Mourning Customs

In class on Thursday, we talked a bit about mourning customs in Islam. One tradition involved widows and childless mothers who wail and pull out their hair when they lose a loved one. I wanted to find out more of their customs.

http://www.seaservices.com/Muslim.htm

Here is an interesting one:

622. The dead body should be laid in the grave on its right side so that the face remains towards the Qibla.

The bodies are buried deep enough so animals cannot sniff them out, and can only be buried in graveyards.
I thought it was interesting that the bodies have to be laid a specific way. In Islam, it is always important to be facing the right direction.  Just before death, it is recommended that the dying use their final words to reflect on their devotion to Allah.

In class, we talked about the benefits of having a mourning process in other religions as well. In Judaism, the mourners are allowed one year to mourn, and at the end, celebrate. By going through a process of mourning, people can grieve easier. In our culture, there is no one right way to mourn. Sometimes we feel like bawling our eyes out, and other times we feel like our emotions aren't responding how they should.
By having a process, we can act our what were feeling and it can help us process our experiences. Through acting, we can sometimes force ourselves to believe it.

In this area, many generations were living in the same household, and as Prof. Silliman said, these people have witnessed death multiple times before witnessing their own. That was another thing that got me thinking...how many of us have the privilege of dying somewhere were comfortable. The majority of deaths occur in hospitals, nursing homes or other facilities. Other deaths occur through accidents and crime scenes.
At the time of death, we are experiencing our final moments on Earth in our current form, so why not be somewhere enjoyable?
To all the House fans, *spoiler* think back to last weeks episode about Wilson. He begged not to be taken to a hospital. He wanted the his cancer treatment to be given by House at his home. He didn't want to be surrounded by people to pity him, but wanted to die with dignity.
Dying is a part of life, and it is up to you how you handle it. Enjoy every minute you have.

RE: Grapes or Virgins? Maybe both...

This is a response to Rachel's post about a mistranslation when reading the Qu'ran. In some cases, the word is said to mean 72 virgins await to satisfy a man, and in other cases, it means 72 grapes will satisfy. Rachel asked her cousin what he thought. See more here...
http://butisthechocolatereallygone.blogspot.com/2012/04/grapesor-virgins-maybe-both.html


When this was first brought up in class, I was totally taken back! Virgins could be mistranslated for grapes...really? I did some quick research on Google, and there's actually a lot of commentary about it!
The experts are leaning more towards the translation to mean grapes, but the word is mistranslated between languages.
in Aramaic, the word "hur" means "white grape/raisin," and in Arabic, "houri" means virgin.

Whatever it is is described as being full grown and swelling, which could be referring to a woman's chest, or the fruit itself.

But, I was thinking...this was a culture who often disposed of their babies if they were female. I always believed that heaven was a place for resting souls, so if the children were disposed of after birth, they would certainly be virgins, and given time, they become the desirable women. It's all just a theory, though.

To me, the translation leads to very different things, but I can see how each would be desirable for an Islamic man.
If your cousin ever gets a chance to see the word in context and can clarify, do let me know though! I'm intrigued.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2004/08/06/2003181944

RE: Where have all the prophets gone?

This is a response to Adam's post about our culture needing a prophet, and not another false promise from the government. It's been a while since God has chosen a prophet, but I wonder if maybe there is one out there, but no one is listening...

http://adamtsblogspot.blogspot.com/

I was wondering the same thing the other day!...I feel like prophets are nothing but a part of the past. As Muhammad said, Islam is not meant for everyone, each man has his own religion. Each religion, intentional or not, was created by a prophet or a savior, and assisted the people with whatever they needed. Jesus helped the people accept members of their community and taught them to stick up for themselves. Buddha and Sri Krishna help others to see that we are all one in the same, and to always be calm and seek a higher state of being.
And here we are now, with so many problems and not so many solutions. I think the problem is that while a lot of problems are being talked about, there is less listening and helping each other. It's so easy to complain, but quite another to be selfless and do something about it. The Occupy movement is a great example of trying to change things. The people congregate and share their ideas, and listen to one another. It drew attention, and as a result there was a huge interest for a while.
I'm not sure where the prophets are, but I think it would be just as helpful if we shared our enlightened ideas with one another. We all have ideas, but they're no good in a room full of noise where no one is listening.

Responses...

Here are two responses, both dealing with the topic of Americans assuming everyone in the Middle East is Muslim. It's amazing that Islam, one of the world's most influential and popular religions can be so misinterpreted.

The first blog comment is on Adam Tobin's page. He is concerned about the education of America's youth, and Lauren and Avery being up some important points as well.
http://adamtsblogspot.blogspot.com/2012/04/western-bias.html?showComment=1335638217075#c3557154246815860861
Wow...I never thought of it like that. It is one thing to be sheltered from the truth, but something worse to be led astray from real intentions. Many of the guys from my high school joined the military for reasons similar to ideas that everyone in the Middle East are, "evil fanatics who want to bomb America until no one there is alive."
Do you think that keeping America's youth ignorant helps the economy? (may be true, but it's not right at all.)




My second blog comment appears on Sebastian's blog. He talks about one of his favorite artists, Lupe Fiaso, and how his music was inspired by Muhammad. Many of his songs are about his faith.
http://swaldron1.blogspot.com/2012/04/muhammad-walks.html#comment-form

This is pretty cool. I've heard of Lupe Fiasco, but I've never listened to his music. Like you said, it's really cool that main-stream rap artists rap about religion like this.
I wanted to learn more about the holy war, or Jihad. Many people in our Western World are unaware of what Jihad really is. Like Prof. Silliman said, the holy war is an internal struggle to surrender to Allah. He compared it to the Dhammapada and the battle on the field of Dharma. There are those who take this holy war to be a literal translation, meaning slaughtering of those who are non-Muslim, but the majority of Muslims are advocates for peace.

