Salvation is free

I will never relate to or understand those who have never tasted the depths of depression or sadness because they *asked* for salvation once upon a time. I was once a part of a culture that enforced asking for salvation at an early age, coddling children with comforting thoughts of some invisible forcefield separating themselves from outside sin and condemnation. It was a blanket of distorted reality, as superficial as the love of money or material possessions they condemned so often. It was superficial because it was rooted in nothing but attraction to a life without hardship. It was an attraction to the happy end point. And although desiring the happy end point is common to me, I refuse to accept a mere request to the director of operations is going to get us there.

And what if a life is still riddled with hardship even after this request of salvation? Was it all in vain? Or does one tell herself that this is part of a master plan? Does one live her life continually telling herself all that is not clearly understood is an invisible godhead’s plan?

Salvation is thought to be free, but it hardly is. It is a painstaking journey and not attainable at age four. And a society that backs and bolsters children merely asking to be saved before real life has begun is completely and utterly distasteful to me. So much so I occasionally fantasize about their eradication…until I realize they have the same sentiment about me.

Salvation is liberation. And it can be attained only in contrast to the deepest and darkest depths one can experience, otherwise life is just a stagnant stasis, a plateau. This plateau may be appealing in and of itself to those of little experience, and understandably so. But once experienced, even the comforting plateau of complacency is not enough for those who burn for more.

And I burn for more.

And it begins with breath

“The uprising in Egypt has discredited every Western media stereotype
about the Arabs. The courage, determination, eloquence, and grace of
those in Liberation Square contrast with ‘our’ specious fear-mongering
with its al-Qaeda and Iran bogeys and iron-clad assumptions, bereft of
irony, of the ‘moral leadership of the West.’” – John Pilger

It is imperative to look at the uprising from Tunisia to Yemen to Egypt and humble ourselves. From Western perspective it is as though the Arab world has entered a new dawn, one of civic unrest yielding social justice, reminiscent of the days we marched for racial equality. But we cannot label the Middle East ‘backward’ or ‘lagging’. This is not a race and our time line cannot be applied cross-culturally. We must stop the pervasive idea within us that supports colonial theories of unilineal cultural evolution–this line also promoted ideas of white supremacy.

What inside us compels us to separate ourselves, hoist ourselves up on pedestals, and put down those we deem ‘unlike’ us? Our differences are superficial. We look at skin color, facial features, dress for distinction; we separate our beliefs–we do this in vain. It is in vain that we struggle to make islands of ourselves when we inhabit the same planet, because when our waters recede, it is made visible we are one continuous mass.

If we continue to push to elevate ourselves among others, we will fall harder when our time in power comes to an end. And it will come to an end. I implore you to refocus. Refocus efforts on bettering the whole rather than just the self. Refocus efforts on enlarging the whole to include all, not just the nuclear family, not just the congregation, not just the nation. The harder it becomes, the closer we are to our goal. It is my belief that within each one of us is dormant greatness. It is in action that this greatness will be revealed. And it is in love that our greatness will flourish.

I challenge you, and myself, to see all others as brothers and sisters.

Lento e Largo

The ache of what feels like yesterday is still present in today. A memory sparked, a feeling resurfaces, strong as the moment of its inception, and my dignity is suspended…somewhere out of reach. To make a leap with intention to clutch is to admit desperation for a notion empirically approved by the world that conceived me…so long ago. A world I never fully set foot in, and yet, in contrast, I never fully immersed myself in any other.

I once pledged allegiance without question. And now, I just question. Where does critical thinking end? I long for the comforts of ignorance on occasions like this. I envy the one who is so secure in her answers, a question, much yet amateur analysis, crosses her mind not. I fear the simplicity of certainty is something in which I will never take pleasure again. My indecision is a handicap, and I feel handicapped by lacking the kind of plausibility structure or sturdy foundation others are provided through attachments to religion, science, government, media or technology. For none are enough to sate me. I am a vessel without anchor. And as much as I yearn for anchorage, I despise it all the same. Max Cohen took a drill to the part of his brain that drove him mad, and although it is unlikely I will ever have that brand of gumption, I fully sympathize with his action.

