Virtual Tour of the Temple of Eck (3/3)

The Temple of Eck is located in Chanhassen, Minnesota. The Temple of Eck is the headquarters, so to speak, of Eckankar. The thing that first drew me to this religion is the fact that this Temple is located less than an hour from my parents house. The Temple of Eck is called the "heart of the Eckankar Spiritual Campus." It is seen by Eckists as a very comforting place where people can spiritually study their past lives, examine their dreams or explore their beliefs in soul travel. Here is the webpage where the virtual tour is. Harold Klemp is quoted, which regards to the Temple of Eck, as saying

Any of you who visit the Temple of Eck will find it has a special character, a presence of its own. That presence is the love of God. Later, if you are ever in need of spiritual help, at bedtime imagine yourself back at the Temple. Ask the question that you need help with, and then just go to sleep. Often you'll awake in the morning with an entirely different view of the situation. 

This quote shows an emphasis on dreaming that is present throughout all of Eckankar. The Eck Masters speak to people in their dreams, and here Harold Klemp is encouraging people to come to the temple, reflect on their spiritual concerns and the Temple as well as the Eck Masters will help them. The Temple of Eck is used for a spiritual purpose, but it is not just for Eckists. The Temple is open for all religions, and even for people who do not have a religion at all. They believe that all can benefit from visiting the Temple.

The Temple of Eck has hours listed on their website as well. Something interesting is that the Temple is not open during any religiously celebrated holidays. This shows that they really are not aligning themselves with any other religion. They also have tours available during the week and the weekends for any person to take.

View of a sign at the beginning of the Contemplation Trails

Though the temple is located in a suburb of Minneapolis, they put an emphasis on making this Temple a picturesque space. It is located on over 100 acres of woods and prairies, and they also have seasonally open Contemplation trails that, combined, are over two miles long. These Contemplation Trails were made for people to walk on and reflect on all of the wonderful things in their lives. They are meant as a place for people to contemplate all of the reasons they have to be grateful. On the left is a map of the Contemplation Trails. There are signs located throughout the trails, and on those signs there are some writings of Harold Klemp that explain many Eckist beliefs as well as writings meant to inspire one to contemplate one's life, the spirit and God. These trails show that there is an emphasis on the balance one achieves through contemplation in nature. Though these trails are mainly covered in snow for 7 months a year, they are still very important in the Eckankar faith.



Now, let's start the virtual tour! You are encouraged to take the tour yourself, it was linked above. But there are screen shots from the virtual tour of the Temple of Eck.

 

This is the entrance into the Temple of Eck.

Stage in front of the Chairs in Sanctuary

 The sanctuary in the Temple of Eck is very minimalistic in nature. The sanctuary is located under the large golden pyramid. Because of the inherent shape of the pyramid, the sanctuary has very high, vaulted ceilings and is square. There are none of the typical symbols in this sanctuary. No crosses or stained glass windows, there are actually no windows at all. Instead, the color scheme is mainly beige, with less of an alter and more of just a stage at the front of the sanctuary. There is not even a pulpit for someone to preach at. The lighting in the sanctuary is extremely beautiful though.

Blue Star on ceiling of the Sanctuary

There is only one symbol located in the entirety of this sanctuary, and it is a blue six-pointed star at the very top of the ceiling, which would be the highest point of the pyramid. As stated earlier, the Blue Star is a sign that the Spirit of God is always with you. It makes sense that the Blue Star would be at the top of the pyramid. It is the highest point and is reigning over the heads of all in the sanctuary, like God is above the physical world.

The sanctuary actually looks more like a very nice recital hall more than a sanctuary. The seats in the sanctuary are just like seats you would find in a movie theater or recital hall, they are individual and even have arm rests. You can see on the left here, that this looks more like a concert hall than anything else. It is very beautiful, but there is almost nothing that would indicate it is a place for religious gathering. There are no holders for bibles or hymn books behind the seats.  The system of symbols the Eckists follow are based more in the spiritual world and deal more with terms and ideas instead of tangible objects, so it makes sense that the sanctuary would not have explicit symbols scattered throughout it.

Eck Masters on the front wall of the Chapel

The chapel in the Temple of Eck is where more symbols are present. The seats are set up the same as the sanctuary, but they are in a row and all facing this wall with the pictures of all the Eck Masters. The Eckankar spiritual text is also displayed here. The chapel seems more of a place where one reflects on the protecting and helping Eck Masters. To me, it seems that chapel is where people reflect on the specific teaching of Eckankar, as opposed to the sanctuary where people focus on achieving self and god-realization and reflect upon their Soul.

The fellowship hall is where receptions take place, as well as other group gatherings. It is a very large hall, and again is characterized by the distinct lighting, the beige color scheme. The front of the fellowship hall, has some symbols, but still very little. The EK logo is front and center, and a picture depicting a white bird is displayed to the
 left of it.



From what I have seen of the Temple of Eck, is that it is very beautiful. It's simplistic and none of the rooms are rectangular. There rooms are always more rhombus or circular shaped. I couldn't help but notice the ceiling of the fellowship hall. To me, it seemed to be inspired by more mission style architecture. Frank Lloyd Wright designed many houses in a mission style, and the ceiling reminds me of that. He designed many mission style stained glass windows, and though there are no stained glass windows in this temple, this ceiling seems inspired by those mission style windows. This is interesting, because the work of Frank Lloyd Wright has very strong ties to the Midwest. So many of his houses are in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Illinois. Look at the stained glass window below, it looks a lot like the blue six-pointed star on the ceiling of the sanctuary, and it is also similar to the ceiling of the fellowship hall. Also, just the angles of the walls and the orientations of the rooms in the temple remind me of this stained glass window. It would make sense for a religion that is based out of the Midwest would have a temple whose architecture is inspired by the work of such a Midwesternly based architect. 

