Only in America?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/us/politics/09hanukkah.html?_r=2&hp
Thoughts? Opinions? Yay Pluralism?
On a side note: it is quite the catchy song. haha
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Happy Thanksgiving
Enjoy this great article about American Civil Religion and Thanksgiving and have a great day with your family and friends everyone! :)
The Sacramental American Day of Thanks
The Sacramental American Day of Thanks
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Vicaarana: Oh My God. Questioning Religion in the Movies.
You may recall (or perhaps you don't) that I had a good discussion on Bill Maher's Religulous film in my Vicaarana section about Atheism. Well, about a week ago I saw a preview for this movie called "Oh My God" which seemed to be a different attempt to do what Bill Maher was also doing: grapple with a belief in God. Now, I normally like to go for the socio-cultural side of religion because who am I to say whether or not you should believe in God...its not my place. Buuuut all of these movies keep coming out asking that question: What is God? Why do we believe? I'm not going to weigh in on the question but rather address why I think this film Oh My God was more successful than Religulous in achieving the same intended goal: to put the question out there as to why we as human's believe and God and, more importantly in my eyes, why do we practice religion?
I've gone on the oh so popular religious studies rant about how religion is undefinable, so I will not get into it again. Instead I want to focus on the scope of these two films. In the beginning of his film, Maher says that he is not an atheist, but rather the best thing he can do is say that he does not know. Then he continues the film to pick out the craziest seeming Islamo-Judeo-Christian peoples he can find in the US (mostly), a bit of the UK, and Israel / Palestine and badger them to account for their belief in God and their religious practices. He ends this string of interviews with a plea to the world to give up religion (which is definitely crazy, by his count) and belief in God (which is what religion directly is) and to give in to science or we will destroy ourselves. So much for not being an atheist... My problems, besides the definition of religion itself, are many. Namely Maher's lack of consideration of all aspects of religious life and people, his focus on only the Abrahamic sphere of religious life, and of course his kind of hypocrisy for claiming he is not looking to make a case for atheism and yet being incredibly militant at the end of the movie complete with doomsday pictures and music.
I now want to turn to Oh My God! Oh My God was a documentary made by Peter Rodger that is in the process of being released in select theatres in big cities throughout the US (it was just release in NYC this weekend). The project was the filmmaker's attempt to wrestle with his own belief in God by traveling to 23 countries and interviewing countless people. He also enters with a similar intended mindset as Maher, which is one of neither atheism or theism, however, in my humble opinion, Rodger succeeded where Maher failed. Although Rodger's film is not perfect (for example, there is a huge focus on the celebrities over the common people, but as a small filmmaker when you can get a Beatle, a princess, and Wolverine to speak in your movie, I guess you take it), I really do think he created an interesting film. Rodger managed to a) cover a multitude of religions and worldviews from all different countries and b) to leave the answers to his questions about religion and God ambiguous in the end. Where Maher ended with judgement, Rodger ended with more questions and I think that more closely relates to what we are looking at here: there are no answers. There is no definition for religion. And that's ok. Perhaps that's why we study it and why its fascinating. Rodger's manages to capture the full spectrum of religious life and expression: the positive, the negative, and the multiple view points. These are all the areas of Maher's movie I found wholly unsatisfying, and they were found in this movie. Rodger's main question may have been about the ontological existence of God, but he also addressed why we practice religion as a people, how we do it, and what it means in our relations with one another. Sure he had director's OCD, used weird Moby-like music (according to the reviewer from Time Out New York), and seemed to jump around while moving between topics, but overall I do wish this was the movie that was wide released and Religulous was limited release. Overall, I thought that this movie better (not best, of course) addressed this enigma of our socio-cultural lives that is religion for a mainstream audience. Well, and it was just a goshdarn pretty looking movie, and that always helps!
Religion Dispatches Review of Oh My God
PS- If you happen to see this movie, respond back and let me know if you also noticed the strikingly interesting focus on Islam over all the other religions mentioned. I left the movie wondering what that was all about. Addressing Islamophobia?? haha.
I've gone on the oh so popular religious studies rant about how religion is undefinable, so I will not get into it again. Instead I want to focus on the scope of these two films. In the beginning of his film, Maher says that he is not an atheist, but rather the best thing he can do is say that he does not know. Then he continues the film to pick out the craziest seeming Islamo-Judeo-Christian peoples he can find in the US (mostly), a bit of the UK, and Israel / Palestine and badger them to account for their belief in God and their religious practices. He ends this string of interviews with a plea to the world to give up religion (which is definitely crazy, by his count) and belief in God (which is what religion directly is) and to give in to science or we will destroy ourselves. So much for not being an atheist... My problems, besides the definition of religion itself, are many. Namely Maher's lack of consideration of all aspects of religious life and people, his focus on only the Abrahamic sphere of religious life, and of course his kind of hypocrisy for claiming he is not looking to make a case for atheism and yet being incredibly militant at the end of the movie complete with doomsday pictures and music.
I now want to turn to Oh My God! Oh My God was a documentary made by Peter Rodger that is in the process of being released in select theatres in big cities throughout the US (it was just release in NYC this weekend). The project was the filmmaker's attempt to wrestle with his own belief in God by traveling to 23 countries and interviewing countless people. He also enters with a similar intended mindset as Maher, which is one of neither atheism or theism, however, in my humble opinion, Rodger succeeded where Maher failed. Although Rodger's film is not perfect (for example, there is a huge focus on the celebrities over the common people, but as a small filmmaker when you can get a Beatle, a princess, and Wolverine to speak in your movie, I guess you take it), I really do think he created an interesting film. Rodger managed to a) cover a multitude of religions and worldviews from all different countries and b) to leave the answers to his questions about religion and God ambiguous in the end. Where Maher ended with judgement, Rodger ended with more questions and I think that more closely relates to what we are looking at here: there are no answers. There is no definition for religion. And that's ok. Perhaps that's why we study it and why its fascinating. Rodger's manages to capture the full spectrum of religious life and expression: the positive, the negative, and the multiple view points. These are all the areas of Maher's movie I found wholly unsatisfying, and they were found in this movie. Rodger's main question may have been about the ontological existence of God, but he also addressed why we practice religion as a people, how we do it, and what it means in our relations with one another. Sure he had director's OCD, used weird Moby-like music (according to the reviewer from Time Out New York), and seemed to jump around while moving between topics, but overall I do wish this was the movie that was wide released and Religulous was limited release. Overall, I thought that this movie better (not best, of course) addressed this enigma of our socio-cultural lives that is religion for a mainstream audience. Well, and it was just a goshdarn pretty looking movie, and that always helps!
Religion Dispatches Review of Oh My God
PS- If you happen to see this movie, respond back and let me know if you also noticed the strikingly interesting focus on Islam over all the other religions mentioned. I left the movie wondering what that was all about. Addressing Islamophobia?? haha.
Monday, October 19, 2009
A Hindu-American Blogger Gets Added to Beliefnet
I am an unapologetic reader of beliefnet.com... perhaps its a bit unacademic of me...but I like some touchy-feely spun religious stories every once and awhile (what can I say). One part about the site that I do especially like is the blogs. These blogs are usually by faith practitioners commenting on stories in their religious communities (to date, my favorite was the one on keeping Ramadan in America) . I was very excited to see an add on of my own particular interest. The newest blog is Om Sweet Om: A Hindu American Journey by Vineet Chander. My own interests in the South Asian-American diaspora have gotten me excited about this new blog. So far there are some really cool entries about Obama's Diwali message worth checking out. So, I just wanted to give a little shout out to Mr. Chander that i'm logged on and reading, and to direct my own readers (if you do exist! haha) to go ahead and check out the always interesting Beliefnet Blogs.
PS-
Idol Chatter and Pontifications (which seams to have been replaced by Deacon's Bench) are also worth checking out....
PS-
Idol Chatter and Pontifications (which seams to have been replaced by Deacon's Bench) are also worth checking out....