I have felt on the fringe of madness too many occasions to count. And the idea of just letting go has been one I have found comes accompanied by solace. This might be met with discomfort by those who attach a stigma to social suicide or the cessation of abiding by norms, but how many times has one fantasized about quitting–quitting a job, a marriage, a dynamic or relationship whose burden is more taxing than the fruits of inputted effort? The appeal that the release of tension has is in its relief. Do we not all seek relief in one way or another? What is relief? It is commonly known as the easing or alleviation of distress. For this to apply, we have to accept distress comes along with so many aspects of our lives, aspects we are not always quick to admit overwhelm us because we struggle to appear as though everything is under control. Why fool ourselves? Why take pride in truth and integrity when we lie to the point we are no longer aware we are lying?

What happens when someone abides by all the rules and stays within all the parameters set by that which governs us? For some it amounts to a penthouse, 5,000 luxurious square feet and a lush yard, a sexy sport coupe, bank accounts bursting at their seams, an ultimate power’s favor, a multitude of virgins, prime real estate in the afterlife or maybe just a meagre life without external hassle. The difference between me and the believer is that I ask (and am quite comfortable with asking): “What if this doesn’t pan out as planned?” You may lose your job, you may contract a life threatening disease, you may be sued or divorced and lose all your wealth, you may become the object of someone’s contempt, you…may…simply…cease…to exist. What then? Is this your test? How long will you reify the very foundations of your ignorance? Why is disruption to order stigmatized? Change does not have to be painful.
When you let go, you suspend yourself from the brunt of the opposing force.

Am I just addressing myself here? No and yes. I’m in the last days of my most recent period of inertia. And this morning I found myself with some trepidation after weeks and months of wanting and being eager for this change. It’s so close now; I can’t look away from it. I set a goal and I have achieved it. Years ago I learned setting goals and achieving them is all I need to keep my depression at bay. Before landing my job opportunity I was in a bit of limbo. I learned to release myself of a burden that caused me too much distress and I relearned to take care of my body and soul, but even then, it wasn’t enough to make me happy. I also learned gratitude; I learned to be grateful for the things and to the people in my life who aid and support me. While this brought about peace, it still wasn’t enough (though, for the first time, it was the closest I’ve ever been to enough). My idleness was eating at me, but this time I had very little control over my employment. And my tunnel vision for this one position with this one company really narrowed my chances at being employed, but after a few months of persistence, I finally managed an interview. And well, I interviewed excellently despite all my nerves.

So now, on the brink of being “comfortable”, I ask myself: Will it be enough?

My endurance will reveal the answer.

Rainy Day Revelation

My father says he loves the rain.

We’re receiving a wonderful rain shower today, and although I find delight, like my father, in cleansing waters, it is too cold to go on a walk.  So instead I watched the rain from the shelter of my roof and stretched my limbs to release the body’s stored pollutants and awaken the circulation of energy within.

“Your body is a temple” are words that have never rang so true.  I read Corey Haim died early this morning and spent some time thinking about celebrities who die (seemingly) young.  If the norm is to die in “old” age (whatever the standard is for a particular people), then why do certain individuals pass ‘before their time’?

When it is made known celebrities had a drug buffet coursing through their bodies at the time of death and their lifestyles mirrored one of excess, I can’t help but associate reckless neglect of the self with early death.  Is there something that makes such recklessness worth the trade-off?  If ‘producing art’ is the chosen trade-off, was the art produced worth an untimely demise?

I cannot ask this of Corey Haim or those who are no longer with us, but in my humble, subjective reflection I would want to leave more than some dated, pop culture films.  But I am biased.  And my talents lie elsewhere; so why would I?

