May Ushers In Historic Preservation Awareness: Fill & Download for Free

They’re rare but real.Old soul doesn’t refer to how long the soul has been incarnating. It is a reference to how much spiritual growth they have attained. Becoming an old soul means one is nearing the end of their reincarnation cycle.They will likely seem like anyone else but in general they likely don’t boast, don’t engage in criminal activities (unless it is part of their soul growth), are not money hungry, are not into power, are unlikely to engage in dangerous sports. They will not necessarily be happy or psychologically together. They will probably be idealistic and respect your boundaries.They are still working out their karma so will not necessarily be at peace with themselves or others.Here’s the system I devised.1) YOUNG-YOUNGA young or first time soul is learning how to get along on Earth and is beginning his evolution to return to an awareness of God. Having recently left the spiritual plane they are unaccustomed to experiencing limitations or consequences.A first time soul is not sophisticated about their approach to the world. They easily lose their way and become confused about right and wrong. They have almost no moral compass so might break the rules left and right. They are generally the ones who perpetrate physical acts of violence. The first-timers can become lost. The acts that hit the newspapers, especially the truly horrendous ones, are usually the work of the first-timers. Their emotions and appetites drive them more than reason. They assign great importance to their emotions. Hate, envy, and revenge are frequent sources of their downfall. Their Gods are wealth, power, and status. A moralistic God may be a nuisance.They can be very intelligent but they also lack wisdom so might make critical mistakes. Every soul comes in with unique characteristics. A tendency to be proactive may lead to impulsiveness. So potential weaknesses may include arrogance, carelessness, deviousness all of which may get the young soul in trouble in its early incarnations.Ted Bundy was such a soul and an extreme example of how wrong a young soul can go. He got caught because, intelligent as he was, he was also an innocent who didn't understand how things worked. He would kidnap girls in broad daylight and then was shocked when he was caught after trying to outrun the police in his Volkswagen. Arrested and in jail he escaped, couldn't control his dark appetites, and got caught again. He reveled in his notoriety and loved the cameras. He took over his defense making mistakes that lost a trial his lawyers might have won so ended up being executed. He was dragged to his death in a state of undignified terror. He became an older soul when he was strapped into the electric chair suddenly figuring out just doing what you want can lead to unpleasantness.The young soul Bill Cosby debacle mirrors much of the Ted Bundy fiasco and he exhibits the same cluelessness.Most first timers don't make such terrible mistakes but they are vulnerable. Some may end up homeless or otherwise have trouble functioning in the broader society. Others may lead lives that are harmless but kind of sad. They can exhibit an astonishing talent that is pure in it expression but for one reason or another never fulfil their potential. Fundamentalist religions with strong and strict guidelines help these souls navigate life.2) OLD-YOUNGThe old-young are more sophisticated and will usually get others to do their dirty work. Their moral compass is wobbly so they may lie, manipulate, and steal to get their way. Unlike the young-young who are often violent they are more likely to be thieves, hackers, CEOs, white collar criminals, etc. They will be attracted to authoritarian institutions with clear guidelines that can teach them right from wrong. When they commit physical violence they are often following a young-young soul. When you see an authoritarian nation you are seeing a lot of young souls.Those that aren’t so inclined will live lives as peasants or work in a hierarchal institution such as a corporation or the military. Some will achieve wealth but may get into trouble with it. They will raise their families in relative peace attending their churches. They need the moral guidance of an authoritarian church such as Catholicism. They will concern themselves with matters of morality, right and wrong, and attempt to understand why people behave the way they do.Nixon is a tragic example of how the old-young can get themselves in trouble. Idealistic and talented Nixon set out with an outstanding set of goals for his presidency that were, given how capable he was, within his grasp. Yet, in the end, his flawed moral compass led him to making serious mistakes an older soul would never make.Nixon's Vice President, Spiro Agnew, another young soul, is also an example. Neither was given to violence but both were victims of their white collar crimes.3) MIDDLEMiddle souls will have developed a moral compass and restraints on their behavior. Middle souls have moved beyond settling their conflicts with physical violence. As they advance towards old-soul their moral compass will point more assuredly towards true north. They can be very idealistic. The new middle may still lie and manipulate but will, in general, support the rules of society, for instance they might buy a tool, use it, and then return it while a young soul is more likely to steal it. The old-middle are upright with a strong moral component to their makeup. Middle souls are the managers, the supervisors, they