20. Pagans

The main criticism levelled against Anastasia comes down to the allegation that she is a ‘pagan’ — without even the slightest proof or examination of the ideas put forward by this taiga recluse. Though Anastasia herself clearly and distinctly called

herself a Vedruss.

Well, then, if she is a ‘pagan’, what does that imply? Japan, even today, is practically a pagan country. The Roman Empire, in its heyday, was pagan, too. Our forefathers and mothers were also pagan. But much more than that. At the time when the Egyptian state and the Roman Empire were flourishing, Vedic culture was still reigning in Russia.2

So, should we be proud of our pagan history and heritage, or be ashamed of it?

We are told that our heritage is something to be ashamed of.

The words paganism- and pagan3 have been turned into word- symbols — symbols designating something bad or terrible.

The word Christian has also become a word-symbol. But it symbolises, by contrast, spirituality, decency, enlightened thought, closeness to God.

Today we have the opportunity to observe the Christian as a type, and judge his worth by his fruits.

We can judge by our own modern way of life... What am I saying? — we are not in a position to judge anything! We simply can’t compare this type with the way of life led by our pagan forefathers and mothers, which people today are all too prone to curse, hidden as it is from our sight.

In sum, what we are told about the history of our country (as served up to us) is the following:

Our ancestors were some kind of horrible dark people, but then ‘enlighteners’ arrived, bringing with them a new ideology worked out in Israel — namely, Christianity.

The Russian Prince Vladimir adopted it and baptised the whole nation of Rus’.4

Not long ago we celebrated the millennium of this event. But what is a thousand years? A mere split-second against the backdrop of billions of years. Well, let’s think in terms of not a split-second, but a single day: That’s very important — being able to compress time. Now you will see what comes from this line of reasoning.

Let’s say you awake one fine sunny morning and see visitors at your door. They proceed to tell you that your parents are bad and horrible pagans, that you must become Christian and instead of communing with Nature, you must ask forgiveness for your sins, since your parents were such sinners that their sins have attached themselves to you.

And right off you agree with the foreigners’ statements. You follow them to their temple and kiss their hands. You ask for their blessing and try not even to think about your parents. You try to erase them from your memory, leaving behind nothing but the notion horrible pagans.

This is the picture that emerges from our figurative com-pression of time.

Over the past thousand years the ‘foreigners’ have focused our attention on a multitude of different events: they tell about who went to war with whom, what splendid buildings they constructed, who married whom among the princes or kings, who gained power and how. But by comparison with one’s attitude toward one’s parents and their culture, this has no essential significance. All these other events, disasters and woes will simply be a consequence of the fundamental act of betraying one’s parents.

“But we never betrayed our parents,” someone will argue. “Such events took place more than a thousand years ago, and those were quite different people who lived back then.”

Well, I could paraphrase it, and expand the time frame, but it wouldn’t make a scrap of difference.

Your distant (very distant) foremother was a pagan. She loved and understood Nature. She was acquainted with the Universe and knew the meaning of the rising Sun. She gave birth to you... She gave birth to you, in the far-distant past, in

a marvellous garden. And your beautiful foremother rejoiced over you, and your father was happy at your appearance.

And your forefather and foremother wanted you, so far-far distant from your present-day self, to make this marvellous Space even more marvellous — to make it so that it would come down to you in the present day, enhanced by each succeeding generation, so that you, today, would be able to live on an Earth transformed into a planet of Divine Paradise. They did this especially for you.

They were pagans, and were able to understand God’s thoughts through Nature. Your distant (very distant) mama and papa knew how to make you happy. They knew because they were pagans.

Your father died in an unequal battle with foreign mercenaries, fighting for your future.

Your mama was burnt at the stake because she refused to exchange your marvellous future for what you see around you today.

But today still came...

And today the descendants of the pagans are still on bended knee, still kissing the hands of the descendants of those who burnt their mothers and slew their fathers.

They kiss their hands and make up songs about Russia’s inconquerability They sing songs about the Russian spirit, slavishly crawling on their knees for more than a millennium now.

