Marble House

I never know when a tune will trigger introspection, but when it does, I become its captive…

There is great appeal in the midnight hour. It begins the most introspective quarter of the day. In this period most lie asleep. In this period I thrive. As of late I haven’t had much opportunity to soak in thought because work does not allow for it, but when I do have the opportunity, I bathe in it.

It is my cleansing. My spirit swells. I am alive; unlike others; alone. My head is my den, comforting, small quarters where only my pets are welcome and only if they lay in silence with distance. I want to be touched by no other living body, so that all energies that go into thought may not be disturbed. In this quiet, the voice begins to surface. In my stillness, I can hear. Truth emerges and I listen: consciousness awakens.

I spend too many hours in a haze. I am lulled into complacency. What else is life? To live consciously is a curse. It is a life pained by the truth of it all. Even the bits of truth, the moments of enlightenment that spark consciousness bring with them too great a burden to bear. I am too weak to act, to obey. My lack of discipline results in walking in and walking out of awareness. One foot in and one foot out, ever the Bodhisattva of enlightenment and not. I would be a martyr if I were worthy. I wish to be alone; I wish to be connected. I am a fool and I languish walking among the common as much as I lose myself in enjoyment of their presence, for they bring levity to all situations for which I am grateful.

I am no one and everyone. I am everything and nothing.

I haven’t known melancholy, as I did, in a long time. At times I miss it. It was such a faithful companion. But I am a poor companion. I wander. I wander in search of freedom. I now only seek the courage to detach, to be brave enough for goodbye.

During my most lucid states I have felt on the verge of true solitude, in thought and action, and felt the fear that accompanied it: to lose the familiar; to give up family; to give up the name given me. I have felt great fear in the awareness of this reality and yet it was the envisioned progression of my life. In my weakness I let go of awareness and chose a return to dullness and attachment to family and identity.

When my fear is lost, I will detach again so that I may continue my path to freedom, when I lose all that anchors me to earth: desire, identity, memory, flesh and bone.

Prayer

“May all living beings throughout the the universe be peaceful, happy and without worry. May they have all their suffering and obstructions be swept away without exception…”

Tibetan Sky Burial and Internal Dilemma

How good are you at practicing cultural relativism?

It’s not hard to admit seeing pictures from the Tibetan Sky Burial immediately made me upset.  My mind was fluttering with words like ‘cruel’, ‘revolting’, ‘disrespectful’, ‘gruesome’.   Now, the person I am dictates from this point I work backward: why am I reacting this way and what is the cause for this specific reaction?  Some, I imagine, move forward with explanations for their reactions instead (i.e., “This is against [ultimate power's] plan”).  It may not even stop there, it might cross into formulating beliefs about Tibetans and fostering contempt/hatred/prejudice for the way they choose to treat their dead.  But the important word is ‘choose’, and I don’t mean that lightly.

For one to label their tradition(s) ‘inhumane’ or ‘wrong’ a precedence would have to be set.  Is this precedence that the dead should be lowered into rectangular ditches within an opulent box?  What about a meager box: would this be showing less respect?  Is burial about money?  What if one can only afford cremation?  Would you like your remains to be the literal equivalent of cigarette ash?  As a smoker who flinches and swats the slightest fleck of ash from attaching to her person, I’d prefer naught.  Shall I be encased in a cold house of marble, alone or with others (depending on burial allowance), for the loss of me to be lamented by loved ones, remembered for all time (highly unlikely).  This seems all too naive and selfish for it to be palatable:  I am organic and thus I am part of a cycle of birth and death and continuous evolution of matter and spirit.

I am organic and thus I am part of a cycle of birth and death and continuous evolution of matter and spirit.  This statement, though composed of twenty-two words, holds a fraction of and is encompassed by my worldview – my beliefs, in flux as they may seem, are present here.  There is a term for that cycle I have used in the past, but I fear using it again will only alienate me from steadfast individuals who aren’t as open to the beliefs of other cultures/religions as I am.  That said, I am here to unite.  This is my purpose – simplified.  Disharmony brings about a prolonged upset to which some shocking pictures will never compare.

