions or political
oppositions.
The year 2000
is a magical year as it reminds us of the
teacher that guided us for that long throughout
the history of our human errors and suffering.
From Him, our Lord, we learned to respect one
another despite of the many fugues of our
balancing love with strife ('E.');
the 'yin/yang' feminine receptive and the
masculine ( at times opposing) initiative. Out
of respect for Him we celebrate the year 2000
with a mixture of fear and elation. We are
afraid, since we are not sure whether we learned
our lessons properly. Could 999 be a prelude to
another 666 of 'the beast'? At the other hand we
are elated, since we are of progress and still
have our christian belief in a world order of
belief, hope and love. Yet we are also in terror
because of losing control with the climate and
with AIDS. Natural disaster and the blocking of
our love-lives in freedom make us apprehensive
of the coming era: will we further decline, lose
culture and regress from democracy towards
another ever more gruesome dictature, or will we
restore from the alienations of modern
experiments and post modern self realizations to
a new era of enlightenment and glory? Withthis
we know of the classical neurotic jerk suffering
in doubt or the classical schizoid onesided man
losing control over his passions as a dictator
murdering the fellow human beings he actually
should love.
The year 2000
fear, far more than a possible computer bug, is
about this self knowledge: we love our Lord, but
we also fear as we still grope in the dark about
the causes of war and the direction of our
evolution. Our culture full of the signs of
decay, like ancient Rome after the year 45 B.C.,
seems to run at an end. Many have experienced
the burn-out syndrome and the need to reform
their lives of fruïtive labor while sick
leave seems to be more prevalent than
unemployment as a problem of the state. We even
lost our faith many ways: what is the use of our
Lord if we lose control anyhow? Many adhere to
the idea that the teacher, the messenger of the
bad tidings of our error is the problem itself.
We would rather crucify Him again as a rebel and
false authority of God against our mature
options of independence. As such we still have
that old Roman disease of paranoia about moral
teachers in all kinds of schools and religion.
We as mature people hate it to be treated in
condescension and be told to be nice, righteous
and decent. Of course we all know that we should
and our psychology always tells us that we are
as holy as can be in cognitive consonance and
pride with our accomplishments. And we did
accomplish the great benefit of human care in
our societies making for social security and
honorable retirement. We for ourselves need no
wars. We need to be sure of who we
are.
Purely
historical we are not simply roman Christians,
Buddhists, Muslims or Hindu's anymore. We have
become multicultural multifaith worldcitizens in
post-modern selfrealization. This aligns with
the original concept of pax romana that would
realign the world in religious tolerance. We
never wanted the inquisition and onesided
options of belief, that was not us. It was not
the Roman Catholic, as that traditionalist
option also reformed itself, be it into a
celibate rule. It was not Christian reformation
as they adhered to the original christian
acceptance of the holiness of marriage and sex.
It, that transformation, was a change of rule.
That we can say for sure. But what exactly has
happened to our Roman rule? History is a matter
of interpreting facts into a cohering vision
that could explain for the present and would
lead us into a meaningful future with
confidence. History should be our teacher, not
just the reality of our religions with their
moral judgment. Without proper analysis of our
errors we are doomed to fail as repressive
forces going against our own continence and
intelligence. Lordship might redeem us of the
worst of this, but still we have to learn the
lesson: do not repress, but face the history of
error (confess) and know who you are.
Thus boldly
stated we as civilized westerners are Romans to
begin with. And as a world citizen we also have
to learn from roman history. Our timeworld of
the present clock and calendar began 'Ab Urbe
Condita': from the foundation of the city
of Rome. Thus our year is 2753 AUC, provided we
respect the lessons of our year 2000 celebration
of respect for our christian Lord. The fact that
hardly anyone knows of this sets the problem of
our discussion as being one of the ignorance and
the psychology of our own time and time-system.
Once we understand this psychology, once we
arrive at a proper vision of our history of
error, we can regain our pride and independence,
our original hope and belief, our original self
confidence without being a heretic against the
teacher and school of moral teaching we
righteously owe all respect.
The
History of Modern Time
It all began
at our foundation with the first roman ruler
R..
He was a mythical heroic personality who managed
to defeat all opposition against the settlement
of a righteous state. He even had to kill his
own twin brother R.
who opposed him at the foundation of Rome. They
were born the sons of the 'God Mars' and
R.
S.
daughter of N.,
king of Alba Longa. After defeating the tyrant
A.
they restored the honor of the family and
subsequently the city of Rome was built at
Palatine hill where about the drama of the
brothers in opposition happened. He was a great
warrior and liberator who gave asylum to
fugitives and exiles. But he was not such a
great scientist and genius as would be needed.