run things. They can normally be trusted to work without immediate supervision. Warren Buffet is a middle soul. Most of our presidents are middle souls. Hillary Clinton is one. The only president old souls I have found are Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Herbert Hoover.4) OLDThe old live to serve. Wealth, power, and status no longer drive them. They have moved past physical violence and eschew emotional violence as well. They allow themselves to be guided by God. Their moral compass is unerring. They will rarely lie except to preserve someone’s feelings or to protect. If they do lie they know it was wrong. They are satisfied to serve quietly and in the background. They no longer seek the spotlight as they did as young souls. They have learned revenge is a bad idea. Their worship of God is more pure and may or may not take place within the boundaries of a religion. In many ways they are the polar opposite of young souls. Some may have wealth, power, and status and while they may be in the spotlight, they are still driven by the need to serve. They have learned to not impose their will on others. Old souls tend to be progressives in their political leanings. Bernie Sanders is an old soul.5) JESUS LEVELThis is the level Jesus was at. The younger of them are growing into what a 5 can be.God will be a constant reality for them although they may not have a name for what they feel. They will appear completely normal and may even think they are but their potential for growth is huge. I have met four people at this level. There is a famous Hollywood actor at this level. Even though he plays action heroes his compassion is well known.The number of people at this level in the US is growing rapidly. I assume to help usher in the New Earth. The last time we had a large number of people at this level here was during WWII, the greatest historical conflagration the world has faced. Jack Benny was level 5.6) BUDDHA LEVELAt this level their merging with God is nearly complete. We had a level 6 in Britain, Dame Vera Lynn, entertaining the troops during WWII.7) ?I don’t have a name for this level having only recently met someone who is at this level, a level I heretofore didn’t think existed on Earth. At first they seemed like a normal albeit especially well put together for a young person but in time . . .I am humbled in their presence.

My expertise is predominately related to the Old Testament so I will focus there. To resolve some apparent confusion in the comments, the Old Testament is the portion of the Bible that focuses on the origins of the Israelites, not on the life of Jesus. This is the New Testament. As a Jew, I have always been more interested in the Old Testament and as a logistician, the Old Testament is more interesting to me because its historicity is something of a necessary condition for the historicity of the New Testament whereas the same cannot be said vice-versa.Traditional View: Mosaic AuthorshipThe traditional religious view is that the first five books of the Old Testament (the Pentateuch) were written by Moses shortly after the Israelite Exodus out of Egypt, and was transcribed to him word-for-word by a God named YHVH. Although the text quotes Moses at length, interestingly, it never declares itself to have been written by Moses.In the Ancient Near East, authorship of texts was not generally considered important and texts written by other Semitic cultures also did not reference a writer. It appears the notion of Mosaic authorship only developed after contact between Jews and Greeks during the Hellenistic period. The authorship of the two dozen somewhat other texts that postdate Moses was always a matter of debate, but were generally credited to the prophets they describe.For close to 2,000 years, the notion of Mosaic authorship was almost uniformly accepted.Renaissance-Era Challenges to Mosaic AuthorshipAfter the invention of the printing press, literacy rates skyrocketed and people began to read the text. Questions emerged as to how Moses could have written the portions that describe his death and events that occurred thereafter. Some speculated he prophesized these events; others that a successor, likely Joshua, filled in.Another problem with Mosaic authorship was that the Pentateuch repeatedly references two presumably earlier, lost texts (see ex: oremus Bible Browser; oremus Bible Browser). In some instances, the Pentateuch cites these texts to prove the historicity of an event that it describes, which suggests that the Pentateuch must logically postdate these events and could not have been written in Moses’ lifetime. The problem with this is that the cornerstone of the Judeo-Christian belief systems was that these texts are the originals written by Moses and have remained unaltered throughout history. Liberal scholars speculated that the Pentateuch is an anthology of redacted books that were written by Moses. Conservative scholars generally avoided instructing their congregants from reading the text cover to cover so that they would not need to address the issue.Hard Evidence Casting Doubt on Mosaic AuthorshipArchaeological excavations over the past century have revealed evidence that directly questions the notion of Mosaic authorship and the origins of Israelite religion altogether.For starters, we know from an Egyptian inscription known as the Merneptah Stele that the Israelites were inhabiting a strip of land in Canaan by 1208 B.C.E., which indicates both (1) that the Exodus must predate 1208 B.C.E. and (2) that if Moses wrote the Bible, it must have