It is copied from it!..

History is an interesting thing. One can argue, scream and prove something in it, but disputes and proves are idle words while there are facts which cannot be refuted. Church historians may stamp their feet as loud as possible but still they can't say "no" here.

Dionysus the Small, the Turki, taught the Europeans the sacraments of the new religion while another Turki, Jordan, at the same time, being in the same city of Rome, was inventing a new history of his nation from dictation representing it as wild and ignorant. Dionysus the Small translated holy books into Greek and Latin because nobody knew languages and - which is the most important thing - the texts themselves better than him in Greece as well as in Rome. Besides, he calculated the modern calendar; that one according to which it is XXI century today. That was an outstanding astronomer and mathematician of his time. Jordan was also an enlightened person, but in other things.

Two contemporaries - two histories! And both about the Turki. Isn't it interesting?

… Later Rome changed the "Apostolic Rules" written by father Dionysus the Small. And the Greeks also succeeded in it. Hence are their secular disputes and struggle: each Church, covering up the traces of the past, proved its understanding of correctness of the apostolic traditions… But can one deceive God who has given those traditions and ceremonies to people? The Europeans got it from the Turkic lips, which is witnessed even by encyclopedias.

Umai - the female origin of the earth, the patroness of the infants, mother of fertility, was also respected by the Turki together with Heavenly Tengri. She was depicted with an infant on her on her hands. The Christians disfigured her image having borrowed it; - they called her the Blessed Virgin (Mother of God).

Of course, connection of cultures and nations has always existed, every nation has the right to interpret the images borrowed from the neighbors in its own way. Hence is similarity of the ceremonies and different interpretation thereof. It is enough to remember, for instance, gonfalon and religious procession. Gonfalon means "sign of defence" in Turkic. The sense of a religious procession with gonfalons is the prayer for defence; Tengirchilik followers have it as well as Buddhists and Christians.

And the word "God"? It also came form the East. It means "clarification", "to find peace" in Turkic. Or "icon"; it turns out that is also a specific word… (* By the way, before Trull Council (691 - 695), i.e. till the end of VII century, they painted an ewe (a lamb) instead of Christ on the icons; they bowed to it. And it was the 82nd rule accepted at that Council that for the first time ordered to paint "Christ as a human being instead of an old lamb…". It turns out known icons supposed to be early Christian ones had nothing to do with Christianity? It means not Christ is painted on them?.. But who? ) But we will speak about it in detail in the next chapter.

The main symbol of the Christians - a cross (It should be mentioned that there are a lot of interpretations of appearance of a cross and its meaning. Each Church interprets it in its way. The Orthodox Christians, for example, call its vertical line the line of love to God, and the horizontal line - the line of love to man, neglecting the fact that a cross appeared in Christianity in IV century; or the fact that in Orthodoxy it is eight-pointed, i.e. it is not a crossing of two lines.) - probably deserves special attention. The Turki had an equilateral cross and it was called "adji" or "khach".

Here is the phrase dotting all "i's" and crossing all "t's"; it is by an outstanding Christian author of III century, Felix Minitsius: "As for the crosses, we don't respect them at all; we, the Christians, don't need them. You, the pagans, for whom wooden idols are sacred, you respect wooden crosses, perhaps as the parts of your deities, and your flags, banners, military badges - what are they if not the crosses, gilded and decorated? "

Are any comments necessary? And that phrase is not the only one remaining in ancient chronicles. An equilateral cross is the sign of Heavenly Tengri, which means it is also the sign of a Turki. The pagans called it "the sign of the beast" at first.

A Turki - the follower of Tengirchilik, having nobly finished a prayer, crossed himself and said: "Amen", tying himself with a cross and Tengri… Uttering "amen" he showed with a gesture and a sound that his soul belongs to the Lord, i.e. to God… It turns out the word "amen" also contains a specific sense.

But we should mention that a Christian, crossing himself, also makes the sign of the Tengirchilik cross. With the Turkic adji!.. A casual coincidence? No.

Tengirchilik followers emphasized their bondage to God by the adji sign - they used to wear equilateral crosses on their necks. The Christians borrowed that tradition. Sometimes the Kipchaks would paint a cross on their foreheads either with paint or as a tattoo. N.M. Karamzin mentions that custom but not giving any explanations. And it could also be met earlier in a Byzantine manuscript of 588: "When the autocrator asked the Turki who had black tattoos of a cross on their foreheads why had they borne that sign, the Turki answered…" that it guards them against misfortune and diseases.

The Christians also started to paint a cross (it was equilateral in all cases) on the forehead: after the Eucharist the priest paints a cross with a brush on the parishioner's forehead… We can continue with examples of borrowings, but our book is not about them. Another thing is more interesting.