Frank Lloyd Wright Designed Stained Glass

Eckankar's System of Symbols (2/3)

This religion does not push a lot of ideals onto their followers. This religion seems incredibly open with beliefs because the emphasis is on the Soul. They explicitly state on their website that they support gay marriage and they believe opinions on abortion are up to the individual.  There are some beliefs the Eckists have regarding ways to live one's life, but the moral code established is MUCH less than other religions.  What this religion may lack when it comes to a set of rules and morals, they make up for in very rich symbols. I have not encountered a religion that has so many different terms for all the Eckist ideas. There is a great emphasis on proper names of people and ideas.  Pictured below is a book that illustrates how many actual terms they use in Eckankar. If you can see, the cover of the book states that it is a guide to the 1900 spiritual terms and concepts related to Eckankar! That is an incredible amount of terms!

Many of the typical symbols associated with God and religion are not present in this language. God is never depicted because they believe God is completely transcendent of representation.  The "typical" typical religious symbols are not here, instead they have a vast vocabulary of terms and concepts that are unique to Eckankar. There are three systems of symbols I will focus on here. The first being an explanation of some of the key terms in Eckankar, the Soul Planes and Spiritual Worlds, and the Eck Masters.

Key Terms in Eckankar

As explained above, there are around 1900 terms and concepts in Eckankar, but the website has a glossary of the most important concepts in Eckankar. I will summarize some of these terms.

Arahata- A teacher of Eckankar Classes

Chela- A member, or spiritual student, of Eckankar

God-Realization- Complete, conscious awareness of God

Initiation- A private ceremony where a person is linked to the Light and Sound of God

Mahanta- Highest state of God-consciousness on earth which is represented in the Living Eck Master.

Blue Star- A sign that the Spirit of God is always with you

Satsang- A monthly class where Eckist students study a Eckankar lesson

Self-Realization- When one recognized their Soul. The Soul enters the Soul Plane.

Shariya-Ki-Sugmad- The scripture of Eckankar. They were transcribed from the inner Soul Planes by Paul Twitchell.

Soul Travel- The Soul being about to transcend the physical world and travel to the spiritual world of God.

Sound and light of Eck- The Holy Spirit. The ways in which God appears in the physical world.

Sri- A spiritual title like that of a pastor. It is only used to represent the Living Eck Master.

Sugmad- The sacred name for God.

Wah Z- Spiritual name for Harold Klemp. It is his name in the other spiritual planes. 

Just from these few terms, you really get a sense that this religion really emphasizes certain terms. And there are also multiple terms for the same things. The Living Eck Master, for example is also called the Mahanta, Sri and Wah Z. There seem to be a lot of arbitrary names for things. Though they do represent an important idea in Eckankar, it seems as though these name are quite random. It seems as though Eckists have these terms to set themselves apart, much like the Rastafari did in Jamaica. The Eckists could just have teachers and students, but instead they call them Arhata and Cheta to add a richness and complexity to the system of symbols as well to set themselves apart from other religions.

Soul Planes and Spiritual Worlds

To me, the most interesting aspect of Eckankar are the conceptual soul planes and spiritual worlds. Here are their diagrams:

On the second diagram seems to be imposed on the bottom left hand side of the first diagram. These are extremely interesting to me because of how elaborate they are. I have only had a small amount of exposure to philosophical writings, but this looks like a philosophical diagram. This is how the Eckist view the structure of their world. But to be honest, I do not really know what much of it means. The soul must pass through all the Soul planes before coming to realize God. But the worlds of Eck seems extremely complicated. They believe that God reveals himself to the physical world through light and sound, so I think the sounds on the right side of the diagram represent the different ways God reveals himself, but this is only speculation. Though I may not get it, this is indeed the way the Eckists view their place in the universe. The Rastafari viewed themselves as in Babylon and needed to travel back to the promised, sacred land of Ethiopia. That is how the Rastafari explained their place in the world. The Eckists use these extremely complicated conceptual diagrams to explain their physical place, and spiritual place in the universe.

The ECK Masters, or Spiritual Travelers

A large part of the system of symbols in the Eckankar religion deal with Eck Masters. Eckists believe that there are nine Spiritual Travelers, or Eck Masters. These travelers are seen as agents of God who work with the Living Eck Master, Harold Klemp, to awaken the Souls of people and to help the Soul find its true purpose and destiny. Something that is interesting about these Eck Masters, is that there are testimonies of people who had experiences meeting these Eck Masters long before they had ever even been exposed to the teachings of Eckankar. Many experiences with Eck Masters leads people to the teaching of Eckankar. Eckists believe that if someone's Soul is asking for direction, a spiritual traveler will make contact with them. Often times people have encounters with Eck Masters while they are sleeping or if they are extremely ill. All the testimonies online about people encountering these Eck Masters reminds me of Mormonism a little. In Mormonism, there are really no sermons given. Instead, a lot of a Mormon service consists of people giving testimonies that reinforce the fact that they believe the Mormon scripture is true. Eckankar is the same, because for every spiritual traveler, there are several personal testimonies that are about when a person had contact with that spiritual traveler.  I do take these testimonies with a grain of salt though, no full names are given, and the legitimacy of these stories can be questioned. There are no pictures, audio recordings, and it almost seems as though people may be latching onto these spiritual leaders and changing the memories of their encounters. There are several testimonies where the person is never told the name of the spirit they encountered, or they are told the name and forgot it. Many people say that they didn't know who the person was until they saw pictures of the Eck Masters as felt as though they recognized them. There is really no way to know if these testimonies are legitimate because so many encounters are through dreams. They could have actually been visited by these spiritual travelers, or they could have adapted their memory of a dream to something that had a religious basis. These Eck Masters are not prayed to, or worshiped. Instead, they are seen as protective and helpful spirits that help the Soul come to a greater understanding and have a deeper connection to God. Here is a little bit about the Eck Masters...

 

 Fubbi Quantz-- He was The Mahanta around 500 BC, which was during the time of Buddha. He is said to be the guardian of the Shariya-Ki-Sugmad. Eckists believe that he was Columbus' spiritual guide and encourage him to travel to America. 

Gopal Das-- He was The Mahanta around 3000 BC, and is from Egypt. He is thought to exist on what Eckists call the Astral Plane, which is the first metaphysical plane, and he teaches at the Temple of Golden Wisdom on this plane.