Do we all not want to leave a legacy for ourselves?  Am I brash in thinking that wanting to leave a legacy is a nomothetic (general/shared) desire in all individuals?  All I can definitively say is it is present in myself.  And what I have been attempting, for what seems like ages, is to locate what I have to offer and glaze the world as I know it with its purity.

I feel like input is needed for it to surface and be revealed.  An open dialogue is necessary for my idealized invisible system to function otherwise there is organism failure.  What am I saying?  I am saying this is not an individual effort.  At the root of technology is a community.  At the root of progress is the work of multitudes.  Innovation is not a sole endeavor, though an invention’s patent may be in one name.  Historical literature highlight individuals, but it is wrong to think greatness comes from a solitary hero.

Our bodies are sprung from two.  Those two are sprung from four.  If we continue backward, we are all connected through the web of life, and yet, it is so much more than cell multiplication.  I see our identities made up much the same way as our bodies with infinite modifications, mutations, and variability through generations.  I am composed of the many peoples that have touched my life and their influence is present in my unique way to interact with the world.  My identity is experienced by the other and through him/her/them I realize myself — this is the invisible system I spoke of.  I have a degree of individual agency (power) to alter what/who I am, but I am not omnipotent.

Is the human realization of its lack of omnipotence what possibly spurred/spurrs the inclination of the masses to idealize a god figure?

–I don’t think I am prepared to tackle that last question.  I’ve met my match for the time being.  In today’s string of carefully linked words, I have learned a bit more of myself and my understanding of humans through the individual perspective.  Enough sitting meditation for the day.  The day is not complete without meditation in action.

The earth is soggy, but my soul is light.

May I see you on the other side.

x

on the celebration of black friday in american culture

Pulling into Buford Drive on Black Friday was an arduous task, despite the holiday cheer and crisp, wintry weather of northern Georgia. The queue to park extended itself a half mile all the way up the exit ramp of I-85. Even my father’s ability to park in a handicapped space was not salvation enough to find an empty spot. This element of ritual chaos was resolved by traffic officers directing the vehicle flow from full lots to empty ones. The establishment of order was a small conciliation upon the realization I, the frustrated consumer, would have to hike to reach the nearest entrance.

The ambiance within the halls of the shopping mall was subtle, but individual stores decorated their windows and shelves with holiday styles, trees, wreathes, garlands, and stringed lights in holiday colors of green, red, and white. The warmth of Christmas ambient lighting in stores was juxtaposed by the fluorescent lighting overhead, providing an uncomfortable shock of the visual senses that was primarily felt in the supraorbital ridge. The air was thick with tension from adults rushing to make purchases without losing their families and children anxious to see the Santa Claus display or make purchases of their own.

The element of the abolition of time was not experienced personally, though the lack of clocks around the mall would lead one to believe customers were not aware of the passing day. Shoppers would look at their time pieces or cell phones to find out the time, usually in the vicinity of the food court. The crowds of shoppers and their loud, shrieking children reminded me I did not want to be there. The lines at registers seemed to take forever to get moving—this was another reminder of time’s slow crawl. The only period where I experienced the abolition of time was in sporadically getting lost in observation and analysis of the chaotic events.

Particularly interesting was the ritual of crowding of an amorphous body of shoppers within stores, yet their forming lines before the registers of their own accord, presumably, from the enculturation of such religious exercises. Shoppers’ need to consume was fueled by the presence of their desired objects at markedly low sale prices, which were made known through secondary and tertiary myths found in television commercials and newspaper or magazine ads in the days and weeks leading up to the event. The voracious consumers were not always appeased, though. By the time I reached the mall, the early bird sales were over and the shelves were ransacked. The tables were strewn with disheveled items and the sales associates could not keep up with organization. Their jobs were to focus on processing sales on registers. Occasionally, a salesperson would be found on the floor and asked if the store possibly had an item in stock ‘in the back’. The reply would always be: “Everything we have is on the floor. A new shipment should be in next week.”