Friday, October 16, 2009
Today In American Dharma: He Really Is the Theologian in Chief
There are a great many reasons many in America has slipped from their love affair with Mr. Obama (the big ghost in the room is called HEALTH CARE)... but one cannot deny his role as the Theologian in Chief. I documented earlier in the year about how impressed I was with his address to the Muslim world, and the man is at it again. This time in his care and consideration to grant the religions of Hinduism, Jainism, and Sikhism a Happy Diwali. Furthermore, he went so far to invite a Hindu pandit to chant a prayer in the White House and lit a White House diya. Why am I impressed by this? Well, first of all, in a mostly Abrahamic rhetoric that the US has taken in regards to religious themes, its kind of interesting to see an acknowledgement of the thousands of American citizens who are from Asia and practice non-Abrahamic religions. In addition, I don't know about you, but I think this also sort of spreads religious tollerance, and hell, even religious acknowledgement. I didn't know what Diwali was until I went to college. How many people in America are aware that this holiday is celebrated by over a billion people worldwide? From my personal experience...not too many. So, kudos to the Theologian in Cheif for taking a step towards teaching America about the world's religions, if even on the base level. Perhaps you'll earn that Nobel Peace Prize yet!
President Obama's Diwali Message:
The entire celebration complete w/ South Asian a cappella group:
As covered by an Indian news channel:
President Obama's Diwali Message:
The entire celebration complete w/ South Asian a cappella group:
As covered by an Indian news channel:
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Dharma Laughs: Sarah Vowell on the Daily Show
Sarah Vowell thinks there would be fewer car bombs if religious fanatics acted more like Puritan theologian Roger Williams. I found this an amusing interview about the history of religion in America. :) Enjoy!
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Sarah Vowell | ||||
| ||||
Monday, September 21, 2009
Dharma in the Big City: On Authenticity and the Feast of San Gennaro
So, its been quite awhile since I've updated, but adapting to life in NYC (as in any new place) has been a bit crazy. However, despite the beginning of school, the starting of a new job, and all of the other transitional things one must do to start a new chapter in life, I did get a chance to go to something I've always wanted to see and experience: The Feast of San Gennaro.
The Feast of San Gennaro, or simply "The Feast", is an Italian American festival that takes place every September in New York City's Little Italy. The Feast originated in 1926 with Italian immigrants from Naples settling along Little Italy's Mulberry Street and began celebrating the Feast Day of the Patron Saint of their city once a year. From the Middle Ages until today saint feast days have been celebrated as a way of releasing the grip of the social order; Mardi Gras and Carnival are other examples of this. Since the original festival, the Feast has turned into an 11 day event that includes street vendors, carnival games, live music, religious festivities, and an all out celebration of Italian American culture.
But New York is not the only American city with an Italian American fueled feast day celebration. Last year I had the pleasure of attending the St. Anthony's Feast in the North End of Boston. This feast actually originated before the San Gennaro feast in 1919, however, it is not as well known due to the presence of the Feast of San Gennaro in popular culture, such as in the Godfather Trilogy of the 1970s. This feast celebrates St. Anthony, the Patron saint of Montefalcione and the finder of lost things (If you lose your car keys, you pray to Saint Antony).
Having visited the St. Anthony's Feast last year in Boston and *loving* the celebration of my own Italian American culture, I was incredibly excited to experience the San Gennaro Feast which had been talked up by my entire family for as long as I can remember. However, upon reaching Mulberry Street with my younger sister and taking the 6 block walk down to Canal, I found myself disappointed. Disappointed by everything this Feast lacked in comparison to the St. Anthony's Feast in Boston. The Feast of San Gennaro was not just an Italian American festival anymore, but rather a multiculturally mixed spectacle (every other vendor sold Hillal food), the blaring sound of Lady GaGa's "Poker Face" permeated the festival, and one would not have know this was even a religious event at all until a half a block from Canal Street where the statue of San Gennaro was enthroned and older parishioners were selling rosary and saint paraphernalia.
The St. Anthony's Feast in Boston, however, featured a band stand playing old swing and jazz standards and Frank Sinatra (Ever Italian- American's dream son/lover), featured only Italian vendors, and had a nightly procession of St. Anthony for the devoted to give offerings and ask for intercession.
Throughout all of the San Gennaro Feast I made these small comparison's in my head until I realized what I was doing. I, myself, had a preconceived culturally constructed notion of what it meant to be an Italian-American. A true idealized notion of what my culture was and aught to be. As one who study's culture and religion in diaspora, I am no stranger to the concept of "authenticity". When a group relocates in a diaspora, often there is an idealization of the "homeland" and an attempt to recreate it in a new place. I have just finished reading John Jackson Jr.'s Harlemworld where he talks of an African-American population removed from any remembrance of Africa and rather idealizing Harlem as the center of their world and their culture. I could say the same for Italian-Americans. When most Americans think of Italian-Americans they surly wouldn't label Boston as the center of "authentic" Italian-American culture, but rather New York (in all Burroughs) and New Jersey. My childhood was filled with these ideals of the Italian-American culture: what we ate, how we practice our religion, how our parents and grandparents grew up; all of this in the attempt to preserve and pass on our culture. My biggest disappointment after hearing miles of stories about the amazingness of the Feast and its celebration of our "authentic" culture, the way it used to be, was to find that what I had built in my mind as "authenticity" was found in Boston rather than New York. How shocked was I!
However, it helped me to reflect on what can be found in any kind of religious and cultural diaspora and that is the attempt to maintain this "authenticity" by any means necessary. Where we can learn is in how any particular culture or religious group attempts to do so, where they succeed, where they fail. How do these groups adapt their culture to a new setting and how do these groups create a new "authentic" culture in America? When does the Italian, African, South Asian culture become the Italian-American, African-American, South Asian-America culture, respectively? In this case, can we ever find "authenticity"? In spite of myself, I'd say no. We can have an ideal. Such as my idealized conception of what a Saint's Feast celebration *should* be or how Jackson's interviewees saw Harlem as a cultural mecca, but none of these things are static. Time and space changes everything. Time and introduction of new cultures into NYC brought on the extra not-so-Italian carts to the feast, as well as Lady Gaga. We need to learn to embrace change, however, I see nothing wrong with still striving to maintain a certain level of "authenticity" within reason. Without an ideal of the "authentic" to at least strive for, how do we attempt to preserve our culture? Or am I just talking via my disappointment?
PS- All of this does not even mention my surprise at surprising lack of religiosity featured in the NYC Feast as compared to the Boston feast. In the Boston Feast, St. Anthony was constantly present and presented and you were to be reminded often of the presence of the Saint and the purpose of the Feast. However in NY, as mentioned, San Gennaro was hidden in the side streets and back alleys as the original purpose for the feast seemed to have shrunk into the background.
Feast of St. Anthony: Official Site
Feast of San Gennaro: Official Site
The Feast of San Gennaro, or simply "The Feast", is an Italian American festival that takes place every September in New York City's Little Italy. The Feast originated in 1926 with Italian immigrants from Naples settling along Little Italy's Mulberry Street and began celebrating the Feast Day of the Patron Saint of their city once a year. From the Middle Ages until today saint feast days have been celebrated as a way of releasing the grip of the social order; Mardi Gras and Carnival are other examples of this. Since the original festival, the Feast has turned into an 11 day event that includes street vendors, carnival games, live music, religious festivities, and an all out celebration of Italian American culture.
But New York is not the only American city with an Italian American fueled feast day celebration. Last year I had the pleasure of attending the St. Anthony's Feast in the North End of Boston. This feast actually originated before the San Gennaro feast in 1919, however, it is not as well known due to the presence of the Feast of San Gennaro in popular culture, such as in the Godfather Trilogy of the 1970s. This feast celebrates St. Anthony, the Patron saint of Montefalcione and the finder of lost things (If you lose your car keys, you pray to Saint Antony).
Having visited the St. Anthony's Feast last year in Boston and *loving* the celebration of my own Italian American culture, I was incredibly excited to experience the San Gennaro Feast which had been talked up by my entire family for as long as I can remember. However, upon reaching Mulberry Street with my younger sister and taking the 6 block walk down to Canal, I found myself disappointed. Disappointed by everything this Feast lacked in comparison to the St. Anthony's Feast in Boston. The Feast of San Gennaro was not just an Italian American festival anymore, but rather a multiculturally mixed spectacle (every other vendor sold Hillal food), the blaring sound of Lady GaGa's "Poker Face" permeated the festival, and one would not have know this was even a religious event at all until a half a block from Canal Street where the statue of San Gennaro was enthroned and older parishioners were selling rosary and saint paraphernalia.
