Happy Bloomsday!

Since my last few posts have all been about religion, I thought it was time to mix things up a bit and write about something else. And so today I am honouring Bloomsday, a holiday celebrating the Irish writer James Joyce and his infamous novel Ulysses, which takes place almost entirely on June 16^th, 1904.  Ulysses details the story of three characters – Stephen Dedalus, Mr. Leopold Bloom, and Molly Bloom – and their interactions and experiences in Dublin from 8am on June 16^th, 1904 until 2am on June 17^th, 1904. Bloomsday is commemorated in Dublin and by those who are familiar with Ulysses. Many people honour Bloomsday by walking the route that Mr. Bloom take throughout Dublin in Ulysses, visiting the various places that are mentioned in the novel, as well as with readings from the novel, entertainment, and pub crawls.

The first chapter, or ‘episode’ of the novel, is set at 8am, and begins from the point of view of Stephen Dedalus, a young man who has just returned to Dublin from Paris after having failed to carry out his artistic vision. The first three chapters (from 8am-10am) focus on Stephen, and then the time frame jumps back in episode 4 to 8am where the story begins again from Mr. Bloom’s perspective. Mr. Bloom is a pork-eating Jew, who feels tension in his marriage and becomes fond of Stephen. Their adventures around Dublin form the bulk of the novel until the final episode, where the narrative shifts to Molly Bloom’s point of view. In this episode, Molly’s internal thoughts are spewed out on paper with no periods, commas, or any other punctuation. In this episode, Molly pees, farts, has her period, contemplates the affair she just had that afternoon (even describing the man’s girth), as well as the rest of her sexual history and desires.

This was one of the most obscene books I have ever read (and not surprisingly it was banned in Britain and the United States for many years), yet it was also one of the most brilliant. Published in 1922, Ulysses is considered to be the quintessential novel of the modernist period (a period of experimentation in the arts that occurred from the late 1800s to mid 20^th century), and also has a reputation of being ‘hard to start, and even harder to finish’. Part of what makes this work so challenging is that it is primarily written in a stream-of-consciousness style, meaning that the sentences are written as if they are the internal thoughts of the character written out on paper. Furthermore, the narrative also jumps from one character’s thoughts to another, and so it is confusing to pinpoint who exactly thought what – Stephen, Mr Bloom, or the narrator (who seems to become a character himself). What also makes Ulysses so hard to read is the fact that there are so many obscure references to other literary, musical and artistic sources, Celtic and Irish mythology, and political events in the early 1900s. There have been books written that are larger than the text of Ulysses itself to explain all of these vague references! Many of the episodes are written in various ‘styles’ (as if it was a newspaper, a musical, a play, a scientific work), demonstrating Joyce’s ability to manipulate language and firmly establishing him as one of the greatest writers of the English language.

This will be the first Bloomsday that I am commemorating, but unfortunately I am celebrating it by having my wisdom teeth taken out. But, considering that Ulysses focuses on the mundane physical aspects of human life and also has a very trippy episode where characters change shape and gender, maybe having my wisdom teeth cut out of my mouth and feeling loopy from painkillers is in fact the very best way to celebrate Bloomsday!

So, Happy Bloomsday everyone!

Religious Misconceptions #2

Jihad means "Holy War"

This has, undoubtedly, become the popular Western definition of the word. It is partially correct, but it is little known that jihad actually means "strive". Jihad comes from the Arabic word jahada which means "to strive", or "to struggle" (against external forces). The root of the word, juhd, means "effort". Therefore, jihad simply means "exerting one's best effort", and encountering some form of "struggle" or "resistance", in order to achieve a specific goal. The word jihad can also be used in a generic sense, to mean "exerting the best efforts against something", even if that goal is not related to Islam. Even the Qur'an uses the verb jihad in non-religious contexts (see Surah 29:8 and 31:15).