This may be a bit of a stretch, but the chorus from Words I Never Said, "it's so loud inside my head, with words I should have said," reminded me of Muhammad and his visions. He was scared and afraid he was being possessed by a demon, but he was brave and was able to withstand the torment. He listened to the words of the angel and became a messenger of God. There wasn't much Muhammad could do to change the terrible living conditions, but by accepting to become the prophet, he was able to spread the message of God and give the people hope.
"I think that all the silence is worse than all the violence."
Keeping quiet and doing nothing about it is worse than freely allowing the violence to continue. Muhammad tried to make a difference in any way that he could.

Worse than death...

In class on Tuesday, we talked about the importance of remembering.

This was a culture with low literacy rates, so most stories were told orally. The stories sounded repetitive, like music, to ensure they were remembered. Arabia needed ways to remember what was important to them.

Today, we have planners, calendars, reminders to help us remember dates and appointments. Many of us are literate, and can write things down. We have photos of friends from birthdays and special occasions. For our friends whom we've lost, we create collages and tell stories of the good old times.

In Arabia, they had little to no external means of remembrance. If someone died, their memory only lived as long as those remaining still remembered.  Remembering was so important, and to be forgotten was a terrible thing to be.

In Karen Armstrong's book, she notes that hell is not like the angry fires of hell in Christian beliefs. This place is full of sorrow. In this place, the fierce licks of the flames of anger are as equally painful as being forgotten.

This conversation reminded me of one of my favorite characters, Freya (of final fantasy IX). Freya is a dragoon of Burmecia searching for her loved one. When she finds him, she is heartbroken to realize he remembers nothing about her. She falls to her knees, and says "to be forgotten is worse than death." 

Imagine a world without photos to cherish. A world without a way to recall advice or words of a loved one. A place where we only have our memories. When we no longer have those, what do we have left?

RE: Koran by Heart

This is a response to Lauren Feeney's post about the Koran By Heart. She posted some photos from her trip to Egypt and all she learned about the Muslim culture.
http://feeney05.blogspot.com/2012/04/koran-by-heart.html?showComment=1335066820155#c7452019202842729039




Wow that is awesome you actually traveled to Egypt!
I remember when I learned about Islam for the first time in 8th grade, it seemed very interesting. I'm excited about this unit so I can refresh my memory. 
The thing I found most interesting was that several times a day, they had to wash their hands and feet. I remember thinking that people who live in the desert with so much sand must have trouble staying clean. But that is not true.
And that is very cool, the open sky lit area in the mosque. That reminds me of my church which holds outdoor services each summer. It's so nice to be outside and closer to nature, I wish all masses could be held outdoors. It's interesting that this is kind of a universal idea.

Meat- sacrifice or dinner?

In class on Tuesday, we talked about how animals are viewed in Islam.
Some people are upset when they hear about animal sacrifices in the name of God, or Allah.
How terrible to do to an innocent animal, right?
And then we talked about how we Americans are in no position to judge others.

Think of everything we do to animals. Think of our slaughter houses. Think of all the grocery stores with meat cases. Even better, check out this link.... (not for the queasy)
McDonalds http://www.mccruelty.com/

This organization is trying to eliminate suffering of animals in the slaughter house. It is not possible to shut down slaughter houses. Animals consume other animals, and always have, that's not going to change.

But what we can do is try to treat the animals without cruelty or abuse.
I'm not sure, due to the mass numbers of animals killed for consumption each day, if that's really possible though.

According to this blog, http://animaldeathcount.blogspot.com/
" 62 billion animals died to feed Americans in 2010.
Over a lifetime, this amounts to 16,000 animals per meat eater."


In comparison, we are in no position to judge those who sacrifice a goat every once in a while.
(Although, do note that in the Middle East, they consume skinless meat as well. I'm aware that they slaughter animals for consumption as well, but no where near the scale of America. The purpose of this post is to reiterate that we all slaughter animals for different reasons: religion, meal, animal products, fur, etc.)
My advice is to be like the Buddha and minimize the amount of suffering you are responsible for.

In the mean time, check out some Middle Eastern etiquette!
http://www.cyborlink.com/besite/mideast.htm

Re:Letting Go

This is a response to Rachel's post about letting go or thoughts, rather than suppressing or succumbing to them. Through meditation, she has been able to discover what she really wants in life.

http://butisthechocolatereallygone.blogspot.com/2012/04/letting-go.html?showComment=1334344713671#c323884883186636655


Congratulations, Rachel! =) I'm happy that through meditation, you have been able to realize where your path in life is headed.
By taking the time to focus on where we are in life, and by letting thoughts come and go as they like, we are better able to understand our jumble of thoughts from a hectic life.
It sounds like you have used the Four Nobel Truths: Understand that we all have feelings and thoughts, and we should not suppress them, but instead come to terms with your thoughts. Realize you can control them, and use meditation as your tool.

Before learning more about meditation, I thought the goal was to think of nothing. I was never able to achieve this, and gave up quickly. If someone says, "think of nothingness, and not about the day or what I have left to do," or "don't think of an elephant in the park," failure is imminent. Of course I would imagine what I wasn't supposed to...that's how our minds work. But I saw this as failure, and gave up.

After the Buddhism unit, I have learned that the end goal is to think about nothing, but in the mean time, it is encouraged to analyze your thoughts. Why are you thinking about this, and where did this idea come from? How does this thought affect me?

Although probably not near the point of enlightenment, you still appear to have taken great strides toward a more peaceful mind and healthier life.
Good luck next fall!