The St. Anthony's Feast in Boston, however, featured a band stand playing old swing and jazz standards and Frank Sinatra (Ever Italian- American's dream son/lover), featured only Italian vendors, and had a nightly procession of St. Anthony for the devoted to give offerings and ask for intercession.
Throughout all of the San Gennaro Feast I made these small comparison's in my head until I realized what I was doing. I, myself, had a preconceived culturally constructed notion of what it meant to be an Italian-American. A true idealized notion of what my culture was and aught to be. As one who study's culture and religion in diaspora, I am no stranger to the concept of "authenticity". When a group relocates in a diaspora, often there is an idealization of the "homeland" and an attempt to recreate it in a new place. I have just finished reading John Jackson Jr.'s Harlemworld where he talks of an African-American population removed from any remembrance of Africa and rather idealizing Harlem as the center of their world and their culture. I could say the same for Italian-Americans. When most Americans think of Italian-Americans they surly wouldn't label Boston as the center of "authentic" Italian-American culture, but rather New York (in all Burroughs) and New Jersey. My childhood was filled with these ideals of the Italian-American culture: what we ate, how we practice our religion, how our parents and grandparents grew up; all of this in the attempt to preserve and pass on our culture. My biggest disappointment after hearing miles of stories about the amazingness of the Feast and its celebration of our "authentic" culture, the way it used to be, was to find that what I had built in my mind as "authenticity" was found in Boston rather than New York. How shocked was I!
However, it helped me to reflect on what can be found in any kind of religious and cultural diaspora and that is the attempt to maintain this "authenticity" by any means necessary. Where we can learn is in how any particular culture or religious group attempts to do so, where they succeed, where they fail. How do these groups adapt their culture to a new setting and how do these groups create a new "authentic" culture in America? When does the Italian, African, South Asian culture become the Italian-American, African-American, South Asian-America culture, respectively? In this case, can we ever find "authenticity"? In spite of myself, I'd say no. We can have an ideal. Such as my idealized conception of what a Saint's Feast celebration *should* be or how Jackson's interviewees saw Harlem as a cultural mecca, but none of these things are static. Time and space changes everything. Time and introduction of new cultures into NYC brought on the extra not-so-Italian carts to the feast, as well as Lady Gaga. We need to learn to embrace change, however, I see nothing wrong with still striving to maintain a certain level of "authenticity" within reason. Without an ideal of the "authentic" to at least strive for, how do we attempt to preserve our culture? Or am I just talking via my disappointment?
PS- All of this does not even mention my surprise at surprising lack of religiosity featured in the NYC Feast as compared to the Boston feast. In the Boston Feast, St. Anthony was constantly present and presented and you were to be reminded often of the presence of the Saint and the purpose of the Feast. However in NY, as mentioned, San Gennaro was hidden in the side streets and back alleys as the original purpose for the feast seemed to have shrunk into the background.
Feast of St. Anthony: Official Site
Feast of San Gennaro: Official Site
Monday, September 7, 2009
Dharma in the Big City: Scenes from the Streets, Pt. 1
Some scenes of American Dharma from New York City:
Holy Water in a Spritzer!
Union Square, Manhattan
Advice from the UU's
Gramercy, Manhattan
When light is on, Jesus is in (This is the only time I saw it on, it lasted for two days)
East Village, Manhattan
Holy Water in a Spritzer!
Union Square, Manhattan
Advice from the UU's
Gramercy, Manhattan
When light is on, Jesus is in (This is the only time I saw it on, it lasted for two days)
East Village, Manhattan
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Dharma Travels: American Dharma Everywhere in NYC!
Hello readers! Sorry I haven't been as attentive to this blog lately. I have been, over the last few weeks, currently relocating to New York to begin my Masters program in Religion at NYU. Well I officially moved in on Sunday and let me tell you, my interesting encounters with the American Dharma have not stopped. The first morning I was in New York I ran into a Muslim women in a Abhaya texting on a Sidekick (god bless her too...it was SO hot out), and since then I've seen just about everything: giant statues of John Paul II, Hare Krishnas with bead bags, an incredibly large statue of Gwan Yin, Ramadan fast breaking at the Mosque on the corner of my street, my roommate explaining the concept of Purim to a farmer's market vendor, and a very strange store front Hindu temple. Needless to say, I think there's a lot to see and experience here and thus I am starting a new segment called "Dharma in the Big City" which will include, but won't be limited to, chance encounters, photos, and site visits. When classes start, there probably will be a lot more book reviews and theoretical reflections (I appologize in advanced, its due to the theory classes!). I don't have the internets at home yet, so for now, I'll be signing off from some random NYU student lounge.
Until next time!
PS- If you would perhaps like to contribute to this blog as a guest, let me know. It might be nice to not hear my opinion every once in awhile. haha.
Until next time!
PS- If you would perhaps like to contribute to this blog as a guest, let me know. It might be nice to not hear my opinion every once in awhile. haha.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Vicaarana: Are We All Hindu Now?
First I wanna give a special thanks to my friend Aditya for posting this article on his facebook. So, in her article We Are All Hindu in Newsweek Magazine, Lisa Miller claims that America is not *really* a Christian nation, but actually a *Hindu* nation. Not that we are all becoming Hindus, but rather, because Americans are starting to encompass, perhaps subconsciously, Hindu Dharmic beliefs including the famous quote from the Rig Veda: "The truth is one, though sages call it by many names". As much as I can see where this is coming from, I have to put up a small argument that it depends where in America you are. On the coasts, I totally believe it. I've grown up my whole life in the Northeastern US, I went to school up here, and I am going to more school up here. I have met plenty of people from the West Coast who practice, as the author cites, Dr. Stephen Prothero's term "cafeteria style religion". I will even cite myself as guilty of this (look at the name of this blog, after all). I've met the "spiritual, not religious" and I've met the agnostics who just don't know, and those trying to create some sort of meaning. I went to college, after all, and worked in religious life, the spiritual seekers were widespread and hungry for something that wasn't their Mama's religion (often shying away from THAT word, of course). But as many of these people and views of religion in America appear, there are still plenty of the "Christian nation" to contend with (as much as Newsweek has repeatedly insisted we are a Post Christian nation). The Christian political stances on abortion, LGBT marriage rights, and a host of other issues are too hard to ignore. (On a side note, I'm also currently reading Jeff Sharlett's The Family which furthers my belief that we are far from being a post Christian nation. Woah. Its crazy.)
But despite all this, I understand the point being made, things aren't like they were. Americans now have choices and new interactions with Diaspora communities and different faith traditions that were never made available to them in the past. Even death, Miller points out, is being treated differently as more and more people, Catholics included, leave behind that old adage of body and soul = self and go for cremation for their remains (How very Hindu indeed!). So, while I don't think there's gonna be a whole rush of people to begin installing murthis (images) of Sri Rama at their new local Mandir (temple), some of the underlying philosophical ideals of the Hindu tradition are, I can agree, starting to slowly grab hold of the American subconscious.
On the other side of the coin, as Americans are becoming more Hindu, are Hindus becoming more American? It could be argued that some of the American freedom and individualism ideology is equally grabbing hold of the South Asian Hindu diaspora psyche. So how does this new Newsweek article fair for the other side? Does it make more Americans aware and accepting of their likeness to Hinduism, or does it continue to morph the continually Americanizing Hindu tradition as it makes the transformation from India to American culture. Eventually does everyone meet somewhere in the middle? Where does culture and tradition go after we make that sort of jump to the everyone's happy little bit of everything religion, or can we just accept everyone's religion as is and live together? The author claims a little bit of both is happening, and I've seen it around me, however, as I said before, I'm living in a Northeast coast world, and I wonder if these claims are true of the whole country.