been written before 1208 B.C.E.The problem with this is that (1) Canaan was still ruled by Egypt during this period and (2) the Israelites wrote in a script called Paleo-Hebrew until approximately 500 B.C.E.In relation to (1), Canaan was strategically imperative to Egypt as it stood in between Egypt and competing superpowers in the Fertile Crescent. The Canaanites and Egyptians had a vassal-suzerain relationship pursuant to which the Canaanites paid the Egyptians taxes and furnished it with laborers in exchange for Egyptian military protection from outside invasion, and hundreds of 3,000–3,500-year-old documents (known as the Armana Letters) attest to this relationship.In addition to the lack of evidence of the Canaanite extermination, one also has to wonder why the Egyptians would stand idly by while the Israelites exterminated their most important allies. In theory, the Exodus would explain this as the plagues and loss of chariots during the parting of the Sea may well have left Egypt too weak to intervene. However, there is no evidence of largescale internal strife in Egypt in the decades preceding the Merneptah Stele and the Israelites are described almost as an afterthought to other peoples in Canaan such as the populations of Ashkelon and Gezer. If the biblical Exodus is historically accurate, the Egyptians likely would have considered the Israelites more than an afterthought. Religious scholars have responded to these issues by noting that the Egyptians had a tendency to cover up unflattering events, and would argue that the dearth of evidence of an Israelite Exodus or cover-up are the result of a massive cover-up.(2) poses a more direct threat to Mosaic authorship, and one that is more difficult to rationalize. Archaeological excavations reveal that the Israelites exclusively wrote in a language called Paleo-Hebrew, which is virtually identical to the preceding Canaanite languages utilized by the people they purportedly exterminated. Further excavations have revealed that the Israelites were themselves quintessentially Canaanites who gradually and peacefully broke off to start their own culture. The Paleo-Hebrew alphabet that the Israelites wrote in is featured here:The Masoretic Hebrew text we see in the Hebrew Bible is not actually Hebrew, but is actually a fusion of Paleo-Hebrew and Imperial-Aramaic. Paleo-Hebrew is far more archaic than Biblical Hebrew and the alphabet allows for a far more limited vocabulary, which would have made it difficult to compose a text as complex as the Pentateuch. The Imperial Aramaic script is featured here:Anyone who has studied the Hebrew Bible would agree it looks much more like Imperial Aramaic than Paleo-Hebrew. Because Imperial Aramaic did not exist until about 500 B.C.E., it follows that Biblical Hebrew which is a synthesis of Imperial Aramaic and the earlier Paleo-Hebrew script could not have existed until about 500 B.C.E. Ergo, for Mosaic authorship - that is, the belief that the Hebrew Bible has remained unaltered and unchanged since Moses wrote it - to be true, we must conclude that Moses wrote the Bible in a language that nobody would be able to read for 700 years.Attempts to Resolve Linguistic IssueTalmudic sages living during the Middle Ages were aware of the discrepancy, and there’s some circumstantial evidence that some Paleo-Hebrew Jewish texts may have survived into that period (eg: the Sefer HaYasher allegedly being translated from an older form of Hebrew unknown to all but the most learned sages). In one Talmudic debate, they consider whether the Masoretic Hebrew text could be the original text written by Moses. Two schools of thought are analyzed. One is that the Hebrew Bible is a transliteration of an earlier lost text intended to be understandable by people living in a later time. The prevailing view, comically, is that Biblical Hebrew actually existed during the time of Moses, but that because the Israelites sinned, God caused the world to forget the language until the Assyrians re-invented it some 800 years later.Indeed, the idea that Moses wrote the Bible was so deeply ingrained that even the most brilliant minds forewent basic logical reasoning to avoid challenging this view. And even if we were to take the text 100% at face value historical truth, the notion Moses wrote it would defy basic logic. Never mind that the text never itself cites an author or discusses Moses in the first person. To advocate Mosaic authorship, we essentially have to say that Moses leads several million slaves into the unkept wilderness amidst a series of plagues and near death experiences that undoubtedly left them scarred, but subsequently abandons them to write a book spanning hundreds of pages for a nation of slaves who was likely almost entirely illiterate. This is very different from claiming Moses wrote the Ten Commandments, which are short basic commandments. To advocate Mosaic authorship, we must advocate that Moses additionally wrote an entire book explaining the history of the world for a population that likely couldn’t think beyond their next meal, much less about the origin of the universe.Likely Date of CompositionNow that we’ve determined that Mosaic authorship is quite unlikely (and there is scant evidence that Moses ever existed), we must answer who wrote it. To answer this, we first must determine when it was written.The first thing we know is that based on linguistic evidence and the sacredness of numbers (many names in the bible have a special meaning if reduced to the mathematical sum of their letters and the number “40” is repeatedly used as a metaphor for transformation), it likely could not have been written before 500 B.C.E. Imperial Aramaic (as Imperial Aramaic was the first Semitic language to implement mathematics into its alphabet), which is perhaps unsurprisingly the predominant language comprising Biblical Hebrew did not exist before 500 B.C.E. so there’s no way the biblical writer(s) could have created their own language based on it until after it existed.As another writer mentioned, the Septuagint, a Koine Greek translation of the Pentateuch was written in approximately 280 B.C.E. Ptolemaic Egyptian sources inform us that a group of Jewish elders were ordered to translate the text. This means that the text must not only have existed before 280 B.C.E., but have already been well known to the point that there was a demand for it in multiple languages. It’s unlikely the Greeks and Egyptians would have had interest in the Pentateuch in its first century of publication.Linguistic and archaeological evidence combined with deductive logic suggests it took its final form sometime during the Fifth Century B.C.E. , which is not to say that it does not include far more ancient passages. The fact that the Pentateuch could not been have written before 500 B.C.E. does not mean that it does not incorporate texts from before this period. Some portions of the Pentateuch - the Song of the Sea that the Israelites sing as they walk through the parted sea, in particular, seem out of place in that they are written in a more archaic form of Hebrew. Further, as literacy rates were quite low, it’s plausible that the Hebrew Bible incorporates stories that had a far more ancient oral tradition but were not written down.Hard Evidence Supporting Fifth Century B.C.E. AuthorshipIn addition to being written in a language that did not exist until after 500 B.C.E., archeology supports a later date of composition. The later in the First Temple period that archaeologists go to search for evidence, the more biblical events match secular history and by the Eighth Century B.C.E., we start seeing 1:1 matches between the Books of Kings and secular history. However, the further back in Israelite history we go, the more biblical events conflict with hard evidence. This is consistent with the text being written closer to the Late First Temple period than the Exodus as the writer(s) would be expected to have a better recollection of events closer to when they lived.In light of the historical evidence of the Kingdom of Judah’s miraculously surviving the Assyrian invasion and its later destruction by the Babylonians, which are each described in the Hebrew Bible, it appears that the Hebrew Bible was probably written by people with a very good recollection of these events. In addition, some of the priestly blessings given in the Pentateuch have been found in silver scrolls dating to the mid-First Temple period, which suggests that the Pentateuch is implementing elements of authentic First Temple Israelite religion even if the stories surrounding these prayers do not match the historical record.This suggests that writing likely began in the Mid-Late First Temple period, and probably predates the Imperial Aramaic script we see today.The Hebrew Bible Was Likely Written by a Near Eastern Religious Scholar and YHVH PriestSo who wrote it? The prevailing view is the Documentary Hypothesis - that the Pentateuch incorporates older texts from at least four distinct sources - the Jahwist, the Elohist, the Deuteronomist and the Priestly source. The idea is that the Pentateuch is a union of four different schools of thought that existed in First Temple Israelite society and that the text we have today is likely the result of a redactor who harmonized four different texts.Evidence for this theory is predominately circumstantial, but some portions of the bible are written in a more archaic form of Hebrew than others, which suggests there may be a gap of several centuries between given passages. In addition, the Bible frequently will tell multiple versions of the same story (eg: the creation and flood narratives, the name by which the forefathers knew God, the location where the Ten Commandments were given, the identity of Moses’ father-in-law, etc.) This suggests that even if the events are historical, they seem to have been interpreted differently by different schools of thought within Israelite society, and the Bible appears to pay homage to these interpretations.Archaeological evidence is also consistent with the biblical writer(s) retelling more ancient stories in a way that comports to Second Temple philosophy. Descriptions of God in the Old Testament are eerily similar to descriptions of God in the Baal Cycle texts found at Ugarit (a Canaanite kingdom in circa 1300 B.C.E.) Both are described as a king of the gods and rider of clouds who overpowers and controls the sea before commanding their followers to build a temple in his honor on a mountaintop. While there are also notable differences as the Old Testament tells a much more complex and developed narrative, Israelite religion is more similar to Canaanite religion than it is to any other religion. The similarities between the Biblical God and god of the Baal Cycle are consistent with a close relationship between the populations responsible for their respective compositions.The Baal Cycle is particularly interesting in light of the fact that the Bible repeatedly directs the Israelites against worshipping Baal who seems to have competed with YHVH for dominance in Israelite religion