RE: The Monk Hakuin and the Baby

This is a response to Lauren's post about the monk who was accused of being the father of a child, and also found some adorable photos of children who spend time with the monks.
http://feeney05.blogspot.com/2012/04/monk-hakuin-and-baby.html?showComment=1334342527808#c4829516632072502601

So cute!!! ^.^
I find it interesting that young boys spend time as monks.
There is a passage, 138 in the introduction to chapters 9 and 10, the Buddha says children are exempt from karmic residue because he is still innocent and does not fully acquiesce in the action as an adult would have to (ex: hitting another child.)
I found this to be a bit contradicting to the other notion that we are born carrying all traces of karma from past lives to our current life. So wouldn't children be responsible for their karma?
Either way, I see no harm in having children spending time with monks. Teaching them how to be mature at an early age could save a lot of struggle down the road.

Religious harmony

In the beginning of the semester when we learned about Hinduism, we read a packet that mentioned Hinduism is not based on one creed- there are many factors that make up what Hinduism is. It is a collection of so many ideas based on animals or gods with six arms, etc. Hinduism is excepting of many different ideas, and that's why they call it a religious harmony- there is no one correct note, rather a combination of sounds.

The three religions we learned about thus far all have similarities within them, but bring different views to the table. 

Their differences are too numerous to list (you're much better off exploring them for yourselves if you have not done so already) so I will stick to the similarities I have found between the words of Buddha, Jesus, and Sri Krishna.

Buddha and Sri Krishna often spoke about reaching Nirvana, enlightenment, and striving to find a better place for your Self and have a focused mind.

Buddha and Jesus actually believed that a place of peace, or the Kingdom of God was not a place you go when you die, but any place where two or more people meet in "God's name." Buddha encouraged his followers to seek others on a similar path of enlightenment, and to stay away from those who could hold you back.

Both Buddha and Jesus believed the body was a temple. Jesus taught that if they destroyed the temple, he would raise it in three days. Later, his followers decided that he was actually talking about his own body. The Buddha taught that the body is just a home for the mind, and it wasn't really a part of "you." It houses the mind for some time, but all life moves on and changes, and so the mind must find a new home.

Jesus and Sri Krishna both gave encouraging words for warriors, whether on the battle field or doing what they could to not give into the Romans.Sri Krishna taught the Warrior Arjuna to be brave on the field of Dharma and to not be afraid of death.
Jesus taught his followers to be the bigger man, and refuse to fight back to your enemies, thus making them look like bullies.
I guess, in this way, Buddha taught something similar: do not get angry when someone falsely accuses you of something you did not do, but accept it. The truth and justice may or may not prevail in the end, but never cause suffering to others.

The point is, the world is full of many religions. They are different in many aspects, but they have similar intentions. It is interesting to look at them each as a way of thinking, instead of a religion, which, unfortunately, can have negative connotations.
I do not think there should be one universal religion, because there is no one right answer. This course has shown me many different sets of beliefs and ideas, and in each unit, I have found something I believe in. I think  the people of the world should be more tolerant of other beliefs. Mainly, those of my friends who say they are atheistic because there is no proof of God's existence. Whether there is or isn't, is somewhat irrelevant to my idea that you can incorporate "religious values" into your life.
I think the world would be better off if we neither repressed or fell victim to our anger or cravings. It would be better if we lived like we weren't afraid of dying, and tried to live good positive, and healthy lives. It would be better if we accepted everyone for who they are, gross skin conditions or not.

Have tolerance for each other. Embrace the religious harmony and see just as a band needs different instruments, they can all be played together and sound beautiful.

Re: The beauty inside...

This is a response to Dania's post about the Buddha encouraging others to cleanse their minds of impurities. Only those who can do this are fit to be called beautiful. She talks about how unfair it is that superficial and selfish people who are only interested in wanting nice clothes and looking good are the only ones considered beautiful.
Read more here: http://daniaguadalupe1228.blogspot.com/2012/04/beauty-inside.html?showComment=1333847640956#c1384084395136208189

If we are so concerned with always owning the right clothes or latest gadget, we will never win. There is no end to the wanting. Wearing a lot of makeup will not hide an ugly personality. As Buddha says, a pure mind is the only fit quality of a beautiful person.

Actually, maybe there is a difference between being a beautiful person and living a beautiful life. Society's depiction of glamour is typically sought after by shallow, selfish, and delusional people. These "beautiful" people are not at all what the Buddha would want to see. But maybe there is hope that these people can change their ways. They need to take small steps, and begin with cleansing their impurities from their mind instead of just what's on their face.

As you said, "Beauty shouldn't be about what you look like nor what you wear. It should be about the good positive changes we do today, and tomorrow." Be more than a pretty face, be a beautiful person all around.

-I have also posted this on my blog.

RE: Two sides of the same coin

This is a response to Brandon's post about life and death being two sides of the same coin. While playing through Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess, one of the characters was explaining that light cannot exist without shadow, because they are two sides of the same coin, which reminded me of the Buddhist idea that all life must die, and everything that dies must live. One cannot exist without the other.
http://hylianfolklorednf.blogspot.com/2012/03/life-and-death-two-sides-of-same-coin.html?showComment=1333845385856#c6597307854327342029




Last night I finished my second play through Twilight Princess (it's been a while since 2006) and following the end credits, Midna was talking to Link and Zelda about how this will be the last time they meet- light and shadow cannot mix. Zelda corrected her, saying that they were two sides of the same coin, and one cannot exist without the other.
I remembered reading this post and just thought I'd share.
It reminds us that we can't have life without death. In your post, it seems you have found a loophole- what if you never die?
As Avery said, there are no current means for attaining immortality, although it is a popular fantasy.
I cannot confirm that there is a soul which lives forever in either heaven or hell, nor can I confirm that souls exist.
I do believe that everything which begins, ends. Even someone who is immortal cannot physically last forever. They may take their own life tomorrow or be victim to some catastrophic event in 3,000 years. The end is inevitable.

What would Buddha do?

Buddhism, like Hinduism, presents a new way of thinking about the world around us. In class we talked briefly about how looking at something as a religion can be a turn off or filled with negative connotations. But if we view it as a way of thinking or understanding life, more people seem to listen. And they aren't disappointed.