But despite all this, I understand the point being made, things aren't like they were. Americans now have choices and new interactions with Diaspora communities and different faith traditions that were never made available to them in the past. Even death, Miller points out, is being treated differently as more and more people, Catholics included, leave behind that old adage of body and soul = self and go for cremation for their remains (How very Hindu indeed!). So, while I don't think there's gonna be a whole rush of people to begin installing murthis (images) of Sri Rama at their new local Mandir (temple), some of the underlying philosophical ideals of the Hindu tradition are, I can agree, starting to slowly grab hold of the American subconscious.
On the other side of the coin, as Americans are becoming more Hindu, are Hindus becoming more American? It could be argued that some of the American freedom and individualism ideology is equally grabbing hold of the South Asian Hindu diaspora psyche. So how does this new Newsweek article fair for the other side? Does it make more Americans aware and accepting of their likeness to Hinduism, or does it continue to morph the continually Americanizing Hindu tradition as it makes the transformation from India to American culture. Eventually does everyone meet somewhere in the middle? Where does culture and tradition go after we make that sort of jump to the everyone's happy little bit of everything religion, or can we just accept everyone's religion as is and live together? The author claims a little bit of both is happening, and I've seen it around me, however, as I said before, I'm living in a Northeast coast world, and I wonder if these claims are true of the whole country.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Today In American Dharma: Corruption Thy Name Is New Jersey
(And it breaks my heart)
So, as I often do, I surfed around some news sites to remain aware of the world around me and I saw there had been an arrest of 44 officials in a corruption scandal in New Jersey. I was saddened to hear of more corruption in my beloved state, but not surprised. Not at all. Those things are true about New Jersey...corruption...corruption from the North that comes to vacation on the Shore (where I live)... not to say we are totally innocent down here...but that's usually the way it goes (this case was no different, choosing the Shore town of Deal as the vacation home). There was one kick to this story that I just wasn't expecting... and it wasn't that the corruption had to do with money laundering and spare parts (kidneys to be exact), but that out of the 44 people arrested, many of which were unsurprisingly mayors, 5 of the 44 were Jewish Rabbis. Really?! And not just any Jewish Rabbis, Hassidic (Ultra Orthodox) Jewish Rabbis. But there were the pictures of Rabbis with dark locks and full beards, dressed in black suits with widebrim hats in handcuffs. 3 from Brooklyn (you are not so innocent NY) and 2 from Jersey.
Why do I bring it up besides my kind of uncalled for shock (there have always been corrupt "men of god" scattered throughout the centuries).. I guess it just continues the growing nature of religion in this country (or at least in some of it): individualism. The clergy and organized religion are corrupt, many will say. We are spiritual and not religious...religious institutions are bad. Priests touch little boys and rabbis launder money and kidneys to Israel! Right now I am reading Anne Rice's Servant of the Bones, which was written in 1998, and she issues the same cry (this was prior to her return to the Catholic Church, of course): be careful of men with too much power high in religion. They are dangerous. She sites Jonestown and also the issue of Japanese subway poisoning to create her notorious character of Gregory Belkin, the messiah of the Temple of the Mind.
As it all continues to go down, as more and more priests, rabbis, preachers, imams, gurus (Satya Sai Baba sex accusations anyone?) are caught in acts of corruption and sexual mishaps, can we, as Americans trust these leaders with our souls and spiritual journeys? One has to wonder how much longer the trust can last as things like this continue to happen, or will soon it be every spiritual journey for itself? Or is that just my East coast perception?
44 Charged by U.S. in New Jersey Corruption Sweep
Officials lambast NJ corruption after 44 arrested
So, as I often do, I surfed around some news sites to remain aware of the world around me and I saw there had been an arrest of 44 officials in a corruption scandal in New Jersey. I was saddened to hear of more corruption in my beloved state, but not surprised. Not at all. Those things are true about New Jersey...corruption...corruption from the North that comes to vacation on the Shore (where I live)... not to say we are totally innocent down here...but that's usually the way it goes (this case was no different, choosing the Shore town of Deal as the vacation home). There was one kick to this story that I just wasn't expecting... and it wasn't that the corruption had to do with money laundering and spare parts (kidneys to be exact), but that out of the 44 people arrested, many of which were unsurprisingly mayors, 5 of the 44 were Jewish Rabbis. Really?! And not just any Jewish Rabbis, Hassidic (Ultra Orthodox) Jewish Rabbis. But there were the pictures of Rabbis with dark locks and full beards, dressed in black suits with widebrim hats in handcuffs. 3 from Brooklyn (you are not so innocent NY) and 2 from Jersey.
Why do I bring it up besides my kind of uncalled for shock (there have always been corrupt "men of god" scattered throughout the centuries).. I guess it just continues the growing nature of religion in this country (or at least in some of it): individualism. The clergy and organized religion are corrupt, many will say. We are spiritual and not religious...religious institutions are bad. Priests touch little boys and rabbis launder money and kidneys to Israel! Right now I am reading Anne Rice's Servant of the Bones, which was written in 1998, and she issues the same cry (this was prior to her return to the Catholic Church, of course): be careful of men with too much power high in religion. They are dangerous. She sites Jonestown and also the issue of Japanese subway poisoning to create her notorious character of Gregory Belkin, the messiah of the Temple of the Mind.
As it all continues to go down, as more and more priests, rabbis, preachers, imams, gurus (Satya Sai Baba sex accusations anyone?) are caught in acts of corruption and sexual mishaps, can we, as Americans trust these leaders with our souls and spiritual journeys? One has to wonder how much longer the trust can last as things like this continue to happen, or will soon it be every spiritual journey for itself? Or is that just my East coast perception?
44 Charged by U.S. in New Jersey Corruption Sweep
Officials lambast NJ corruption after 44 arrested
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Bodhaka: The Year of Living Biblically
So, since I'm a grad student (and a dork), I read a lot of books concerning the subject of religious studies (both for class and in my free time, because I am a dork), and so I thought it only wise to begin a new segment for this blog: Bodhaka In keeping with the use of Sanskrit words, I decided to use the word Bodhaka ( बोधक ), which means informative, as the name for my book review segments because I hope that you will find my opinions and book suggestions informative and useful, and also because I like the alliteration between Bodhaka and book.
So, the first book I thought I would feature in this segment of Bodhaka is a book I finished a few days ago called The Year of Living Biblically One Man's Humble Quest to Follow the Bible as Literally as Possible (2007) by A.J. Jacobs. This is a more fun than scholarly book, but I still think it is bodhaka (probably not really how you use that in a sentence, but work with me! haha).
The Year of Living Biblically is exactly what it sounds like, the author, Mr. AJ Jacobs, who also wrote a book about how he read the entire encyclopedia from A-Z, attempts to follow the Bible as litterally as possible in the hopes of better understanding what it means to do just that: live your life according to the Bible. The book takes you on a year long quest as Jacobs grows a rediculous looking beard, attempts to keep pure on the New York City subway, and interviews all walks of Biblical adherants including, but not limited to, Hasidic Jews, the Amish, Creationists, and Evangelicals from Lynchburg, Virgina (the home of Jerry Falwell's Libery University; Jacobs visited prior to Falwell's death in 2007).
The book is humorous, including an amusing encounter with a Hasidic chicken sacrifice, and also grounded, as you see the author's own humble attempts to be a better person and a better father to his children. This book was written more for a public audience than a scholarly one, but it still addressed some great issues such as how comunities of Biblical literalists live in the US and what their place in our communities are, and also the question of the possibility of following the entire book word for word, when every translation is just a little bit different. I have to say, in addition, I admire Jacobs' attempt to connect with his own Jewish roots and to use the Hebrew Bible, in addition to the Christian Bibles, and to also consult the Talmud and Jewish scholars and Rabbis, as well as Christian scholars and Rabbis. I think it really gives the book a unique perspective, that, I, personally was not expecting. I honestly thought this book was going to be centered around Evangelical Christian communities, but I was plesantly surprised at Jacobs' attempt to include a broad range of the Judeo-Christian literallist experience.
The book, of course, is not without its flaws, but most of them are acknowledged as part of the burden of the task at hand: the impossibility of following every word of the Bible all day everyday. You have to pick and choose because there are just too many rules, and Jacobs does just that, dedicating the first 7 -8 months to the Hebrew Bible (or Old Testament in Christian speak) and the last 2- 3 months to the New Testament (including an interesting interaction with some Red Letter Christians).
