Meditation

I have yet to talk about the meditation. I would like to describe what I felt in the meditation, and the process with which I personally approached it. It is a process with which I am rather familiar. My brother taught me to meditate years ago and I've sporadically practiced it since then. Every time is different for me, but I have specific ground rules which help me stay in the game. I can’t think about my plans for the day, I can’t think about mundane things. I can’t "make the gestures of profound thought", which is a frequent danger for me. I am a very dramatic girl, so the temptation is to skip the first part, in which I calm down and clear my head, and skip right to the "deep thoughts" part. This results in tawdry and cliché "revelations" that reveal nothing of my real thoughts and can ruin an entire meditation. My particular attempt at meditation in class was unusually successful. As usual, I started out focusing on my body. I stretched, I practiced deep breathing, and I attempted to relax every muscle in my body. This made me hyper aware of my actions. I focused on the feel of air moving in my lungs and diaphragm, I moved my joints around, and I relaxed facial muscles that I hadn't even realized I had. Then I looked at my skin. The patterns of it, its texture, its color. I knew that my fingertips had a pattern, but I looked at the whole hand. I have a swirl on the upper pad of my left hand, but a loop on the right. The entire thing looked like the surface of a lake, with currents and waves. Skin brought me to a whole new level of self awareness, and pushed me into a scientific mindset and then a religious one. Because I had allowed myself so much focus, I released myself to "ridiculous thoughts". I stopped controlling my mind and just let it wander without censure or regulation. I even allowed myself to think about God as a reality. I took down my assumption that didn't exist, and thought as if I thought it did.
Here is what I thought in a rambling and nonsensical fashion. Feel no need to read this; I just don’t want to forget it.

Why do people believe in a soul? People don’t think of themselves as their bodies. We are our thoughts, our beliefs, and our actions. We are something different from our bodies, because, even after we are gone, our bodies are still here. If our bodies can stay when we're gone, we must be something different. But then why does god look like a man, why does he have a body? God never leaves his body- he is ONLY thought and intention, so why does he need the shell that humans have to house their real selves? If god is purely what we are inside, then god must be pure soul- he is soul embodied. If god is a soul, then how does he make souls? Souls must then, be an extension of him. God is pure energy, bodies are pure matter. The soul within the body- the thing that makes us human- is an extension of god's soul within each individual.

It was a good meditation and I came up with new ideas and a new idea of how to look at god which meshes well with my life force view of deism.

Atheism at last

Thank heavens we finally talked about atheism! In a class about religion, many people take it for granted that atheism need not be discussed. After all, many see it as religion's antithesis- the absence of God must mean an absence of religion. And don’t all atheists proudly and adamantly declare themselves religion free? There are so many misconceptions about atheism, that it is often completely excluded from the realm of belief. I'm hoping with this blog, not necessarily to explore what atheism is, because that is different for everyone, but to solidify what I believe it is not.
Atheism is not something you believe because you are afraid of to believe in God or because you don’t have the faith to believe in a God. Atheism is not a fall back or an act of cowardice. Atheism, like every religion, requires strength of conviction, faith and inner reflection. It isn't easy to believe we're alone in this universe, that there is no loving entity watching out for us all. It isn't easy, when faced with troublesome times, to have to rely on your own strength and the love of friends and family. And it isn't easy having to believe that some things happen without a purpose and without an explanation- that sometimes things just happen for absolutely no reason. None of that is easy. But as an atheist I face those difficulties because my beliefs require them. Every religion comes with its corresponding trials and tribulations, but people pull through them because they are dedicated to their beliefs, and find the fulfillment that provides to overcome the discomfort they may feel.
Also, the idea that atheists don’t believe in a god because they want to escape moral judgment is, to me, completely false. If I wanted to be immoral, I could do it just as easily as a Christian as I could an atheist, because whichever belief I subscribe to, I will have the same sense of guilt knowing I'm doing wrong. Atheists are just as moral as anyone else, but we have to monitor ourselves. Our motivation to behave morally must come from an inner desire to behave, not a fear of punishment from God. For example, in many small shops on College Ave, there are signs saying "these dressing rooms are monitored by God" or something along those line. Clearly, they are reminding people to behave morally by invoking the guilt associated with disobeying the bible. The same approach is used in court (so help me God) etc. As an atheist, I don’t have this omnipresent reminder to behave, with role models, stories, punishments and reward all laid out for me. I have to rely on my own strength of will.
It is not true that atheists have no metaphysical beliefs or that they only believe in proven scientific facts. While I don’t see the world as created by or controlled by a god, my entire creation story and my ideas on how the world continues to function is based on blind faith. Almost none of the theories I support are or ever can be proven, and most of them are just as awe-inspiring, beautiful and utterly impossible to ever fully comprehend as is an idea of a god. For example, the idea of other dimensions or string theory. Both are possible and could help explain the world as we see it, but they are so wonderfully complex that I can sit for hours just trying to wrap my mind around them and finish with no more certainty of their truth, but feeling as if the world is a more beautiful place and that I am more fulfilled for attempting to understand it. For me, thinking about the universe and the very fact that I will never fully understand it is like meditation, prayer and study all in one.
Atheism is not an escape from belief, but an alternative one. I find my religious satisfaction in observing and contemplating the world I see around me and the world I can imagine instead of a world of God. I suppose you could say that the world is my God, and my morals and metaphysical needs are fulfilled by exploring it.