After reading the first 13 chapters, I'm trying to implement some of the Buddha's ideas into my own life. The story about the Monk who was accused of being the father, and later found to be innocent (a story Alexandra shared in class) was inspiring. In good and bad times, the monk shrugged off the accusations and accepted the consequences. The Buddhist monks are taught that they should not cause suffering to living things. In other words, be level minded and be aware that you can't change what people think. You know what you did or did not do (and you also know that you do not exist...) so really, there is no harm done, and you should not cause any now.

It's also interesting to see habits people have. Something is damaged or something goes wrong, and too quickly people get angry or defensive. The Buddha teaches that we should not let ourselves give in or take the easy path by getting mad or angry. He encourages us to paddle against the current, and try to show compassion and understanding. The greatest battle to win, is not over others, but over yourself.

Today was the day before Easter, and many customers were in a rush. Some customers were buying eggs and coloring kits or flowers for their mothers-in-law. And per usual, there were the bitter customers, upset at the sales that never ring in correctly, or mad that the strawberries are always rotten. They always appear so infuriated! How nice it must be, I thought, that your biggest concern is about a coupon on toothpaste being expired. And then I realized, maybe these people do have other concerns. It is not natural to be this defensive over such a small issue, there must be an underlying problem. Think like the Buddha. What would he do?

Remain calm, find the real cause of suffering, resolve it. If they are still mad, do not hold onto grudges. If they never want to shop because they think the boy on register 2 is incompetent, there is really nothing I can do to change their mind. I can only hope that they find peace someday, and perhaps their spurts of anger will come back as karma. I'm not hoping for revenge, but justice.

In the middle

The story of Siddhartha becoming the Buddha is so interesting.  He was a prince who had never known suffering. At first, he did not want to see any more suffering, but he could not forget what he saw, and had to find more. He could no longer accept his luxurious life of royalty, but was so disturbed by suffering of man. What  kind of world is full of disease, aging and death? Why can nothing stay the same? There must be a way to get above it all or escape...

Live in the palace forever? Enjoy the company of my wife and child? Accept everything that is given to me?
No.
Living in the woods? Abandon my family and friends? Cut off my hair? Eat one grain of rice a day?
No.

Both are equidistant from the correct path. The answer is to live in the middle. Do not crave for accessories or have wants, because you will never be satisfied.Accept that life is change. Do not hide away in the woods forever, nor should you lock yourself in your castle. Travel in both worlds. If you accept the company of others, accept that they will leave. That which begins, ends, but what is important is that we live here and now. Do not dwell on the past, or worry about the long run.
Of course, we are all humans living in an era where our phones are glued to our palms or the though of no internet access makes us feel trapped in our own lives. We keep our friends close and always need to be with our lovers or families (for the most part). We are a culture of attachments.

The basic principles of Buddhism are understanding we are all connected no matter what. Be free of attachments and suffering. Do not want what you don't need. We may think we need these pieces of technology, and indeed they have become necessities in school and at work.
Professor Silliman said the teachings of Buddhism are widely popular among younger Americans, but I wonder if Buddhists are like followers Hinduism, where most undertake Synasa at the time of the typical retirement age. Should these teachings be undertaken as soon as possible, or is it okay to wait until you are ready. I know it would not be possible to sever all attachments at once, much like quitting anything cold turkey usually doesn't work. I'm just wondering if  this is something that Buddhists try to accomplish a little at a time, or wait until they are free of most obligations in their old age...

RE: Mortality Rate and attachment

This is a response to Avery Finnivan's post about Buddhism sharing the idea of eliminating attachment, which may have had something to do with low mortality rates in the Ancient world.
http://asfwr2012s.blogspot.com/2012/03/mortality-rate-and-attachment.html


Interesting correlation between attachment and mortality rates.

I completely agree, it is very commonplace for members of relationships to feel dependent on one another until they have, as Alex said, a craving for one another. All life needs balance, and one person, one hobby, (or anything for that matter) should take the spotlight. Accept all things and relationships equally, and understand that if you have them, be prepared to lose them. All life is change.

Back to your idea about mortality and attachment...
This idea Buddha shares about not having attachment would be beneficial advice for those struggling with the loss of a loved one. As you put it,
"...Eliminating attachment might indeed have been the best way to maintain a healthy psyche."

However, handling attachment and dealing with grief vary in many cultures. Mexico, for example, celebrates Dia de los Muertos, Day of the Dead. In the beginning of November, families and friends visit the graves of their loved ones and bring flowers. Alters are filled with photos and food offerings for the deceased. In this culture, I'm certain that families and friends formed strong bonds during their lives, but they have accepted that death is natural and unavoidable. I am not sure of the Mexican mortality rates over time, but I do know this tradition has been around for hundreds of years.
I just wanted to use this as an example to show how different cultures handle the loss of a loved one. The families were all very close, and I'm sure they miss their deceased, but they have found a balance of acceptance with their separation. Your theory about mortality and attachment is still interests me. Thank you for sharing.
---I have also posted this to my blog

RE: Heaven Full of Poor People

This is a response to Lauren Feeney's post about the parable of the camel entering through the eye of a needle (not a sewing needle, but a small door- a task still quite difficult)
http://feeney05.blogspot.com/

I think it could also be considered on a symbolic level. Your soul must be pure and free of any distractions in order to enter the Kingdom. 
Jesus accepted all kinds; he accepted the poor and the tax collectors, and I'm sure he would accept the higher class as well. 
We came into this world with nothing, and we will leave the same. No earthly possessions are needed in the Kingdom, and they would probably slow us down anyway.

