Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Final Thoughts

So, semester ended. Wowzers. I guess I saw it coming, but still always seems shocking. So much growth, development, intellectual stimulation, beer pong, motivating people, blogging, well, it all runs together.

Except for some moments. Or maybe all, if I thought hard enough. But I think I'd rather live than think. This class though, it was pretty great. Frustrating, but great. I don't know if I can forgive myself for not finishing the Bible, but I am happy to say I think I will continue reading it, so as to finish it...well...someday. In addition to that, I have some blog reading to catch up on. Don't we all wish we had hindsight? I guess no regrets though. It's funny how in most classes, friendships are made, appreciations are formed, but as a class the sense of togetherness happens just as we all have to say bye. Now, I don't want to be all sentimental, but this class, due to its personal nature, did get together at the end. I'm sad to say it will be over. And that we will all have to start awkward new classes next semester. But, that's life, and it sure is grand.

There is just so much to do, to be, to accomplish, to love, to sing, to laugh, to hate. I want to be great, I believe we are all great, but why can't we admit it? Random thoughts. I wish I was dedicated enough to write them all down. And someday, bit by bit, I will be--just as all of you will be.

I don't even know who I'm writing to anymore. I guess...thanks class, thanks Dr. Sexson, thanks fall 09. It's been good. No better than any other, but still damn good.

Final Paper

(In)herent Truth: The Path of the Devotee

At some point in time, as individuals and as a society, one comes to the depressing realization that life is fraught with nothing but repetition, futility, death, decay and suffering. Buddha would come to recognize this as the first noble truth: all is suffering. The biblical tradition would similarly describe this as hebel, “a metaphorical kernel of fog, mist or vapor… (it) acquires a derived sense of emptiness” (Frye, 123). This is translated as ‘vanity,’ and expressed most clearly in Ecclesiastes 1.14 as “I saw all the deeds that are done under the sun; and see, all is vanity and a chasing after wind.” This represents one of the most obvious and accessible examples of skeptical wisdom in the Bible. The book shifts its tone from history, ritual and worship to a dark questioning, a questioning of the very meaning of existence. This questioning of meaning, of inherent truth, is present inside all humans, and serves as a jumping point as to how we might live our lives. Some choose to ignore questions in favor of doctrine, others look inside themselves for the answer, some choose to find no answer, and still others turn to devotion to answer the question. The path of the devotee is but one way to realize the non-inherent beauty of life, and is at times one of the most overlooked.

The redactor of Ecclesiastes who added to the end of the otherwise skeptical book, “Fear God and keep his commandments, for that is the whole duty of everyone” (Ecc 12:13), would choose the path of ritual, law and habit. He gives the question of suffering no more thought than a cursory glance, afraid of what he might find, and returns instead to the known path of worship. A second reaction to the questions raised in Ecclesiastes is an overt renunciation of all things holy and inherent. As a nihilist, one has asked the questions, and decided them to be too hard to answer. Thus one concludes there must be no answer. He is the one who, in the midst of wavering between faith and despair, was caught on the side of gloom.

Another option is the path of devotion. Devotees give utter submission to their god, but not in the sense of subservience. Instead, the worshipper comes to love the god, as the god loves her. In the Hindi tradition, this is exemplified in the deity Gopala-Krsna, an avatar of Vsnu. He lives in Vrndavana, a fanciful mountain village, frolicking with the gopi maidens and playing his flute. He turns the traditional roles of deity and devotee on their head, asking his worshippers to approach him as a lover, rather than a servant. His worshippers praise him as a god, as a lover, and as an answer.

“Into my vile body of flesh, you came, as though it were a temple of gold, and soothed me wholly and saved me, O lord of Grace, O Gem Most pure. Sorrow and birth and death and illusion you took from me, and set me free. O bliss! O Light! I have taken refuge in you, and never can I be parted from you.” (Kinsley, 59)

Krsna offers escape from societal norms and dharma, while providing a life filled with fervent love and fierce admiration. He inspires his followers, in his fierce loving and childlike nature, to understand the world in a more innocent manner. His devotees shed doubts and fears of death and life, finding joy in simplicity.

In the Christian tradition, this devotion is placed upon Jesus Christ. He is a reaction against the strict Old Testament laws and wrathful Lord. He serves as a contrast to the Nihilists, who so easily lose hope. The devotional figure in any tradition offers himself as the reason for living, and this is popularly taken in two contexts.

The first is the traditional reading of the bible, an idea of inherent love and reason. In this interpretation, Jesus is quite literally the son of God, sent to earth to die for our sins and show us a better way to live. He offers a break from the ritual sacrifice and offerings to the lord, saying “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. Go and learn what this means, I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matthew 9:12). He unabashedly reproached priests who prescribed ritual over virtue, and came to be loved for it.

