Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "meta" <meta AT rraz.net>
  • To: "Corpus-Paul" <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?
  • Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:31:29 -0700

John, adding to my previous message, don't you think Braham is more "the life principle" than Atman?
Perhaps the Tao would be more appropriate (godless).

Richard Godwin.
x
x
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Brand" <jbrand AT gvsd.mb.ca>
To: "Corpus-Paul" <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?


George wrote:
I fail to see how you find any connection between Maitreya and
Mashiach either as cognate words or as having the same semantic
domain. Perhaps you could enlighten me?

Hi, George. I go into more detail on the connection in the first post
that I sent to the list this morning. But I'll pull out part of that
discussion to answer your question:

There is a closer relationship between the Aramaic 'meshia' and the
Aryan Maitreya. And this is where there is overlap between Isaiah's
'anointed' and the Zoroastrian Maitreya. Maitreya means 'friendly,
loving' and is derived from maitri which is the Sanskrit form of
Mithras.

Semantics is all about 'pointing to' as a means of communicating
concepts. Maitreya points to the same concept as Mashiach: An
anointed manifestation of Atman or the life principle.

Hope this helps..

John Brand
_______________________________________________
Corpus-Paul mailing list
Corpus-Paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page