The Qur'an also uses the term jihad specifically in the sense of "struggle/effort for the sake of Allah". Although this can mean fighting with arms, it also means resisting the evil drives and desires in one's self. And so, there are two types of jihad. The "greater jihad" is a 'spiritual' type. It means the inner struggle a believer has, to do the right thing, and resist evil. The "lesser jihad" is that of religious warfare. This "lesser jihad", or "armed jihad" is a response to armed agression, and is only temporary. The "greater jihad" is permanent, because there are always causes for it - one is always struggling against one's own weaknesses. This peaceful jihad can refer to anything instance of peaceful struggle undertaken by a Muslim against external forces, such as preaching in a hostile environment, opposing an evil act, or even donating money to the poor - because it involves struggling against one's selfish desires to keep one's money for one's own pleasures.

So, even though jihad can mean "holy war" - or rather resistance to armed agression - it is actually meant, first and foremost, to denote a believer's inner spiritual struggle.

Religious Misconceptions #1

Religion of the day: Buddhism

i. The Dalai Lama is the reincarnation of the original Buddha on earth

Answer: Not quite: The Dalai Lama is actually the reincarnation (or really the 'emanation body') of the deity Avalokitesvara, pictured below:

The 14th Dalai Lama (Tenzin Gyatso) on the left,  and the deity Avalokitesvara on the right. Since Avalokitesvara is a deity of great compassion, he is often depicted as having many heads and arms to symbolize that he is able to notice and respond to the needs of many people at the same time.                                                                                                           

To many Buddhists, Avalokitesvara is a bodhisattva. Boddhisattvas are beings which, many existences ago, achieved great merit and would have been able to pass into Nirvana, but out of compassion and pity for humanity, delayed their entrance into Nirvana to help other beings achieve enlightenment. However, for Tibetans, Avalokitesvara is not a bodhisattva but a Buddha who attained enlightenment in a previous era and vowed to appear in the future to help bring the Dharma (the teachings of the Buddha) to the people. And so, according to Tibetan Buddhist belief, Avalokitesvara first reincarnated as Gendun Druba (in 1391), and since then has reincarnated after each Dalai Lama's death. Today, Tenzin Gyatso is the fourteenth Dalai Lama.

The search for the next Dalai Lama is as follows: When the current Dalai Lama passes away, the search begins to find his reincarnation. This process can sometimes take years. In fact, it took four years to find the current Dalai Lama. When the supposed child is found, he is put through a series of tests to determine if he is in fact the correct reincarnation. In one of these tests he is shown some artifacts belonging to the previous Dalai Lama, and passes the test if he identifies them correctly. Once the reincarnation has been positively confirmed, he begins studying at a monastery, to prepare for becoming the spiritual leader of the Tibetan people.

ii. Buddhism originated in China

Answer: No. Even though Buddhism has been practiced for many centuries in China, and is the dominant religion in places like Japan and Thailand, it first formed in India. Buddhism began with the birth of the historical Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, who was a prince born at the foothills of the Himalayas (then northern India, but today Nepal) in approximately 563 BCE. He eventually abandoned royal life to find how one can gain freedom from suffering and death. He tried philosophical meditation, bodily mortification, and other extremes, but eventually discovered the cause of suffering, and how it can be avoided, and then gained enlightenment. Thereafter he began to teach his doctrine, or Dharma, and eventually left the world and entered Nirvana.

After the Buddha left the mortal realm, Buddhism began to spread in India (gaining popularity with those who rejected Brahmanism - the ancestor of modern Hinduism), and several different schools/traditions arose. Then, in the first century CE, Buddhism began to spread into China and other parts of Asia, largely because of merchants and missionaries. While Buddhism gained popularity in the rest of Asia over the centuries, it declined in India and basically disappeared by 1200 CE. Today, only about 1% of the population of India is Buddhist.

Happy Mother's Day!

"Whatever else is unsure in this stinking dunghill of a world, a mother's love is not. Your mother brings you into the world, carries you first in her body. What do we know about what she feels? But whatever she feels, it, at least, must be real. It must be"
 - from A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by James Joyce

I know this isn't a flowery or sentimental quote for Mother's Day, but I will use any excuse I can to quote my favourite writer James Joyce. But, even though this quote is quite blunt, it is a reminder of how special a mother's love is. So on this Mother's Day, let's remember and honour the love that only our mothers can give us.