A little Background of Eckankar (1/3)

Eckankar Symbol

Eckankar is an extremely interesting religion that mainly focuses on the Soul of a person. Eckists claim that the teachings of Eckankar have been around since the beginning of human existence, but the actual religion was not founded until 1965 by Paul Twitchell. Eckankar has similarities with Sufism, which is a small religious group in India, who also call themselves "The Parent Faith." The leader of the Eckankar religion, or Living Eck Master, is Harold Klemp. Harold Klemp grew up in Wisconsin, and started heavily studying and learning the teachings of Eckankar in the 1960s, and became the Living Eck Master in 1981. There have been some claims that Eckankar is in fact a cult, but they explicitly address these claims. Eckankar claims to not be a cult because Harold Klemp, as a person, is not worshiped or prayed to. Instead, he is seen as a leader and an aide in reaching the most meaningful relationship with God.

The term Eckankar means co-worker with God. Eckists believe in Eck, which is another word for the Holy Spirit, or Life Force. Eckists believe that God is completely transcendent. They believe there is no way to describe God because God is so far beyond our mental understanding. They also believe that because God is so transcendent, God is ungendered as well. Eckists believe that Eck can only be experienced in the physical world through Light and Sound. Much like their view of God, Eckists also believe that the true self, the Soul, is also ungendered. Because the true self is the Soul, Eckists believe in reincarnation.  Eckists believe that there are three separate ways to discover God, and those are through dreams, exploring past lives and Soul travel. 

Eckists believe that dreams are "windows into the worlds beyond the ordinary." They believe that dreams are where questions are answered and they are where one can gain spiritual insight. Eckists are encouraged to keep dream journals to remember their dreams. Then these dreams can be worked through and interpreted with the aid of the journals. Eckists believe that in order to get spiritual guidance in your dreams, you must contemplate a question before bed. Then you must softly sing HU, which is an ancient name for God. This act connects one with Eck. Eckists believe that upon waking, one has gained spiritual guidance about the problem in question.

Now I mentioned HU in the above paragraph. Hu is a love song to God, and singing HU is a spiritual exercise performed very often by Eckists. Here is a video of Harold Klemp demonstrating the singing of HU:

The second way to discover God is through the examination of past lives. Eckists believe in the concept of reincarnation, and they believe that by examining the things you are attracted to and interested in are clues to your past life. For example, a child who is fascinated with airplanes may have been a pilot in a past life. Eckists believe that whenever a strong love or hate appears with no apparent cause, it is a window into the past lives a person has lived.

Eckists also believe in Soul travel, and this is one of their primary teachings. Eckists believe that the Soul can leave the body and explore different planes of reality. The Soul can leave the physical world and travel to different soul planes that exist on different conceptual levels. Soul travel is a way for the true inner self to make its journey back home to God. And it is through this Soul travel that one achieve self-consciousness and God-consciousness.

The basic principles of Eckankar are as follows:

The Book of Abraham

It was discussed in class last week that Joseph Smith had a sort of fascination with trinkets. There was a compass-like trinket discussed in the book of Mormon that lead Nephi's family in the right direction. And in the Book of Abraham, the trinkets (for lack of a better word) were known as Urim and Thummim. Abraham learned about the creation of the earth through Urim and Thummim. After doing a little research about Urim and Thummim, I found that Joseph Smith actually claimed that Urim and Thummim were two stones fastened to a breastplate and used like large pair of glasses. It is interesting that Joseph Smith consciously made that connection. He wanted to align himself with Abraham and show that he had too gained knowledge and understanding of God and the world through the same lens that Abraham gained knowledge. The idea of trinkets through which God is revealed to you is something that has not been present in any of the other texts we have read in this class. I was also doing a little research and the Industrial Revolution was taking place before and during Joseph Smith's life. He was living in a time where there was a greater emphasis on assembly lines and basically more and more "things" were being invented and mass produced for all to buy and use. So Joseph Smith talking about Urim and Thummim in that way is him drawing on the current state of America and the world and transforming it to fit into something different. He is taking something modern and of great importance in his society and changing it into something ancient and also putting much religious significance with it as well. It would be like someone today is saying that 4000 years ago, prophets had special stones that they could hold up to their ears and talk to God or talk to each other.

I think that the research and explanation given above for Urim and Thummim is an example of the historical critical method we have been using throughout this entire term. We look at something distinct and novel about a reading or belief, and we see how it functioned during the TIME it was written. We are not really concerned with finding fact or truth to the claims or beliefs, instead we are trying to find the motivations behind why the writer chose to put those belief in his or her writing. Joseph Smith, and most of the world, had been immersed in the Industrial Revolution for a while and it influenced his "translation" of the book of Abraham. 

Book of Mormon

Nephites vs Lamanites

When reading Book of Mormon, in the Book of Mormon, the first three chapters seemed to be all about Native Americans. It was stated earlier that the Lamanites were the Native Americans. They lost God and turned dark, then came back to God as were turned white again, and at this point, they have gone back to dark and are trying their hardest to attack and kill all of the Nephites. I got the sense that the Lamanites were the bad guys and the Nephites were the good guys for a time, but even they turned bad. Mormon that had to distance himself from both of these groups because of the terrible things they were doing. And at the beginning of the fourth chapter in this section, the Nephites were exterminated by the Lamanites. Based on what I have read earlier, that means that around 400 AD, all the people that were left in America were the Native Americans. Displaying the Lamanites in this way as brutal and ruthless could have been a way to justify all of the terrible things the white men were doing to the Native Americans during the 19th century.

Also, I found an interesting section that can relate to Manifest Destiny. On page 530, Mormon was explaining how the Nephites (him included) were trying to defend themselves against the Lamanites and in constant retreat from them that "we marched forth and came to the land of Joshua, which was in the borders west, by the seashore." Again, in the way I was reading this, I believe that the Mormons reading this would identify with the Nephites. Nephi was a predominant character and writer in this book, and was a good man, so I think the mormons would believe that their Mormon ancestors were the Nephites. Also, the fact that all the Nephites were killed off, as seemingly martyrs, they would even connect with them more possibly. So, the fact that the Nephites traveled all the way to the West Coast could reaffirm the idea that America, or Mormons, needed to gain their land back from the Native Americans because they drove the Nephites away.

