Kebra Negast on Women

While reading the two excerpts from the Kebra Negast, a few passages jumped out at me. I was struck by the casual and indifferent manner in which women from this text were treated. In the first reading, the passages that most evidence this point are on pages 30 and 31 where it discusses Solomon’s 400 wives and 600 concubines. The text goes on to further illustrate this point by saying that Solomon didn’t believe that this was fornication, and his main purpose in having 1000 women was procreation to further his lineage. Even with this explanation, I feel that this is still an indifferent way of looking at women because although this was not technically forbidden, “no law had been laid down for him in respect of women, and no blame can be imputed to him in respect of marrying many wives” (31), this is still degrading and disrespectful to women because their only purpose is to serve for Solomon. Even the text, while not outright forbidding this practice, does state, “Those who marry many wives seek their own punishment. He who marrieth one wife hath no sin.” (31). In the second reading, the King is speaking to Menyelek and offering him women as prizes, “and I will make a marriage for thee, an I will give thee as many queens and concubines as thou desirest.” (50). I think that this casual regard to women, as evidenced in the Kebra Negast and many other religious texts, is directly related to Genesis in the Bible. In Genesis, God deliberately puts man higher than woman, and it is woman (Eve) who caused the fall and created the concept of sin. Because of this connection, I think that many other religious texts have adopted a similar attitude toward women that remains unchanged for many years after.

Kebra Negast and Wealth

Brad Hoh in his most recent blog discussed the concept of God granting wealth and monetary possessions to faithful followers. He references the Time Magazine article Does God Want You to Be Rich by David Van Biema and Jeff Chu, on which I also happened to write a paper. In my paper, I discussed the differences between the two ‘camps’ involved with this ideological debate. The more traditional religious groups felt that God wants all of his followers to be happy, but these people believe that happiness does not equate wealthy. The more Evangelical religious groups, or followers of the “Prosperity Lite” camp, believe that those who have the strongest faith in God will be rewarded monetarily. The believers of this less conventional camp use many Biblical quotes to strengthen their argument. Deuteronomy 8:17-18, for example, states, “Then you say in your heart, ‘My power and the might of my hand have gained me this wealth.’ And you shall remember the Lord you God, for it is He who gives you power to get wealth, that He may establish His covenant which He swore to your fathers, as it is this day” (Van Biema and Chu 52). This Biblical passage directly corresponds to the passage from the Kebra Negast that Brad used in his blog, “and his possessions became numerous, and his children were many; and God blessed him and he died in honor”. Both of these excerpts from their respective religious text illustrate the viewpoint of the Prosperity Lite groups and perhaps a portion of the Ethiopian Christian people. Brad, in his blog, disagrees with this way of thinking, and points out that it conflicts with the Catholic religion with which he was raised. I would agree with Brad and say that in my personal opinion, God (or any other higher being) would feel equally about all of his followers and not favor any one group over another by granting monetary possessions. I believe that good people who do good things will have good things done to them.

Metropolis

I found the silent film Metropolis to be very interesting, and several parts stood out to me as relating to religion. The first was that the upper class of the society had no real religion, but was more technologically advanced than the lower class. Earlier this term, we discussed the origins of the human belief process and discovered that religion evolved in more technologically advanced civilizations, not because of the technology, but because of the higher brain capacity that occurred in these types of societies. In the civilization from the film, the upper class was clearly more advanced; however, due to the social status, it appeared as though the lower class had the greater brain capacity for religion. There were several indications of religious symbolism above ground (upper class), but they were all broken down and abandoned. Oppositely, the catacombs below ground were alive with religious symbolism such as crosses and stars. While I am not saying that the upper classes did not have the brain capacity for religion overall, it appears as though social status and society in general have influenced where religion has taken hold in this civilization.

Another religious connection of this film was the connecting of the head and hands by the heart. I believe that this might represent God, the people, and Jesus. In the anecdote explaining this, Maria states that there were people who had great plans for the city, but they could not build it themselves. Then, there were people who had the strength to build the city, but they did not have the same vision as the others. They needed a mediator to help bridge the two together. Therefore, the visionaries could represent God (head), the workers could represent the people (hands), and the mediator, Freder, could represent Jesus (heart). Another proof for this comparison is the fact that Freder is the only son of the leader of the city, and he is acting as and working for the workers, just as, historically, Jesus did.

Finally, the last connection to religion that this film made is the many random Biblical allusions. One of them is the obvious allusion to the Tower of Babel. Another is the flood at the end of the film. I think that the flood could be alluding to the Biblical flood and the story of Noah. The characters were also representative of Biblical characters. Maria could represent Moses because she had heard the call of God and led the followers to freedom. The robot-Maria could represent Satan because she was tricking the citizens into a life of sin and lust. Previously mentioned, Freder and his father, Joh Fredersen probably represented Jesus and God because of their major roles in the city and the actions they performed throughout the film.