and, archaeologically, appears to have been worshipped late into the First Temple period. In light of the fact that the Israelites appear to have been polytheistic for most of the biblical period, the disdain for these non-YHVH deities may suggest the Pentateuch was written by a priest of YHVH. Tantamount to this idea is the fact that the Bible never expressly states that these other deities do not exist, only that the Israelites must not worship them. The obsession with worshipping other gods would be odd if there was only one God as worshipping any god would constitute worship of the one God so long as the requisite rites to worshipping YHVH were followed.This in addition to the commonality of language, names, culture, and pottery strongly suggest a shared origin. Normally when one nation exterminates another, they do not adopt the exterminated nation’s culture. In addition, a closer look into Canaanite religion reveals that they were not nearly as polytheistic as one would expect and a close read of the Pentateuch reveals it’s not as monotheistic as one would expect. The Canaanites of the Late Bronze Age did not practice animism. They believed in a network of gods ruled by a chief god much like the Pentateuch refers to YHVH as the creator of the “hosts”.Furthermore, archaeological evidence reveals that even though the Israelites had temple(s) devoted to YHVH, the public still worshipped household gods largely based on their ancestors. It’s worth noting that the Canaanites believed El (the first god) and his consort Asherah fathered 70 minor gods. In the Pentateuchal narrative, Israel descends into Egypt with his 70 descendants, which may both implement the Canaanite myth and ancestor worship in a way deemed compatible with the populace’s growing monotheistic beliefs.On the other hand, other portions of the Bible are eerily similar to Egyptian religious texts from the Armana period in which a pharaoh named Akhenaten implemented a monotheistic religion based on the exclusive worship of the Aten (the deity believed to have created the sun). Descriptions of YHVH in some biblical passages are nearly identical to Egyptian descriptions of the Aten (see eg: Psalm 104 - Wikipedia). The similarities between YHVH and other gods worshipped and biblical texts and these other religion’s religious texts suggest that the Israelites may have diverse origins.Moreover, many aspects of the Pentateuchal religion are not as distinct to the Israelites as they were presumed to be. Purity rituals relating to bathing, cleanliness and circumcision were practiced by the Egyptians as early as the Third Millennium B.C.E., and abstaining from grain during the early part of spring and harvest cycles were common among Semitic nomadic pastoralists throughout the Near East dating back to the Third Millennium B.C.E. This is to say that many of these rituals likely predate any Israelite Exodus, which is not to say that the Exodus never happened but that the religion would not be dramatically different even if it did not.Taken as a whole, all of this evidence suggests that the Pentateuch was as much about harmonizing multiple extant religions as it was about advocating a new one and may have been as much about preserving old traditions as creating new ones.It, therefore, appears most likely that the Bible synchronizes surviving remnants of Canaanite religion with aspects of Egyptian and Mesopotamian religion and much more advanced theocratic thinking that took place in the 800 or so years following the composition of the Baal Cycle found at Ugarit. These advancements include the gradual absorption of a god named YHVH, and gradual expungement of idols as philosophy advanced to a point where people could accept a deity they could not reduce to a tangible image. Based on archaeological evidence, it does not appear that Israelite society evolved to such a point until the very late First Temple period and even then still believed that God physically inhabited a temple. At the same time, there are no references to Moses or any of the forefathers until the Second Temple period.This suggests that the Pentateuch was likely mostly written after the destruction of the First Temple; and once we reject the notion of Mosaic authorship, the Pentateuch appears to be most applicable to a population that lacks or was about to lack a religious temple. The original belief in all Near Eastern religions was that a nation’s deity inhabited its temple, and from the power of the Ark of the Covenant to the mercy seat to the description of light emitting from the Temple, the Pentateuch never hides that this was the Israelite belief. If the belief was God was omnipresent and infinite, there’d really be no need for any of this. Even the most brilliant scholars such as Maimonides pulled at hairs trying to justify the need for a Temple if the Israelites believed in one universal deity.It’s important to note that the Pentateuch fosters a religion contingent on neither a temple nor even a homeland. God follows his people throughout the Near East and is with them at even their darkest moments. In fact, the dimmer the prospect of a temple seems, the greater the lengths God extends to make his presence known. Although this message would resonate with any population, it would particularly resonate with a population who has just lost its temple and is placed in a foreign land. Again, before the Pentateuch, the belief had been that a god was only tied to a specific piece of land and that a god dies along with the destruction of its temple.The Pentateuch may well contain