The Black Friday experience is not exactly one of joy, even for children who are forced to sit atop a strange, portly, white-whiskered man’s lap. Smiling parents attempting to have their children photographed would often be met with disgruntled faces that soon contorted to screaming, crying, tomato-red heads. This painful ritual was hard to watch, recalling my own experience at the tender age of three when I was forced to sit on Santa’s lap. Their sodden faces resurfaced memories of guttural sobbing and struggling to free myself from the awkward grasp of a strange man who did not feel like Santa Claus to me, though his trickery apparently had all the adults deceived. The resulting feeling is only comparable to swallowing a dense, leaden ball and having the digestive fluids helpless against processing it.

Despite the agonizing experience of crowding within and outside the Mall of Georgia, I did not find myself wanting to inflict physical harm on shoppers or salespersons. Why do we take part in this near-hellish event? An extra ten to fifty percent off items does not seem worth an aneurism or the extra fat deposits left around the midsection due to stress. Perhaps it is like going to the dentist, painful yet good for us. Perhaps we are innately masochistic. Maybe it is easier knowing there are many others around the country going through the same ritual we are, bonding us in religious camaraderie. Perhaps it is that camaraderie found in such a ritual that has us come back for more.

Satisfaction

Dawn awaits.

We travel toward the horizon,
but with each step closer,
the destination doesn’t appear any nearer.

Our sun is looming,
stirring beneath the blanket of night;
its clock is
not our clock; our sacred times
are not synchronized.

Shall it then
be used as a reference point?
Its worth is in the light is provides us.
But its curse
is in the annual reminder
that we’re one year closer to an end.

If desire is ‘sin’,
then the greatest human sin
is the desire for more than what we have
in this corporeal form.

The greatest tragedy for one who believes in an afterlife
is the realization that there is no more than what is housed within this world.
I am sorry for all those that live their lives based on what might be after physical death,
because there are no guarantees,
and they may miss out on their one opportunity for happiness.

If there is an afterlife,
then I do not fear, because I don’t believe in one absolute path to access it.
Our world’s cultures and beliefs are too
beautifully discrete
to believe only one has the correct answer.

Right now I am thankful.
I love and I am loved.
I am still working out a solid plan of action for my future, but I think it gets easier with each day. And with my initiative, I hope things will fall into place more easily, as I have had the opportunity to see happen before.

At a point like this, I would want to thank some higher power for all the good things in my life. It seems the custom of most folk, which I’ve witnessed on all sorts of award shows. But instead, I’d like just like to thank everyone I’ve come across. Every entity that had something to do with my being here right now as well as every choice made to get here.

on the road to enlightenment

Goodness, it’s been so long this box no longer even feels like home.  How could I have forsaken you!

I’ve been so focused in my studies I haven’t taken the time to reflect upon what I’ve learned.  I get so tired, mentally, I just want to waste my free time away on things that don’t involve much critical thinking.

I’ve been fairly isolated.  I ventured out with a couple old friends a few weeks back and partook in activities I had not done in at least a year.  It was very strange.  I did a lot of talking and thinking as I always did, but I felt uncomfortable.  I had trouble engaging my peers and I preferred writing my ideas out in general concepts. When I read what I’d written, it was pretty much a review of topics covered in my classes.

What I tapped into during this altered experience just reified how focused I am within academia.  Sometimes it seems like I’m one of those “all or nothing” people.  The more I know myself, the less it seems that I am a multitasker.  Yes, I can do different things within the same period of time, but when it comes to doing something absolutely excellently, I can only focus on one thing.  So far.  My next goal will be to learn to balance all important aspects of my life.  Right now I am just so desperate to complete my BA I can barely think of anything else.