Sam Harris Response

I found that the most interesting point of Sam Harris’s commentary on Islam was how closely some of the examples he used related to any other monotheistic religion. The most obvious parallels were the idea of repentance or punishment for sins, the degree of extremism amongst the religion, and most importantly, the use of the religious text as justification for actions.

Harris discusses the internal and external jihad that devout Muslims are expected to go through. External refers to waging war against others in defense of Islam, while internal refers to the inner “war” against personal sin (111). While not specifically stated in the Bible as Jihad, followers of many other faiths are also expected to satisfy some sort of punishment or repentance for their sins. Whether it be confession, denying oneself of normal pleasures, or personal prayer for forgiveness, repentance from sin is a common bond between most monotheistic religions. Harris then discusses the differing degrees of intensity of the Islamic faith, which also appears in numerous other religions. In Judaism, there is the Orthodox sect which is the most conservative, strict, and traditional; followed by a more moderate sect and lastly, by the Jewish reform sect, which is the most liberal and progressive. In the Christian religion, there are many different sects which all range from extremely conservative to completely free-spirited. Harris talks about the differences between fundamentalist Muslims and moderate Muslims in terms of the degree to which they agree with violent action as an acceptable practice, if necessary, to their faith (110). This is comparable, to a much lesser degree, to the divide in the Christian faith between more traditional sects and more Evangelical sects over issues such as abortion, gay marriage, etc. The most important parallel that can be drawn between Sam Harris’s commentary on Islam and other monotheistic religions is the use of religious text as justification for actions. Harris lists some quotes from the Koran that are used by many of the extremist Muslim groups as validation for attacks and bombings, for example, “Jihad is your duty under any ruler, be he godly or wicked.” and “A single endeavor (of fighting) in Allah’s cause in the forenoon or in the afternoon is better than the world and whatever is in it.” (112). These extremist Muslim groups look to these passages to rationalize their actions that most people see as inexcusable. Many other religious groups look to their religious texts for validation of their actions or beliefs. For instance, many Evangelical religious groups strongly oppose gay marriage, and they look to scriptures such as Leviticus to justify their beliefs.

Sam Harris’s commentary was clearly revealing his negative opinions on Muslims and the Islamic faith. I do not think negatively about any of the religions mentioned above, and I also don’t think that the similarities I pointed out are as radical as the ones discussed in the article. I do believe that between the monotheistic religions, there are many parallels in the way in which they live their lives.

Literal Interpretation as Subconscious Thought Process

In response to Carissa Keith’s most recent blog post referring to the article on conceptual blending.

In our class discussion, we talked about conceptual blending in terms of relating Biblical stories and concepts, but Carissa Keith, in her most recent blog, brings up an interesting point. Carissa’s main point from her blog is that if conceptual blending does occur subconsciously, then individual beliefs will be acknowledged as fact rather than as analogy. I agree with this point and would like to further it by relating it to modern day issues. I believe that many people tend to interpret their personal religious beliefs as complete truth rather than for their abstract value. If it occurs so naturally in human nature to blend together the personal beliefs with the analogies that explain them, it is understandable that many people do just this. The majority of religious followers understand that the basis of religion in general is to structure moral guidelines and to give a sense of community and higher being (all somewhat abstract); however, there are many who feel that religion needs to be taken absolutely literally, and this specific brain activity helps explain this.

The article by Augustine discusses when and how to interpret the Bible literally or figuratively. I feel that conceptual blending relates to this concept as well because some individuals are subconsciously interpreting their personal religious beliefs as concrete fact, while others take the Biblical stories for what they represent. Many Evangelical Christian groups or ultra conservative are religious groups that interpret the Bible as absolute truth, but It has never been discussed that this instinct to interpret literally is a brain function that only some people can separate. I think it is interesting that an action, such as reading and personally interpreting, could be a subconscious brain action.

Saint Augustine's Bible Interpretation

Saint Augustine has a very specific set of guidelines for interpreting the Bible. Augustine suggests looking at the bigger picture and using the correct reference frame as his two most important points, and uses the juxtaposed ideas of love vs. lust to differentiate when to interpret the Bible literally and when to interpret the Bible figuratively. This strict set of rules seems to leave very little room for exception. In my opinion, the Bible and all other religious texts should be interpreted loosely and on a personal level. This is not to say, however, that a personal interpretation can or should be used as an excuse for wrongdoings, but I believe that there should be some middle ground between the extremes of purely literal interpretation and radical figurative interpretation.

We discussed in class the issue of homosexuality and discovered that according to the method that Augustine provides, homosexuality would more than likely be considered lustful because its purpose is not procreation. However, polygamy, as discussed by Augustine, is considered acceptable because its main purpose is procreation. In today’s world, for many people, this situation seems reversed. I feel that Saint Augustine’s method for interpreting the Bible does not take progress into account.