the first religion that was not contingent on anything tangible, which is what makes its applicability so universal. This seems like small change now, but would have been mind-blowing at the time. Although it’s likely that such an endeavor would have required the efforts of many people, if forced to pick one person, it seems most plausible that the prophet, Ezra wrote the Pentateuch.Ezra was largely responsible for reuniting exiled Jews and ushering in the Second Temple period. He was also closely connected to Persia, who financed the Temple and practiced a monotheistic religion, Zoroastrianism. Archaeological evidence suggests that the Israelites were far more pagan than was previously thought, and it’s plausible that the connection with Persia was a catalyst in procuring the monotheistic faith we see today. Ezra seems to be the one individual fluent in both Imperial Aramaic and Paleo-Hebrew who not only had the intellect, skill and ambition to compose the Pentateuch, but the ability to seamlessly mold a previously pagan population into staunch monotheists. He is also one of the biblical heroes who we have strong evidence existed, which makes picking him much easier.

It gives me great pleasure to have the opportunity to exchange ideas with Indian friends of Rotary Club. The organizer of the meeting asked me to deliver a "non-political" speech, and I totally agree with that. There are endless topics regarding China and India, and today the theme of my speech is "China and India: Related yet Different Civilizations". I am going to elaborate on three points. First, there are many similarities between Chinese civilization and Indian civilization. Second, Buddhism, which originated from India, has greatly enriched Chinese culture. Third, the civilizations of the two nations are quite different.Speaking about similarities between China and India, what first comes to our mind is population. Both China and India are the most populous countries in the world. Their combined population is as many as 2.3 billion, accounting for two-fifths of humanity.Coincidently, the development of ancient philosophical thinking in both China and India was thriving in the 6th century B.C. Almost at the same time, Confucius founded Confucianism in China and Siddhartha Gautama established Buddhism in India.It is again a historical coincidence that around the 3rd century B.C., after years of wars, the first united dynasty was established in China by Shihuangdi, the First Emperor of China, as was in the sub-continent, by Mauryan Emperors.China and India are great civilizations and historically both were the centers of the related civilization circles in Asia. In Northeast Asia and some Southeast Asian countries, the historical influence of Chinese culture could be easily detected. Similarly, Indian culture could be traced in many South and Southeast Asian countries, even as far as in Indonesia. Such cultural influences reveal the great contribution made by China and India to the world.In their long history, both China and India were frequently invaded by alien tribes, but despite repeated foreign cultural onslaught, the backbone of the two ancient cultures, namely Confucianism in China and Hinduism in India, vigorously sustained. The vitality and continuity of both Chinese and Indian civilizations are exceptional in the world.In modern times, both countries lagged behind the West in economic and social development and suffered tremendously from the invasion of Western powers.Coincidently, once again almost at the same time, China and India were reborn. In 1949, after the liberation war, new China was established, while in 1947, India won its independence. Afterwards, although different in political system, China and India took similar paths of planned economy and both failed to achieve their goals.Today, the similarities between China and India have become even more striking. Both countries have been pursuing policies of reform and opening-up, and both are now the fastest growing economies in the world, drawing great universal attention. Indeed, development of China and India over the next decades will have great impact on the whole world.Between China and India there lie the greatest mountain ranges of the world, insurmountable obstructions in ancient times. Inspired by Buddhism, dedicated monks of the two countries overcame all conceivable perils and hardships and succeeded in linking the two civilizations for one thousand years since the time of Christ.After its introduction in China, Buddhism was embraced and localized, becoming an integrated part of Chinese civilization. The great value of Buddhism in Chinese civilization can never be overemphasized.Before the introduction of Buddhism, Chinese civilization was isolated by geographical location, with no communication with other major civilizations. The introduction of Buddhism marks the first step of Chinese civilization's interaction with the outside world. From then on, Chinese civilization developed a new world vision and became much more broad-minded.Before Buddhism spread in China, there were indigenous Confucianism and Taoism in that land. However, Confucianism could not be regarded as a religion in its true sense, and the influence of Taoism was rather limited. The introduction of Buddhism enabled common people in China with a new religious faith and the ideas of Karma and Reincarnation enriched Chinese people's spiritual life.Buddhism ushered in a profound and pervasive revolution in Chinese culture. A series of new philosophical concepts for understanding