Also, I found some similarities with Baha'u'llah at the beginning of this book as well. Mormon writes,

But wickedness did prevail upon the face of the whole land, insomuch that the Lord did take away his beloved disciples, and the work of miracles and of healing did cease, because of the iniquity of the people.... And I did endeavor to preach unto this people, but my mouth was shut, and I was forbidden that I should preach unto them; for behold they had willfully rebelled against their God, and the blessed disciples were taken away out of the land, because of their iniquity (529).

This quote reminds me of Baha'u'llah, because it makes it seem as though these Americans were in a dark period with respects to religion, which is something that Baha'u'llah believes. The Baha'i believe that religion is ever changing; there are waves of heavy presence of God and a thriving following of a prophet, and there are also dark times when God is not as present and the world is in more of a transitional time. The Nephites and Lamanites were in a transitional time here. Also, it seems as though Mormon himself wanted to become a prophet and preach to the people, but he was shut down and ignored. The Baha'i believe that one of the worst things to do is to deny a new prophet. This could relate to the state of America at the time Joseph Smith was writing. He could have viewed America as in a transition phase. He was witnessing many different religions believing different things and he was seeing many people attack Native Americans too. He could have written this story as a reflection of their present state all the way back into 400AD. Also, maybe he was aligning himself with Mormon as well. Mormon was denied as a prophet at this time, and maybe Joseph Smith was being denied as a prophet himself.

Hey, i've heard that before

While reading the Third Book of Nephi, I noticed that when Jesus was speaking, he used certain terms and phrases that are very commonly used and were used in the King James bible as well. Many phrases struck me as familiar when I was reading it, because I have heard many people say these phrases in everyday life. I asked around and chatted with them about the phrases, and we came to a conclusion that these were indeed biblical phrases. So I assume that these phrases were commonly known (maybe even more than they are now, because people seemed to be more religious in the past) in the 19th and 20th centuries. Jesus says

Yea, blessed are the poor in spirit who come onto me, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. And again, blessed are all they that mourn, for they shall be comforted; and blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth (488).

The most striking language here is when he says that the meek shall inherit the earth. This is a common phrase and a biblical phrase. Also, on the next page, Jesus is quoted as saying

And behold, it is written, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. But I say unto you, that ye shall not resist evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on they right cheek, turn to him the other also (489).

Nephi

Both of these quotes are very recognizable and from the bible. There could be several reasons for Joseph Smith including these quotes in the Third Book of Nephi. First of all, making direct references to the bible would first legitimize the Book of Mormon. If these were indeed true stories from when Jesus went to New World and spoke to Nephi, doesn't it make sense that he would say some of his most known ideas and lessons to these people. These are the things that Jesus believed, and because the phrases are so recognizable, society has shown that they are some of the most poignant and most helpful things that Jesus has said. By including these phrases, the book of Mormon is legitimized because it directly reference the bible, which at that point was definitely a legitimate document. Also, it shows that Joseph Smith really liked these things that Jesus said, and thought it important to include in his "translations." Also, these quotes do just provide a part of the moral compass people needed in the 19th and 20th century. 

Baha'u'llah and his Writings

As mentioned in my earlier blog post, in this biography, I was craving for the author to get into the actual beliefs and writings of Baha'u'llah. And in chapter 7, that is exactly what the author did. And I have to say, I found the things that Baha'u'llah believed to be extremely interesting.

First of all, I have always had a problem with prophets or religious writers claiming that the scripture they write are the actual words of god. I think this is a common belief in many religions. I do not know much about the bible, but Augustine firmly believed that the scripture were the actual words of God, and Baha'u'llah and his followers also believed that he was writing the actual words of God. I still do not think that the scripture we read are the exact words of God, but the testimony given by 'Azizu'llah Varqua, who was only 9 years old when he made a pilgrimage with his father to visit Baha'u'llah, gives a very compelling and convincing argument that Baha'u'llah's writings were indeed the words of God.

Varqua explains that when Baha'u'llah would get inspiration or have a revelation about something, he would order everyone in the room to leave while the words were being revealed to him. Varqua, being a curious boy, longed to see the revelation proccess Baha'u'llah did not allow others to see. Varqua accidentally went to see Baha'u'llah during one of these revelations, and his experience was extremely profound. He recalls

I stood near the door which I had entered, and was only a few moments in the room when I began trembling in my whole body. I felt I could not stand any more on my feet. His Holiness Baha'u'llah turning to me said 'Goodbye'. As I lifted the curtain to go out, I fell on the threshold and was unconscious... Then I understood why Baha'u'llah in haste dismissed everybody. It is because the people cannot endure it, there is such a Power in the room (139).

 This testimony was also powerful for me to read, and it caused me to slightly question my view that scripture cannot really be the exact words of God. This is a first hand witness account of something that seems too great to handle. I would say I am still up in the air about my thoughts regarding scripture as actually being written by God, which is nothing new. I seem to be up in the air about everything relating to religion, but this first hand account caused me to question my view, which I like. Being challenged to think about something different can be intellectually stimulating and fun to do.

Compassion

Wow, the Karen Armstrong video was very moving, and I have to say that I agree with all that was being said there. The first thing I found striking was that at the very beginning Armstrong was talking about fundamentalism being "a militant kind of aggressive religiosity" and that there was "sense of rage expressed in religious terms" when trying to deal with the injustice or imbalance in our world today. I think this relates to the points I was trying to make in a previous post about the fundamentalist baptists that were on the Tyra show. They were very aggressive and had a great amount of anger and rage inside of them because they believed so much of the world was corrupt and living in a way that would damn them to hell. But in this Armstrong video, the overarching theme was compassion. Though those baptists believed they were helping people out by telling them their ways were corrupt and sinful, most people who were not also fellow fundamentalist baptists would agree that their message and their religious goals were not those of compassion.

I do wish that the biography we were reading about Baha'u'llah did have more explanations of his actual belief system and the belief system of the Baha'i. And based on the next chapter being titled the writings of Baha'u'llah, maybe we just haven't gotten there yet. But there were some first hand accounts the author did include that illustrated Baha'u'llah as a compassionate person.


Fadil Mazandarani, an Iranian Baha'i historian writes

Among the other manifest qualities of Baha'u'llah were his matchless moral and spiritual courage, his fortitude and joyfulness even in times of hardship and difficulties, his generosity and munificence, his sympathy and compassion towards the poor and misfortunate, and his paying no heed to the rich and powerful (135).