Overall, I thought this was a light and fun read about one aspect of the Judeo-Christian experience in America. Bodhaka beach book! (oh the alliteration!)
So, the first book I thought I would feature in this segment of Bodhaka is a book I finished a few days ago called The Year of Living Biblically One Man's Humble Quest to Follow the Bible as Literally as Possible (2007) by A.J. Jacobs. This is a more fun than scholarly book, but I still think it is bodhaka (probably not really how you use that in a sentence, but work with me! haha).
The Year of Living Biblically is exactly what it sounds like, the author, Mr. AJ Jacobs, who also wrote a book about how he read the entire encyclopedia from A-Z, attempts to follow the Bible as litterally as possible in the hopes of better understanding what it means to do just that: live your life according to the Bible. The book takes you on a year long quest as Jacobs grows a rediculous looking beard, attempts to keep pure on the New York City subway, and interviews all walks of Biblical adherants including, but not limited to, Hasidic Jews, the Amish, Creationists, and Evangelicals from Lynchburg, Virgina (the home of Jerry Falwell's Libery University; Jacobs visited prior to Falwell's death in 2007).
The book is humorous, including an amusing encounter with a Hasidic chicken sacrifice, and also grounded, as you see the author's own humble attempts to be a better person and a better father to his children. This book was written more for a public audience than a scholarly one, but it still addressed some great issues such as how comunities of Biblical literalists live in the US and what their place in our communities are, and also the question of the possibility of following the entire book word for word, when every translation is just a little bit different. I have to say, in addition, I admire Jacobs' attempt to connect with his own Jewish roots and to use the Hebrew Bible, in addition to the Christian Bibles, and to also consult the Talmud and Jewish scholars and Rabbis, as well as Christian scholars and Rabbis. I think it really gives the book a unique perspective, that, I, personally was not expecting. I honestly thought this book was going to be centered around Evangelical Christian communities, but I was plesantly surprised at Jacobs' attempt to include a broad range of the Judeo-Christian literallist experience.
The book, of course, is not without its flaws, but most of them are acknowledged as part of the burden of the task at hand: the impossibility of following every word of the Bible all day everyday. You have to pick and choose because there are just too many rules, and Jacobs does just that, dedicating the first 7 -8 months to the Hebrew Bible (or Old Testament in Christian speak) and the last 2- 3 months to the New Testament (including an interesting interaction with some Red Letter Christians).
Overall, I thought this was a light and fun read about one aspect of the Judeo-Christian experience in America. Bodhaka beach book! (oh the alliteration!)
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Happy Independence Day from American Dharma
So today is Independence Day (the 4th of July in colloquial) and what better way to celebrate than talking about my favourite figures in American history and American Dharma: Thomas Jefferson. (All who know me in real life have thus given a large groan due to their knowledge of my absolute unabashed love for Thomas Jefferson. They saw this coming). Why is Thomas Jefferson so special in the context of this blog? Well, aside from his importance to this day (aka penning the Declaration of Independence), he was an interesting character when it came to religion. My other major was archaeology and I used to love to say that Thomas Jefferson was the first scientific archaeologist, but he may as well have been among the first American religion scholars (well perhaps I wouldn't go *that* far with the latter! haha). He did have an interest, however, in religion; that much I can say for certain is true.
Most Americans, if they know anything about the religions of the Founders, know that many of them, particularly those from the Southern states like Washington and Jefferson, were Anglican Christians (the modern day cake or death Church of England). Still others proclaim many of the founders to have been Deists (from Wikipedia: " a religious and philosophical belief that a supreme God created the universe, and that this and other religious truth can be determined using reason and observation of the natural world alone, without the need for faith". Its a very Enlightenment era- vibe kind of religion. Jefferson's deism could be argued with one of the books he "wrote" (I use that term loosely in this case): The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth (aka the Jefferson Bible). He didn't so much write the book as he took a razor blade to the New Testament and carefully cut out any mention of miracles (including the Virgin birth), thus leaving only the moral teachings of Jesus. He believed that this, more than the popular Christianity of the times, "outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man.".
On the more political front, for those who argue that America was founded as a "Christian Nation" (see previous posts), Jefferson could be considered the first opposition to that idea. Jefferson is the modern day founder of everyone's favorite phrase "the separation of church and state". It could be thought that this notion was the direct response to the Church of England and the state support it got from America's former Mother Country. Jefferson first enacted this idea in 1786 for Virgina, thus freeing the state from paying tribute to the Anglican Church and he further proposed (with his good buddy James Madison) the Bill for Religious Freedom, claiming that no one should be forced to follow any religion that wasn't their choosing. Perhaps this could have been influenced by the privacy in which Jefferson regarded his own piety (or lack thereof to some) and his own personal (unorthodox at the time) views on Christianity and Deism. In this same regard, Jefferson would continually support the Establishment clause of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights which states the same: that the US cannot establish a state religion and everyone has the the freedom to choose there own. Todays pluralism can thank Mr. Jefferson (directly or indirectly aka via his friend Mr. Madison who penned the Bill of Rights while Jefferson was absent in France as the ambassador for the US).
Despite all this free exercise and anti-religious establishment-ness flying around, the Federalist party during the 1800 elections still felt free to slander Jefferson as anti-religious and a death the providence of America (and all sorts of other fancy slanders which are as similar as the Obama is a Muslim / Obama is a Christian with a crazy preacher claims from the 2008 election). Thus religiously, the rather private Jefferson became on of the first victims of the still on-going battle of Christian v. Secular nation.
But after stating all this about Thomas Jefferson, his relationship with the American Dharma, and his influence in creating American Pluralism, his crowning achievement remains what we celebrate today. Some say his human rights proclamations are the influence of Enlightenment thinkers such as John Locke and 18th century Deism, others say they are Christian rights, but regardless... in 1776 on July 4th in Philadelphia, a group of men in the midst of war signed a statement that claimed,"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...". This is the American Dharma, and all else are just the different flavors.
Happy Independence Day. Now go shoot off some fireworks!
Most Americans, if they know anything about the religions of the Founders, know that many of them, particularly those from the Southern states like Washington and Jefferson, were Anglican Christians (the modern day cake or death Church of England). Still others proclaim many of the founders to have been Deists (from Wikipedia: " a religious and philosophical belief that a supreme God created the universe, and that this and other religious truth can be determined using reason and observation of the natural world alone, without the need for faith". Its a very Enlightenment era- vibe kind of religion. Jefferson's deism could be argued with one of the books he "wrote" (I use that term loosely in this case): The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth (aka the Jefferson Bible). He didn't so much write the book as he took a razor blade to the New Testament and carefully cut out any mention of miracles (including the Virgin birth), thus leaving only the moral teachings of Jesus. He believed that this, more than the popular Christianity of the times, "outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man.".
On the more political front, for those who argue that America was founded as a "Christian Nation" (see previous posts), Jefferson could be considered the first opposition to that idea. Jefferson is the modern day founder of everyone's favorite phrase "the separation of church and state". It could be thought that this notion was the direct response to the Church of England and the state support it got from America's former Mother Country. Jefferson first enacted this idea in 1786 for Virgina, thus freeing the state from paying tribute to the Anglican Church and he further proposed (with his good buddy James Madison) the Bill for Religious Freedom, claiming that no one should be forced to follow any religion that wasn't their choosing. Perhaps this could have been influenced by the privacy in which Jefferson regarded his own piety (or lack thereof to some) and his own personal (unorthodox at the time) views on Christianity and Deism. In this same regard, Jefferson would continually support the Establishment clause of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights which states the same: that the US cannot establish a state religion and everyone has the the freedom to choose there own. Todays pluralism can thank Mr. Jefferson (directly or indirectly aka via his friend Mr. Madison who penned the Bill of Rights while Jefferson was absent in France as the ambassador for the US).
Despite all this free exercise and anti-religious establishment-ness flying around, the Federalist party during the 1800 elections still felt free to slander Jefferson as anti-religious and a death the providence of America (and all sorts of other fancy slanders which are as similar as the Obama is a Muslim / Obama is a Christian with a crazy preacher claims from the 2008 election). Thus religiously, the rather private Jefferson became on of the first victims of the still on-going battle of Christian v. Secular nation.