RE: My Introduction to Buddhism

This is a response to Ryan Walter's post.
http://ryansreligions.blogspot.com/2012/03/my-introduction-to-buddhism.html?showComment=1332557368329#c8294986677940882767


I was not aware that the Beatles were influenced by Buddhism/ Hinduism/ Indian culture, but now that I think about it that does make sense.
I do agree that our culture does have very skewed view of various religions. I once heard a quote (I forgot it's origin) "We fear that which we do not understand."
I feel like with some religions,we feel afraid. Some religions are only compatible with certain cultures, because religion reflects the needs of the citizens.
By learning more about Buddhism, maybe we can learn more about what the Beatles songs were about. Sometimes, with more background information, we can come up with different/ more accurate interpretations of the lyrics. Perhaps you have a good starting place, but I agree, I can't wait to learn it all for myself.

Knowledge is not a sin

Growing up and going to catechism, I can relate to the comment Rachel made in class on Thursday about not being able to ask questions in Sunday School.

"To ask questions is to judge the validity of God," my teachers would say when anyone asked how something could be possible. They would tell us that believing in God and the miracles of Jesus wasn't about having proof it happened, because that is what faith is- "blind trust."

They reminded us of the Garden of Eden, and the tree of knowledge. If we could just behave and accept life the way God intended, then we would always be happy. I could never get over this...why would God want to keep us in the dark?

I really enjoyed Crossan's novel. It really opened my eyes to the different meanings beyond literal translations. Before this book, I had no idea that the human body could resemble the body of society. I didn't know the difference between healing an illness and curing a disease. As Silliman said, we are welcome to forget we ever learned any of this, but for me, the cat is out of the bag.

From an early age, I never felt the need to go to church, but that may have just been me being a stubborn child who wanted to play all day. "If God is everywhere, why do we need to go to church?"

"Because church is God's home and he likes it when we visit him," Mom would say.

I now know about the Kingdom of God, and how I was right, that God is everywhere. Jesus was an itinerant and believed no mortal building on Earth could compare to His fathers Kingdom. He didn't believe in rules, and broke the standard social restraints. He befriended the tax collectors and whores, and told everyone that they either follow and accept Jesus for everything he is, or not at all. He was a revolutionary man, whose ideas became the foundations of a religion, even though he wasn't trying to.
My views of Jesus are completely changed. By seeking the knowledge, I have a better understanding of who he is and it all makes more sense. Knowledge should not be considered a sin, that doesn't make sense. By knowing more and asking questions, we get closer and closer to who Jesus was and what he meant by his actions and words.
Wouldn't he want us to know the truth?

Recent comments

The following are my comments for the last 2 weeks. My apologies for not posting them here sooner...

Adam Tobin March 7
Adam's post was about what our culture believes Jesus to look like. Really cool find.
http://adamtsblogspot.blogspot.com/2012/03/image-of-messiah.html#comment-form
Wow Adam, this is great!!
I must admit, your appearance does remind me of the typical Western view of Jesus, but as you pointed out, that image may be wrong entirely. 
In my Sunday school, we were taught about the Shroud of Turin, so I always held that as proof of what Jesus looked like. The main illustration on your link is a startling contrast to our culture's idea. 
This was very eye opening, thank you for sharing!!

Martha Bruso on Feb. 25
Martha commented about her new views of the "holy family," with Jesus being a rebel and John a possible terrorist...
http://marthabruso.blogspot.com/2012/02/jesus-first-rebel-with-cause-and-john.html#comment-form
Haha, I know exactly what you're going through. It's hard to believe that Jesus, a man whom I was taught was peaceful and loving and serene was actually a revolutionary. Until Prof. Silliman mentioned it, I had no idea that Jesus and John were considered opposites.
And yes, why is it that Jesus is one of the few figures of Christianity? If he knew there was a religion and churches made in his name, he might be taken aback. My views on this man are completely changed, but you're right, we must keep an open mind.

A house is not a home, and neither is this Church

Today at my church,, the gospel was about the Temple Cleansing. This story caught my ear, because I am still curious about it ever since I read it in Crossan's book.

According to Father, Jesus was in Jerusalem to celebrate Passover by having a feast. While visiting the Temple, he was upset by what he saw. He was ashamed a place built in the name of his father was a used as a robber's den. He overturned the tables and told the ox and dove owners to leave. These creatures are not meant to be sacrifices.

"Destroy this temple!! I shall raise it up in 3 days!"

The Jews were in disbelief. Why should they destroy the Temple? What evidence is there that would make the Jews believe what Jesus says is true? It took 46 years to build, and he will raise it in 3 days?? It wasn't until later that the disciples realized that Jesus was talking about the Temple of his body.

Crossan points this out as well, but it wasn't until today in church when I realized that when Jesus says, "Destroy the Temple," he is actually telling the Jews to destroy him! " Imagine telling someone to destroy you...

Doves and ox are not good enough. Sacrifice me/my body! It will be raised in 3 days.

The people thought he was crazy. Who was this man to come in and overturn the tables? Who was he to say that these animals were not worthy of sacrifice? And he wants to die instead? Very well...

The priest then talked about the Kingdom of God, and how Jesus claimed that no building on Earth could be worthy enough to be called "The Kingdom of God;" that the Kingdom existed wherever Believers congregated. The priest said that this church, Pope John Paul the Great, was the Kingdom of God whenever mass was held. However, the Kingdom is never confined to one particular building.

Recently in my hometown, one of the churches has been reopened since it was closed 1,150 days ago.

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/02/after_three-year_vigil_st_stan.html

Back when it first happened, many Polish people in town were upset that their church was being closed. The place where they were once married, where their grandparent's funeral service was held, or where their children were baptized, closed. I think they were more upset about a  building full of family history being closed, rather than a place of worship being closed. Whatever the reason, they never let the church sit empty.
About 200 people participated in the vigil for about 3-4 years. They were upset, and they all wanted their voices heard. More often, they came across being rude or jealous. I understand they were hurt, but if they listened to the word of the scriptures, they had no need to.

What about those who are overseas fighting in war. What about the bed-ridden people? Think of anyone who  physically can't make it to their church to worship or pray. In Sunday school, we were always taught that good practicing Christians go to Mass every week. If God is all around us, then why do we need to meet in one particular place? This reading of Crossan helped to explain a lot of miscommunication for me.