Jesus preached loving thy neighbor as thyself, but he further represented the price one must pay for sin. He recognizes that sin is not hard to commit, nor is it objective. Yet, Jesus believed there are some things one must come to understand, and this can be regarded as metanoia, a “change of outlook, or spiritual metamorphosis, an enlarged vision of the dimensions of human life” (Frye, 130). Translated in the bible as “repentance,” metanoia represents the ultimate broadening of horizons and recognition that there is a kingdom of heaven, and a way of attaining it. Traditional readers understand this to be the world that will be revealed at the end of times, after the apocalypse. In Frye’s analysis, attaining the kingdom of heaven does not rely on an apocalypse in the physical sense, but rather in a mental state.

To achieve mental apocalypse, one reads the Bible something short of literally. It no longer matters whether Jesus was or was not the son of God, or whether or not there is a god. There may be no inherent purpose or love, but it is enough that we do love. This resembles nihilism at first glance, but where nihilism falls short, devotional traditions provide an ultimate reason, one hinted at by Frye when describing the first, metaphorical phase of language. “All words in this phase are concrete…this shows how intensely physical such conceptions as soul, mind, time, courage, emotion or thought are” (Frye, 7). What Frye is alluding to is the telling power words and ideas have on the psyche, and beyond that, the real world. This idea is, ironically, hard to express. It requires a return to thinking of metaphors as reality, as simultaneously existing paradoxes that do not truly conflict. Although a fruit tree and Jesus are two physically distinguishable and separate objects, because the Bible proclaims them to be the same in some deeper sense, they are. The impact of words is not measured in their validity, but rather in their power. Even if Jesus was not the son of God, he is a son of a god, and further than that, the impact of his story is powerful whether or not it is credible. In the absence of proof, we have faith. In the absence of faith, we can still have meaning.

A second result of the metaphorical devotion to Jesus is the shift from an imminent and upcoming apocalypse to an every-day realization, or, realized eschatology. This is the theory that the world has already come to an end, and continues to do so every day. It is only us who are not aware of this fact. It alludes to the idea of anamnesis, of “recollection, the recognizing of the new as something identifiable with the old” (Frye, 81). In and of itself, there is no revolutionary thought process in deciding that what has happened before will happen again and continue to happen in the future. In fact, this type of thinking easily loses sight of devotion and turns again to the question. An ingredient is still missing, and this is the idea of the proclamational figure who declares “Behold, I make all things new” (Rev 21:5).

A declaration of this sort is not simply predicting an end to the world as we know it. Instead, one has experienced anamnesis; they know what it is to live a life of repetition. Jacob in Isaac Bashevis Singer’s novel The Slave has come to understand this truth: “Everything remained the same: the ancient love, the ancient grief. Perhaps four thousand years would again pass; somewhere, at another river, another Jacob would walk mourning another Rachel” (Singer, 279). Further, the devotional figure (Jesus, God, Krsna) understands and relates the idea that “the mere attempt to repeat a past experience will only lead to disillusionment, but there is another kind of repetition” (Frye, 82). This biblical repetition serves as the unveiling, the apocalypse. There is no fire from heaven nor otherworldly beasts required. All that is needed is the recognition that this world, even if not inherently meaningful, has meaning in its smallest bits, in its simplest joys. This is the disappearance of the ego, encouraged by a divine muse. Through both his teachings and his passion for life, Jesus became the muse.

Thus the promise to make all things new contains three important conditions: first, one must understand the idea of anamnesis, of recognizing the new as old. Second, one will seek an inspiring devotional figure with which to reconcile the idea of repetitious behavior and ultimate truth. Third, one realizes this repetition is not mundane nor cause for suffering. Devoting oneself to Jesus or Krsna is only one way to recognize this truth.

We choose many different ways to deal with the question of why, the question of why me, the question of why anything. Some turn to ritual and habit to drown out the humdrum, others revert to nihilistic tendencies that obscure any meaning at all. Some look inside themselves rather than out to find meaning. In the devotional traditions, man is given a good, inherent or not, that he may come to love. This figure provides both and inspiration and an outside source of strength to draw upon and love. In this loving, the apocalypse will be realized. Depending upon interpretation, this unveiling will come in the future, it will come hard and fast and physical, and it will make up for all that has been done wrong. In another tradition, the apocalypse is synonymous with the disappearance of the ego, and comes every day.

Conservapedia

So, I was sitting in my living room checking email while my roommate was watching The Colbert Report. Someone came on as a guest, and apparently there is this new website, like wikipedia, called "Conservapedia."

Pretty freaking awesome, right?