I think this quote portrays Baha'u'llah as compassionate. He is portrayed as always keeping hope and always having sympathy and compassionate to the poor and those in need. I find it remarkable that Baha'u'llah could have everything taken away from him, all this riches and status lost, but yet he still manages to be so compassionate to others as well.  Also, it was stated that when assassins tried to kill him, there were multiple times that Baha'u'llah, just through talking with them, actually caused them to not attempt to kill him. He did not try to convert them to his religion, but there must be something about his personality and compassion that caused these assassins to not carry out their required task.

He loved children and was very involved in creating effective education for children. He set up a school for the Baha'i children in 'Akka, where he and many Baha'i lived. Baha'u'llah, even when he became very sick before he died, still saw visitors and followers because he had so much compassion for his believers that he did not let his sickness get in the way of seeing them. Mirza Ahmad Yazdi, who lived with Baha'u'llah writes "Although so majestic, Baha'u'llah was exceedingly loving, kind, and courteous and generous. When out walking with some of the believers He would chat with them very affably (142)."

He was quoted as telling a fellow Baha'i Sayyid Asadu'llah Qumi, who was upset by the terrible things we witnesses people doing, saying that "We [the Baha'i] manifested ourselves in order that feuding, disputes, tyranny and injustice should be removed and eliminated from the world... These individuals here... block the path of those who are seeking their Beloved (145)." When Baha'u'llah was describing the people that upset Qumi, he described them as perpetuating feuding, disputes, tyranny and injustice in the world, and all of these things go against the idea of compassion. These four aspects all pin people against others with the intent to hurt, sabotage or defeat, and that is not the compassion that Armstrong is talking about.  And Baha'u'llah states that his main goal is to get rid of all those forces that go against compassion.

 

Rastafari had Hope

Aside from Religious Studies, I am also taking a psychology class titled Psychopathology. In this class, we study various mental illnesses, personality disorders as well as mood disorders. In class today, I found myself thinking of the Rastafari movement many times. In Psychopathology, we were learning about the hopelessness theory of depression. In this theory, it states that having feelings of hopelessness can lead to specific and debilitating depressive symptoms. Several times during the lecture, I found myself drawing connections to the African people and their situation in Jamaica, and I came to the conclusion that these were a strong group of people that really never gave up hope, despite all of the terrible circumstances in which they lived. And not giving up hope caused them to create a system of symbols and beliefs that gave their lives meaning and purpose and raised their morale and increased the enjoyment of their lives.

In the hopelessness theory of depression, feelings of hopelessness are characterized by someone thinking that highly aversive will undoubtedly happen in the future and that there is no way for a positive outcome to occur. They believe that there is no way for them to achieve their goals, and there is no way to stop the terrible things that will occur in the future.  And one of the main causes for these hopeless thoughts have to deal with how someone interprets causes for certain aspects of their lives. Say someone failed a test, they could believe that they failed because they didn't try hard enough, the professor hates them or is a hard grader, or they think internally and actually believe that they failed because they are dumb. It was found that having thoughts like the last one, where you believe you are internally and perpetually dumb causes the most psychological distress. Always blaming yourself for your situation is not really the best thing to do.

When learning about this, I kept on thinking how many white leaders or colonialists were trying to make these Rastafarians actually interpret their socioeconomic status in an eternal way. The Rastas were raised in an environment where, from birth, they are lead to believe that they are fundamentally inferior to the whites. On page 31 of Rastafari: From Outcasts to Cultural Bearers, Edmonds writes

While these overt forms of oppression met constant resistance, there was widespread acceptance of the ideas that associate whiteness with beauty, goodness, and God and that associate blackness with ugliness, evil, and the devil... The end result was an endemic lack of self-knowledge and healthy self-identity among Afro-Jamaicans.

This quote shows that the Afro-Jamaicans were raised in a society that wanted them to believe they were somehow inferior. But this quote also shows that these forms of oppression were always met with constant resistance. Rastas were put into an environment where others wanted them to feel responsible for their poverty or perceived inferiority, but their strength came in the rejection of those ideals. And the rejection of those ideals caused them to not have feelings of hopelessness that could lead to a nation wide epidemic of depression.

  

Instead of giving into what the colonialist whites wanted, the Afro-Jamaicans instead never gave up hope, They instead looked to bible scripture and found a specific interpretation that explained their situation and gave them hope to change their lives. Instead of going with an extremely psychologically distressing explanation of their lives (blaming themselves like the colonialists wanted) they instead chose a different explanation that was instead rebellious but also empowering.

I always really enjoy when I can find some connections between the classes I am taking here at Lawrence.

Boboshanti

Here is a short video explaining some customs and beliefs of the boboshanti in a Rastafarian village. In this video, there are many things that are in keeping with the Rastafarian traditions explained in our text, Rastafari: From Outcasts to Culture Bearers. Their entire lives are focused on getting back to the homeland that is Ethiopia. They consider themselves children of Africa and they believe that they must return to there. They desire equality and justice for all, which is a Rastafarian ideal stemming from the inequality and injustice they have faced for decades in Jamaica. Something that was striking about this group of, what the narrator calls the "most spiritually committed Rastafarians," is the fact that they wear turbans to cover their traditional dreadlocks.

The text explains that the dreadlocks have multiple levels of significance. Firstly, dreadlocks go against the social norms of beauty in Jamaica. It rejects the notion of skin bleaching or hair straightening and actually accentuates the nature of African hair. Also, dreadlocks go against the social norms of cleanliness and bathing because they appear matted, which in turn are thought to be dirty. The dreadlocks also emphasize the Rastafarian believe in all natural and organic living, because the hair is not being pulled or combed in unnatural ways.  The dreadlocks also signify fearsomeness and fearlessness because of their visual association with the Lion. Dreadlocks are seen as a spiritual and "mystical link between the Rastas and Jah... In this context locks are a kind of receptor or psychic antenna."  And finally, the dreadlocks are symbolic of the Babylonic Jamaicas unavoidable doom (Edmonds 59-60).