I am writing about a Wicca website for my website review, and learning more about this religion has made me think about some new things. Wicca is arguably one of the oldest, or one of the newest religions. It is a rejuvenation of ancient, pre-Christian pagan beliefs, but it only appeared as "Wicca" in 1954. Today, Wicca is largely regarded as a "weird" religion; people mistake their practices for devil worshipping, and are confused or afraid of their "magick", spells and potions. Yet, in spite of the hardships in believing, Wicca has many faithful followers. It seems that all new religions go through this aggressive period. People look at the beliefs, so incredibly different from their own, and say "how could anyone believe that? It's nonsensical, it's impossible, it's just plain wrong." And some of the new religions do look a little ridiculous. Scientology, for example, ardently believe that aliens stuck to our bodies are the cause of many of our problems. However, in a time when, in Rome, religion consisted of many powerful Gods, each watching over a specific aspect of your life- how strange and cult like it must have seemed to suddenly have a group of people dedicating their lives to a man with no religious experience- a carpenter, nothing more! who is saying that none of the Roman Gods exist, there is only one God, and that he happens to be that Gods son? I would never believe it! All religion is nonsensical, because it requires a leap of faith. There has to be something amazing about it, or nothing will separate it from the hum drum of daily life. the only difference between Christianity and Wicca are what leaps of faith they make. talking to a big guy in the sky, hoping he'll help you out is just as "weird" as appealing to the spirit of the earth by using plant spirits to make helpful potions. And on Scientology...I don't know, maybe in a thousand years Ron Hubbard will be the new Jesus, and Isaac Hayes (the voice of Chef in South Park) will be one of his disciples.

Secular Vs Religion- who calls the shots

In class we discussed whether religion shapes, conforms to or has a symbiotic relationship with societal change. We all seemed to take one position and argue that, if one were true, the others must be false. This to me is a misguided assumption. Religion is not one single thing, but a title given to a wide variety of beliefs, rules and assumptions. Some aspects of religion are fluid and changeable over time, while others are more foundational and solid. Religion and secular culture exist, not only with parts of the other. In these clashes between the two "teams", you could consider each to be divided into thousand of little "battalions", each one comprised of one ritual or belief or norm. If a strong, solid religious belief comes into conflict with a fluid, unsteady secular one (such as the evil religious symbolism of devils horns clashing with an up and coming trend of wearing them to dinner parties) then the religious battalion will win. However, when strong secular beliefs class with shaky religious references, then secular culture will win (the 1920's desire for female liberation overriding the biblical requirements of modesty in dress and behavior). Yes, occasionally religion causes enormous, spectacular changes in secular culture and thus completely reshapes a new society (the founding of America) but then secular drives and beliefs do that too (Lutheranism). It is impossible to overriding say that "religion shapes secular culture" or "religion conforms to secular changes", because they are constantly changing each other.