But after stating all this about Thomas Jefferson, his relationship with the American Dharma, and his influence in creating American Pluralism, his crowning achievement remains what we celebrate today. Some say his human rights proclamations are the influence of Enlightenment thinkers such as John Locke and 18th century Deism, others say they are Christian rights, but regardless... in 1776 on July 4th in Philadelphia, a group of men in the midst of war signed a statement that claimed,"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...". This is the American Dharma, and all else are just the different flavors.
Happy Independence Day. Now go shoot off some fireworks!
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Vicaarana: Is Atheism a "Religion"?
Nothing starts a controversy like claiming atheism is a religion-- at least in my world. But in my opinion it is one just like any of the major 8 and the minor hundreds. And the debate always comes up between friends (we are East Coast living, libral arts graduates after all!) and I always insist that atheism surly is a religion because it really depends on how you define "religion" (See the intro post to this blog about the word "religion" and the word "dharma"). Its the same argument Brent S. Plate makes in his criticism of Bill Maher's Religulous (glad to know someone out there felt similarly about this movie): you can't have an old school definition for a new school understanding. Meaning just this: religion is more than "belief" and "God". Those are not the only things that constitute a religion. Those terms may be included in a definition of a specific religion but it inacurrate to say that is what defines religion. And the search for the proper definition of what is and isn't a religion can go on and on for as many hours as it takes to teach 1000000 Theory of Religion seminars (and how many hours during those classes I have to pinch myself to remain awake! haha). But meaning is everything and as long as the definition is black and white, there are atheists and believers and never shall the two meet.
However, its more complex than that, especially in America. There are the culturally religious, the agnostically spiritual, the organized atheists, the Unitarian Universalists of a varying degrees, the right wings of all sorts, the left wings of all sorts, the New Agers, the Old Time Religions (as many Pagans sometimes call themselves) , and the list goes on. Religion is more than belief and non-belief (but those American Protestant origins tend to give us all a little bias in this black and white)-- there are rituals, expression, community, communitas, and multifaceted brakets of religion go on and on.
Before I go on and on any further about the importance of "religious studies" in society (justifying myself in a bad economy, right? haha)--let me return to the topic at hand using what I have just mentioned: Is Atheism a religion? Yes. Yes it is. And to go futher, it sometimes even goes as far to be exactly what it claims to despise: ideological and sometimes radical.They call them the New Atheism , and they are just as much a "religion" as the rest in the American Dharma spectrum. Bill Maher's documentary is a great example of this. In the movie Religulous, Maher only focuses on the negatives of "religion" (Western only, might I add) and he emplors the viewer to "convert" to his side (for the sake of science!). Its the same sort of mind set that sparked the Tibetan exile by the Chinese ("saving" the Tibetan Buddhists from the "terrible theocrasy" in which they lived; freeing them from the bonds of religion. They saw themselves as liberators the same way that the American government saw themselves as the liberators in Iraq). There is right and there is wrong, black and white, believers and atheists, and the dichotomies continue. But the point is, its not like that at all. And that is how atheism is a religion.
Well, you could say, God must be in a religion! Wrong. What about Theravada Buddhism? Well it must have a faith community, books, centers, ect. And Atheists have all this and then some. They have their poets and prophets, their leaders, and beliefs. They have their own hardliners and even their own (anti-)religious violence (Polpot, anyone?). About the only thing they don't have yet is their own tax break. But their belief in the separation of church and state means they're morally opposed to that of course! ;).
You can disagree with me all you want but there is as much a case for the religiousity of atheism (which as far as I'm concerned is just that- no god, not no religion) as there is for the Jedi-ism and the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. May you be touched by his noodly appendage!
Read More:
Purpose Driven Atheism by Frank Schaeffer
The New Atheism and Something More- Peter Steinfels
Don't Stop Unbelieving- Scott McLemee
What Would Jesus See: Fireproof or Religulous? - Richard Corliss
The Variaties of Non-Religious Experience- This one is a little old, but still useful
(ed: In keeping with my new idea of Sanskrit names for some segments, I've named this segment vicaaraNa (विचारण), which means "discussion", "reflection", "inquiry", "examination", and, as often with religious discussion, also means "agitation" )
However, its more complex than that, especially in America. There are the culturally religious, the agnostically spiritual, the organized atheists, the Unitarian Universalists of a varying degrees, the right wings of all sorts, the left wings of all sorts, the New Agers, the Old Time Religions (as many Pagans sometimes call themselves) , and the list goes on. Religion is more than belief and non-belief (but those American Protestant origins tend to give us all a little bias in this black and white)-- there are rituals, expression, community, communitas, and multifaceted brakets of religion go on and on.
Before I go on and on any further about the importance of "religious studies" in society (justifying myself in a bad economy, right? haha)--let me return to the topic at hand using what I have just mentioned: Is Atheism a religion? Yes. Yes it is. And to go futher, it sometimes even goes as far to be exactly what it claims to despise: ideological and sometimes radical.They call them the New Atheism , and they are just as much a "religion" as the rest in the American Dharma spectrum. Bill Maher's documentary is a great example of this. In the movie Religulous, Maher only focuses on the negatives of "religion" (Western only, might I add) and he emplors the viewer to "convert" to his side (for the sake of science!). Its the same sort of mind set that sparked the Tibetan exile by the Chinese ("saving" the Tibetan Buddhists from the "terrible theocrasy" in which they lived; freeing them from the bonds of religion. They saw themselves as liberators the same way that the American government saw themselves as the liberators in Iraq). There is right and there is wrong, black and white, believers and atheists, and the dichotomies continue. But the point is, its not like that at all. And that is how atheism is a religion.
Well, you could say, God must be in a religion! Wrong. What about Theravada Buddhism? Well it must have a faith community, books, centers, ect. And Atheists have all this and then some. They have their poets and prophets, their leaders, and beliefs. They have their own hardliners and even their own (anti-)religious violence (Polpot, anyone?). About the only thing they don't have yet is their own tax break. But their belief in the separation of church and state means they're morally opposed to that of course! ;).
You can disagree with me all you want but there is as much a case for the religiousity of atheism (which as far as I'm concerned is just that- no god, not no religion) as there is for the Jedi-ism and the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. May you be touched by his noodly appendage!
Read More:
Purpose Driven Atheism by Frank Schaeffer
The New Atheism and Something More- Peter Steinfels
Don't Stop Unbelieving- Scott McLemee
What Would Jesus See: Fireproof or Religulous? - Richard Corliss
The Variaties of Non-Religious Experience- This one is a little old, but still useful
(ed: In keeping with my new idea of Sanskrit names for some segments, I've named this segment vicaaraNa (विचारण), which means "discussion", "reflection", "inquiry", "examination", and, as often with religious discussion, also means "agitation" )
Friday, June 19, 2009
Today in American Dharma: The Other American Terrorism
When most people in this country think of terrorism, they automatically assume that the word is only inclusive of Islam and al Quida, however, no religion is devoid of violent extremism (if you don't believe me read Mark Juergensmeyer's Terror in the Mind of God originally written pre-9/11 and revised to include it). Lately the terrorism that has been prevenlent in the news as of late was the return of pro-life extremist Christian terrorism. Yes, return. Although most of us who were not old enough before 9/11 to know or understand what terrorism was, in the 1980s and '90s strings of pro-life killings and arsons occurred at abortion clinics throughout the country. Most of them were initiated by the Christian group Army of God and the pastor (all of which you can read about in Juergensmeyer's book).
As I was saying, although the pro-life terrorism was quelled during the years of the Bush administration, they are back and in full force beginning about two weeks ago with the shooting of Dr. George Tiller, a late term abortion doctor. Since the occurance two interesting ideas have been brought to the table concerning the incedent: the language of terrorism in America and the dichotomy of the abortion debate.
