From Radical Comensality to Reactionary Comensality

This weekend I watched a very unique documentary called Into Great Silence, about the daily lives of the monks at the Grande Chartreuse, which is the seat of the Carthusian order of monks in the Catholic church. At one point the monks are eating together while one brother reads a book of monsatic rules which I couldn't identify, but it was a text something like the rule of St. Benedict, and at one point it began talking about proper behavior if one must pass through a town. I cannot find the text (likely because the subtitles where a freelance translation) but it it specifically prohibited 'entering the house of seculars' or eating or drinking anything while in the area.

This naturally stuck out like a sore thumb to me after reading the Cross an text. I'm honestly not sure why this change took place in Christianity. What was it in Christianity that changed? Was it the simple fact that it went from being a peasent's movement to something institutionalised and thus became antipopulist in exactly the way it was populist in the beginning?

Crossan Against Egalitarianism

I suppose I bent the parameters of the Q&A a bit to discuss this, but I think it was interesting to note Crossan's response to radical egalitarianism as presented by Jesus. The only example he used was electing the president of the United States by lottery and then going on to say that we are not ready for it. Of course I'm biased myself in the way of radical egalitarianism, which is why this stuck out to me.

Despite this I don't think his bias will harm his conclusions significantly. If he was that sort of scholar I think he would have not included that section at all.

The Need to Evangelize

Along with the Crossan book I'm also reading Journey to the East by Liam Brockey. I borrowed it from Freel, incase anyone is interested when I'm done. Journey to the East is a history (and at some points an analysis) of the Jesuit mission to China from its earliest beginning to 1724.

The history is a bit dry and, by the nature of the mission, repetitive; this missionary arrives, moves to a city, meets with little success, repeat. What is striking though, and what connects this more modern Christianity to the Christianity immediately after Jesus, is the faith of these men and their desire to spread Christianity in foreign lands. I would submit that it is this desire to gain converts, as much as any bending to suit cultural beliefs, that caused early Christians to write a non-biographical account of the life of Jesus.

The New Text

The transition from the Gita to the Crossan text is quite jarring. They are almost extremes in two directions. Where the Gita is a brilliant archetype for a poetic and religious text, the Crossan text is extremely academic, though it is aimed at popular audiences. I do rather enjoy the straight forward nature of this text though I miss the poetics.

Hindu Ideas Emergent in American Culture

One of the most striking things about the Bhagavad Gita's message is the occasional (or not so occasional) connections you get back to western culture. A strong theme in Hinduism in the Gita and from what we have been discussing in class is that there may be many gods but they are all aspects of the same god/god-head/unifying spirit (still slightly struggling with the concept of what exactly that is.)

In neo-paganism there are two major strands of thought dealing with the nature of the gods. The less popular is that they are all separate entities that acted out what happened in the myths. The more popular strain of thought may have been influenced by Hinduism, and that is that the gods are all aspects of the same God and/or ultimate reality. Some neo-pagans also consider the gods to ultimately be man made images that need to be left behind if one wants to mystically approach the true divine.

The Gunnas

When reading about the gunnas in the Bhagavad Gita I cant help but think of the humors of classical Greece. I'm not sure if these gunnas are a physical thing or entirely mental, but certainly an interesting, sort of psudo-scientific, way to look at human motivations.

My Dilema

This is the dilemma I used for the first phase of my essay:

"Lacking the capacity for any normal form of rebellion as a young 12/13 year old humanities nerd, I thought it would be interesting to study other religions and choose one for my own. I read all sorts of books with no interference from my parents, who are at least shaky in their Christian faith, but I will never forget when I finally persuaded them to let me buy a Koran. “Its fine to read anything you want,” said my father In a deadly tone I had never heard before “but always remember you are a Christian.” Unfortunately by that time I had already decided I was a Buddhist (though my knowledge of the Dhamma was rather thin) and I was wondering when I should tell my parents. After that incident I shut up. As I learned more about Buddhism however it was clear that I should never ever lie, especially to my parents. I eventually told them the year before I left for college, where it turned out they didn't particularly care!"