In addition, Augustine’s method does not appear to be concrete because many different interpretations of the same scriptures can be taken. Augustine even simply states, “Sometimes not just one meaning but two or more meanings are perceived in the same words of scripture.” (86). He then states to look to the other passages for the correct interpretation, or secondly, to use “a process of reasoning” (87). This causes numerous different interpretations of the same writings, which seems to defeat the purpose of a strict set of guidelines.

I think that the notion of a set of guidelines is a good idea; however, I believe that there are some shortcomings in Augustine’s method. I personally think that the Bible or any other religious text should be used as a loose reference point for everyday life. I also think that while many of the parables outline basic moral structure, personal morals and current context are essential to keep in mind when interpreting.

Lamentations

Lamentations is a written work that is used as an explanation for hardship, specifically the destruction of Jerusalem (586 B.C.). As we discussed in class, the emotions described in this narrative are comparable to those associated with any sort of loss. I think that this relates to the universal purposes of religion.

A core purpose of religion is to explain the unknown and to give reasons for why hardships happen. This work tries to answer both of these questions. Lamentations depicts the series of emotions and events that occur when dealing with a tragedy: distress, realization, forgiveness, and finally, hope. In addition, religion was developed to bring people together, and unfortunately, tragedies tend to do just this. This work shows the progression of the previously listed emotions to the outcome of a strengthened belief in God. The last few lines of Lamentations describe the renewed sense of faith. The narrator states, “But you, O Lord, reign forever; your throne endures to all generations. Why have you forgotten us completely? Why have you forsaken us these many days? Restore us to yourself, O Lord, that we may be restored; renew our days as of old—unless you have utterly rejected us, and are angry with us beyond measure.” This quote clearly reveals the immeasurable devotion to God, even after a terrible catastrophe. Lamentations closely relates to common day situations through the emotions discussed and the outcomes of tragedies.

Grizzly Man

Timothy Treadwell’s 13 years spent in the Alaskan wilderness seemed to have no religious purpose. However, the experience Treadwell had is somewhat comparable to other religious texts or traditions.

Treadwell’s experiences with Alaskan bears most closely relates to Native American or pre-historic animal worship. Both these religious groups and Treadwell live in harmony with the bears and have extreme respect for the creatures. Treadwell gave the animals human-like qualities, which is something that Native Americans and other animal-worshiping groups may have done. The main difference, however, is that the religious groups live separately from the animals and are dependent upon them for their basic needs. These groups live in harmony with the bears but do not cross the metaphoric line from human world into animal world. In addition, these groups do hunt the bears and use them for their basic everyday needs. Treadwell, oppositely, crosses this imaginary line and lives completely in the bears’ environment, but he would never dream of harming any of the bears, even for survival purposes.

Another religious parallel surrounding Timothy Treadwell’s experiences with bears is Genesis. In the Creation story, animals and humans were not equal. Man was given reign over all other creatures, and Treadwell challenges this. Treadwell was living completely with the bears, which puts man and animals on the same level. However, Treadwell still felt dominance over the bears (perhaps as though he were the Alpha bear). In the introduction of the film, Treadwell speaks about controlling his fear and acting superior to the bears so they respect him and be more comfortable around him. He even shouts out, “I will be master!”, which shows his superiority above the bears.

Timothy Treadwell’s experiences with Alaskan bears can be interpreted in many ways. From a religious standpoint, although Treadwell did not have religious motives, his experiences could be seen as spiritual because they closely relate to several other religious traditions and texts.

Neanderthal Blog from Week 1

Sorry, I forgot to add this post from the first week.

Steven Mithen discusses the capacity of Neanderthals for language and communication and asserts that although Neanderthals do not have the capacity for a spoken language, they can communicate by the use of 'hmmmmm'. Mithen believes that one purpose of this 'hmmmm' communication is to help further Neanderthal culture and way of life. I believe that if Neanderthals had such an immense stability of their culture, there is a possibility that they also had the capacity for some form of religion.

First, Mithen feels that there is an absence of symbolic artifacts in Neanderthal culture; however, there are several contentious artifacts that many believe could be considered symbolic, such as the piece of volcanic stone that resembles a female form or the incised fragment of bone that has marks resembling a symbolic code. The use of these artifacts could have been for a religious purpose, or the artifacts themselves could have been symbolic of some sort of higher power.

Another argument for Neanderthal religion is the possibility of rituals. There are large quantities of stone nodules containing mineral manganese dioxide, which is believed to have been used for body painting. It is possible that this could indicate proof of religious rituals. Another ritual could have been animal sacrifice. There are several examples of planned mass animal slaughter, such as at Mauran or Combe Grenal. A final ritual could have been the Neanderthal performances. Mithen discusses the possibility of singing and dancing performances that could have been put on because of the presence of large open "empty spaces" within the caves. It is possible that these performances were used as religious rituals.