So why do these Rastas wear turbans to cover their distinguishing dreadlocks? Well, the answer is explained in the video. It is explained that turbans are worn because it is an ancient dressing that is worn by the people of Ethiopia. In the text, the dreadlocks were never explicitly linked to Ethiopia, except for the fact that they could be a "psychic antenna" between the Rastas and Jah or Selassie. I think that wearing these turbans are another way to connect to Ethiopia explicitly that is not accomplished through dreadlocks alone. Obviously these people are still following the dreadlocks tradition under their turbans, but this means that they value the physical connection with Ethiopia over the implications of wearing dreadlocks alone. Though the strength and defying of social norms is still present in their appearances, they value the idea of upholding an ancient Ethiopian tradition as well. They call themselves Rastas, so they have the dreadlocks like all other Rastas. But they also call themselves children of Africa, which is not what all the Rastas call themselves, so they use their appearance to reflect their strong connection to Africa by adorning themselves with turbans as crowns in the ancient Ethiopian tradition.

Kebra Negast

When reading the Kebra Negast, I was struck by a couple of things. First off, I was not expecting this to be such a narrative. I expected this reading to be way more like a scripture that was instructing all on what is right and wrong. There were a couple places where the story took a turn from straight narrative into a more preaching and instructional guideline on how to live your life, but there was a lot less than I thought there would be. Maybe this was because we did not read the whole thing. There could very easily be places in the entire book where there are explicit guidelines about the right and wrong thing to do, but in the section we read, it was more telling a story than anything else.

The other thing that struck me in this reading was the fact that Solomon actually tricked Sheba into sleeping with him. Throughout the entire reading, every person was raving about how great Solomon was. The merchant went to visit him and when he came back all he did was rave about Solomon until Sheba finally had enough and had to visit him herself just to see how great he was. But then, he tricked her into sleeping with him. When I was reading this, I got extremely confused. But then he had that dream where he realized the fault in what he did and he apologized and tried to make it up to Sheba. After reading that, I tried to think of reasons why Solomon would have been portrayed as so wonderful, yet he tricked Sheba. The explanation I came up with is that is showed someone making a mistake, owning up to it and making it right. It could be an illustration that everybody messes up, and that there are very extreme consequences if you do not apologize and ask for forgiveness in what you have done.

Where is the Love?

On page 76 of On Christian Teaching, Augustine writes,

"But since the human race is prone to judge sins not by the strength of the actual lust, but rather by the standard of its own practices, people generally regard as culpable only such actions as men of their own time and place tend to blame and condemn, and regard as commendable and praiseworthy only such actions as are acceptable within the conventions of their own society."

Augustine then goes on talking about how scripture only ever speaks of love and the only true way to interpret the scripture is to interpret it in a way that facilitates love. When reading, I couldn't help thinking of so many christian fundamentalists who only take the scripture at face value, and think that so many modern ideas are sinful or ungodly. I remembered this episode of the Tyra show where she had fundamentalist baptists on her show, and I feel like it fits into this blog topic. Here is a little bit of the interview on her show:

In her interview, the baptist lady and her family spoke of love many times, but to me, it seemed incredibly false. They believed that they loved homosexuals because they had the courage to tell them they were going to hell. Does that make any sense? I really don't think it does at all. Augustine writes about misinterpreting the scripture, and I, and also Augustine, think that is what this family is doing. Augustine writes

"And so it happens that if scripture enjoins something at variance with the practices of its readers, or censures something that is not at variance with them, they consider the relevant expression to be figurative." 

In this interview, these women are blindly quoting the bible and speaking out against gays while not giving any context to these quotes. Religion changes to fit society. It constantly is changing to account for the new ideas in and structures of social culture. So back when the bible was first written, things like homosexuality were not as widely present and accepted. But what Augustine is saying is that because homosexuality is present in our society, we should only look at seemingly anti-gay things in the bible as merely figurative, or ignore them altogether. This is definitely something that is not being done by the fundamental baptists.

In the same paragraph, Augustine then writes, "Scripture enjoins nothing but love, and censures nothing but lust, and mounds men's accordingly...It narrates the past, foretells the future, and demonstrates the present, but all these things serve to nourish and strengthen this love." Just listening to the things these fundamentalists are saying, one gets a sense that there is no love in what they are saying. They are so defensive and are filled with such rage and anger, and I don't think that is what religion is all about. And I commend Tyra for actually pointing out the anger that these women are displaying.  Just blindly quoting the bible with anger in your words is not in accordance with the scriptures. This is the modern age. Just love.

Reading the Bible: Now and Then

In the online article,"How to Read the Bible", the author talks about how there are two different approaches to understanding scripture. The first approach is a theological approach where the scripture is used to fit into an already established conceptual "blueprint" that is the bible. The approach is that we already know what the overall meaning of the bible is, and that we use certain passages of scripture to enforce that meaning. The second approach to reading scripture is what the writer deems a "smorgasbord approach." In this approach the Bible acts as a resource people us to answer questions or get advice pertaining to their life. In the first approach, there are many assumptions which we believe are true and we make the Bible fit into that. In the second approach, we actually believe that the scripture is a way for God to directly communicate with us and give divine advice.

In On Christian Teaching, Augustine discusses two types of learning. He writes that, "One consists of things which have been instituted by humans, the other consists of things already developed, or divinely instituted, which have been observed by them." At first read, these two ideals really did not seem to coincide with the article"How to Read the Bible", but after reading the extensive explanation Augustine gave for these two types of learning, they actually did seem to coincide to a certain degree. To me, they coincide on a more abstract level because Augustine was writing on a more abstract level in his work then in the online article.


Augustine explains that the scripture means nothing without a baseline knowledge of things, which coincides with the "blueprint approach" explained in the online article. For Augustin, we must know how certain things relate to the world to understand the metaphors or representations of these things in the scripture. We must have a baseline knowledge of numbers to understand the use of numbers in the bible, as well as we must have a baseline knowledge of music in order to understand musical references. He is saying that if we don't have baseline knowledge of certain things, the scripture will either have no meaning, or will lack the much deeper meaning it actually possesses. He also explains that all meaningful things are meaningful because humans decided they would be meaningful. Things become meaningful as a result of human institution. In reference to demons, Augustine writes, "They are not observed as a result of their influence, but they gained their influence as a result of being observed and recorded." He then explains that a writer choosing to write something in one language does so because it would mean something different if written in a different language. And "All these meanings, then, derive their effects on the mind from each individual's agreement with a particular convention. As this agreement varies in extent, so do their effects. People did not agree to use them because they were already meaningful; rather they became meaningful because people agreed to use them." He writes that signs are null and void unless accompanied by the observer's agreement. And the article is saying a similar thing with reference to the first approach to reading the Bible: If we do not have an underlying blueprint of what we think the Bible is really all about, than reading passages from it will have no meaning if not made into the building blocks in that blueprint.