The poet O.
(43 BC-A.D 17) said about him that he was
'better versed in swords than stars'. This
criticism was because of the calendar he made.
It was a peculiar piece of work consisting of 10
months. His year counted effectively 304 days.
The remainder of the year was a speculation. As
to the vision of R..it
was never sure how long that year would be
counting from the moon. His calendar was a lunar
calendar. He could settle for ten lunar months
as the present beliefsystem was about the number
ten. But that might have been coincidence as in
fact he practically couldn't be sure of more
than ten lunar month's in a row. The new year
would happen somewhere at the end of the next
30-day period of the moon or later. The adding
up of moon 'years' or lunar months never makes a
year more precise than 10 days close to the real
solar year. Therefore the year had to count for
(at least) ten months. October, November and
December, now counted as month ten eleven and
twelve originally mean what their names denote:
eight nine and ten (not all months were named to
their number though by reasons unknown). Our
present calendar thus still reflects this
earliest feat of setting the time of our
society. In fact R.
was worshipped ever since as the God Quirinus, a
practice continued till O.
seized power and ruled the empire as
A.
at the time of the descend of our Lord. The
error of this early roman calendar was to fix it
on the moon in stead of fixing it on the sun as
the Egyptians had learned to do long before
that. Because of this the calendar did not
properly align with the seasons and thus created
confusion and dissatisfaction among the farmers
and inhabitants of Rome. It was quickly (after
about 35 years) reformed by the first successor
King N
who added two months, inspired by the greek
calendar, to make a lunar year that ran closer
to the solar year. It needed intercalation, the
adding of an extra intercalary month regularly.
This system lasted until the reform of
J.
C.
some 700 years later.
What
R.
did right was to align the weekorder with the
month. Cyclic time, like the concept of a week,
has only one authority: the natural cycle of the
spin of heavenly bodies; God's creation and
will. No human may manipulate this essence of
religion, life and the soul. Despite of the
reform of adding two months was the Godhead
Quirinus, or instigator of the roman lunar
time-order, the state-religion, respected. Thus
there was not a real psychological problem or
repression of history and tradition yet, nor was
there need for another God to descend from
heaven. One improved the alignment with nature
getting closer to the rule of the sun(-god),
which was a good righteous and religious thing
to do as proven by the continence of the system
of 700 years. The alignment with the moon
persisted and not only brought peace, justice
and wealth for all, making Rome vital and
prosperous, but also instigated the old ideal of
the perfect republic ruled by nobles in consent
with a popular senate. This moon alignment made
for irregular 'weeks' of 7-8 days consisting of
socalled legal days when it was 'fas' for
fruïtive judicial and official business
(thus giving the roman calendar the name
fasti-legal days). They were contrasted
with signal days called Kalends (hence the name
calendar), Nones (half moon) and Ides (full
moon). Ides constituted the fifteenth day
dividing the month in two periods of about
fifteen days. This was in accord with the oldest
but at the time unknown calendar we as yet know
from the vedisc scripture that also divided the
month in a dark and light period named paksah
or panca dasa, 15-day half months
(see
time-quotes
or ch11
canto 3 of the Bh.
P.).
The problem of
this old roman luni/solar calendar in fact was
as with the first version. It was decided by
priests and kings and nobles when intercalation
took place (that is where the morally motivated
modern politician originated from). It was even
a secret to the 'plebs' how it was done. They
could rule with lust and power over the ignorant
'plebs' who had no knowledge and could be
condemned by them for trading on illegal days in
stead of attending to the temple services. At
the one hand they were integer keeping the
schedule and 'science of God' to themselves
limiting it to the regularity of their ritual
exercises of plebeian respect not imposing it,
but at the other hand they corrupted ruling with
it. Because of their own manipulations of the
time arbitrariness could make for political
corruption and 'modern politics': depending on
the quality of the king and the need for the
support by the priests the intercalation was
postponed or speeded as would be convenient, not
unlike the way these days the times of starting
with summertime schedules have been manipulated
(by prime ministers M.
and L.
for the sake of the European Union e.g.). They
who ruled the time would rule the state. In the
old roman days the nobles and the class of the
priests made one and the same rule. 304 B.C the
plebs didn't take it any longer and got hold of
the calendar schedule for public use (by
C.F.).