Fitting the glove to the hand, or the hand to the glove

Do religious texts reflect the world, or shape it? How much does writing make the morals so.The bible has created scores of rules and taboos that, before its creation, society lived without. For example, the condemnation of homosexuality. Homosexuals had been socially acceptable in many of the countries that, after Christianity, condemned it- such as Rome. Was this a product of public needs and sentiments, or was it the sentiments of the small group of bible writers who then riled the rest of the people? How many of our "intrinsic moral instincts" would exist without religious systems guiding our thought?
I grew up without the immediate presence of any religious text, but have recently had the privilege of discussing my world views with a devout Christian woman. The conversation showed me how essentially a religious text can change the way you see the world. It changes the way you develop ideas about what's "normal" or "acceptable", and with or without a book, it can be very difficult to make judgement calls. My friend sees the world through a lens that deeply includes the contents of the bible, but it is very hard to come to terms with the fact that, sometimes, she disagrees with it. I see her going through an internal struggle, trying to both follow the contents of his bible and remain true to herself. Unlike my friend, I have no book laying my guidelines before me. This can make it difficult to be confident in my moral choices, however, it saves me the tribulation of trying to bring my own beliefs to terms with a book that I'm supposed to follow faithfully. I wonder how many people in the world twist and reshape their own beliefs to fit their faith, repressing ideals or resisting acceptance because the writers of the bible, two thousand years ago, tell them that something is wrong.

The discussion in class about kebra negast took me by surprise. In reading, I had missed most of the intentions of the text and its underlying intention of including Ethiopia in the christian history. I had seen it as a somewhat bizarre and inconsistent story about the goodness of Solomon and how he spread his righteous seed. It had seemed to me a very strange story, but I accepted my interpretations because it fit with many of my assumptions of what religious stories are: a little nonsensical, a little strange, but you just have to take them as a moral and ignore the counter intuitive details.
However, my interpretation was entirely wrong. Instead of searching for meaning in the text, I passed it off simply because it was religious. It is this prejudice that I'm trying to battle in this class. We looked beyond the surface of the text, like the Torah's garment, to the moral, political and social motivations of the text. I am too quick to label something as "justifying the desired status quo" (aka, genesis justifying sexism and domination of the earth) or as political jargon to control a faithful public. When I make these decisions I often stop thinking, satisfied that I understand enough. I'm learning my lesson, though, and in future readings I will think harder before I dismiss the text out of hand.

The Contradictions of King Solomon

After reading the first part of kebra nagast, I'm left a little confused. the first half was almost all a dry recital of lineage and factual history. so and so ruled over so and so, this son was followed by this son... a list, more than a lesson! And then the second half spent so much time detailing the virtue of King Solomon, his wisdom and trust in God, but then he turns around a tricks a virgin queen into only semi-consensual sex! The story is clearly meant to promote wisdom through the knowledge and obedience to God, yet that message seems to be constantly contradicted within the text. Solomon justifies sleeping with a thousand women by saying that his actions are not caused by lust, and that his sons will fulfill god's commands throughout the land. However, he clearly demonstrates lust toward the queen and actively plots to sleep with her against her will. his intentions were not virtuous, nor his means. He made an oath not to sleep with her against her will in exchange to her oath not to steal anything from his palace. Then he plotted for her to be thirsty, plotted for her to unwittingly break her oath y drinking water, and plotted for her to want the water badly enough that she would agree to let him break his oath in return. As a woman, I'm not really digging this guy as god's chosen sage!

Also, it really bugs me when people in stories all of a sudden make radical world changing decisions, at the drop of a hat. The queen decided that she would never again worship her gods, that her entire life's religion was false. And then at the end she decides that queen shouldn't rule, but only sons should? Sounds like a religious post facto explanation of the loss of matriarchal rule. Surprise surprise that patriarchy came to her land at the same time Christianity did. That's something that always frustrates me when I read these texts, is the unjustified enormous decisions that are presented as being justified and reasonable simply because they are "inspired by god". If I'm going to read a book about a divine intervention into the existence of an entire society, I want more detail than simply stating "henceforward a man who is of thy seed shall reign, and a woman shall nevermore reign". I don't need to know what happened, I want to know why, and how God could possibly have been involved.