Now, the second type of learning in Augustine and the second type of approach to reading the Bible may not be as similar as the first types, but I still think they go together nicely. Augustine writes, "Now those elements of human tradition which men did not establish but discovered by investigation, whether they were enacted in time or instituted by god, should not be considered human institutions, no matter where they are learned." He is saying that there are things man observes and views that were not his construction, but rather the construction of God or time (which all in all just wraps up into God). This intertwines with the second approach to reading the Bible because the people who take this approach really believe that these are the words of God and that we should interpret the Bible in just this way. We should look at it as God directly communicating with us, and we should take those words as advice to live a better life. Both these approaches view things as not man-made, rather they view them as God-made and we are just here to observe and study them.

For the last part of the blog post, we are to address whether these readings of the Bible are positive or negative. I firmly believe these are positive ways of doing things, and I believe Augustine agrees. At the end of his Book 2, he writes, "For what a person learns independently of scripture is condemned there if it is harmful, but found there if it is useful. And when one has found there all the useful knowledge that can be learned anywhere, one will also find there, in much greater abundance, things which are learned nowhere else at all, but solely in the remarkable sublimity and the remarkable humility of the scriptures." This means that Augustine believes we can learn many things outside of the scripture, but learning things in the scripture will give us the most meaning and clarity in our lives.

Psalm 131

When reading through the songs of ascent, Psalm 131 especially stood out to me. It did not stand out to me in length or plot, but stood out to me in the simplistic and beautiful way it was written. The simple Psalm reads: 

 

Lord, my heart has not been haughty, nor have my eyes looked too high,

not have I striven for great things, nor for things too wondrous for me.

But I have calmed and contented myself like a weaned babe on its mother--like a weaned babe I am with myself.

Wait, O Israel, for the Lord, now and forevermore

 

This psalm is just so beautiful! I think what is most striking is how content and static it is. Many of these songs of ascent have a strong emphasis on motion, pilgrimage, journey, etc. These songs were written about the long journeys the Israelites had to take to Jerusalem multiple times a year, and many of the psalms deal with hardships, danger, seeking protection from God, climbing the mountain to Jerusalem. But this psalm has no sense of motion and there is no looking back on a journey or anticipating a journey. I would imagine this would be something said before bed. We all must personally calm ourselves in order to fall asleep, and this psalm is reflecting the calm that one achieves with God. Many of the psalms we studied in class have been about hardships. Some psalms reflect how the Israelites believed God abandoned them and they are just pleading for him to come back and save them. There is a sense of unrest and wanting and dissatisfaction with their current states. 

 

 

But this psalm is different. The poet is completely content. They express how they are like a weaned babe when alone. There is still a sense of waiting for God, but it is expressed in the line, "Wait, O Israel, for the Lord, now and forevermore." The "now and forevermore" illustrates the stasis of the psalm. It makes it seem as though the poet, or anyone reading or singing it, will remain content and calm for eternity. There is still a sense of waiting for God, like in many other poems, but this is not an agitated waiting, it is a serene waiting. In many of the psalms we read, there is always talk of opposing forces, or those who are haughty non-believers that are always persecuting or hurting the Israelites. The victimization that the Israelites faced throughout history is reflected in these psalms, but this psalm makes no mention of that. Instead it is just a personal reaffirmation that what they are doing is right and that they are content and happy. I really liked this psalm just because it was simple, sweet and calming.

 

Wait, O Israel, for the Lord, now and forevermore

King David and Chinese Monarchs

Something that struck me during our class discussion on Wednesday is that in the Alter translation of the psalms, King David was seen as the seemingly the son of God. It was believed that he was descendant from God as was personally chosen by God to be the king of the Israelites. When we were discussing this fact, I couldn't help but be reminded of a class I took my sophomore about the arts of China and Japan. In this class, we learned that back when China was a monarchy, they believed in the "Mandate of Heaven" which stated that the emperor acted as the Son of the Heavens when in power.  The Mandate of Heaven was something that the Chinese used to legitimize their leaders by claiming that the leaders had divine approval, and that divine approval would either approve or disapprove of the Emporer's leadership. This concept struck me as very odd three years ago, and I think it was because we today are so used to the separation of church and state. It struck me as odd that these people would view their political leader as the Son of the Heavens. When we were discussing the psalms in class, I found that I was having the same feeling when discussing David. Up until this point, I ignorantly thought that the Chinese were the only to think that their rulers were divinely blessed to rule, but I was definitely wrong. But I guess it does make sense that other cultures would  believe that. The separation of church and state idea is such a modern concept. Thousands of years ago, everything was intertwined when it comes to the secular and sacred, so it makes sense that several cultures viewed their political leaders as sons of god.

Lost in Translation?

When comparing the Alter translation of Psalm 2 to the translation in the Bay Psalm book, I found that the most striking discrepancies were dealing with quoted dialogue and the narrative perspective of the psalm.  I found many discrepancies between the second and sixth verses. In verse 3, Alter chose to include a quotation that is believed to be uttered by the narrator of the poem. In the Alter translation, the beginning of the poem talks about how the nations and kings and princes of the earth are conspiring against the Lord. Alter then translates, "Let us tear off their fetters,/ let us fling away their bonds." But in the Bay Psalm book, there is no quoted material. Instead, the translation reads:

Though the content of the verse is still the same, there is a different point of view established in these translations. There is no attribution to David in this psalm, so the narrator or poet is quite vague in this psalm. But in the Alter translation, include a quotation for this verse has a couple different interpretations. First, it puts the text somewhat removed from the narrator. I get a sense that the first, unquoted part of the psalm, is acting more as stated fact, and that the quotation is the poet's reaction to the disrupt world leaders. Or, perhaps this quoted material could be illustrating a group dynamic where people are banding together against these leaders and chanting this material. In the Bay of Psalms translation, aside from having a more poetic and ancient feel to it, I get a sense of a more personal or introspective character to the psalm because there is no distinction between quoted and unquoted material in these first verses.