Because I consider myself more open-minded than the masses, my reaction has me bothered.  Bothered enough to compose today’s entry.  I am disappointed in my initial reception of these shots.  I am disappointed because I do not approve of this in others, because this is the kind of thing my liberal education, as well as my specific course of study, is supposed to extinguish – this is at least how I see it.  Being conscious of this has left me feeling weak, vulnerable, and a bit hypocritical.  Am I being hard on myself?  My only saving grace was where I went postreaction:  I questioned how this came to be, trying to understand what was seemingly instinctual rather than relax and recline in the ethnocentric notions that too many – whether cognizant of it or not – allow to induce  intolerance, nurturing the spread of discrimination and antipathy.

The title of this page states:  “NOT FOR SENSITIVE SOULS”.  Its major audience was targeted by bull’s eye, and as much as it irks me, I have to be lumped in with that majority.  But what is ironic is that stomaching these pictures is for the sensitive soul.  Understanding these cultural/religious practices is for the sensitive, empathetic soul.  It is through this empathy that I choose to gaze through the lens of my chosen studies (anthropology/religious studies); it is through empathy that we may best educate ourselves in matters of the other; it is empathy that will unite us.

And I find myself lachrymose.  There is so much swelling beneath the surface, and I can’t  fathom how it is to be tackled.  My reaction is linked to what I consider part of a major problem – something embedded within us that fosters discord between peoples.  If I consider part of my purpose here, on this planet, to aid in eliminating such discord, then I’m screwed because I have yet to experience its cessation within my self.  I do not have consistently harmonious relationships with others; I do not have stable dynamics with everyone who plays a role in my life.  And I am not okay with sitting here and dreaming up a day when everything will just snap perfectly into place without contemporaneously acknowledging it is illusory.  I am not okay with doing nothing and yet within me is a voice speaking of the ultimate futility of action – I am sopping with discord.

I find the tenets of Buddhism winding through the back of my mind and how the solutions seem so simple and evident:  Right view; right intention; right speech; right action; right livelihood; right effort; right mindfulness; right concentration.  I am also reminded of Carlos Castaneda’s Journey to Ixtlan: The Lessons of Don Juan and how vital it is to “stop the world” before I can ‘see’.  By ‘stopping the world’ one must remove oneself from the profane experience and perception of his/her world to ‘see’ differently.  All this has been done but in mere flickers.  Consistency is the problem.  But how do I remain fluid when all I know are the troughs, crests, and wave breaks of life?

Ahh, yes.  Don Juan would simply say:  Stop the world.

A Self-Reflexive Review As An Anthropology Major

This paper will be a reflection and personal account of the discipline of anthropology as viewed through the lens of an undergraduate major. The following questions will be broached and answered from personal experience: What drew you/continues to draw you to anthropology? How has/will anthropology influence your future career/life? What do you find to be its critical insights and perspectives, as well as theoretical or methodological strengths or weaknesses?

Anthropology was not my original major upon entering university. Halfway through my college career I registered for an introductory course in anthropology to fulfill a general education requirement. During this course I accessed a sliver of a world I had always been a part of but with I was barely familiar. The disappointment of this realization was enough to inspire a change of major. Suddenly the bewilderment of my first two years of university were finally defined through a new collegiate pathway, one of profound importance in regard to my own identity.

Anthropology’s enormous scope has its greatest appeal as it also has its greatest setback. How could one subject possibly study humans not only in the present but through the past as well? Anthropology endeavors to and uses a four-field, holistic approach incorporating archaeological, linguistic, biological, and cultural sub-disciplines. The breadth of the anthropology major is incredibly appealing to me as a mostly indecisive individual who finds it troublesome to stay loyal to one subject  when university offers an array of painfully fascinating courses.

Anthropology is not just a discipline of study, but it is one of application as well. Watching many films exposing the hardships of human beings locally and globally due to ecological, social, economic, political or various other factors has struck and continues to strike at my empathetic core. Learning of the dismal literacy rates, food insecurity, malnutrition, social, political, and religious subjugation and exploitation of peoples, especially among females, around the world was particularly shocking during my first course in anthropology. Over several semesters of anthropology courses I was moved to tears repeatedly due to the plight of humans in lesser developed countries as well as developed countries. Watching was simply not enough for me and I felt a silent call to action in the classroom a few weeks into my introductory course. But before I could delve into any sort of real world application, I knew I had to obtain a proper education in what I wanted to pursue.