The priest explained that we have churches as a safe place for all of us to meet and listen to the Gospel. True, we don't have to meet every week, but it's not likely we will have the same group dynamic and discussions otherwise. It's like going to class. Sure, we could do the reading on our own each week, but when we meet to  listen and share ideas with each other, we benefit more.

The Kingdom of God is where ever Believers meet, in God's name. It is not confined to one church, nor should it be. If a church closes, it is sad to remember all the good times once held there, but it's not the end of God's Kingdom. 

Through Whose Eyes?

In the class discussion on Tuesday, we talked a lot about the leprosy story and illness vs. disease.
To refresh us on the difference:

Illness- What patients suffer. Psychological experience and meaning of perceived disease.
       created by personal, social, and cultural reactions to disease

Disease- Physical abnormality. Can be diagnosed and treated by physicians. malfunctioning of biological.

A leper approached Jesus and asked him to "make him clean." It never says if Jesus healed the illness or cured the disease, only that "he was made clean."

Lower class peasants, who are more likely to believe in magic, may believe that Jesus is a miracle physician who can cure any disease.
Wealthier citizens, although they may disapprove Jesus touching a leper, may see that Jesus refuses to ostracise the sick man and therefore heal him of his illness.

Or a third option, perhaps there was no actual man, but the story and the infected body are a metaphor for the politic body, representing the social body with "ingoing and outgoings categorised as clean or unclean, (89)" which establishes an intense concentration boundary establishment. It is a symbolic contamination.

The story's interpretation varies on who and which class is doing the interpreting. Through which eyes do you see the story?

Turn the other cheek, a lesson from Pokemon

First all, I love analogies.
Second, I think many of the things we learn as children are the things we benefit the most from. The stories I read or cartoons I watched have given me life lessons which help me to understand the current world.
Of course we all have seen the mindless cartoons filled with explosions and Acme pranks, but the morals can still be found.

One of the most heartbreaking scenes I have ever watched in a child's movie is in Pokemon the First Movie: Mewtwo Strikes Back. At the end of the film, the clone Pokemon are forced to fight the original Pokemon.

Pokemon the First Movie: Mewtwo Strikes Back, 1998

Of course, Pokemon are meant to battle, but it is interesting in this scene that the original Pikachu isn't putting up much of a fight. This scene came back to me when we discussed the meaning behind, "turn the other cheek." As much as we want real Pikachu to fight back, he does not. He just takes hit after hit. The clone does not look tough or brave, he looks like a jerk. He is being made a fool and no one approves.
By turning the other cheek and refusing to fight back, the real Pikachu is the victor.

If we are going to explain concepts of Jesus to children, we should use relatable and relevant examples. We should not sugar coat them by saying "If someone offends you, just look away," or "If someone asks you for some help, surprise him and go the extra mile to show how much you care!" These examples miss the point of what Jesus meant.

Re: The Phantom of the Opera and God

This is a response to Caryn's post about the Phantom of the Opera and God
http://carynpine.blogspot.com/2012/03/phantom-of-opera-and-god.html?showComment=1330810779757#c1633091380976139519

Interesting similarities!

In the beginning of The Phantom of The Opera, many people are skeptical, and do not believe there is a Phantom. Skeptics think the others are just hearing voices. Soon, the future of the theater is at stake, and people do whatever the Phantom wishes just so they can stay in business. Anyone who does not follow the Phantom's orders will pay the price, much like the man who is hung from the rafters.

In the end, all that is found is his mask, and we are only left with the terrifying stories.

The phantom hid his face because of his deformities. Why do you think God hides himself?

Revolution through the filter

       Every week in Catholic Sunday school, our teachers would read a passage from our text books. The passages were interpretations of lessons in the bible, similar to the ones talked about in class today. There wouldn't be more than a few quotes to support the main issue of the story, and looking back I think that was a problem.
       Maybe its because we were children that they thought we could not think for ourselves. I knew the Bible existed, of course, but we never read straight from it until about 7th grade. I was shocked when I read about The Great Flood and the Garden of Eden. These were moments where God was absolutely pissed at the humans, and wanted the flood to wash away everything except a male and female of each worthy species, so the world could start fresh. I saw that these stories were not anything like the silly cartoons of cute pigs and giraffe's on a boat smiling. I didn't know that "God purified the earth for you" meant only the good were quarantined. I never knew the reason why those creatures were on the ship, but was told that they just were. The 7th grade classroom was full of "God loves you!" and "Jesus makes me new again!" and here I was with the fear of God in me.
       How can you love and trust someone with that much power without constantly fearing for your life? Where is there comfort in obliging to demands, and should you mess up, you could be responsible for the extinction of your species...(makes me wonder what the dinosaurs did... ; )  )
       I know God decided the situation was bad and maybe the best solution was to start again. He didn't like the way the world was headed and stopped it before it went any further. Or so I've been told.
       My point is that we can't trust one filter, we need many. We need to (if possible) look at the actual information ourselves and draw our own conclusions. When we need help, we need an unbiased expert. It is not necessary that we agree or change our believes, but we must try to understand what is really happening or why some people think a certain interpretation is correct.
The "Jesus" and "God" I was taught seems to be changing into someone else, and I just want to know the truth.