That's what I thought. At first I had to laugh at the site- it is such a blatantly one-sided piece of work that it's hard to take it seriously. But...then...I realized: people do, and will, take it seriously. They will live their lives by the definition of Obama as defined on conservapedia, never trying to internalize their thoughts or seek another source to balance it out. Which, as my conservative roommate reminds me, is what everyone does already. Yet, there was something especially distasteful about this: it was so one sided, so obviously....wrong, that people would be hard pressed to look at anything else. To be sure, there is the liberal side of this too, although I don't know if I can think of an example as disgusting. There is one, but I can't name it at the moment.

Anyways, surfing through some articles: I highly recommend doing this, if you are looking to expand your world view and not shrink it (aka, if you are conservative and read this website only to masturbate to it, fuck you). *sorry

I happened upon a page entitled: Conservative Bible Project. This is a project designed to rewrite the Bible, taking all them nasty liberal ideas out of it. So....reverting to a pure religion. But, talking in class, what it a pure religion? It is what is included in the bible, right? Well, according to conservapedia--wrong. Our translations are horrible 7th grade reading level interpretations that completely miss the point of Christian traditions. We must retranslate, take out things that don't emphasize conservative ideals and so forth.

They have a few good points. But....the bible is so influential because of how it is written now. That is what has built its following, its popularity, its intrigue. Ripping out bits and pieces will create a religion that never existed in the first place....some ideal we wish to return to.

Overall, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. But, maybe they have a point?

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

The Slave

Reading The Slave without first reading the bible still makes for a good book, yet reading it after or concurrently with the bible creates an experience. The reader, who might have agreed stoically with Jacob’s thoughts, or cried at his path, can see the importance of the story if he has read the bible as well. The similarities go much deeper than the obvious congruent paths of biblical Jacob and slave Jacob. Even the philosophy of the book, the underlying texts and problems fit in perfectly with the message of the bible. This means that if one enjoys the philosophy of The Slave, they will probably commiserate with the meaning in the bible. (Old Testament)

Thus, The Slave has two purposes: firstly, it serves to illustrate the people of the bible, or those that follow the bible. It fills in lacuna not in the traditional sense, but because “everything remained the same: the ancient love, the ancient grief” (p 279), the trials and tribulations of Jacob’s biblical ancestors can be translated through generations to reach Jacob himself, with no significant change in human experience. This idea relates in a big way to Frye’s concept (and many others) of the type and antitype. This is not in the traditional Christian sense of the word. Instead, the idea of type and antitype represents the bible setting the stage for countless Israel people to carry out the message of the bible, not in an endless stream of boring repetition, but rather fulfilling their ancestor’s words.

Indeed, Jacob sins as his forefathers did, and puts words to the otherwise silent lips of his namesake, “He did not feel so much contrition as annoyance that he had been placed in a situation which made his sin possible” (p 79).

The second beautiful bit Singer infused in his writing—or was perhaps the purpose of his writing—was to somehow make the bible’s philosophies more accessible. Mentioned above, The Slave parallels the bible on both a shallow and a deep level, and does it while remaining a damn good read. The negative connotation many non-bible-reader place on the bible allows them to ignore the beauty of it, never picking it up, or only picking it up to scoff at its outdated ideals. Yet, as I have learned this past semester, the bible as a whole is anything but outdated, or primitive.

Frye writes of anamnesis, of remembering what we have forgotten, and metanoia, or repentance, an enlarged outlook on the dimensions of human life. In the bible, these serve as ways to understand apocalypse, and how to live unveiled, whether in this life or at the end, with fire and brimstone. In The Slave, these very same ideas are conveyed through Jacob, who again and again alludes to the unknown ways of god, and the vain ways of men. “Infinite worlds, angels, seraphim, mansions and sacred chariots surrounded man, but he did not see them because he was small and sinful and immersed in the vanities of the body” (p 61).

Jacob understands hebel, he understands god’s magnificent power, he understands men will always be trying to deny, abuse and take advantage of that power. He understands, as is accepted in the Judeo/Christian tradition, outlined by Frye, that salvation in this world cannot come through humanity alone, but must be accompanied by a god. “The record of human cruelty and folly is too hideous for anything but the sense of a corrupted will to come near to a diagnosis….Man has to fight his way out of history and not simply awaken from it” (Frye, p. 133).

Jacob assents.

“But now that Jacob observed this rabble he understood that some forms of corruption can only be cleansed by fire.” (p 57)

Sunday, November 1, 2009

Another Testament, another Dolla

I decided to skip forward into the New Testament in order to keep up with the class discussions, and I am really excited to see what it has in store. Similar to the Old Testament, I am influenced continuously by the stories in the N.T., and I am even tricked into thinking I know them. However, as I begin, I once again realize how little I know about what is written. I am struck by the beauty of the verses, but I am most concerned with the idea of reading this book as literature. Literature, by some abstract definition that I conceived in my head yesterday while reading one of the most important foundations of my Western mindset—no, not Facebook updates, but the Bible— is a reaction.