I just had a vision of life being densely packed with many opaque layers.  I’m envisioning it as a sort of flower or fruit.  In this momentary vision, I saw a layer removed.  Age does this.  Experience does this.  In reflection it seems as though my person, my essence, my soul (however you wish to classify it) is born as some thick, densely packed object.  My goal is to reach the center.  That center, to me, is Enlightenment.  But there are so many layers to get through and they are all opaque.  I have no idea what’s in the center (Tootsie Roll pop jokes will be checked at the door, please) and I don’t know how long it will take to get there.  But I know there is an imperative for me to get there.  I don’t know if the imperative is natural/instinctual or learned and it doesn’t seem to matter.  I need to get there.

The path to get there is curious.  I think I am over the attempt to arrive there religiously.  As in through an established world/organized religion.  Right now I’d say I’ve got most of my eggs in the Academic basket, but part of me knows it’s not that simple.  I think  I will spend the rest of my life stumbling along, slowly uncovering layers until that final glorious day.   I  have this feeling that  I may only  uncover that final stratum on the day I die, because no human could continue living life as we know it once the truth has been unmasked.

I often wonder if all my contemplation is alienating me or bringing me closer to the human community.  When I am in social situations, which has become rare these days, I feel as though I am a spectator.  Have I already become the anthropologist, the ethnographer? Being an insider has become difficult.  I feel awkward as a participator at times.  I’m not there right now, mentally.

I feel like a balloon that’s lost its anchor to the earth and is slowly ascending toward infinity.  I wonder when I shall lose grasp of my corporeal vessel.  (I hope it’s not soon.)

Occasionally, I think humans are predictable disappointments.  But I want to focus on what I don’t know about us.  I’m really sick of the world the media glorifies.  And it’s no surprise I am so disappointed in humanity if what I see on popular tv/film/etc is a reflection of society or of its ideals.  I think that’s why I’m so drawn to Anthropology.  I have a desire to learn about cultures that aren’t my own and through the study of other cultures, I hope to understand my own better.  But it doesn’t just stop at culture.  I want to know why we are the way we are.  It’s a pretty lofty ideal.  Maybe I’ll never achieve it, but I think I’ll have some fun traveling on that road.

MLK Jr and Malcolm X

 

How does the contrast between the sacred and the holy, or morality and ethics, appear in Martin Luther King, Jr.’s ethic as expressed in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail”? 

          King’s understanding of the interdependence of people is what inspired the content of his letter in response to the white clergy who believed the civil rights movement was ‘unwise and untimely’.  In the letter, King states, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.  We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.  Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly”.  
          King’s statement questioned the ‘sacred society’ of the white clergy and their morals; instead, he brought up ethics and the idea that humanity is not comprised of white individuals, but is actually a collective of different individuals that should be treated justly.  His inclusion of all humanity instead of just a specific society is what makes this a ‘holy’ act.  King’s audacity to question just laws is summed up in the following:  “An unjust law is a code that a majority inflicts on a minority that is not binding on itself”.  In this, he maintains that unjust laws are begging to be broken and a law that begs disobedience must be corrected to reinstate justice for all. 

 Describe Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “kitchen experience” and explain its significance for his spirituality and ethics.     

          Martin Luther King, Jr.’s  “kitchen experience” occurred in the early days of the Montgomery bus strike.  This event that occurred as his public career was burgeoning was a poignant experience in his life where he was finally able to overcome the fear of death.  Overcoming fear of mortality is an event vital to the life of a religious figure.
          In the story, it is recounted that King came home late from a boycott meeting and received a phone call:  “N*gger . . . we are tired of you and your mess now, and if you are not out of this town in three days, we’re going to blow your brains out and blow up your house”.  He had received many phone calls of this nature before, but this one in particular struck at his core for some reason that night; it made him think of losing his family or vice versa.  These thoughts left him restless and he decided to go to the kitchen for coffee; his rationale, his principles, and everything he used to make sense of the world around him was no longer comforting him.  
          In his desperation, he did what he knew best–he bowed down and prayed.  In a moment of vulnerability, he expressed his weakness to God and his belief in what he thought right.  God spoke back to him and told him to rise and stand for truth and if he did so, He would be with him and remain with him until the very end.  This self-induced salvation for King is what provided a direct experience with God that he would take with him for the rest of his life.  King’s spirituality and ethics were deeply rooted in his religion because of his “kitchen experience”–this example fits well with Masao Abe’s model for Christianity because his religious experience leads to ethics. 