Crossan's Mission

       Results can never claim more than probability (Crossan)..."Probability is the very guide of life," (Bishop Butler) --prologue.
       There has been a lot of discussion on why further research needs to be done to learn about Jesus if we already have the bible. Isn't  it enough that we have four first hand accounts? When read consecutively, they all seem to flow well with similarities, painting a common picture. But when studied individually, there are certain details which do not match up. Was Jesus a carpenter, or was his father? Did Mary and Joseph return to Nazareth?
       It would seem there is missing information which was not included when the bible was created. The council of Nicaea was under pressure to complete a basis for Christianity for Constantine, meaning that not everything could be included. There may have been some bargaining (meaning, I'll allow the letter of John to be included if we can include this passage as well) but as Alexandra stated in class, if it made it in, it's because it couldn't be left out. 
       But what about the lost information. What is it that we don't know? Is it possible we ever will? What about the scriptures which were falsely translated? How do we know if our current beliefs are what our ancestors intended. (Hint: I don't think they are.)
       In conclusion, we should not be afraid to search for the truth. For those who strongly believe in God and Jesus, don't be afraid of searching for knowledge and the truth. For example,there is a new translation for the Roman Missal in my church at home. Many of the older folks don't like the new changes because it is different than what they were taught. Yes, it may be more accurate, they say, but the change is such a hassle. No longer can they recite from memory, but everyone reads off or a card. Instead of "Peace be with you... And also with you," we now say "Peace be with you....And with your spirit." On the surface, we seem to be saying the same thing, but sharing peace with another's spirit is more special and more specific. 
       Knowing Crossan is a Christian himself brings some comfort. He's looking into the history from an academic standpoint, rather than a theological one. Professor Matt reassures that he is not trying to "debunk religion,"rather he has devoted 30+ years to find the truth behind who Jesus is and what it means to be a Christian.
       There will always be those who don't like change, but if the change is for the better, then it should be made. 

RE: The natural self doubt

This is a response to Dania's post, The natural self doubt
http://daniaguadalupe1228.blogspot.com/


I know exactly how you feel. I have always wondered whether or not what we read today is what God intended for us to believe. There are so many interpretations, and over time, the original intentions are lost. In my church, some of our prayers and creeds have changed due to recent interpretations. Many of the older folks have recited these prayers since they were young, and now that a new translation has been found, we must all recite it. No longer do they recite with confidence, but they stumble on words as they read from pamphlets. I guess it's better that we now know a more accurate translation, but many are not happy with the change. 

In the end, I think it's better that we always keep searching for accuracy. If we just accept things and assume they're right, we're missing out. As for what Christianity is, I think we're still learning. We seem to have a solid base, but as more texts and translations are discovered, we will have more material to make our own judgement.

All you need is love....and financial stability

Back in an anthropology class I took in high school, I learned about different cultures and marriage traditions from around the world. Thursday's class reminded me of what I learned about arranged marriages. As Matt said, "93% of marriages in India are still arranged," followed by gasps of surprise from some classmates.
Parents choosing their child's date can be one thing, but choosing someone for their child to marry is another.
My initial high school student thoughts: How terrible! Why won't parents let their children choose who they want to spend the rest of their lives with!? What child would willingly go along with this arrangement??
I began to rethink how different our two cultures are. In America, we choose who we want to date and marry. Sometimes parents approve, other times we don't want to hear what our parents think.
We mostly marry because of strong attachments and feelings for each other, and it's no surprise they don't often last. Marriage is associated with a romantic proposal, a dream wedding party and a happily ever after. Few people realize that the purpose of marriage was an eternal union, for better or for worse- romance or not.

In India, parents just want what's best for their children. They pick suitable partners based on who could support their son or daughter. The best way I understood it was searching for a suitable business partner. The decision is made without attraction or infatuation in mind. Marriage is not a next step in a series of "falling in love," but a decision made for a better quality of life. Yes, they are marrying for money, but this isn't considered a shallow trait. Couples should be able to take care of each other and the family. The arranged children grow to care for each other, and should they feel attraction for each other, all the better. But a marriage often won't end just because feelings of lust have past.
Of course, in India, no one has to marry their parent's choice- if you strongly oppose the relationship, most parents will honor their child's wishes. Children do have say, but parents choose who they feel would be the best fit. And yes, I am aware of the medieval practices of dowry and other stipulations, but I just wanted to share with you all why arranged marriages are still very popular, and if you think about it really isn't a crazy idea...

What do you think? Would you marry someone you didn't know? Someone you didn't love? Are you still shocked at the idea of an arranged marriage? Should more Americans arrange their children's marriage?

As my teacher put it, "Marriage should not be base on something as unstable and unpredictable as feelings of love."

RE: Take a chance and see/ WBC

---This post appeared as a comment to Lauren Feeny's post: "Take a chance and see"

Hey Feeney! I listened to the song and I read the lyrics you posed a few days ago. I agree with what you and Brandon were saying about similarities between the lyrics/Krishna and the two religions.

The first verse reminded me of the chapter, the Cosmic Vision. Krishna explains how it is everything in the universe- good, bad, powerful, loving. And to allude to your previous post about the lines, "No fear in life, No guilt in death," I was also reminded of the earlier chapters when Krishna tells Arjuna not to fear death or dying. Because of the promise of an afterlife, there need not be fear

I am happy for you that you find comfort and strength in God. Thank you for posting.

And Avery, I can understand why you do not support WBC. It seems they are very extreme, insensitive, and rude. They seem to follow a different religion entirely. I've never heard of "spreading God's hate" to be a message others would want to follow or be inspired by...

Although Wikepedia is not the most credible source, I've learned a lot about this cult.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church

Something for everyone

While reading the assigned handout, (chapter two of The Hindu View of Life, S. Radhakrishnan, 1973) I really saw how open ended Hinduism was. Hinduism is a symphony of many different beliefs working together in harmony.There is no domination of one idea over the other; old stories from cave men are accepted equally.
"The emotional attitudes attached to the old forms are transferred to the new which is fitted into the background of the old," (29)...."Opinions cannot grow unless traditions are altered," (32).

Because we all come from different locations, it only makes sense that our beliefs should be as different. What a poor, lonely man living near the mountains believes is bound to be different than the ideas of a wealthy man living with his family in the city. But Hinduism says that's okay, and encourages that. This acceptance to interpretation is so different from the Christian beliefs I was raised on.