A cross appeared in Christian ceremonies in IV century. In outward appearance it was absolutely the same as the Turkic one; later it was called Byzantine. And the history of the Latin cross started in V - VI centuries; at first it was a T-cross. Later, by VII century, an Orthodox cross appeared, which is a combination of a T-cross and adji.

It is not inconceivable that the sign of Tengri wasn't invented by the Turki; maybe it was borrowed by them from the Tibetan culture. The Tibetans call it "vadzhra", the symbol of the strength, a kind of diamond. "Adji" is its distorted pronunciation because in ancient Turkic language the words usually didn't start with the sound "v".

Vadzhra was the weapon of the Highest Deity - shining beams of grace dispersing form the Single Center. Hard as a diamond, pure as the sun, vadzhra protected against evil spirits which have always been afraid of light.

Hence is a Tengirchilik tradition - to gild adji, to decorate it with precious stones for they are the signs of Heavenly, Sunny nature… "A life-giving cross" are the best words for it.

The mysteries of a cross take away to the depths of thousands of years, into the heart of Indian mythology. There, in India, the famous Sun Dynasty was in power (an ancient royal family); Ikshvaku was its founder. According to Indian legends (!) he was a Turki. His grandfather had the name Adja… It seems this material is enough for a new investigation.

The Christians borrowed a cross and the tradition of respecting thereof. But they did it blindly, not thinking over deep philosophical and historical sense of the cross. And their cross is a kind of a block - an instrument of death, and it is immoral to gild it and bestrew it with precious stones…

Equilateral crosses were stamped on Turkic gravestones, a great deal of which remained in the Great Steppe since IV century due to omnipotent Time. Tengirchilik adji also remained on the clothes of Orthodox priests… Here they are, obvious witnesses of the past!

Grave monuments, clothes of the clergy, church plate are surprisingly conservative. Fashion doesn't change here. And the sources of that "fashion" are in Altai… Nothing ever leaves without a trace and nothing appears from nowhere! In order to repeat that truth we could cite the historian of the Gospel who has the settlement of the Balkans by the Turki in 376 and marked their relics in astonishment as well as the clothes of the clergy… Everything is coinciding to everyone's surprise! These were the long black robes for which Turkic clergy was notable at ordinary days. Festive, solemn clothes were different.

The steppe taught the Turki a lot. It was an inclement school of survival for them, it was testing their courage and sharpness; new ideas were born there.

Maybe steppe barrows were the prototypes of the first Tengirchilik temples… Unfortunately neither of the scientists has ever seriously investigated the ceremonial part of steppe barrows. The barrows were just pillaged. However, there are several legends according to which a barrow didn't "die" together with the deceased. It remained alive: people visited it and prayed there paying tribute to the departed.

And here is an example to confirm that idea. During the excavations in Kiev under Dessiatine Church a barrow frame was found on which the brick church has been standing more than a thousand years. And that is not the only example… It seems a barrow really played a part of the temple.

In "Altai" times the whole world around people was the temple of Tengri; it was covered with the vault of Eternal Blue Sky. Thus it remained with the Khakases, Altai inhabitants, Kumandines, Tofalars who didn't leave their motherland and didn't learn to build temples. They retained their ancient ceremonies which usually take place near the sacred mountains.

A Turkic temple was called "kilisa". The name is taken from the sacred mountain Kaylasa - the abode of Gods. It seems at first Kaylasa gave the idea of a barrow to the Turki and later the idea of a temple followed, or the idea of architecture, to put it more preciously.

Turkic temples appeared during the years of the Great Nations Migration. But people prayed not inside but near them. (It is interesting, until VII - VIII centuries the Christians also didn't enter the premises but prayed near it in the street!) Walls of a kilisa were decorated the same way as the sacred mountains were decorated formerly. Here are the sources of church painting - in rock paintings!

Kilisa was inaccessible for mere mortals; only a clergy could enter it. But he didn't have the right even to breathe there: he would run outdoors to breathe in and out. It seems this custom contains an evident similarity in construction of the first temples and barrows; the latter also had an entry to the burial-vault… Of course a special research is necessary. The topic is realizable (V. E. Voitov partly stated the stages of its formation in the mentioned work.). The Turki built the temples on brick foundations which were in the form of an equilateral cross.

And after they've learnt to construct beautiful buildings they forgot about the barrows being inexpressive in their appearance. The temples copied the shapes of sacred mountains as they were directed into the sky; they started to spread desired grandeur. The bells called people for a prayer to the great Tengri with their tuneful sounds.

The altars were oriented to the East - to Altai. Later it has also become a Christian tradition.

Archeologists write about ancient Kipchak temples as follows: the "are situated in the center of barrow groups and were notable for small sizes… Broken internal outlines form the shape of a cross… The church is oriented… to the East".