Hinduism and the Caste System

"Men are equal. For, though they are not of the same age, same height, the same skin and the same intellect, these inequalities are temporary and superficial, the soul that is hidden beneath this earthly crust is one and the same for all men and women belonging to all climes"
 - Gandhi
 
Okay, so it has been way too long since I've written a post on this blog. I definitely did not keep up with my New Year's resolution of blogging at least once a week. I've only written four posts this year - so about one a month. Yikes! Alright, time to resurrect this thing!

Over the months of March and April I had the opportunity of going to Hindu temples and discussing Hinduism with several different people. But first: I landed up discussing religious studies with a pastor at a church on campus one Sunday in the beginning of March. She said that she was also fascinated by other belief systems, but when I mentioned that I was particularly interested in Hinduism, she immediately criticized this religion because of its caste system. The caste system is a frequent criticism against Hinduism, and ever since this conversation I have been thinking a lot about it.

The caste system is a hierarchical division of society based on birth. It consists of four social classes (or varnas):

1) Brahmans - keepers of the Vedas (intellectuals, priests, ministers, doctors, teachers)
2) Kshatriyas - protectors of the people (kings, warriors, aristocrats)
3) Vaishyas - generate and distribute wealth (farmers, merchants, artisans)
4) Shudras - serve the rest of the hierarchy (labourers, servants).

The caste system is heavily based on purity and pollution: as one goes down the hierarchy, one naturally gains more karma due to one's occupation. The people whose occupations make them the most impure are the Candalas, or Dalits (who consist of tanners, washermen, sweepers, hunters). They are considered to be outside of the class system, and are therefore 'outcastes'. Because of their status they have been vigorously (and sometimes violently) discriminated against.

Where did this hierarchy come from? An important source that solidified the caste system within Hinduism is a text called the Manava Dharma-Shastra, or The Law Code of Manu. I read an English translation of this text in my Indian myth course last semester, and its laws regarding women, Shudras, and outcastes are definitely very harsh and unjust.

The Law Code of Manu and the Hindu caste system has been responsible for inequality towards women, violent mistreatment of Dalits, and inequality within India in general. However, does this mean we should reject Hinduism on these grounds? First, not everyone who follows Hinduism believes in the caste system. Many people who believe in reforming Hinduism reject The Law Code of Manu. Many of these reformists reject Manu on the grounds that it is a smrti (human-authored) text, and not a shruti (divine-authored) text like the Vedas or the Upanishads, which advocate the equality of humans. Gandhi, who was a Hindu reformist, rejected the Law Code of Manu and fought to improve the conditions of outcastes.

As I mentioned earlier, I've had some opportunities to discuss Hinduism and experience it first hand by going to temples. I mentioned the Law Code of Manu to my friend who is the son of a Hindu priest, and he claimed that, at first, the class system was not determined by birth. It was merely a classification of different types of people according to their abilities. He argued that this eventually turned into classification by birth, because, for example, a Brahman priests were not able to accept that their children could possibly be laborers or sweepers if they displayed these traits, and so it was devised that whatever status the father had, the child would be born into. So, the aristocracy was protecting its interests by implementing a hierarchy that was determined by one's birth.

Furthermore, I was at a bar with my roommates one night and I landed up chatting to my roommate who is from Malaysia. He follows the Hindu religion, but he told me that he doesn't believe in the caste system. He said that the idea of women and certain classes having an inferior status is crap.

Furthermore, I investigated Hinduism further by going to my roommate's temple in Burnaby with him and his friends, and also going to the Mahalakshmi temple in Vancouver, where my friend's father is the priest. On both these occasions I saw the genuine faith of my friends, and saw that this obviously means a lot to them. At both temples I was struck by the sense of community. I personally felt welcome, and was invited to join the rest of the community as they ate together after the ceremony.

The truth is, followers of all religions have done some pretty horrible things at one time or another. Just recently, the Catholic church came under fire yet again for more sexual abuse scandals. But although some members of a religion do atrocious things, this does not necessarily reflect the actions or beliefs of everyone following that religion.