What kind of freedom is that? Hey, you who have been oppressed by a thousand-year yoke, intoxicated by the drug of foreign ideology, it’s time to wake up!

Whoever is able, wake up and start thinking! How could it have happened that Anastasia, a Siberian recluse, a Russian, after saying only a few words about Russian history, was immediately met with such opposition — and not just anywhere, but right here in Russia itself?!

If this country, as we believe, was not seized by ideologues from abroad, then who is behind all this opposition? It turns out that it is the Russians themselves who are opposing even the slightest mention of their past, of their parents. As though they — Russians — had quite lost their marbles.

No, not quite, and this is evident from the multitude of letters, songs and verses, the constantly increasing print-runs (already totalling millions of copies) of books containing the sayings of Anastasia.

The hearts of Russians are starting to beat in time with the hearts of their forebears — both distant and not-so-distant — who dreamt about their children’s happiness. The opposition is being provoked by mercenaries and their accomplices. What kind of mercenaries? What kind of mercenaries’ accomplices?

Can you seriously think that the transformation of the whole Russian people’s way oflife was brought about simply by the word of some Russian prince named Vladimir? Especially in view of his rather shaky hold on his princely throne. What, did he just happen to be sitting around one day and say: “Well, lads, I’ve decided you’re all going to have to forget your parents’ culture and be converted to Christianity”?

And the people enthusiastically replied: “Sure, we’re tired of our ancestors’ culture — come on, Prince, baptise us”?

Absurd? Of course it’s absurd. In actual fact, Prince Vladimir first tried to strengthen his hold on power through changing the religious views of the ancient Slavs, setting up a pantheon of pagan deities. Pagan belief, however, would not permit the hallowing of the social relations that would result. It rejected the attempted justification of social and proprietary inequality, Man’s exploitation of his fellow-Man and the divine right of kings. Hence Prince Vladimir, in order to satisfy his political ambitions, was obliged to select a foreign religion for the Russian people.

It is no secret that the choice fell upon the Byzantine variant of Christianity, precisely because it allowed for the virtual subordination of the clergy to the prince’s authority, never mind the legal question of subordination to the patriarchate at Constantinople. But we are assured that Vladimir took this step for the benefit of Rus’s enlightenment and prosperity

We are all aware that a change of ideology is almost invariably accompanied by social disasters and bloodshed. But in this case it wasn’t merely a question of a change of ideology It was a sharp sea-change in religion, culture, way of life and social order.

Compared to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 this was a revolution ‘seventy times seven’. And if it too had been followed by a bloody civil war, it would have been a civil war ‘seventy times seven’.

But in those early times there was no civil war. There was no civil war simply because pagan Russia was inhabited exclusively by pagans. We are told there was opposition, including armed opposition between pagans and Christians in Rus’. But if Rus’ was wholly pagan, then where did the Christians come from? They came from other countries, along with the mercenaries.

Prince Vladimir at the time was a long way from being the most powerful prince in the region. Of course he had his own armed garrison. But we learn from history that this garrison was far from being equal to any serious military confrontation. Additional support from the populace was always required. The basic armed forces in Ancient Rus’ were always made up of the People’s Militia.

But what kind of popular military resistance can we talk about if the people as a whole were opposed to baptism?

Foreign mercenaries, perhaps? Of course! But was the Prince’s treasury wealthy enough to hire and maintain an entire army? Of course not! But the Prince still obtained the required funds. From whom?

From the patriarchates of Rome and other christianised countries — these patriarchates had become fairly wealthy by that time.

And so it happened a thousand years ago that the half- Russian Prince Vladimir, in return for the boost to his power, allowed foreign emissaries to conduct their propaganda campaigns, along with their schemes and provocations — and in the long run to commit acts of violence against the Russian people.

Rus’ turned out to be a tougher nut to crack than the Roman Empire, and not easily given to being influenced by

propaganda. This resulted in the Prince using mercenaries to reinforce his garrison and — again, with the mercenaries’ help — to get rid of a part of the rebellious population.