Still the power of control stayed with the
priests and politicians and also the abuse of it
could persist. As the Bible says, the
manipulation of time is of the Beast
(D.7.25),
and thus the system, like any other fix would,
ran into reform after due time of
service.
Half a century
before the christian year 1, 700 AUC,
J.
C.,
appointed dictator of Rome, (although he refused
to be crowned King by his general
M.A.
as that was forbidden to the republic) realized
that the whole of the Roman state needed a
thorough reform. He reformed as good as anything
that could be reformed and thus also the
time-system. He fell in love with
C.,
princess of Egypt where the solar year ruled the
state since P.III
in 238 B.C.. For many years he meditated in her
arms on the ins and outs of the egyptian respect
for the sun and the stars. Eventually he became
that vigorous that he not only reformed the old
lunar calendar into a full solar calendar, he
even lost control with it. He became hated by
the competitive members of the senate as he was
relentless as if possessed by 'the beast' of
power and didn't know where to stop. It was he
himself who violated the old roman integrity of
respecting the lunar signal days when it was not
legal to conduct official business. This warrior
and 'priest of state' fell from his own
religion. The great British
playwright
S.
commemorated the moment before he was
assassinated when C.
was told as a warning "beware of the Ides of
March". But C.
failed to understand this, lost the rule, and
could not hand it over to his general and
righteous successor M.A..
Thus the roman Empire lost its religious and
political directive and integrity including the
chance to restore to the ancient republican
ideal. The integrity and natural norm of the
lunar weekorder was lost with this fall of the
Roman Empire and got perverted and mystified as
'holy number' seven with later christianity that
by edict of the then still pagan Constantine in
321 AD formally had to consent to the dead seven
days rhythm of the market days that ran right
and indifferently through the solar year, just
as coldly unidirectional deliberated as did the
earlier O.
who betrayed the roman loyalty of
M.A.,
thus giving no calendar-reference to natural
phenomena anymore but to the annulal cycle of
the sun (Our Lord as the Sun-god of the
Sun-day). The once priestly rulers became
illogical ego-dictators like C.
and N.
reflecting the psychology of alienation and
repression of a culture falling in chaos. The
worship of the traditional father/Godhead of the
natural time-managed state Quirinus was
abolished. As J.
C.
still had a logical division of alternating 30
and 31 days of the month, it was quickly lost by
the rule of his successor O.
who as
emperor A.
drove his co-ruler
M.A.
into suicide after withholding him the support
for his defense of the eastern part of the
empire fighting against the Parthians. He
finally defeated him in the sea-battle at
Actium. The 'year of confusion' 45 B.C. counting
445 days when introducing the new Julian
calender grew from then on into an illogical
political arbitrary time-system and a whole
christian era of confusion about time from then
on gave evidence of the natural entropy of all
systems of timemanagement (entropy: the
diversity of the inevitable chaos is
irreversible, but the energy lost can be
retrieved, reversed).
At present the
calendar is a historical mix of an alienated
political order that only vaguely reminds of the
original respect for the natural order of lunar
irregular weeks aligned with a solar year as can
be found in the oldest
vedic literature describing the division of time
from the atom
(Bhagavata
Purâna).
In fact the complete of christianity, except for
the gregorian reform that set the julian
calendar back to the true solar year with a
precision of losing 1 day/2500 years, is a
power/control neurosis of time-management in
repression of the natural dynamics of cyclic
time. Denouncing the impractical lunar order
with its manipulations one fell by political
passion in the other extreme of thinking of
linear time only. This was formally confirmed by
the papal rule, the new holy father and ruler of
Rome, and the works of St. A..
This repression bears the scars of psychological
trauma with the ancient beliefsystems and
abusing priests of God and His natural order. In
stead human society developed another concept of
consciousness: order against order became the
incentive of consciousness. It even became the
definition of christian reform and the new
'human' (certainly not divine) consciousness
itself. Man (of political standard-time) is a
sinner and God (of natural cyclic time) in the
heavens (socalled 'abandoning us' while we
abandoned 'Him') is the holiness. Weekorder
against year order and linear time against
cyclic time, as we see with modern clocktime
management, constituted the newest version of
the 'modern' experiment of ego. This
duality
is the mark of modernity in its full glory: any
respect of time can be called religious and
divine as the original scale-less God of Time is
not really harmed or denied with it. We are free
to worship the God of Time as we like. As the
philosophers K.
and B
pointed out: time is - philosophically-
primarily an inscrutable subjective experience.