The discipline of anthropology is now and from now on will be a permeating influence in my life and career. Anthropology is no longer a concept bound by classroom walls; it has transferred itself to my daily life and my relationships with family, friends, and strangers. The exact point in which this happened is unclear, but I was made aware of how fused I was with what I have learned from this major and how I wish to apply it most clearly midway through my final spring semester at university. Before this moment of clarity, it was unconsciously active in the way I approach understanding the other as well as the self. Hopefully, my anthropological studies will not end here.

In the future, though I am not certain what career path I am to take, I plan to utilize my background knowledge in anthropology as an advantage over my competition. I endeavor to obtain a graduate degree in conflict resolution and I find anthropology to be the most ideal background to further my studies in theory, practice, peace, justice, and international and intercultural conflict resolution. In the future, I also endeavor to be a mother and wife and I will use my knowledge of human variability as a resource to aid in personal or family trials as well as personal and family growth and education.

Anthropology’s critical insights and perspectives lie in its holistic approach and breadth of study. Its attention to variability and focus on acquiring a wealth of knowledge in order to maneuver with greater dexterity within complex and diverse environments is an invaluable asset. Its strengths are in critically approaching social norms and human assumptions. Anthropology is a study that may have its historical flaws, but its strength is in the will of its greatest thinkers and contributors to critically reflect on information and reshape or simply demolish what was thought flawed. Theoretically it covers many antinomies such as: material and ideal; structure and agency; inductive and deductive; synchronic and diachronic, nomothetic and ideographic; society and culture. Methodologically it shows flexibility in using phenomenological and empirical data through various methods (e.g. case studies, focus groups, qualitative and quantitative interviews, surveys, participant observations, etc.) and can approach research etically or emically. Its weakness may lie in the overwhelming quantities of information it has to account for. Thankfully, anthropology does not have a deadline for acquiring human information of the past and present, though that might depend on context.

The theme of taking “the middle road” in more recent decades with the use of practice theory or manipulating and synthesizing theories for a better approach to problem-solving is a direction I would like to see anthropology to continue. This is not enough alone, though, and must be supplemented with new theories or approaches under novel circumstances. Though prediction of where culture may go is not plausible, looking to the past can shed light on what we can expect in the future: Anything is possible.

I see anthropologists as having potential to be like the Bodhisattvas within the religion of Buddhism: enlightened (or just well-educated) beings with such great compassion that they maintain one foot planted within the ether (or the other) and the other foot back on earth (the self) so that others may benefit from their knowledge and one day, too, may be enlightened.

Thich Naht Hanh and Abraham Joshua Heschel

 

How does the contrast between the sacred and the holy, or morality and ethics, appear in Thich Nhat Hanh’s life and thought?

Thich Nhat Hanh appears to move in and out of both realms.  To maintain his roots in his sacred tradition of Buddhism, he shares beliefs in non-dualism and mindfulness.  His expression of omnipartiality can be found in his poem “Call Me By My True Names”.  He rids himself of polarized assumptions and attains an elevated, enlightened perspective.  Fasching and deChant quote Kierkegaard to better explain what enlightenment brings about “a kind of ‘teleological suspension of the ethical’.   The expression of interdependence of all things in the poem conveys the Mahayana Buddhist focus of ‘no self’ or anatman.

But Nhat Hanh’s Bodhisattva abilities are showcased in his ability to pass over to another realm, that of social justice for all.  In an effort to keep thousands of Vietnamese refugees from death in 1976, he participated in a boat rescue operation.  He and his partners manned boats, fought with government officials, and gave the international press notice so that the world at large would be cognizant of the injustice occurring against those trying to escape persecution.  “During those days, we practiced sitting and walking meditation, and eating out meals in silence in a very concentrated way.  We knew that without this kind of discipline, we would fail in our work.  The lives of many people depended on our mindfulness”.

Thich Nhat Hanh was able to simultaneously take part in the sacred and the holy and because of that he is a physical representation of the Buddhist concept of omnipartiality.