Wisconsin Mound Builders

The article Indian Mounds of Wisconsin discusses a crucial aspect of religion, ritual burial. Burial suggests a belief in some sort of higher being or deity. More importantly, it suggests a belief in an afterlife. Both the Neanderthals and the Homo sapiens displayed evidence of burying their dead; however, Native Americans from Wisconsin created effigies and rituals for their dead to further their own beliefs and to give assurance of the sanctuary of their loved ones. These effigy mounds are also beautiful works of art, and the sheer size of them is astounding. It is interesting to me that although there is a large location change and a gap of time between Wisconsin mound builders and the prehistoric artists we already studied, all of the cultures still use art to further their spiritual purposes. The prehistoric cultures used certain cave art, totem designs, symbols, etc. to help explain symbolic stories and to aid ritualistic belief, while the Wisconsin Native Americans actually incorporated their art into their burials. Also, the pottery created by these people is similarly comparable to the art of the prehistoric species. All of these helped aid ritualistic belief by beginning to define the afterworld (upper/lowerworlds).

Group Identity and Religion

I am writing this blog in response to Caro Leach.

The type of religion that was discussed in the article featuring the Homo sapiens after the Holocene could be considered a foundation for modern religion of today. I believe that religion serves many purposes and comes from many different sources. The main purposes referenced in the article, The Nature of Paleolithic Art (part 2) are explanations for the unknown and group identity or community. Caro, in her most recent blog, also points to these as the most important purposes for religion; however, Caro states, “Identity was more defined with the use of religion; people would feel a sense of worth due to religion.”, and I would assert the opposite. I believe that religion emerged from a sense of group identity.

I do agree with Caro that with the creation of organized religion caused a stronger sense of identity; however, I think it is more likely that religion evolved due to an already present sense of group identity. A climate shift occurred following the Holocene that caused the evolution of a greater number of species and more importantly, better hunting conditions, which led to food surpluses. These food surpluses had both benefits and consequences for the groups. Food surpluses meant more food and a better diet for these people, and trade began at this point. With trade came a stronger sense of group identity (mine vs. yours; ours vs. theirs). This strong sense of identity ultimately led to increased warfare. These groups further involved themselves with their group identity by establishing customs and rituals, such as coordinating dress decoration, totem styles, artwork, etc. According to Guthrie, “these patterns carry symbolic meaning and their shared visual reading gives emphasis to group cohesion and order.” (412). In addition, with more wealth circulated throughout the groups, a sense of upper vs. lower began to occur, and a hierarchy developed. Those with more food were considered above those with less, and the upper classes had more free time to expand their newfound mythological beliefs. The tribal ruling class and their shamans began to create stories to explain the unknown, which eventually led to a more stable belief system within the group. Therefore, the original group identity greatly influenced the early development of religion.

Paleolithic Art

In my last blog, I asserted that Neanderthals had the capacity for religion, although all evidence pointed otherwise. After reading the last two articles The Nature of Paleolithic Art, I would like to adjust my opinion. To use our computer analogy from class, I now believe that Neanderthals had the software for religion, but not the hardware; while the Homo sapiens who created the Paleolithic art had the hardware, but not the software.

The Neanderthals had many of the cultural icons that are evident in early religions, such as symbols, burials, rituals, etc. Although these are present, the Neanderthals lacked the “cognitive fluidity” to invent symbolic meaning. They had the knowledge of how to make and create these things, but they did not have the capacity to connect them to some larger purpose. The Homo sapiens had just the opposite problem: they had the capability for metaphoric thinking, but the culture they lived in was not conducive to religious thought. The Homo sapiens mentioned in the first chapter of The Nature of Paleolithic Art were physiologically built just as humans today, which means they have the brain capacity for religion. However, Guthrie believes that many of the art forms of these people had no significant religious purpose. When discussing the presence of war scenes and human faces, Guthrie states, “These…may have little symbolic significance” (38). In addition, many would conclude that the location of much of the Paleolithic art (deep in the caves) would suggest some sort of religious or supernatural theme; however, Guthrie dissuades this by explaining that this conclusion can only be drawn if three important points are ignored. The first is that art in caves is more likely to survive that art in the open air. The second is that evidence proves that the caves were rarely used. The third is that significant amounts of Paleolithic art were also found in abri and open-air sites (40). Therefore, these people had the right mental equipment (hardware), but religious thought did not flourish because their culture was missing certain essential aspects, such as morals/ethics, a God/deity, reoccurring symbols, explanations, and a hierarchical system (software). The post-Holocene Homo sapiens were the first of the cultures studied so far in this class to exhibit both signs of hardware and software. They had both the mental capacity for symbolic thought and the cultural aspects to support religion.

Entry 1

Taylor's first post!