Reading: Heraclitus

This is certainly the most unique reading we have had so far. I have to say, I liked it. I think the simplicity is kind of misleading. I am sure that a lot of people will look at this reading, and pass it off as not having enough “meat” to warrant comment. Something else I find interesting is that these are fragments so whatever Heraclitus truly meant in many of these passages will totally left to the interpretation of the reader. All that being said I still feel there is a lot to be had here, mainly because there is so little. One section that communicates this so well is “The way to God is the way through the self.” These passages may provide the spark, but it is up to the reader to stoke the fire.

Looking at the text itself there were a couple of sections I really liked. “Opposition brings together, and from discord comes perfect harmony.” This concept is so simple t is often overlooked. There are a myriad of examples throughout history where we see to enemies become allies to face a common enemy. The French and English, for example, have centuries of hate and malice between them. However, when faced with a common enemy, the Germans, these differences are quickly forgotten.

Here is anther quote that I really liked. “To men, some things are good and some are bad. But to God, all things are good and beautiful and just.” I always gravitated toward the concept of everything being fundamentally good. This is the same concept that is so clearly expressed in the first chapter of Genesis, in the Bible. This notion that God creates everything in the universe, and when he looked on his creation it was good. It also implies that everything that is bad is only that way because humans perceive it as such.

All things considered I really liked this reading. Its simplicity seems to say things that volumes could not. I think this is because I am really reading in my on answers.

Reading: Maximus of Trye

Now this is a reading I can really sink my teeth into. I not only appreciated the message, but the tone as well. It appeals to me so much because it is written very much in a way that I would argue something. That is if people are doing something that is bringing them faith, why should we be upset with them. Even if what they are doing is against our own dogma, the chance of us changing their mind is slim and the odds of making enemies are high. To me this is right inline with the Buddhist point of view. This point of view is the concept that once you have discovered an idea that is particularly enlightening its fine to share it with people, however one should never try to inflict their opinions on others.

The first section discuses the intangibility of God, and to me this is a topic becomes more of an issue the more theological a discussion becomes. I would be very surprised if most practicing people, of any of these faiths, really give much thought to the “unknowability” of God. However to the theologians of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism this topic is of critical importance. I really feel that this rather ridiculous. It reminds me of a section in Monty Python’ s Life of Brian. In the scene a man is about to be stoned for speaking God’s name, however, in reading the crimes the judge inadvertently says God’s name too. In the end they are both stoned. I think Maximus is trying to express the same concept here, while maintain a bit more seriousness.

I really respect this Maximus fellow. He did an eloquent job of describing the foolishness of persecuting those that do not follow the same faith, but he did it while maintaining a level of civility that I found very refreshing. Especially in today’s mediums of discussion where it seems like the only way to be heard is by saying something inflammatory.

Abu Abdallah Al-Harith Al-Muhasibi

I found this a much easier reading than the piece from Muhammad. Where in the previous reading it seemed like the theme was, one God, this reading seemed to focus alot more on the love a praise of that God. It also makes a very strong case that those that love God will lead much happier lives. "Their bliss is eternal and their joy is made perfect. " Here we are duscusing love rather than surrender, and for me personally I think it's a better message.

One concept I didn't like from this reading was were it talks about seeing the face of God. "'By my glory, I will show him my face'" I feel they are taking this passage a little to literally. The way I invtion it is once a man devoted himself to the love of God he is granted a vision of this Zeus like being up in the clouds. I never like the idea of a diety that sits in the cloads with a Greek body looking down on all his creation. I just seemed trite to me.

All and all I liked this passage. I think it had a lot of good notions. The idea that if you love God life will seem easier I'm sure is true. I think it's the same concept that the eastern religions communicate in their paths to enlightement. That is that if you eliminate yourself, ego, you will find life far easier to live.

Reading: Muhammad

We have seen many diffrent religions in this class now. Several of those have been monotheistic, but it seems like none take the concept of one God more seriously than Isam. In particular, Muhammad's writings, have one cental theme: One God. This is repeaded through out these readings. "Do not dispise the world, for the world too is God." I tend to appriciate this acceptance of a God that is principally good, but who does creat evil. Often times other monotheirstic religions will blame the evils of the world on another being, typicly a devil creature. The way I see it that is defying the principe of a monotheistic faith. I think this is becuase it is much easier to conceptualise an "all good" God and an "all evil" Saitan than it is to picture an "everything" God. Even I would feel more comfortable placing my faith in somthing that is pure good, but in Islam you must place that faith in a God of "everything" and know that it will turn out alright. I have a lot of repect in that kind of faith.

This reading also deals a lot with the concept of surrender. This is somthing else that I respect the idea of, but could never seem myself doing. I think this concept of surrender is very much like faith. It's the idea that you have to give up something to get something. This is the point of contest for me. The idea of suspending my judgement, and accepting what is being told has never seemed right. This may be because of my age or just who I am, but the notion of faith in or surender to a doctirne without constantly questioning as always seemed alien.