We were taught that there is one God, and Jesus the savior was his son. Each year in mass we are asked to renew our vows and commit that we believe there is one God, and we hold the parables in the Bible to be true. In Christianity, you either believe or feel like a sinner for not believing.

You can tell a lot about a man based on what he believes in...
"The right way to refine the crude beliefs of any group is to alter the bias of mind. The view of God an individual stresses depends on the kind of man he is. The temperament, training...influence of the environment determine, to a large extent, the character of his religious opinions. Any defect in one's nature or onesidedness in one's experience is inevitably reflected in the view the individuals," (32).

We believe what we need to believe in. Hinduism is one religion that seems to allow its followers the freedom to choose. "Not common in creed, but common in quest," (42). Maybe someday it will, as the author believes, become the universal religion...

We believe what we need to believe in.

Re: Emotional Attachment and the Concept of Moksha

This is a response to Avery Finnivan’s post: Emotional Attachment and the Concept of Moksha

 It can seem wrong to join a crowd because it feels like we’re losing our identity and what makes us each special, but I don't think those trying to achieve Moksha see it like this...

When a friend passes, we remember all the times we had with that person. The closer we were, the more the memories mean to us. That person once existed and will continue to exist as long as we keep their memory alive. Their existence or their impact on us won’t just go away because they’re gone.

When a person’s life ends, no one really knows what happens, but for now, let’s use reincarnation and Moksha as examples.  The Self or a person’s soul gets to reenter the world in a new shell and start anew. This person is said to carry their past lives inside them, but each life they live is different from the previous one (assuming we aren’t reliving the same life over and over…). Each life is out to achieve something new, something the previous life did not attain, and each experience shapes us individually.

I think the creators did care for one another, as friends or maybe something more. We all want what appears to be the best outcome for one another and we never forget those who impact our lives in some way.  By attaining Moksha, we no longer occupy a mortal state. When someone becomes a part of the universe, it is true they must leave their physical presence behind, and yes we miss them, but aren’t we happier knowing they must be somewhere better?

*Imagines attending high school again and again…

We’re sad, but we never forget how unique they were or why they were special to us. Sometimes leaving this world to find a better one/ more fulfilling one elsewhere is their choice, and we must respect their choices because it is their life.

By rejoining the bonfire, we are an infinite number of sparks burning together as something greater than we could ever be on our own. We bring with us all that is our past and all that we once knew and become The Universe.

Nothing is real

In some ways, the words of Sri Krishna reminded me of the film, The Matrix. (haha bear with me)
Arjuna could only become a powerful warrior if he realizes the words of his mentor, Sri Krishna. He must put all fears and feelings of sadness behind him and understand that by fighting, good can come out of it. Krishna tells Arjuna that if he succeeds in battle, he will live on as an honorable man. Should his enemies, or even himself die, they will enjoy the comfort of heaven. It seems to be a win win situation.
It is only when Neo (of the Matrix) puts aside all he thought he knew of his world and realized that none of it was real that he is strong enough to defeat Agent Smith. Neo learns that the world he was once a part of is not real. He is still attached to his old lifestyle and his job. He has commitments and isn't sure if he's ready to joint the life of the all knowing. Once he decides to let go, he begins to learn and discipline himself,, and eventually, he becomes a supreme being, godlike and all knowing.
Arjuna is like Neo. Each man is full of doubt and feels unsure. Neo is apprehensive about leaving his previous world of commitment and selfish desires. Arjuna is in anguish about killing his relatives and friends. The words of Sri Krishna provide answers:
"Selfish desires are consumed in the fire of knowledge"- the more we want to learn, the more we will understand and be better able to make judgements about the world and how to live. Once we figure out why we are attached or feel the need to hold onto things, we can learn to control that want, thus better controlling ourselves.
"2:39 Those who take wisdom as their highest goal, whose faith is deep and whose senses are trained, attain wisdom quickly and enter into perfect peace. 2:40 But the ignorant, indecisive and lacking in faith, waste their lives. They can never be happy in this world or any other."
This passage reminds me how Neo feels he can never be happy now knowing his old life was all based on selfish desires, and the feeling of loss that he can never live in his old life; it will never be the same, but he feels this way he is better off.
A man must remain unperturbed in pain and joy and all things are connected. By accepting things as they are, and feeling no response, we can have a clear mind not clouded by bad judgement or have personal bias for one way or the other. We understand that Krishna is in all things, and by that we are all equal. We are all attached because we are all "precious jewels." Everything is united, and we are all souls born and reborn until we are born unto a state mature enough to seek wisdom.
Krishna says all things are immortal, and if a man is wise, he would not grieve when one life ends;
"2:23, The Self cannot be pierced by weapons or burned by fire; water cannot wet it, nor can wind dry it. 2:24 The Self cannot be pierced or burned, made wet or dry. It is everlasting and infinite, standing on the motionless foundations of eternity. 2:25 The Self is unmanifested, beyond all though, beyond all change. Knowing this, you should not grieve."
The Self Krishna is referring to is what I would equate to having a soul. I find comfort in these passages, as well as 2:27,
"Death is inevitable for the living; birth is inevitable for the dead. Since these are unavoidable, you should not sorrow."

If you could ask one question...

Every Sunday, one of my favorite things to do is go on PostSecret.com and read the confessions of postcards from around the world. I've decided to create a folder of all the secrets which I have myself.

This one seemed appropriate to post here.

It was probably at CCD (Sunday school) when my teacher first asked us ripe young 3rd graders, If you could ask God anything, what would it be? That question stuck with me for a long time...if I could ask anythinggg...
I think I was in Mom's minivan, staring out the window at the stars when I found my answer.
I would ask him/her/it what he/she/it thought about the world we humans have made. Would they be proud? Disappointed? Was there a plan? Does he care? Who knows....
I just thought it was cool to see a secret I shared posted this past Sunday.

I promise I will post something of more thought soon, but I do love sharing photos/memes.
Until next time!