The Psychoanalyst S.F.
added to that notion that with this modern
concept of christian suffering in subjectivist
collective chaos we have become not the
reasonable dualist - as some scientists might
have been able to accomplish - but instead
became a mankind ruled by uncontrollable
passions rising from the 'unconscious' living
the illusion of a holy time order - of clocks
loyal to the sun and calendars loyal to natural
cycles - that in fact long time ceased to exist.
Although the physicist E.
declared that an absolute of clock-time is an
illusion because time is in fact observer
dependent, still the dualism of this time is not
really respected in society (apart from
S.'
new dualistic concept of Internet
time,
C.'s
digital analogue watches, and the
clock
design
at this site). The dualism complicates the
time-respect beyond common interest. Only a
small elite of the scientific community knows of
the temporal
determination that should be respected
dually.
Only a rare social scientist is aware of the
complicated psychology of man relating to time
(see Tp=Tt-Tk,
the M.-equation).
For the normal civil population it is in fact
again the same type of secret as it was during
the old roman days of the lunar calendar. Who
knows of the 15-day
vedic 'paksah'
and
the according roman "ides of march"?
After
S. it
was forgotten that once we contained the state
and the religion, the glory and the culture, on
the harmonizing of linear timing with cyclic
timing of lunar Nones and Ides. With the
neurosis (if not the schizoid) of absolute time
units and absolute (dead) regularity - as can be
observed in the millennial quest for the
stabilization of the calendar with the solar
year and the effort for reliable clockwork - we
have lost the integrity of the consciousness of
natural dynamic time and its horological
astrarium-type of non-political validity. We
have forgotten about the divine of cyclic time
that would make for the continence and virtue of
our spiritualities of the soul. We have become
an history of psychology in which an original
consciousness of dynamic natural phenomena as
was respected with lunar calendars and sundial
directed waterclocks (clepsidrae), has gradually
been replaced by a politically manipulative and
psychologically complex type of
ego-consciousness with all its characteristics
of denial, repression, projection and
insanity.
The
millennial problem
The millennial
problem of the timesystem can be found in the
difficulty of dividing a year in a logical
manner. A year essentially means one turn of 360
degrees relative to a fixation point. Therefore
a lunar year (as seen from earth) is in fact
only 29.5 days long: a so-called lunation. This
is the sober logical truth that has never been
properly recognized. The illogic was to respect
one system with the other. Discrete variables
were treated as if dependent. The concept of a
fixed seven days week as practiced with the
gregorian calendar (that took centuries of
christian reform to get introduced after the
middle ages), does not belong to the concept of
the solar year (nor to its original lunar 'year'
anymore either alas). In fact one is worshiping
two Gods of time separately: the natural sun and
the (in fact forgotten) denaturalized moon. And
that being in favor of nature and opposing it at
the same time we shouldn't do. Two such contrary
beliefs on one pillow make a weeping willow: not
knowing to be natural or not defines the
neurosis, the cramp of modern ego. Politically
we have understood that the calendar should be
solar, because normal people, citizens and
farmers, simply live to the sun with its
seasons. To align it with the seasons is more
important than the meaning of a full moon or the
rising of the dog-star when the Nile used to
flood. Dates align with the stars, but that
doesn't make the solar calendar a sidereal
cosmic one. The precession of the equinox, the
shift of the celestial sky, relative to the
seasons, makes the alignment of dates with stars
a temporary one; it lasts for a human lifetime
of seventy years. After seventy years the
sidereal sky has shifted for one day. After one
lifetime of a ruler of time-management, the
whole system needs to be reformed for another
personalistic fix of power. For this reason
astrology in fact must be renamed into
planetology, as that science simply tries to
tell the time of the planetary clock with nine
hands. The astrological zodiac, the factual
scale of that planetary clock, is fixed on the
seasons, the solar year, and not on the stars,
the celestial sky. We have two zodiacs: a
sidereal one and a solar one. Who knows this?
Thus a solar year is not a year to the moon and
not a year to the stars. Nor is a calendar week
a quarter of a lunar month, it is purely
political in fact. It is common knowledge to
astronomers, but mankind wrestled ever since the
first signs of civilization with it.
If for the
year 2000 we want to say: 'we have learned and
we know', we must be sure first of all what kind
of logic we think is suitable for what purpose.
One may respect the moon for managing a harbor
with its tidal changes, or for having a full
moon party or a bout of religious fasting or
study. But that makes thus for another calendar,
another religion and another conditioning. It
cannot directly dominate as a world order, as
the majority of farmers and citizens calculating
for their summer holidays, do not live by it.