The first subject is what I was speaking of before, when you think of the word terrorism what word comes to mind: Muslim. Whether you like it or not. It was a direct by-product of 9/11 and, I'm from the tristate area, I understand, those wounds hurt deep. And the language concerning the matter around the nation didn't help (but that's another story for another time). But as I mentioned before, there is extremism present in almost ever religious tradition (almost always culminating in violence to boot!) and Christianity is no exception to the rule as proven by the actions of the Army of God in the 80s and 90s and the recent gunning down of Dr. Tiller. However, it almost seems as if the American public (or at least the media) is not ready to accept the existence of Christian terrorists. The example brought to my attention was the media treatment of two different cases occuring at once: the George Tiller assassination and the killing of an Army Recruiter in Arkansas by an American convert to Islam. In this interesting article by Dan Mathewson called Muslims Murder, Christians Don't, the media's attention to detail concerning the Islamic connection of the latter killer versus the avoidance of Scott Roeder's (Tiller's killer) commitment to extremist Christianity is appalling but surprisingly typical. These two related incedents bring to the forefront so many issues: the end of Christian America (yes! says Newsweek; Not even close says Dr. Stephen Prothero), the hypocrasy of pro-life killing, and especially the Islami-phobia of the general American public (see the previous entry on Obama's address to the Muslim world).
Finally just one more issue worth discussing remains with this issue: the dichotomy of the abortion debate. Pro-life v. Pro-Choice. Religious v. Secular America. Good v. Evil. Notre Dame v. Obama. Roe v. Wade. But its not so black and white as we want it to be. The ever increasing shades of gray grew ever present the minute Dr. George Tiller got gunned down while attending Luthern Sunday Services in his Church where he served as an usher. Its not so simple at all says Ed Knudson in his 6/18/09 article, On Religion, Abortion, and Politics: Dr. George Tiller and Christian Ethics. Now I'm not too familiar with Lutheran Theology to make too much of a detailed comment on this article, but I found it interesting enough to bring up particularly about the point of gray areas in this debate.
The assassination of Dr. George Tiller was indeed a tragedy but it did bring many issues to the forefront. How far the dialogue on Christian terrorism will go, no one can say, but it is an issue that cannot be ignored, that is for certain.
As I was saying, although the pro-life terrorism was quelled during the years of the Bush administration, they are back and in full force beginning about two weeks ago with the shooting of Dr. George Tiller, a late term abortion doctor. Since the occurance two interesting ideas have been brought to the table concerning the incedent: the language of terrorism in America and the dichotomy of the abortion debate.
The first subject is what I was speaking of before, when you think of the word terrorism what word comes to mind: Muslim. Whether you like it or not. It was a direct by-product of 9/11 and, I'm from the tristate area, I understand, those wounds hurt deep. And the language concerning the matter around the nation didn't help (but that's another story for another time). But as I mentioned before, there is extremism present in almost ever religious tradition (almost always culminating in violence to boot!) and Christianity is no exception to the rule as proven by the actions of the Army of God in the 80s and 90s and the recent gunning down of Dr. Tiller. However, it almost seems as if the American public (or at least the media) is not ready to accept the existence of Christian terrorists. The example brought to my attention was the media treatment of two different cases occuring at once: the George Tiller assassination and the killing of an Army Recruiter in Arkansas by an American convert to Islam. In this interesting article by Dan Mathewson called Muslims Murder, Christians Don't, the media's attention to detail concerning the Islamic connection of the latter killer versus the avoidance of Scott Roeder's (Tiller's killer) commitment to extremist Christianity is appalling but surprisingly typical. These two related incedents bring to the forefront so many issues: the end of Christian America (yes! says Newsweek; Not even close says Dr. Stephen Prothero), the hypocrasy of pro-life killing, and especially the Islami-phobia of the general American public (see the previous entry on Obama's address to the Muslim world).
Finally just one more issue worth discussing remains with this issue: the dichotomy of the abortion debate. Pro-life v. Pro-Choice. Religious v. Secular America. Good v. Evil. Notre Dame v. Obama. Roe v. Wade. But its not so black and white as we want it to be. The ever increasing shades of gray grew ever present the minute Dr. George Tiller got gunned down while attending Luthern Sunday Services in his Church where he served as an usher. Its not so simple at all says Ed Knudson in his 6/18/09 article, On Religion, Abortion, and Politics: Dr. George Tiller and Christian Ethics. Now I'm not too familiar with Lutheran Theology to make too much of a detailed comment on this article, but I found it interesting enough to bring up particularly about the point of gray areas in this debate.
The assassination of Dr. George Tiller was indeed a tragedy but it did bring many issues to the forefront. How far the dialogue on Christian terrorism will go, no one can say, but it is an issue that cannot be ignored, that is for certain.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Dharma Travels: Encountering Brahma in Sin City
A few weeks ago I went to Las Vegas with three of my friends as a post-graduation celebration. Although Las Vegas most likely would not have been my first travel destination choice (exactly one year prior another friend and I backpacked in Northern India), I decided to go anyway to have some fun with my friends, to go West (I had never been west of PA), and to enjoy the general kitchi-ness that is Las Vegas. I got a little more interested in the trip due to a lovely book that we read in my Spiritual Wandering class called Wanderlust by Rebecca Solnit and an interested class project by this guy Daniel (who later gave me the wanderer's guide to Vegas via facebook message which I am thankful for). I was ready to see Sin City in all its glory: all of the reconstructed miniature, clean and safe replicas of the world's great cities. I thought I knew what to expect, especially after being there a few days before I did my own wander of the strip, however, what I didn't expect to find was some good old fashioned Eastern Religion smack in the middle of Las Vegas.
The day I wandered alone, I walked the three miles from our resort to Mandalay Bay at the beginning of the Strip and all the way down the strip to the other end at Sahara. (I think I walked a total of 10 miles, because I wandered the entire Miracle Mile Shops looking for a potential meal which I didn't find 'til I reached Paris, but that's a) another story b) fun to say). Somewhere in the course of my journey I came upon probably the last thing I thought I would find in Las Vegas: a shrine to Brahma. I say this because a) here was a Hindu shrine in the middle of the Las Vegas strip in front of Caesars of all places and b) Brahma is not really popularly worshiped now a days. However, there is was in white marble looking back at me. I stopped dead in my tracks when I saw it because I wasn't expecting such a thing. While I was looking at it, a small Thai woman came (the plaque I found later said this was a Thai shrine) and began placing flowers and oranges around the different spots of the shrine. In silence I watched her do this as tourists who had never seen a Hindu or Buddhist anything looked at the statue and moved on, as men directly behind me handed out pamphlets for prostitutes, and as the strip echoed a searing blazing noise of motors and horns in the hot Nevada sun. But amidst all of this a small Thai women made offerings of flowers, fruit, and incense to a shrine of an unpopular god in an unlikely city far removed from its culture of origin.
What does this really say about the nature of religion in America? Perhaps it is its adaptability. At least that is what struck me about this shrine most of all. Perhaps the most striking thing about this shrine to me was the ability for a clearly "spiritual" thing to be placed in what seems to be the antithesis of a spiritual place. But perhaps that was the point. I am not sure. I was quick to write it off as a gimmick when I first saw it (like the ginormous Buddha in the Tao restaurant and nightclub in the Venetian), because that is what Vegas was full of--I had seen it all day. Cheep gimmicks to ease you into spending money. However, the minute I saw this woman making offerings to this shrine I realized that this was still a place where people lived and worked and not just played and partied. This seemed to be a bit more than what people usually think of when they think of religion in Las Vegas: little wedding chapels with ministers dressed like Elvis. However, perhaps there is more to the story of American Dharma in Las Vegas after all (and I'm talking about the strip of course, I'm fully aware there is a living Las Vegas community outside of the strip in the other parts of town). I have to admit I just couldn't help but be intrigued by an operating shrine to Brahma in the middle of the Las Vegas strip. Life is full of surprises in that way I guess.
Ok-- he had a securty alarm, maybe he is a little bit kitchi haha.