How is the postmodern spirituality of “passing over” and “coming back” illustrated in Thich Nhat Hanh’s life story, and what is its ethical significance?

It is the practice within the Mahayana tradition of Buddhism that the Bodhisattva maintains one foot within the realm of enlightenment and one within the world of samsara.  Out of compassion, the Bodhisattva refuses the final stage of enlightenment to help all those who have yet to reach it.  Knowing that there are so many still stuck within the wheel of desire (samsara), the Bodhisattva cannot move on without them because it would go against his or her understanding of interdependence—it would be selfish.

Thich Nhat Hanh went about “passing over” and “coming back” when he went on an international tour practicing socially engaged Buddhism.  He approached the Bodhisattva ideal, not through a spiritualized understanding of compassion, but through a socially conscious approach in search of justice.  Fasching and deChant claim, “it is only with the transformation of our understanding of the socially constructed nature of the social order that emerged with the social sciences in the modern postmodern period that religious compassion has been channeled into the reform of societies and their institutions as an essential task of ethics”.

Nhat Hanh became a proactive monk who published socially conscious books, took part in peace agreements, and also shared in the religious traditions of the other.  He recognized that there are elements of other religions in his own and his own religion in others and because of that he was able to connect with the other for a greater good.  But it was his understanding that sharing another’s tradition does not mean abandoning one’s own that allowed him to pass back.

What is the key spiritual practice in Abraham Joshua Heschel’s ethic, and how does it function ethically in his life?

Heschel puts himself in the position of the other when he prays.  He states, “Prayer is a radical commitment, a dangerous involvement in the life of God … I pray because God, the shekinah, is an outcast … God is in search of man, in search of a home in the soul and deeds of man.  God is not at home in our world.  Our task is to hallow time, to enable Him to enter our moments, to be at home in our time, in what we do with time”.

Praying to God put Heschel in the position of the stranger.  In doing so, he can understand the others’ plight and once that plight is understood, the only thing to do is to behave in accordance with the “divine imperative – the demand for justice”.  The practice of prayer is an ethical one because it is done on behalf of the stranger—to understand the stranger.

Prayer is not about approaching God with selfish requests, but about knowing what it is to feel like an outcast and through that understanding, arriving at a solution to remedy the problem.  It is only when one truly understands the place of the stranger, when one experiences life as he or she does, that one can commit to the responsibility of fighting injustice.  Heschel understood this and believed “true prayer and prejudice cannot coexist in the same heart” if one honestly partakes in true prayer.

How are the Hasidic practices of self-annihilation and audacity reconciled and expressed in Heschel’s life?

Self-annihilation has an important part in Hasidism.  “Mystical experience is often described as a death of the self experienced as ‘the kiss of God’ – a kind of spiritual ecstasy that comes with cleaving to God”.  In the face of the Holocaust, Heschel clung to God through his writings and passion for God and everything involving God.  Heschel was willing to sacrifice himself for God and others in regard to just matters, but when he believed injustice occurred, no one is exempt from criticism, including God.

Heschel expressed an example of audacity in 1944:  “Where is God?  Why dost Thou not halt the trains loaded with Jews being led to slaughter?”. The audacity  found within Judaism is summed up eloquently by Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor:  “I . . . remember my Master . . . telling me, ‘Only the Jew knows that he may oppose God as long as he does so in defense of His creation’ . . . What is Jewish history if not an endless quarrel with God?”.

The most poignant of all statements made by Heschel is made when he clarifies holiness:  “holiness is not the monopoly of any particular religion or tradition“.  In a post-colonial world, this reverberates in a way that cannot be shaken.  What would the world be like if instead of negotiating with the other based on predetermined terms, negotiations were put off until both parties meditated on what the plight of the other is until there was a breakthrough or realization of the stranger’s experience?  I imagine those predetermined terms and their definitions would go through a fair amount of editing.