Also, at the beginning of verse 5, Alter translates, "Then will He speak to them in His wrath," while the Bay of Psalms translation reads, "Speak to them in his ire and wrath." Again, this illustrates the more distant and abstract quality of the Alter translation when compared to the more internal or personal nature of the Bay of Psalms translation. In the Alter translation, "Then will He speak" can be understood in more of a doubting or questioning way. There is uncertainty in this text, while there is no uncertainty in the Bay of Psalms translation. The Bay of Psalms translation is more personal; it is not expressing doubt or questioning, but is rather a personal plea from the poet directly to God.

Alter again includes a quote in this psalm. In his translation, there is a direct quote that God spoke to the narrator, and the quote is included in verses 7-9. Though there is no quote in the Bay of Psalms translation, this discrepancy is not as distinct or separating because the Bay of Psalms translation is still obviously quoting God, though no real quotes were used. The Bay of Psalms translation reads: 

  Both these translations start off with "God spoke to me" or "He said to me." What is significant about this is it illustrates how influential and experience of talking to god must be on a person. Though I feel the Alter translation creates a sense of distance between the narrator and the text while the Bay of Psalms translation does not, this quote comes off as extremely intimate in both translations.  You are led to believe this is the actual voice of God talking to the poet. That is a momentous occasion, and is illustrated in a personal way in both translations. 

I also spent some time comparing the translations of Psalm 8 in these two books as well. An interesting discrepancy I found was in the fifth and sixth verse of the psalm. Alter translates, "What is mad that You should not him,/ and the human creature, that You pay him heed,/ And you make him little less than gods,/ with glory and grandeur You crown him?" While the Bay of Psalms translation reads:

What is interesting here, is that there is a question mark after the sixth verse of the Alter translation and not in the Bay of Psalms translation. There could be several reasons for this. First, there could be more of sense of skepticism or uncertainty in the newer Alter translation which could reflect the skepticism of religion that is more of a modern notion. Or it just could reflect the sheer sense of awe the poet was experiencing while examining the great and many things God had created. Or, when looking at the whole quotation, it can be summed up to, "What is man that You should note him.... with glory and grandeur You crown him?" This could be interpreted as the poet asking who humans really are. He is asking, "who are we exactly?" and seemingly questioning what the meaning of life is.

Lady Gaga: Monster Religion

So I am sure that none of you guys in the class know this about me, but I am a HUGE Lady Gaga fan. I have been a "superfan" for around 2 years now. Since starting this class, I have been thinking a lot about her views, statements and her love for her fans. I have seen many, many of her performances and interviews, and she uses her voice as an outlet for an agenda filled with love and acceptance of all kinds of people.  I would say I am fairly tuned into the fan base that is little monsters, and a lot of us view this fanbase as a religion.  In her performances, she makes statements with religious undertones. She says "my religion is you" to her fans as well as says that her fan base views pop culture and music as a religion. Here are just a few videos that I think kind of shows her love for her fans and says some of the things that she believes.

 Now I know that not every person reading this is going to feel the same way about her as I do, but I think that her message of love and acceptance of everyone is something that can really help and change the world. I was lucky enough to see her in concert a year ago, and that night really changed my life. I felt free and empowered. Though many would think that a fan base calling themselves a religion is blasphemous or wrong, but I highly disagree with that.  To me, religion can be separated from spirituality.  I believe that someone can be extremely spiritual and believe in god and Jesus and still not be religious. One of the biggest problems with religion, in my opinion, is that there isn't one religion that doesn't hate or feel strongly against another religion or different group of people. But in the "monster religion," if you really listen to the things that Lady G is saying, we are really striving to accept everyone. I think that religion is something that people get involved in so that they can learn a moral code for which to live their lives. They join a church or believe a religion because it tells them what is right or wrong. Isn't this the same thing? We believe in acceptance of everyone and living life without prejudice and hate. 

There are many people who would not say that there could ever be a Monster Religion. To quote Lady Gaga, "they just see wigs and lipstick and shut down." Or people could think that because God is not involved it could not be a religion. I am not saying that I personally view Lady Gaga as God. I am saying, take god out of it, and just try to live life free of prejudice or hate, which is hopefully the main belief of Monsters everywhere.  This Monster Religion could give people who don't believe in God something to believe it. Religion came about as a way to bring people together and support one another, and this monster religion does just that. To illustrate how united a fan base can be, a fellow fan, Jamey committed suicide recently. Though I had never met Jamey, I followed his blog on tumblr and had some contact with him in that way. He was 14 years old and ended his life because of the immense bullying he endured everyday at school because he was bisexual. After people learned about Jamey's death, people were extremely upset. Lady Gaga was extremely upset, and tweeted:

"The past days I've spent reflecting, crying, and yelling. I have so much anger. It is hard to feel love when cruelty takes someones life."

A couple days after his death, a group of 150 fans made this video in response:

And Lady Gaga herself dedicated her most recent performance of her song Hair to Jamey.

I guess what I am trying to say here, is that though God is not involved, this fan base could be considered as religion as well. We all love each other, and when someone is hurting, strangers unite to support that person even if they have never met them.  To me, I don't have a problem saying that this group is a family or religion. I personally do not feel a strong connection with God nor do I even know if I believe that there is a god. But I do know that the outpouring of love and support for this one person means that the Monsters are doing something right. We are millions strong, and hopefully hate and cruelty can be diminished a little less if we speak up. 

Effigy Mounds in Wisconsin

Man Mound, Baraboo, Wisconsin

In his definition of religion, Geertz writes that religion is "A system of symbols which acts to establish a powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that that moods and motivations seems uniquely realistic." When it comes to effigy mounds in Wisconsin and surrounding states, the "system of symbols" that Geertz references seem to correlate with these mounds. These effigy mounds acted as a sacred place where Native American would gather and where they would bury their dead in what is believed to be mass burial ceremonies.