Nor does the astronomical respect for the shift
of the celestial sky to the seasons make much of
a calendar on its own. It in fact, apart from
classical astrology, never has made any
significant culture. We as yet did not celebrate
the
galactic new
year
of the true celestial cosmic zodiac, the reality
that, according to the Bhagavata
Purâna
is regarded as the Lord Himself, because then He
is visible. We better concentrate on one system
for the new world order. The rest may be of
subcultural interest. The one system we must be
rational and logical about is the present world
calendar system of respecting the sun and its
seasons. The present gregorian/julian illogic
thereto is an historical roman attachment that
is in the way of a multicultural respect of
time. The psychology is one of forgetfulness
about the propriety of some of the old practices
of respecting cyclic time and the inexperience
with also logically proper schedules never
tried, but already existing since the first
accounts of the old vedic culture.
A
New
Calendar for a New Era
The
proposition of this article is to adopt a second
calendar to the gregorian one. The gregorian
calendar with its chaos of political and
horological management is recognized as
supportive to a form of ego-consciousness that
only really makes sense if it is known what it
actually relates to. The more sophisticated
person in need of control over this historical
monster of pragmatical political populism, is
obliged to a dualistic vision. From the
scientific integrity we are talking of we are
obliged to adhere to the dualism of a second
scheme of timemanagement that does restore the
original logic of the foundation of our
civilization. Therefore we have the year 2753
A.U.C. in A.D. 2000, therefore we
have
a timetable for setting a reference
clock
to the sun as we always did with the old
clepsydra, therefore we have a
calendar based on scriptural
evidence
that does align with the original lunar calendar
order of old Rome and with modern scientific
logic with its 15th day Ides and 30-day month on
a solar year (the 'Cakra'-calendar). We should
count with this for our selves in the first
place as a secret society with an integer
concept of time that does not deny the reality
of cyclic time any longer nor the history of
psychology about it, nor the electromagnetic
truth of a reliable scale to count and measure
with it. Full fledged the system this duality
makes is a complication only fit for the
intelligent and civilized person. Like in the
old roman days it can not be politically
imposed, until another F.
snatches it for the democracy of the 'plebs' to
know about the legal and illegal days of
containing to the power of the natural and
conditioning local culture. The new chaos is in
need of a new order, and here it is.
This new
system of time-respect makes for a new religion.
That is admitted. But it is the most simple
ritual that is possible: one only needs a
ballpoint, a normal clock, a normal gregorian
calendar and a
table.
The social definition is that of free
association: one may go to church or to the
cinema with it as it is not heretic or
repressive. This religion tells you to correct
your reference clock to the position of the sun.
This religion tells you not so much to refrain
from fruïtive actions on christian sundays
and jewish saturdays, but to do so on lunar
signaldays and solar 'cakra'- days/dates
throughout the commercial christian week. At
those days one does revive the original
(roman/vedic) wisdom by studying and socializing
for the sake of the local principle of personal
presence in free association (in fact the
oneness of contemplation and socialization of
the old culture are separated and put into a
dynamic relationship: a
new dualism).
This religion tells you to be aware of the
danger of the new media that tempt you to
isolate yourselves in the private sphere keeping
everyone on a distance with telephones,
computers and televisions. This religion tells
you it is o.k. to work with it, but not at all
days of the week. This culture warns you against
the devastating conditioning of the stress
culture of the alienated ego-freaking
standardtime as reflected in the pragmatic of
the new media. On the signal days of this solar
calendar one should in principle refrain from
watching television and endeavoring on the
internet, or doing other fruïtive business
on a distance. On this calendar every fifteenth
day is a day of study and every two months one
adapts to the natural solar rhythm with a feast
of the season on an extra signal 'cakra'-day.
This way this 'New' but classical Order creates
a religiously properly set 36-hour part-time
worker (counting days of study as 'work') that
is not a modern stress victim-condition, but
gives a better control over the consciousness,
ones (mental) health and ones destiny. This way
the postmodern world citizen can restore his
original (also subculturally local specific)
love of knowledge (his filognosy) and the
integrity and happiness of his soul and find a
cure for all the chronic diseases and nasty
psychology of the maddening ego-time system of
trauma and denial. This way the world citizen
has the right to say " we have a shining future
ahead of us", "we are heading for a new rebirth,
a restoration, of cultural selfrespect". Then we
may count on and from the 2753- year roman
foundation A.U.C. aligning with egyptian, greek
and vedic wisdom with all its original ideals of
natural harmony, civilized cultured intelligence
and social order.
T.H.E.
Servant
References
-
Links
to hindu-sites of vedic culture