Corpus-Paul

["meta" <meta AT rraz.net>]

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