By reading the Bible as literature, then, we begin to view the stories as reactions to trends, cultures, people, environments; it becomes a living record of our past. Reading the bible in the traditional sense of the word necessarily ignores this interesting facet, as the bible is no longer a book of the people, but a book of the Lord. However, for my purposes I will forgo recognizing the authorship of the divine in favor of the words of the people.

Religion as literature. Theology as an evolutionary process, a slow series of small changes showing the progression of a people. The idea of Bible as ‘reaction literature’ is not unique to Judeo/Christian traditions. As divine as a god may be, he is subject to the irrationalities, preferences and political moods of his/her worshippers. This is apparent in the Indian traditions in a pattern very parallel to Judeo/Christian evolutions.

Let us consider, that, in the beginning, there was a creation, and then law. Rites and rituals, otherwise known as superstitions to those outside the faith, dominate early Judaism as well as Hinduism. Many early Hindu devotees worshipped nagas, or snakes, as well as various earthly gods that represented virility and natural phenomena. Early precursors to the Israel traditions were also concerned with ritual sacrifices, and much of that habit had passed on into the Torah.

“You shall take some of the first fruit of the ground, which you harvest from the land that the Lord your God is giving you…” Deut. 26.2

“On the third day: eleven bulls, two rams fourteen male lamps a year…..also one male goat for a sin offering…” Num 29.20

As we can see, a large amount of Bible books are given to the precise description of what to sacrifice, how to do it, when it must be done, and to whom the sacrifice was offered, and why.

Next came renunciation in the Hindu tradition, spawning the popularity of renouncer traditions and widespread Buddhism in Southeast Asia. The writings that went along with this movement were found mostly in the Jnana-Purana, Jnana meaning ‘knowledge.’ The idea came as a reaction to the lifestyles the worshippers had fallen into, of luxury and comfort, of satiety and ease. People no longer believed in god nor understood heaven; they simply followed habits imposed on them for generations. The renouncers wanted to reawaken the quest for salvation, through meditation and knowledge rather than by habitual practices.

The parallel in the Bible can be found in the emphasis placed on fasting and righteous suffering described in the books following the Torah. One prime example is the Book of Job. Oh, did he suffer. Yet, through Job’s suffering, and yes, even because of his incessant complaining, Job received “twice as much as he had before” (Job 42.10). The path to his salvation and intimate reconnection with god came not through obedience and mindless ritual, but through physical hardships and questioning. He now respected and cherished his Lord even more than he had before his hardships, and certainly more than his ‘frenemies’ ever had.

Still, one last reaction was to take place in the written accounts. Harsh renunciation and crude questioning of divine grace has its place, but someone in the history of both Judaism and Hinduism seemed to believe that a life lived in pain in order to appreciate salvation forsook the joy and possibility of the material world. The next step became one of pure, unadulterated love and devotion for the Lord.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWYGEM19cUk&feature=related

This process can be exemplified in the Hindu tradition by the worship of Krsna, possible avatar of Vsnu. In his two incarnations, Krsna appears first as a respected general on the battlefield, showing the face of respectful devotion, and later in his most beloved form as a young lover in an idyllic world. In both, he presents himself as a god worthy of admiration and intense devotion. He inspires in his followers not laws nor rituals, but a way of life, a passion towards a being unrivaled by any mortal love.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47YiHynliYM&feature=PlayList&p=15AA2F782EF05463&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=17

The Christian equivalent, is, of course, Jesus. Though his immediate reception was slightly less enthusiastic, he soon became a cult figure towards whom intense devotion was freely given. He preached not salvation through ritual, but liberation by action.

“Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. Go and learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” Matthew 9.12

Jesus demanded a better way of living, a life filled with love towards him and the Lord, towards all of God’s creatures. He did not demand sacrifices, other than the sacrifice to live a life pure and with devotion. Similar to Hindu traditions, emphasis was placed on devotion before anything, including family.

“’Who is my brother and who are my brothers?’ And pointing to his disciples, he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers.’” Matthew 12.48

It was through this singular devotion towards a god that one could find peace, comfort and liberation. The writers of these parables and stories, or even the historical actions of Jesus speak to the mind of the people. They were uneasy with the strict measures of fasting and rites, they saw the futility in offering to a god for salvation when they were living in poverty and corruption. A revolution of religious thinking came to their minds, and was embodied by Jesus Christ in the Christian world, or Krsna in the Hindu realm. Through devotion towards a single, beautiful, God, the people could find serenity and begin to practice what they preached.

The idea of religion as reaction is striking. It shows the human side of things, the story of the people, the story of emotions and drama, of lacuna and necessity. Corrupt, perhaps. Moody, most certainly. Yet, it remains a constant, and therefore, something entirely more relatable and ultimately more inspiring than a far off supreme being.

So that’s it for now. I think I will continue on this idea and hopefully turn it into a narrow enough final paper.