My opponents may argue that this is only one version of events. No, my ideological friends, we are talking about objective historical reality It can be proved even without the phenomenal abilities of Anastasia or her knowledge of history I as a simple human being can prove it to you here and now, and that means a whole lot of other simple human beings will also be able to figure it out.

Perhaps those devotees of occult ideologies can tell me how many millions of Russian fathers and mothers they burnt alive at the stake? Name your figure — even a conservative estimate will do. Or are you going to tell me that this never happened? But it did! Your own sources mention it. Think back.

At a congress that took place in Russia back in the fifteenth century, a group of Volga elders raised the question of abolishing the death penalty for heretics. Note that this was already five centuries after the christianisation of Russia, and here are the sons of Rus’, still resisting. Not only was the death penalty not abolished, but the Volga elders faced an unenviable fate.

But if you still wish to look upon what I have said as simply my version of events, go ahead. Only let us then regard your statements as a version too, and then let’s compare both versions.

A comparison will easily show that your version is completely illogical, that it is founded merely on statements which you demand to be accepted as truth. Besides, you are unable to present a single document confirming, for example, that pagans in Rus’ offered human sacrifices.

Show people what archaeological evidence you have, go dig up the victims. You won’t find any, because there weren’t any.

Show us the pagan books outlining their world-views. Give people a chance to compare the cultures of both civilisations.

You refuse to show them? Why? Because you know very well that once people become acquainted with such texts, they will see the utter absurdity of their modern lifestyle.

And so it turns out that your Utopian version is not backed up by any proof, and so you demand that everyone simply believe and that’s it. “Believe in us, or else you’ll be labelled a godless non-believer.”

There is evidence to show that Rus’ was enslaved by deception and force. I shall not go through the whole list — a single example will suffice.

From those times right up to the present day Rus’ may be considered an enslaved country. And foreign ideology is still prevalent in the Rus’ of the present. Even today Rus’ is still paying tribute money, only in a different form — the flight of capital, the sale of mineral resources, the stranglehold of poor-quality foreign food products on our market. And today the ideological component is very closely monitored.

The mere mention of the culture of Ancient Rus’ is enough to call counter-measures into action — including the never- ending scheming and attacks on Anastasia.

You speak of freedom of speech, but why are you so afraid of her words? Why do you try to discredit your own country’s culture and not allow people to get to know it? I know why. The culture of our ancestors is marvellous, joyful and highly spiritual!

*****

In my previous volume, called The Book of Kin, I cited Anastasia’s account of a wedding rite involving two lovers. This rite still existed a scant two thousand years ago in Rus’. The publication of this book gave rise to a number of conclusions on the part of scholars and researchers. I have already mentioned that over the past while Anastasia’s sayings have been subjected to investigation by scholars in various disciplines. Some of them carry on their work openly and even try to have their findings published, while others simply send them in to the Anastasia Foundation for reference. So as not to leave them open to attack, I shall not name names, but simply convey the gist of their various reports.

*****

Anastasia’s presentation of the wedding rite prevalent in the culture of Ancient Rus’ is a unique and priceless document attesting to the high level of knowledge among the inhabitants of the time. The whole rite is based not on belief in the supernatural but on the knowledge of that which we today term ‘supernatural’.

The individual components of this rite maybe seen even today among various peoples. But in the modern interpretation these components are purely ritualistic, senseless and deficient in nature and, consequently, not up to the task of cementing the union of two people in love to the same degree of effectiveness as back when they were applied with full conscious awareness.

In today’s version of the rite, some of these components seem meaningless, grounded in a kind of superstition. At best, they fall into the category of so-called ‘esoteric’ activities. Anastasia’s description takes us from a misperception of the rite as a senseless act to an awareness of its pre-eminent rationality and indicates not only knowledge but the ultimate height of spirituality among those generations of Slavs which came before us. [...}

A comparative analysis of today’s wedding rites and the one described by Anastasia fosters the impression that today’s rites are more characteristic of an undeveloped primitive society, while those of Ancient Rus’ belong to a civilisation which is highly developed in every sense of the word. For example:

Among a number of peoples today, including Russians, there is a ritual activity of showering the newlywed couple

with cereal grains. One of the mothers or grandmothers or relatives of the newlyweds scatters cereal grains in front of the couple on their way into their home or throws it over the couple themselves as a token of happiness for the future family

This kind of activity today is associated with superstition or esoterica. There is no other rational explanation for it. What sense is there in seeds of grain simply falling on the floor, asphalt or pathway leading to the house where they will immediately get trampled on and crushed?