Why to "the East"? Because Altai lay there… Why "in the center of barrow groups"? It seems this needs no explanations - new was close to old.

Unfortunately time has the power over wooden buildings. Only brick foundations remained from many Tengirchilik temples… How can we know anything about their architecture? It turns out we can. That architecture was borrowed by the Armenians and it was developed in Armenia; but in stone.

Who has built the first temples for the Armenians? Why were they oriented to the East? Why did they have a cross in their foundation? Answers to those questions are… on the walls of ancient Armenian temples - Turkic tamgas are there! The signs of the builders. On the walls of different temples up to twenty-three signs were counted.

Runic writings were found in Zvartnotz, Dvina, Kotavank, Dzhvari and other settlements! It seems the stones tell where to look. Everything is visible! The Armenians look at them, publish them and… don't see them - they are Turkic. And if one casts jaundice aside and takes a strict look, for instance, at the known inscription on the wall of an ancient temple in Kotavank (it is in better state as compared with others) ancient Turkic runic inscription becomes interesting not only for the Turki. When one reads it from right to left it goes like this: "Accept for community of the monk". And two tamgas of the people having made that hereditary gift are near it.

There is a similar inscription on the walls of the ancient temple in Shogkhagavank as well as on the ruins of the temple in Kaput settlement in the Northern Iran.

It turns out ancient Turkic religious architecture remained. It remained regardless of evil and injustice… And there are unexplored temples of Derbent and the whole flat Daghestan. In Tatarstan and Bashkortostan there are also amazing historic places. Or in Kazakhstan, near Aktyubinsk; a forgotten Turkic cloister is situated there; only wind remembers it. An archeologist has never trod in this place.

Nobody has ever studied archeology of those antiquities thus origin of Gothic in Europe is not known as well as its Turkic roots… It's a pity; similarity is evident even in small items.

The Turki built octahedral walls of the temples. The domes were also constructed of eight pieces. Where is it from? Form a kuren which was octahedral, and from a terem. And the kokoshnik on the building had a religious meaning having even become an element of national clothes… In a word, many interesting things are waiting for their researcher.

There are really many traces of Turkic spiritual heritage. It is possible to turn to another field of culture. Take, for example, famous church singings; they used to be the musical language of Tengirchilik some time. Very impressive and deep music.

And it is a Turkic method which was known in Altai two thousand years ago and remained until now. To tell the truth, in Russia it is called "Russian", although the Russians have become aware of those heavenly singings in the time of Kiev Russia.

And the Italians borrowed it earlier, in VI century, and they don't conceal the fact of borrowing… I'm sure many of the readers don't even know what is in question here.

In Russian those singings were called the singings of "flags" or "hooks" (pronounced as "kryuk" in Russian)… Maybe. Let us open the ancient Turkic dictionary. Both these words mean the same. In first case it is the translation of the Turkic word "flag" which means a "mark", a "sign". In second case that is the reproduction of the ancient Turkic word kerk.

Those unsatisfied with explanations may compare the graphics of the "hooks" themselves with ancient Turkic writing. All the questions should be no longer relevant after that…

Majestic spirit of Altai remained even in singing.

Two and a half thousand years ago Tibet has become the center of pilgrimages for the Turki. Everyone had a dream to see the sacred mountain Kaylasa. But nobody would take the risk to climb that mountain; they were afraid to provoke God's wrath. People lived on the bank of the sacred lake Manas and looked at Kaylasa, read prayers, held philosophical discussions.

Thus the idea of monkhood was born.

It should be mentioned here that the idea of cloisters and monkhood is not Turkic. The Turki borrowed it from the Tibetans and later they brought it to Europe. And that was the greatness of the Great Nations Migration!

The word "abbot", as well as "monastery", appeared in Europe after VI century. Benedict Nursian (480 - 543), the founder of Benedict Order, was among the first who pronounced it, but of course he didn't say something new. In his order he copied the rules according to which communities of monks lived in Tibet, Altai and the Great Steppe.

How could he know about that spiritual tradition of the East if not from the Turki? In Tengirchilik monkhood had two forms - hermits and service… Those two forms got the rights in Christianity.

It is not known who was Benedict Nursian by birth. But he grew among the Turki who have taken the side of the Romans and considered themselves the Romans.

And here are some interesting facts from the life of another innovator of monkhood, the founder of the first monastery in the West. Pakhomius the Great (? - 348) was a Egyptian, served in the army of the emperor Constantine; as we know the backbone of that army was formed of the Turki. Pakhomius wasn't a theologian, he didn't know the Greek language, but he knew Turkic well, apparently… He took the rules for his monastery from the Kipchaks; many Turkic words have been in use by Egyptian and European monks since then.