The day I wandered alone, I walked the three miles from our resort to Mandalay Bay at the beginning of the Strip and all the way down the strip to the other end at Sahara. (I think I walked a total of 10 miles, because I wandered the entire Miracle Mile Shops looking for a potential meal which I didn't find 'til I reached Paris, but that's a) another story b) fun to say). Somewhere in the course of my journey I came upon probably the last thing I thought I would find in Las Vegas: a shrine to Brahma. I say this because a) here was a Hindu shrine in the middle of the Las Vegas strip in front of Caesars of all places and b) Brahma is not really popularly worshiped now a days. However, there is was in white marble looking back at me. I stopped dead in my tracks when I saw it because I wasn't expecting such a thing. While I was looking at it, a small Thai woman came (the plaque I found later said this was a Thai shrine) and began placing flowers and oranges around the different spots of the shrine. In silence I watched her do this as tourists who had never seen a Hindu or Buddhist anything looked at the statue and moved on, as men directly behind me handed out pamphlets for prostitutes, and as the strip echoed a searing blazing noise of motors and horns in the hot Nevada sun. But amidst all of this a small Thai women made offerings of flowers, fruit, and incense to a shrine of an unpopular god in an unlikely city far removed from its culture of origin.
What does this really say about the nature of religion in America? Perhaps it is its adaptability. At least that is what struck me about this shrine most of all. Perhaps the most striking thing about this shrine to me was the ability for a clearly "spiritual" thing to be placed in what seems to be the antithesis of a spiritual place. But perhaps that was the point. I am not sure. I was quick to write it off as a gimmick when I first saw it (like the ginormous Buddha in the Tao restaurant and nightclub in the Venetian), because that is what Vegas was full of--I had seen it all day. Cheep gimmicks to ease you into spending money. However, the minute I saw this woman making offerings to this shrine I realized that this was still a place where people lived and worked and not just played and partied. This seemed to be a bit more than what people usually think of when they think of religion in Las Vegas: little wedding chapels with ministers dressed like Elvis. However, perhaps there is more to the story of American Dharma in Las Vegas after all (and I'm talking about the strip of course, I'm fully aware there is a living Las Vegas community outside of the strip in the other parts of town). I have to admit I just couldn't help but be intrigued by an operating shrine to Brahma in the middle of the Las Vegas strip. Life is full of surprises in that way I guess.
Ok-- he had a securty alarm, maybe he is a little bit kitchi haha.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Today in American Dharma: Obama Addresses the Muslim World from Cairo
It's easier to start wars than to end them. It's easier to blame others than to look inward.It's easier to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There's one rule that lies at the heart of every religion -- that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. (Applause.) This truth transcends nations and peoples -- a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the hearts of billions around the world. It's
a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today. - President Barack Obama, 6/4/09
Today, June 4th 2009, President Barack Obama made an address to the Muslim world from the University of Cairo in Egypt, in this speech he covered such topics as terrorism, nuclear programs, the Israel-Palestine disputes, and in general Islam and the West. This speech was a very interesting one because I noticed some things (besides the fact that an speech like this would have never come out of the last administration) : the call for religious tolerance, the mention of only the Abrahamic faiths, and the well thought out use (imho) of the Koran. What the impact of President Obama's speech will be, I couldn't say. However, I felt it was very well done to attempt to promote religious tolerance between the American people and the Muslim world. How it will be received in a country in which sore feelings are still felt against Muslims because of al Quida and the incidents of 9/11. All of these Obama addresses but mostly from the perspective of the people he's addressing: the Muslim world. But what do Americans all over the country feel about this outstretched hand of diplomacy and religious tolerance? Will they be willing to put aside their differences and preconceived notions of Islam and unite as a country to work with the Muslim world? Will they even care to listen to this speech? I'm waiting to hear more reactions to this speech to find out.
Transcript: A New Beginning: Obama's Address to the Muslim World
a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today. - President Barack Obama, 6/4/09
Today, June 4th 2009, President Barack Obama made an address to the Muslim world from the University of Cairo in Egypt, in this speech he covered such topics as terrorism, nuclear programs, the Israel-Palestine disputes, and in general Islam and the West. This speech was a very interesting one because I noticed some things (besides the fact that an speech like this would have never come out of the last administration) : the call for religious tolerance, the mention of only the Abrahamic faiths, and the well thought out use (imho) of the Koran. What the impact of President Obama's speech will be, I couldn't say. However, I felt it was very well done to attempt to promote religious tolerance between the American people and the Muslim world. How it will be received in a country in which sore feelings are still felt against Muslims because of al Quida and the incidents of 9/11. All of these Obama addresses but mostly from the perspective of the people he's addressing: the Muslim world. But what do Americans all over the country feel about this outstretched hand of diplomacy and religious tolerance? Will they be willing to put aside their differences and preconceived notions of Islam and unite as a country to work with the Muslim world? Will they even care to listen to this speech? I'm waiting to hear more reactions to this speech to find out.
Transcript: A New Beginning: Obama's Address to the Muslim World
Monday, June 1, 2009
All Transmitters to Full! All Receivers to Boost!
And we're live with American Dharma!
What is American Dharma you may ask? Well, like it or not, religion is an integral part of America from our founding to our very existance today. From the Anglicanism and Deism of our founding fathers to the Pluralism, Evangelicalism and even the Atheism mixture in our present society. I chose to use the word "Dharma" instead of Religion (and not just because I study things on the East side!) because a) the very word "religion" leaves a nasty taste in many people's mouths b) Religion is not exclusive in and of itself (or "sui generis" as the theorist Mircea Eliade once claimed) and c) because Dharma is meant as an ultimate overlying truth. Though I cannot comment on the kind of Truth with a capital T the Hindu Rishis really meant, I can say this: the "truth" is that love it or not, religion (and the absence thereof) and all of its implications is a fact of American life and religious ideas, rituals, and symbolism, interplay with our everyday lives.
Jack Kerouac once dreamed and wrote of an "American Dharma", which is now recorded in a collection of his journals on his Buddhist meditations and writings called Some of The Dharma. He dreams of uniquely American sages and figures, creating uniquely American Buddhist texts and sutras. Although Kerouac's dream of an American Buddhist wonderland did not quite come to fruitition the way that he hoped, one thing is true in my mind, and it is this: there is a uniquely interesting way in which "American Dharma" is different than religious expression in any other country in the world. Perhaps it is our puritanical beginnings, our mixed salad society (I'm ever wary of the term "melting pot"), or the great expanse of land where each region holds different customs and traditions. Perhaps its all of this.
All I can know for sure is that the American Dharma is ever expanding, ever changing, ever developing, and ever encompassing the different aspects of our everyday lives and love it or loath it, it is there and it effects each and every person who calls themselves an American.
So please, sit back and enjoy watching the American Dharma unfold. All transmitters to full. All receivers to boost. Forget London-- this is America calling. American Dharma is live and running!
What is American Dharma you may ask? Well, like it or not, religion is an integral part of America from our founding to our very existance today. From the Anglicanism and Deism of our founding fathers to the Pluralism, Evangelicalism and even the Atheism mixture in our present society. I chose to use the word "Dharma" instead of Religion (and not just because I study things on the East side!) because a) the very word "religion" leaves a nasty taste in many people's mouths b) Religion is not exclusive in and of itself (or "sui generis" as the theorist Mircea Eliade once claimed) and c) because Dharma is meant as an ultimate overlying truth. Though I cannot comment on the kind of Truth with a capital T the Hindu Rishis really meant, I can say this: the "truth" is that love it or not, religion (and the absence thereof) and all of its implications is a fact of American life and religious ideas, rituals, and symbolism, interplay with our everyday lives.
Jack Kerouac once dreamed and wrote of an "American Dharma", which is now recorded in a collection of his journals on his Buddhist meditations and writings called Some of The Dharma. He dreams of uniquely American sages and figures, creating uniquely American Buddhist texts and sutras. Although Kerouac's dream of an American Buddhist wonderland did not quite come to fruitition the way that he hoped, one thing is true in my mind, and it is this: there is a uniquely interesting way in which "American Dharma" is different than religious expression in any other country in the world. Perhaps it is our puritanical beginnings, our mixed salad society (I'm ever wary of the term "melting pot"), or the great expanse of land where each region holds different customs and traditions. Perhaps its all of this.
All I can know for sure is that the American Dharma is ever expanding, ever changing, ever developing, and ever encompassing the different aspects of our everyday lives and love it or loath it, it is there and it effects each and every person who calls themselves an American.
So please, sit back and enjoy watching the American Dharma unfold. All transmitters to full. All receivers to boost. Forget London-- this is America calling. American Dharma is live and running!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