The ritual described by Anastasia also includes a special act involving cereal grains. But here, right off, one can associate it with several distinct and clearly thought-through rational purposes. All the wedding guests — relatives, friends and acquaintances — bring with them seeds from their best plants, and each one plants by his own hand the little seed he has brought with him in the spot designated by the newlywed couple.

In terms of material wealth, it is not simply betokened but actually achieved in practice by the special act described. In just a brief space of time — an hour or two — the newlyweds have the makings of their future orchard, drawing upon the best fruit and berry plantings in the neighbourhood, as well as a vegetable garden and a green hedge wherewith to frame their Space. {...}

No less important is a second, or psychological, aspect of this special act. Many of us know about the improvement in one’s mental state upon entering into natural surroundings. Such pleasant sensations are enhanced by contact not with someone else’s garden plantings but with your very own. The strength of spirit and level of emotions you should feel upon entering a garden where every little tree, bush and blade of grass was created as a gift for you directly by your parents, relatives and friends is something

we can only guess at, as it is doubtful that anyone living on the Earth today is able to have such a Space as this.

And by all appearances it was not just material prosperity but, more importantly, one’s inner positive emotions resulting from such a special act, that played a fundamental role therein. {...}

In current esoteric literature a lot is said about the energy of kundalini and chakras, The information presented basically focuses attention on the possibility of the existence of chakras. There is little doubt as to the existence of the energy of love or the energy of sexual attraction between men and women.

The vast majority of people have experienced the effect of this energy on themselves. However, neither the theoreticians of the past nor our modern sciences have ever touched upon the possibility that Man can actually control this energy.

The rite described by Anastasia has shown for the first time how Man can control, transform and maintain this energy {...}

In actual fact, the young lovers materialise the love which has been bestowed upon them — or which has entered into them. With the help of this energy they shape a visible and tangible Space around them. They see to it that this great energy remains with them in perpetuity.

Why was this possible for them, but not in our present reality? Let us compare the actions of two loving couples — in the past and present.

The average loving couple today spends their time either at entertainment venues or alone together on walks or at home. They often enter into sexual relations even before marriage. [...}

The basic goal of most lovers today is the official rec-ognition of their relations by a secular marriage bureau or a church. Research has shown that young couples do not adequately plan for their future life together. If a couple should try to determine their course of life together after marriage, it is a vague conjecture at best. Psychologists observe that it is the hope of each would-be newlywed that, after joining together, their life will be improved by their partner.

They all hope that the elevated, life-fulfilling state of love will carry on after marriage. But the love is fleeting. The surrounding space becomes routine — far from reminding them of their earlier feelings of being in love, it starts to become irritating through its routineness and primitiveness.

The irritation can also arise in the couple’s relationship to one another. Few suspect that something other than this irritation is at the root of the couple’s actions after marriage. Dissatisfaction actually results from an inability to make proper use of the state of love. [...}

As practice has shown, neither secular laws nor religious admonitions are capable of ensuring continuing mutual af-fection or even an attitude of mutual respect.

Now let us take a look at the actions of the young couple in the account presented by Anastasia and try to come up with a logical, scientific interpretation.

First, the declaration of love in itself is quite striking:

“With you, my beautiful goddess, I could create a Space of Love to last forever,” the young man told his intended. And if the girl’s heart responded in kind, she might answer: “My god, I am ready to help you in your grand co-creation.”

Now compare this with the declaration of love formulated by the famous poet, which comes the closest to describing the gist of modern attitudes toward the energy of love:

I love you so, what can I say more,

What else could I tell yon besides...