So I don't think one should dismiss Hinduism - with its rich variety of scriptures, traditions and beliefs - simply because of the caste system.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY JOANNE!!

"The glory of friendship is not the outstretched hand, nor the kindly smile, nor the joy of companionship; it is the spiritual inspiration that comes to one when he discovers that someone believes in him and is willing to trust him with his friendship."
–Ralph Waldo Emerson

 Olive, Joanne and myself on Halloween 2009

Ever since my friend Joanne found out about my blog at the beginning of this year, she has been bugging me about writing a post about her. I kept putting it off, telling her that she doesn't fall into the categories "Culture" or "Religion", yet she kept insisting I do it. But, to be honest, although I may have been a little hesitant about it (because I usually don't put anything too personal up here), I actually have been meaning to write about her. And seeing that today is her birthday, I can't think of a better occasion!

First off, you must know that Joanne is an amazing person, and a really genuine friend. She is always laughing, and fun to be around, but never insincere. Before I go on, let me relate the story of our friendship.

In September 2008, at the start of my third year at UBC, I began my amazing relationship with Olive, who I have now been seeing for a year and a half. Joanne, was one of Olive's roommates in Fairview, although neither of them knew each other before living together. As I was going over to her house all the time, I soon met Joanne myself. My first impression of her was that she was friendly, confident, and extroverted. She soon began to joke around with me, pretending to give me a hard time for things, but as a result of this and her outgoing personality (and because I learned she was in a sorority), I must admit that I was a little intimidated by her!

I remember one time when I was in a bad mood and had come over to Olive's place to see her. Joanne opened the door for me, and I bluntly demanded, "Where's Olive?", instead of the more polite, "Oh hi Joanne, is Olive around?" that I usually gave. I felt really bad afterwards, and apologized. Joanne however was not offended, but did enjoy making a few jokes about it! As the year went on, I got to know her a lot more, and became more comfortable around her. I remember the first time that I made a comeback to one of her witty jokes - she was so surprised, but thrilled too!

As the school year was finishing up, everyone was trying to figure out living arrangements for the following year. Olive had been considering living with a good friend of hers, but when that fell through, Joanne asked Olive if she'd like to live with her. And, of course, Olive said yes. I thought that this made a lot of sense, for over the course of both semesters they had become friends, and were used to living together. And time has shown that this was a fantastic idea, because they live and interact really well together, and have become even better friends.

But, my story is not yet over...I was glad that Olive had a good person to live with, and since I had gotten to know Joanne more, I knew I'd be comfortable spending time at their place. However, since this past September, I have really gotten to learn more about Joanne, and see what a great person she is. We've had many late-night conversations together, usually on occasions where Olive had already gone to bed, and I would be sitting in the living room reading Ulysses for class. It was during these chats that we delved into more personal subjects, and really learned a lot more about each other. For a long time, Joanne had always been "Olive's roommate", but after our first late-night conversation, I knew she was truly my friend as well.

And so Joanne, or 'Jo-Jo Bear' as Olive and I affectionately call you, I wish you a very Happy Birthday. Thank you for putting up with me, because I know I'm over at your place a lot - taking up the washroom, lying on your couch to read my 'literature' (but that couch is just so comfy for reading!), and using your milk for my cereal. But, most of all, thank you for being a great friend.


You are an amazing person, inside and out. Happy Birthday.

 - Gavatron

Religious Parallels; and what to make of them.

Jesus and Krishna

Now that I've taken several Religious Studies classes, I'm continuing to find a number of similarities between the beliefs and scriptures of all the various religions - both those that are practiced today, and those that are ancient. I began to learn of some of these similarities in one of the first religious studies courses I took - the Myths, Legends and Scriptures of the Near East. Over the course of a year we read excerpts from Ancient Mesopotamian mythology, the Bible, and the Qur'an. What was especially interesting in this course were the parallels between the Mesopotamian myths and those of the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible. Mesopotamia (now in modern Iraq) was home to a prosperous society over 4,000 years ago, and had their own Creation and Flood stories which have some striking similarities to those in Genesis.