of the universe and individual soul were brought into China by Buddhism. Today few Chinese people are aware of the fact that actually many words in our vocabulary originated from the translation of Buddhist scriptures into Chinese more than one thousand years ago.In ancient times, the Chinese had no knowledge of phonology. It was through the translation of Buddhist scriptures and under the influence of ancient Sanskrit phonology, that the Chinese phonetic notation and Chinese phonology were created. This, in turn, pushed forward the development of Lvshi, one form of Chinese poetry which has a strict tonal pattern and rhyme scheme.China's early literature was restricted to realism. It is because of Buddhism that the power of imagination of Chinese literature became invigorated. Since Tang Dynasty, from the 7th century A.D., romanticism became more popular in Chinese literature. Journey to the West, a novel well-known to every household in China, is a good example. It is about the pilgrimage of Xuanzang, a learned monk in Tang Dynasty, who travelled from China to India to study Buddhism. The most popular figure in the novel, Monkey King, is believed to be based on Hanuman, the revered figure of Indian mythology.In ancient China, the art of stone-carving was underdeveloped. The spring-up religious caves and stone sculptures in China were a direct result of the spread of Buddhist culture. Additionally, Buddhism has exerted a profound influence on Chinese painting, music and dance.Apart from that, the development of ancient printing in China is also closely related to the spread of Buddhism, which was driven by the increasing demand for Buddhist figures and scriptures.During the mutual exchanges between the two civilizations in the past, although certain Chinese technologies and inventions contributed to Indian civilization, in general, especially in spiritual terms, it was mainly China that learned from India. In one thousand years or so, India was China's teacher. Chinese people will never forget that.Today, the Chinese people's admiration of Indian culture remains undiminished as it was in the past. In the year 2000, to commemorate the 140th birth anniversary of Rabindranath Tagore,The Complete Works of Tagore was published in 24 volumes in China. As far as I know, Chinese is the language which has done the most for Tagore's publications, second only to Indian languages and English.Ladies and gentlemen, of course, cultural exchanges between ancient China and India did not benefit China alone. Because of religious thinking, ancient Indians believed that history was a cycle, repeating itself timelessly, so that they did not record the real history. On the other hand, the Chinese have a very strong sense of history and began to record history as early as three thousand years ago. Since then China has maintained a continuous chronicle of all the dynasties, which is unique in the world. In those one thousand years, Chinese monks studying in India continued with this tradition by taking down in detail what they had seen and experienced in India. Today, those monks' recordings have become the most precious documents about ancient India, without which, and without those of other foreign travelers, any serious research of the history of ancient India would have been impossible. Furthermore, thanks to relentless efforts of both Indian and Chinese monks in the past, Mahayana Buddhist scriptures are now mostly preserved in Chinese. Therefore, without referring to those Chinese sutras, it is almost impossible for any Buddhist scholar in the world to have a real comprehension of ancient Mahayana Buddhism.On the other hand, and as importantly, the dissimilarity in the thought process of the peoples of China and India implies the fundamental difference between the two civilizations. Whilst Chinese civilization mainly concerns practical life, Indian civilization emphasizes more on the spiritual world. This basic difference has resulted in a series of different features of the two countries' culture and history.You can easily find the difference, for example, in historical monuments in the two countries. In India most of the grandiose ancient structures were temples, in which priests were the masters managing the affairs between God and humanity; while in China most of the magnificent ancient structures were palaces, in which emperors and kings were the masters managing the affairs between states and their citizens.Long before Buddhism was widely accepted in China, Confucianism had been the dominant ideology. Unlike religions, Confucianism was not concerned with issues regarding relationship between man and God, but restricted to the relationship between man and man, namely, relationship between king and subjects, between rulers and ruled, between father and son, between husband and wife, between teacher and student, between friends and so on. It did not teach people how to attain spiritual liberation, but how to adjust with reality and properly deal with various kinds of relationships with other people so as to enjoy a harmonious society. However, since the 7th century A.D. i.e. Sui and Tang Dynasties, Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism became three pillars of ancient Chinese culture, forming a coexisting and complementary structure, within which each of the three influenced and integrated with each other. Some Chinese scholars consider the three played different roles in ancient China: Confucianism for the health of the state, Taoism for the health of human body, and Buddhism for