As we can see, the first declaration above proposes right off a distinctly formulated grand act, namely the creation of a Space of Love. In effect, it is a scientific materialisation of love. The second declaration, on the contrary, does nothing more than state “I love you” with no further action specified. It is simply that neither he nor she have any idea how and for what purpose to use their energy of love. {...} The lovers in Anastasia’s account, by mutual agreement, set about forming a Space of Love for themselves and their future generations. They go off by themselves, and may even spend the night in the shelter they have built on their chosen plot of land, but refrain from entering into sexual relations. Is this some kind of ritualistic abstention? {...} Such instances of abstention are part of many peoples’ religious beliefs. They are also found in secular ethics. Young people in love should not enter into sexual relations before their marriage is registered or, alternatively, before they are wedded in a religious ceremony However, the vast majority of young people today pay no heed to religious admonitions or public condemnation, but freely launch into pre-marital sex. Why? The most probable answer lies in the complete illogicality of both the social and religious

requirements — the lack of a plausible explanation as to what the energy of love is all about — or, more accurately, simple ignorance thereof.

The energy of love activates a whole complex of feelings in Man. It accelerates the mental processes. And this energy can be compared to an apex of inspiration which presupposes a series of grand acts to follow.

Thanks to their knowledge, as well as a highly developed culture of mutual human relations, the young couples of Ancient Rus’ quite naturally directed the energy of love and sexual attraction toward the act of creating a Space for their future life together.

*****

What two young lovers create together can hardly be sur-passed, one would imagine, with the help of scientific in-vestigation. The following statement of Anastasia’s attests to this:

The world of academe is in no position to create even the similitude of a splendid domain because, again, there is a law of the Universe which says: A single Creator inspired by love is stronger than all the sciences combined, which are deprived of love.

All the actions of the participants in the events reflected in Anastasia’s account of the wedding rite are infused by logic, rationality and the highest degree of culture and spirituality. By comparison, what a sorry spectacle is offered by our modern wedding ceremonies, with the main focus on the reception, where the guests gorge themselves on food and alcohol.

*****

In terms of their emotional richness, along with their meaningful and informative content, Anastasia’s presentations of the parables and rites of Ancient pagan (or, to use her term, Vedic) Rus’ by far surpass all the ancient tales we know of, describing our past history Even the famous Song of Igors campaign0 pales before them.

Through her narratives on Vedic Rus’ Anastasia is, in effect, revealing to us the highly spiritual culture of a civilisation of which we were hitherto unaware. She is radically transforming academic concepts as to the history not only of our country but of humanity as a whole.

Such an unexpected sea-change, not to mention the sim-plicity with which it was brought about, has thrown many leading lights of contemporary academia into confusion. And in an effort to somehow maintain the framework of the academic positions they have attained, they try to pretend that nothing has changed, that they know nothing about the information presented.

They are like ostriches hiding their heads in the sand. The information is real, it is truly priceless and sensational, and it will come to be demanded more and more by society at large.

*****

Who might that be? Under whose influence are they operating today —- these people that are calling our ancestors ‘barbaric pagans’, perverting that great word pagan to suggest something backward, or evil? What programme are they following?

And how come our historians have accepted such a definition? It couldn’t have been our historians that did that.

Maybe they’re not historians at all? If they haven’t been able to tell us up to now anything concrete about the history of our country of just one thousand years ago, but keep on insulting or tacitly allowing others to insult this period of our history, then these are not historians of Russia, but traitors or mercenaries, acting on behalf of somebody else.

And we shouldn’t be relying upon them any longer. It is vital that we ourselves, through our joint efforts, bit by bit, use analogies to restore our own past and rehabilitate both our forebears and ourselves. If we don’t...

*****

Many readers the Ringing Cedars Series have already begun to write a Book of Kin for their children.11 Some of them will certainly want, too, to express their thoughts on the history of Ancient Rus’, to tell their children about where we came from. But what can we write about our past? Are we really going to carry on with that nonsense we have been told for so long?

Maybe it’s better not to write anything about our past, just pretend it never existed. But that won’t work. If we act that way, then our children after us will keep getting served up the same story over and over again in a way that will suit somebody’s particular interests.