Reading: Cloud of Unkowing

I found this reading very similar to some of these eastern religions, but also very diffrent. The concept of prayer in this reading is very reminicent of meditation. "And be sure not to think of anything." This is very much in line with the idea of clearing ones mind and getting rid of all that extemporanious thought. This seems like just as much of a catch 22 as in buddism. That is in the attempt to clear ones mind all one will think of is the fact that their mind is not cleared. I think this reading even acknolages this in a later section. "Otherwise it is hard, and a miracle if you can do it." It find it paculuar that this concept of clearing ones mind is so prolific through out the world. Though I can't say I have ever accomplished it, there must be something to be had by doing it or it wouldn't have spread like it has.

Most eastern religions seem to discribe this sort of mind state only in abstract metaphors, but hace very little instruction as to how specifially to go about it. In this reading I found it to be extremely specific and far more blatent with the message it is trying to communicate. "For although it is very profitable sometimes to think of certain conditions and deeds of certian special creatures, neverless in this work it profits little or noyhing."

Over all I was able to grasp this reading far more than the previous few we have studied. I'd probably have to atribute this to the fact that it was writen for a European audiance, and as a result apeals to some basic values that have been injected in our society.

Reading: Jesus of Nazareth

There was a lot of good stuff in this reading, but there were somethings I didn't quit agree with. For example the first section where Jesus says, "pray for those who misstreat you." I always felt this was a very cercomestancial lesson to live by. The idea of leting somone hurt you hoping that a God will punish that indavidual seems like the kind of pacifism I just can't support. On the other hand if you are the brunt of a joke at work and letting it go for the sake of the community seems like a just aplication. Some acts deem retaliation, while in other situations it is best to turn the other cheek. I think the mark of a mature person is knowing which is which.

I though the second section was rather obscure. From our perspective worring about what to eat and wear is a matter of chouce. I'm sure at the time Jesus was preaching this, people were constantly worrying about wheather they were going to be able to eat at all or have clothes that weren't going to fall apart. I think the message still aplies though, that we should not be so cought up in the material nature of life that we miss the really good bits.

I think the Prodigal Son section really illustraites why christianity caught on so well. Comming from a religion like Jewdaism, where an infaction of the covinant would result in a calamitous disaster, to Christianity, a religion with a lot more forgiveness. This man's son could go out and live a life of sin, and oppon his return, rahter than be ostrisied by his father, he is welcomed back as if risen from the dead. I'm sure that would seem preposterous to many from that time, but I personally prefer that much more than exiling the wayward son, and I think a lot of people at the time did as well.

Reading: The Diamond Surtra

A thought came to me as I was reading this passage. If rencarnation ends when a person reaches Nirvan, and escapse the wheal of suffering, are new "souls" ever added to the world? The idea that we live life over and over till we finally reach enlightenment is somthing that I find extremely interesting, but after an eternity wouldn't there eventually be no one left? I realize that this is blaphimous because I am subjecting logic to an illogical universe, but the though still hands in my mind.

Getting back to the reading, I didn't like this one quite as much as the selections from Budda. This reading seemed a little more criptic and hard to understand. "no being has been liberated. Why? Because no Budhisattva who is a true Buddisattva entertains sush concepts as self or others" (35). This seems like one of those paradoxal saying that eastern religions love to distress their students with. The idea that there really isn't enlightenment, because those that are enlightened do not precive themselves as an indavidual therfore there is no one to be enlightend. All of that seems more designed to confuse and confound the readers rather than to empart any kind of meaningful message.

Reading: The Budda

I very much enjoyed this reading. The idea that this is a compilation certainly needs to be taken into acound, and the passages that Stephen Mitchell selected do come together to from a very specific message. That message being that one should, "Hold to the truth within yourself, as to the only truth" (11). That being said I really agree with this perception of things. I always liked that idea of thinking and feeling my way through religion rather than accepting a teaching or reading part and parcel. This isn't to say that I never want to hear what others have to say, or read anything about religion. I simply like to make the final call on what I really agree with, and these passages from Budda are certainly amoung those things I agree with.

"...when you realize that something is unwholesome and bad for you, give it up. And when you realize that something is wholesome and good for you, do it" (10). This seems like such a basic no brainer, and I feel like I have always tryed to stick to this sort of a rule weather I really acknowledged it or not. Though it is a very simple way of looking at life some times I seems so hard. Staying up late doing a paper because I procrastinated on it, is a great example. I certainly knew it would be far more wholesome if I had done the paper earlier, but I chose not to and now I find myself forced to do it in an unwholesome manner, so that I can achive my goal of passing the class.