In this same course, I began researching religious figures of salvation for a paper, and I found a lot of similarities between Jesus Christ and the figure of Krishna in Hinduism. Krishna can be considered as both an incarnation or avatara of  Vishnu - one of the principal Hindu gods - as well as Vishnu himself. I compared their birth narratives, their representations as God manifested in human form on earth, as well as their teachings of salvation (as attested by Christ in the Gospels and Krishna in the Bhagavad-Gita). Both Jesus and Krishna teach that one can attain salvation through the grace of God, and reveal a loving and personal God. Finally, both are predicted to return at a future time to defeat evil and unite humanity with God. There are, undoubtedly, many differences between Jesus and Krishna, but the features that are similar are remarkable. I've now written two papers comparing and contrasting Krishna and Christ, and I think it is safe to conclude that both figures had a influential impact on the respective faiths, transforming the religious traditions that came before them.

Anyways, I would love to elaborate more on these similarities, but what I wanted to talk about in this post was the most recent 'cross-religious' discovery I've found. I am taking a course in the religion of Ancient Egypt, and just last week my professor was talking about the various cosmogonies (theories of how the universe came into being) that the ancient Egyptians had. The ancient Egyptians had thousands of gods, so it is not surprising that they also had several different theories of how the world came into being. One of these is the Memphite Theology, named after the ancient capital city of Memphis. In this city the god Ptah was regarded as the creator god. Now what is interesting is that Ptah creates the world by 'speaking out'. We know of this cosmogony because of the hieroglyphics on the Shabaka Stone (from about 700 BCE). Here are some excerpts describing Ptah's creation of the world:

"There took shape in the heart, there took shape on the tongue the form of Atum. For the very great one is Ptah, who gave [life] to all the gods and their kas through this heart and through this tongue, in which Horus had taken shape as Ptah, in which Thoth had taken shape as Ptah"

and later:

 "Sight, hearing, breathing - they report to the heart, and it makes every understanding come forth. As to the tongue, it repeats what the heart has devised. Thus all the gods were born and his Ennead was completed. For every word of the god came about through what the heart devised and the tongue commanded" 

This bears similarities to the Genesis story, where God declares something and does it: "Then God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light." (Gen 1:3). It also bears similarities to the opening of the Gospel of John, where the logos, or 'word', is described as divine, eternal, and is also identified with Jesus:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people...And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father's only son, full of grace and truth." (John 1:1-4, 14)

Both the Memphite Theology and the Bible emphasize the 'word' of (a) god becoming something more. In John, the Word/God brings all things into being, and also manifests as Jesus. In the Memphite Theology, the speech/'words' of the creator god Ptah create all the rest of the gods.

Okay, so now the big question is: What do we make of similarities such as these? Are they mere coincidences? They could be. Or, perhaps, has the one myth/story predated and influenced the other? I believe that this was most likely true in the case of the Creation and Flood stories in the Mesopotamian and Hebrew traditions. But what about Krishna and Jesus? Some might argue that Krishna's teaching of salvation in the Bhagavad-Gita may have been influenced by early Christianity, but on the other hand, I have found a book that claims, quite vehemently, that Jesus and Christianity originated from a Krishna cult! Theories like this abound (I've read a journal article that discusses whether Jesus could have been influenced by Buddhism), but, just as people travel and communicate, religious ideas and philosophies have and do continue to travel. This could also serve as an explanation for the interesting connection between 'creation by word' in ancient Egypt and Christianity.

However, I also wonder if similarities such as these -  which cover huge geographical, cultural and time periods - instead point to a common, underlying psychological, 'human condition'. Ever since humans began to think, they have thought that there must be a greater power of some kind. Some may then argue that 'god' and 'religion' are a thing of the past, but if you consider that millions of people today are Muslim, Hindu, Christian, or 'spiritual', or even agnostic, then this claim cannot easily be made.

Maybe the common ground between religious beliefs (in those currently practiced and those that have disappeared) instead suggests that there is some kind of higher power, and that throughout history humankind has interpreted and experienced it in a variety of ways.