Someone may wonder how we, as ordinary folk — not scholarly historians — can restore a history of two or three thousand years ago. We can! Since we’ll be doing it not because we’re carrying out someone’s instructions, but according to the dictates of our hearts and minds. I shall attempt to start the ball rolling, but let us all together begin gathering whatever stories, facts and analogies we can, and putting together our own family histories.

Let us all begin thinking and reasoning about this together. As I said, a lot can be restored even just using analogy. Here’s an example. Take a look.

More than two thousand years ago the mighty Roman Empire was in its heyday, including Roman law, the Roman Senate and the Roman Emperors. The cities of the Empire were adorned with epochal edifices, and Rome already had a water supply system. There were libraries, and a flourishing of art. The Roman Empire waged quite a number of wars.

In contrast to the developed states of the pre-Christian era, there is virtually no information about the Russian state — its political structure, its territories or culture. Maybe it simply didn’t exist? Of course it existed. We know from historical sources that by the time Rus’ was baptised it already had cities and princedoms. And Prince Vladimir, who oversaw the baptism of Rus’, was by no means its first prince. The same sources tell us about his father, Prince Sviatoslav12

In other words, Rus’ existed contemporaneously with the Roman Empire. It had its cities and a multitude of wealthy settlements. Yes, wealthy, because the cities of Ancient Rus’

took shape not just as capitals of princedoms, but as trade and handicraft centres serving the many settlements in the outlying area.

Poor settlements do not give rise to cities. There would simply be no one to finance their construction and no consumer demand for what they produced.

And now let us try to determine whether pre-Christian Rus’ was a strong or a weak state? Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that it was extremely weak. Not only that, but historians claim that Rus’ was divided into petty independent princedoms which were constantly warring with each other.

But once again the question arises: if pre-Christian Rus’ was so weak, a state torn apart by internecine conflicts, why did it not fall prey to attacks by more powerful states?

As a weak state by comparison with its neighbours, not to mention the Roman Empire, the Russian state could have been easily conquered and transformed into a tribute-paying colony But here is where the enigma and the mysteries begin.

In all the annals of the Roman Empire and other states of the period there is no mention of any attack on Rus’.

We ourselves know that up to the time of the official baptism, Rus’ was a free and independent state, unconquered by any other.

So, why did no one try to conquer pagan Rus’?

Perhaps it was because it had an extensive, well-organised and well-equipped army? But no, that it did not have. Even during the time of the princes there were only small armed garrisons whose numbers were far from equalling those of the Roman legions.

We shall never understand the historical truth if we start with a false reasoning about pagan Rus’ — especially Vedic Rus’.

On the other hand, everything falls into place if we accept and understand the opposite hypothesis.

Vedic Rus’, before the time of the princes, was a highly spiritual, highly organised civilisation. It was that same ‘lost civilisation on the Ranh about which legends would be subsequently told.

I deliberately referred to Ancient Rus’ not as a state but as a civilisation, since the benchmark of statehood for that period is considered to be Egypt or Rome. These were under the control of supreme rulers, priests and an elite that had enriched itself at the expense of slaves.

The social structure of Rus’ was significantly perfected and more civilised in comparison to Egypt or Rome.

In Rus’ at that time there was absolutely no slavery Neither were there any petty princedoms warring amongst themselves. Rus’ was comprised of marvellous kin’s domains. Decisions were taken at popular assemblies known as veche. Information was circulated by ‘wise-men’.

But note how the concepts have been distorted, including the meaning of the word civilisation. Egypt, where all the people were subject to the rule of the priests and pharaohs, was known as a highly developed, ‘civilised’ state, while Rus’ at the same period was called backward, uncivilised and weak, without any kind of real statehood. That’s pretty steep! If there was no slavery, and no petty-tyrant despots, does that mean there was no state — that Rus’ was uncivilised?

Again, the same question: why then did nobody conquer Rus’?

There were, of course, attempts at conquering the Vedruss people. But those who tried it always endeavoured to erase the results of such attempts, even from their own memory

Here is what Anastasia told me about one of these attempts that took place more than two thousand years ago.

<<< Back Next >>>

Pay attention!

Main