This fact was partly confirmed in the beginning of V century by one of the main theorists of monastic life in Europe - John Cassian, the Turki by nationality, native of Bulgarian chaganat. "A monk should avoid women and bishops in every possible way", - the elder teaches. Christian bishops, which is very important! It turns out Pakhomius was hiding from an Alexandrine bishop Athanasius not by accident…

Christianity was alien to the first monks; they stood aside and believed only in Tengri. But finally they were forced to step back. In 451 the Greeks and Egyptians passed the monasteries and communities of the monks to the Christian jurisdiction.

But European monks retained even the Turkic clothes!

Their clothes are worth mentioning. One would think, where are a black gown and a cap from? A gown was called caftan, it was obligatory for Tengirchilik followers during a religious rite. Over the shoulders of any Kipchak there was a bashlyk - a woolen pointed hood. Clerics also couldn't do without a hood for their religious rite took place under the sky; they had to have firm clothes in any weather.

Monks of Tengirchilik united a caftan and a bashlyk. Thus modern clothes of a monk appeared.

Ancient Kipchak culture… Books are to be written about it. The truth about the Great Steppe hasn't been told in full. The Greeks were the first who started to distort it… Nowadays many things are derived "from the Greek roots" in Christianity.

But one can easily find the Turkic traces, say, in icons' painting… What is known about Kipchak icons' painting today? Absolutely nothing! While these are the priceless masterpieces by Andrew Rublev, these are the works by tens and thousands of unknown steppe painters which are known as ancient Russian now.

And in the meantime Russian school of icons painting appeared in XVII century after the split of the Church (Of course there are other, "non-Turkic" opinions on this point. They were expressed by academician V. L. Yanin, professor V. N. Lazarev and other prominent scientists. But none of them, as though due to ignorance, has ever mentioned the religion preceding Christianity in their works. None of them has said a word about Buddhist icons and ancient traditions of icons painting in the East… Not negating the importance of the works of abovementioned authors, it remains only to regret about their narrow-mindedness in the field and evident Europocentrism tendency. ). Russian priest Habakkuk said about it as follows: "They paint the image of Emmanuil: puffy face, dark red lips, fat arms and muscles… Good old icon-painters painted the saints otherwise: face, arms and all the feelings have become thinner".

Those good old icon-painters were the Turki!

An icon played an important part in a Tengirchilik church, it was a noticeable attribute there: "open your soul", "speak the truth" - these are the translations of the word from ancient Turkic. Due to this unique ability an icon has become a part of Buddhist ceremony in I century, it has become the sacred piece of art of the East.

It is not a Christian invention at all. There were no ancient Russian icons, there were only Kipchak icons in Europe (whatever it is called!) (V. E. Voitov partly stated the stages of its formation in the mentioned work.). And it is witnesses by the documents of the Christian Church itself, aforementioned Trull Council and its famous 82nd rule. Representation of Christ's face in Christianity originates from it.

And there is no desire even to mention Greek icons (gloomy, puffy faces, sad paintings and total poverty of plot). Although… tastes differ, as far as we know.

And doesn't the term "Eden" - the Christian symbol of paradise - give food for thought? Why is Eden in the East? Why was it shown to the north from Palestine even on the ancient maps? Why is it the land of forebears? Why does the word "adam" mean "the first ancestor" in Turkic?.. Finally, why did all these "whys" appear?

For example, in medieval Europe there were the legends about a Christian country situated in remote Asia, - the country of presbyter John. Plano Carpini, William Rubruk, Marco Polo and other Europeans went in search for it when they needed allies in their struggle against Islam.

Was the presbyter John a Turki since they searched for him in Altai? It seems so. That is a real historical person, apparently; they say there are copies of Popes' letters addressed to him in Vatican… Indeed, there are many mysterious facts in Turkic history.

There are certain facts that seems to have nothing to do with the Turki… How did Christ turn to his Father? "Eloi!" - he exclaimed on his cross. But that was the Turkic name of Tengri-Khan!.. What is it - a new mystery or another ignorance of Turkic customs?

It turns out the Turki had five ways to address the Most High. The first one was Tengri; the others were: Boga (Bozhat), Ala (Alla, Eloi), Khodai (Kodai), Goz-Bodi. Each form had its shade; each of them remained until now.

"Alla Byle!" ("God be with you!") - the Kipchak riders would cry out rushing to the attack… Maybe Byzantine and Roman emperors paid their attention to it, for they willingly called the Turki into their army - they wanted to be closer to God, to be guarded by Him.

Easter cakes, colored eggs, New Year's tree, Father Frost - they are the attributes of Tengirchilik.

One would think, a Christmas tree… And it is a fir - not an oak, a cedar or a pine! Nowadays its appearance is connected with the name of Christ. But there are no firs in Palestine or in Egypt. The first Christians couldn't see a fir as well as a polar bear or a kangaroo.