Comment on the differences between the speeches made by Umar and Abu Bekr when Muhammad died.  What makes Bekr’s speech the more appropriate Islamic response?

          In his speech, Umar stated, “Some of the disaffected will allege that the Messenger is dead, but by God, he is not dead: he has gone to his Lord as Moses son of Imran went and was hidden [on Sinai] from his people for forty days.  By God, the Messenger will return as Moses returned and will cut off the hands and feet of men who allege that the Messenger is dead”.  Umar was making appeals to sacralize Muhammad in a way that should have only been reserved for Allah (from an Islamic perspective).  
          To clarify to the congregation inside the Mosque that Muhammad was not a deity to be worshipped or expected to return, Abu Bekr followed with a statement of his own:  “O men, if anyone worships Muhammad, Muhammad is dead; if anyone worships God, God is alive, immortal”.  In this address, Fasching and deChant claim, “the true essence of Islam was reaffirmed, the very core of the first pillar, the shahada (confession) – there is no God but God”.  
          Bekr’s speech conveys the proper understanding of Islamic belief.  Muhammad is to be remembered as a special man among men who was chosen by Allah to be his messenger – the Messenger of his will, but not as an equal of God.  Likening him to a similar like a saint or lesser god would be considered shirk, or idolatry, and that would be going against Islam’s first pillar. 

What is the hajj, and why was it so important to Malcolm X?  What made Malcolm’s experience different from that of the Muslims he met during the hajj?
         
One of the Islamic pillars requires all Muslims to make a pilgrimage, or hajj, to the holy city of Mecca once in their lifetime if possible.  Fasching and deChant claim that this pilgrimage was “his own flight (hijra) from the sacred society of the Nation of Islam to the traditional Islam and a new vision of a holy community, open to all races and religions”.  
          Malcolm X, who once identified as a member of the sacred society of the Nation of Islam, was converted to a member of the holy community and no longer promoting black separatism, but seeking justice for the human collective instead of just the specific group he belonged to.  
          Malcolm’s experience was different than that of the Muslims he encountered during the hajj because his perspective was that of a member of the Nation of Islam.  It was on the hajj that he first learned to pray and posture himself.  Most importantly, he learned that Islam means “submission, peace, and unity of all peoples of the world”.  One could think being ignorant of these Islamic staples originally had him at a disadvantage, but Malcolm’s receptiveness to the holy event allowed him to absorb many universal and spiritual elements that made the hajj a priceless experience during his life journey.

Gilgamesh and Gandhi

 

How does ”wrestling with the stranger” function as an ethical theme in the story of Gilgamesh, so as to illustrate the positive side of “doubling”?
         
           Fasching and deChant claim that doubling most likely first occurred during humanity’s move from tribal communities to urban civilizations because of the extreme changes in social environment that went on during that time.  The Epic of Gilgamesh provides an example of a person who no longer identifies with the tribal collective, but is finding himself as an individual among other individuals and
coming to grips with mortality.        
          Gilgamesh embarks on an ethical journey when instead of understanding his identity from his perspective as a prince, he views himself with the eyes of his double, Enkidu.  Enkido becomes the ‘mirror for Gilgamesh’s soul’ and his reflection through Enkido allows him to “see and understand himself and his relationships to others”.  Through this relationship, Gilgamesh attains what Fasching and deChant call ‘reflexive self-awareness’ which allows him to obtain much needed humility and wisdom.     
          Gilgamesh’s doubling is thought to be positive because it permits him to reflect upon himself honestly through the eyes of another.  Fasching and deChant state, “doubling becomes demonic only when this capacity for self-reflection is avoided through self-deception, so that responsibility for the actions of the self in particular circumstances are denied”.  Gilgamesh’s doubling led to the transformation of an individual from egocentric to compassionate.  In losing his arrogance, he was motivated to pursue justice not only for himself, but for his kingdom as well.      