the health of human spirit.In this sense, Chinese people hold quite a different attitude towards religion from that of most Indians. Many Chinese people, to whom I refer as ethnic Han people, urban intellectuals in particular, are atheists, having no religious belief at all. This is not an effect of dominant Communist ideology in the past decades, but a result of the deeper influence of Confucianism in the last 2,500 years. While all religions concern death and future life, Confucianism is focused on present life, showing no interest in post-death matters. According to classic works of Confucianism, "Confucius did not talk about strange events, supernatural power, chaos, or spiritual beings". Confucius said, "Work on what is right for the people, respect the spirits and gods but keep a distance. Such behavior can be considered wisdom". He also said, "If we do not know about life, how can we know about death?" Indeed, quite a lot of people in rural China are Buddhists, but a popular saying might characterize their religious attitude as such: "You do not pray unless you are in trouble."Like other ancient civilizations, big rivers are also the cradles of Chinese and Indian civilizations. Both Chinese and Indian people show their emotional feelings by calling the rivers "Mother Yellow River" and "Mother Ganga" respectively. However, the similarity stops here. In India, the Ganga River is considered as an incarnation of Goddess Ganga and worshipped by Hindus all over the country. Thousands of people make a pilgrimage to the sacred source of the River, millions of people take a bath in the River to purify themselves; some believe water from the River can cure all diseases, some even choose to breathe their last nearby the River to achieve Paradise. The Chinese can hardly imagine such religious enthusiasm. It may be difficult for the Chinese people to understand why Indians spend so much time, energy and money on religious activities, and in the same way, Indian people may consider atheists and those who fail to fully devote themselves to their faith as uncommon.Relevantly, Indian mythologies are so rich and developed that they have been absorbed by many other countries and are vibrant in Indian people's lives even today, especially in their festival celebrations. On the contrary, Chinese mythologies are not so developed, much less relevant to today's life and few Chinese festivals are religion related.Talking about ancient mythologies, there is an interesting fact. In Hindu mythology, most Gods have Goddesses as their wives, while in Chinese mythology, most Gods or Goddesses appear single. Maybe this reflects the higher social position women once enjoyed in the ancient Indian society.Comparatively speaking, having lacked religious assertion, Chinese culture is more ready to accept foreign influences. In the last one hundred years, Western performing arts have gained much popularity in China and China now has its own ballet troupe and many symphony orchestras of high standards. There are even performances of ballet based on modern Chinese life and traditional Chinese operas accompanied by symphonic music. This might be unimaginable in India. Although China is famous for its cuisine and Chinese food has become synonymous with Chinese culture, Chinese people like Western food, too. Twenty years ago, there was no KFC or McDonald's in China, but now their outlets are all over China, in big and small cities alike, totaling about 1,000 and 800 respectively.From a historical perspective, the relationship between State and Civilization in ancient China and India is different. More than one thousand years ago, China was "one civilization within one state", while India was "many kingdoms within one civilization". In China, the state was the main force for unification, while in India, the sense of "unity" mainly came from the widely shared religious faith and passionate cross-region pilgrimages. Such historical difference is evident now in the names of Provinces/States of the two countries. Most Chinese provinces' names are related to their geographical location. For example, the names of Shandong and Shanxi Provinces literally mean "East of the Mountain" and "West of the Mountain". We also have the names of provinces like "South of the River" and "North of the Lake", etc. Many Indian states, on the other hand, are named after the majority people and their languages of the states, like Punjab, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, etc.Ladies and Gentlemen, my speech is quite long and needs to end now. Lastly, as a Consul General of China, I would like to emphasize that, in my opinion, Chinese culture is essentially an open culture. In ancient times, it is just because of its openness that Chinese ancestors learned the cultural essentials from "the Western Heaven", a respected term used by Chinese people when referring to India in the past. Historically, such openness played a decisive role in making China in Tang Dynasty one of the most developed countries in the world then. Today, under a new context, China is open to the whole world. In exactly one month's time, World Expo 2010 will be inaugurated in Shanghai, China. This is a significant step to invite the essence of all civilizations to China, with far-reaching historical significance for China's future development. Of course, World Expo belongs to the whole world, including India. I sincerely hope Indian friends would seize this opportunity, spare some of your time, and see the whole world in a city which is not far away from you.