Organized Chaos

Upon the cessation of a private review session I had with a fellow classmate before World Religions class, I realized I was really pumped for the midterm we were going to have.  I walked into the auditorium thinking “I’m totally going to ace this!”  Around question 61 I realized the GTA lied when I specifically asked if there would be questions that weren’t covered on the crib/review sheet.  Fortunately, those incredibly specific questions regarding obscure passages in the readings were quite limited, so I have no excuse for not receiving an A.  The first 90 questions were multiple choice and the last 10 were short answer.  I left one answer out of 102 blank because I couldn’t for the life of me recall what important figure brought communism to China.  It was not on my review sheet and it was part of a reading that was not mentioned in class.  I sat in my chair for 5 minutes mentally scanning names of important figures we learned about and couldn’t even conjure up some semblence of a good guess.  I was quite ashamed for leaving an answer blank, but, I had to get over it.  So, I attempted the bonus questions.  Of course, one just had to ask what family Ganesha was a part of.  Since I know Brahma is generally overlooked, I narrowed it down to Vishnu and Shiva in the Trimurti.  And being such a fan of the counter-culture, I chose Vishnu because Shiva is so blasted popular.  Curses! I was wrong.  I could have hung myself, but the second bonus question asked to explain how Buddhism rejected Upanishadic and Vedic Hinduism.  Thankfully, I knew that answer.  I just hope it was what they were looking for.  I found myself trembling whilst testing and at some points I thought I’d go mad.  At first I thought it was just my desperation for the grade, but several hours later I remembered I had about 18 ounces of coffee earlier in the morning. 

I walked out of the exam with a lot less arrogance, realizing the exam had humbled me.  But I respect DeChant more for it.  This class is not an ‘easy A’ and if I eventually attain it, it will because I put forth the effort.  At best, I’ll find out my grade on Thursday, but most likely it’ll be Tuesday before I know. 

I walked my anxious self to the library after class, as I regularly do and worked on some Anthropology homework.  I completed my readings for tomorrow but have yet to complete my project.  It shouldn’t take too long.  A 3 to 5 page essay and a kindship chart should take but 2 or 3 hours of my time? 

On my drive home my head swirled with what I still have to accomplish before this week is over: a kinship project, Russian homework, completion of the eastern religions reading, and a couple poems for a certain Poetry Jam to be had on Thursday evening.  My mind wandered from school to recreation and contemplated what my compositions’ focii would be.  I thought of incorporating my studies into the poems.  And an idea to express music as a religion was born.   I hope to work on this tomorrow after classes.  But it, of course, will take a backseat to my studies.  And with all that I still have to make it to the nearest computer with a decent internet connection and headset tomorrow by 5PM BST to hear Shardcore’s interview.

I <3 USF’s Bull Market

I have never held/seen up close/read a copy of L. Ron Hubbard’s Dianetics until yesterday afternoon.  Though, I certainly didn’t read it all yesterday afternoon.

I was walking through the Bull Market yesterday and stopping at several booths and learning what their representatives had to say about their organizations.  I enjoyed it but mostly brushed off a lot of the religious hogwash and took to the ‘atheist/humanist’ booth.  We both let out our religious frustrations and even did some debating but then our Rabbi neighbor decided to join in on the conversation.  Mr. Humanist/atheist was going on about how he thinks women should have two husbands so that if one fucks up she will have a back-up.  I expressed my belief in monogamous relationships when considering offspring and how it is beneficial to the offspring to have two stable figures (Ideally yin and yang) in their lives.  I began to provide some examples of such relationships in nature and how I think it is more nurturing to the offspring than to have fleeting parents.  The rabbi liked my example and mentioned we should look to nature to find ourselves, probably thinking I’d side with him.  But instead I decided to go on about homosexuality in nature and how it seems absurd for humans to debase a person for taking part in such things.  He of course was turned off once I gave examples of the Bonobos, which he considered a poor example.  He said, “What about regular animals like cows and sheep? Are they gay?”  Uh…How is the Bonobo not a regular animal?  They’re our closest relative!  He kept asking me if cows and sheep participated in same sex sex.  As if I fucking know.  I told him I had no source and that I couldn’t provide an argument on it so he took that as my admitting defeat.  Which seems ridiculous to me because sheep and cows have been domesticated for fucking ever and shouldn’t even be taken into consideration in my opinion.  They’ve been tampered with.  If you can find me a band of wild cows or sheep and present some research study on their purely hetero lifestyles, I may consider it.  He also kept going on and on about cows and sheep being hetero and wouldn’t allow me a word in edgewise.  I was even planning on stopping at his booth afterward but not after that!  I’m sure he’d think I was only there to give him a hard time.  So eff him!
So then I walked over to the Scientology booth disguised as a Dianetics booth offering a FREE STRESS TEST.  One guy who happened to be foreign with incredibly bad breath said “open your hands and hold this”.  I held two tubes (one in each hand) that looked like they could have been made out of aluminum.  They were attached by some cable to some sort of meter that supposedly measured “upsets in my life”.  First he asked me my name and then asked me to visualize something from my past.  I decided I would make this easy on him and just divulged stressful occurances in my life.  But I also made sure to mention many pleasant things in my life so that I could watch the meter and test how consistent it was.  The wand was going crazy back and forth.  Everytime I projected my voice it would shoot to the stressed side of the meter.  I would mention the stress of tests at school and homework and balancing my life then how fruitful it is to receive an education.  The wand was bouncing to the stressed area the entire time I talked.  I thought it was full of crap, but the Dianetics fellows kept insuring me that it was measuring my stress.  And that it was bad stress it was measuring.  I said, “There’s positive stress and negative stress. How can this primitive piece of technology tell the difference?”  They assured me that it was measuring what has upset me.  Which is crap because the wand shot to ‘STRESS’ everytime I got excited whether or not I was happy or upset. 