In what ways does the story of Socrates express an ethic of the holy?

          Socrates resided within the ‘holy community,’ though, he passed back and forth from the sacred to the holy because he also identified as a citizen of Athens.  He resided within the holy community because of his belief that recognizing ignorance is the beginning of wisdom, this being a characteristic of the ‘holy’.  Socrates’ teaching his students to question everything created a feeling of discomfort within the citizens of Athens because they felt he was threatening their sacred order.  
          The Athenians’ focus on the ‘cosmos writ small’ had them caged within the ‘little picture’.  They desired to maintain order as they knew it because they valued what was familiar and of ‘this world’.  They had all the answers they needed and were comfortable with the way things were because they believed it
was the way things should be.  Their understanding was sacred because the knowledge was passed on through customs and traditions and anyone who questioned it received a hostile reaction and became the ‘enemy’.  This is what eventually happened to Socrates.  He was accused of being an atheist because
Athenians were blinded by their sacred-centric views in such a way that they could not fathom the idea of an internal god because it was too different and other worldly.  As Fasching and deChant claim, “[Socrates] invented ethics as we now understand it, namely, ethics not as observance of the ”sacred customs” but rather as the questioning of sacred customs and sacred order”.

In what ways does Gandhi’s ethic violate the modernist paradigm of the privatization of religion?  
          
           With the emergence of secularization brought about by the Enlightenment, western civilization put God on the back burner to make way for scientific explanation.  Religion’s answers were no longer satisfactory in comparison to the scientific method’s appeal to reason and logic.  This event downgraded religion for westerners—their beliefs were removed from the holy sphere and placed within a sacred sphere.  Those who chose to maintain their beliefs had to do so within a private realm.            
          When Western society was promoting the marginalization of religion, Gandhi instead promoted his belief that religion and politics are intertwined:  “I can say without the slightest hesitation, and yet in all humility, that those who say that religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion means”.  Religion and politics were one and the same for Gandhi.
          The merging of politics and religion Fasching and deChant state as follows, “For Gandhi, religion and politics became one through the practice of brahmacharya.  For only selfless compassion for the well-being of others can inspire the trust that makes political leadership possible”.  Gandhi’s aim was to
be selfless and live life for others.  He was not satisfied with the ‘cynicism of politics-as-usual;’ he desires to turn politics into a ‘spiritual and ethical enterprise’.  Gandhi found his ethics through his religion and believed if politics was to truly be honest and ethical as well, it would have to do it with the involvement of religion.  

Does the concept of human dignity play a role in Gandhi’s thought?  If so, how?
         
          The concept of human dignity does play a role in Gandhi’s thought because his drive for justice was sparked by experiences of humiliation that compromised his human dignity.  “Any conduct that is contrary to truth and ahimsa is to be eschewed and any book that violates these principles is not a shastra [sacred scripture]“.  
          The two experiences that changed Gandhi’s direction in life occurred when he was fresh out of law school.  They both involve him being physically thrown out of a place because of prejudice.  In the first situation, he tried to use his weight as a British-trained attorney with a British political agent, but it failed him, and in the second, he attempted to ride first-class in a train and was ordered to the baggage compartment, but when he refused he was thrown off the train.  
          These experiences coupled with his interpretation of the Gita allowed for Gandhi to move forward with his teachings of non-violence through soul force.  It was those brushes with humiliation that led him to understand the plight of the ‘untouchable’ or the ‘other’.  Because of this knowledge, he came to a new
understanding of what his life objective would be—to seek justice for all people through non-violent means.  His promotion of self-suffering over inflicting suffering on others was the way he believed justice could be reached.  

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.