After the test, the guy who conducted it showed me a copy of Dianetics and said the answers to my problems are in this book, and this book costs $35.  Do I look like I carry wads of cash around between classes?  This isn’t Cornell or Harvard.  My filthy rich parents (or not) haven’t sent me to school with a couple of Benjamins as my lunch money.   I don’t have $35 to throw away on 1,000 sheets of paper when I can go to the library and check out whatever I please for free.  $35 might be what the messiah of Scientology accidentally finds under his car seat when looking for a tube of Astroglide, but I am paranoid about carrying cash on my person after having my pocketbook stolen in the past and $35 is a full tank of gas.  And I’m sorry, but I find a full tank of gas a hell of a lot more useful than Dianetics. 

He flipped through some pages for me rather quickly but my eyes caught on to the term “Nirvana”, probably because it was recently covered in my World Religions class.  Once I had possession of the book again I went to the glossary to find it again and read the definition.  “The goal of Hindus is Nirvana”.  Uh..What?  Nirvana’s a Buddhist term and Buddhists aim to reach Nirvana.  Hindus aim to reach Moksha.  That’s a grave error in my opinion and this was my first impression of Dianetics.  The man tried to argue this and said I wasn’t reading it in its correct context. Well, yeah, I can pick out a word and create a context for it and that’d be right too, but that doesn’t mean the word is being used correctly.  So then another male chose another angle and decided to blame the error on the editors who wrote the glossary.  So, I had nothing else to say other than that was my first impression and that I’d mostly like spend the rest of the time reading it looking for errors.  So I managed to get away. 

My brain was fairly exhausted by that point and I decided to wind down at the library.  I had Russian club to attend within an hour. 

Thankfully, it wasn’t about anything profound; we just watched a Russian film which was incredibly Americanized.  It was just like American action films – Filler.  But at least the leads actors were hot and spoke in Russian, so I was pretty much mentally masturbating throughout the 2 hours and 11 minutes we watched it. 

It – Shadowboxer – is about a young Russian boxer who loses his eyesight during a fight and falls in love with his doctor who permitted him to fight even though she knew he had torn retina only because he said ‘pretty please.’ She is an ex drug junky that was once involved with a major drug trafficker.  She witnessed his murder and has to run from the law because she has been framed.  Uh, this isn’t meant to be a synopsis.  I am stopping there before I go on for another half hour.  But my favorite part in the film is where she sits on his  lap after they escape from the hospital and he says “I can feel your smell.”  And she replies, “How awful! Like animals!” And then they make out, like, super hard. It made me chuckle.  Still does. 

I spent 10 hours on campus yesterday.  I got home exhausted.

Now I have to attend World Religions – my favorite class.