In reading the Bhagavad Gita

I read the Bhagavad Gita a year ago – during a cold January. I read it every day from 8 to 8:30 in the morning and later when I had time- the only book I’ve ever read with vigorous routine. I read it sometimes half asleep, sometimes listening to music, sometimes with full attentiveness. What I found in the Gita was a long and repetitive and boring poem that somehow never lost my attention. There was something in its essence so captivating and other worldly. It is difficult to put into words – it’s not like I agreed with its messages (often in “contradiction”). But the discourse, the thoughts, the poetry kept me alert.

I’ve always  been fascinated by Hinduism, a religion so vast, diverse, and misunderstood. It’s not like I understand Hinduism, but it’s alien-ness in many ways gives it an attractive exotic-ness (Orientalism, anyone?). I swear the text gives an impression of cyclical infinity, of contentment, of ultimate liberation. It gives the hint of an entirely and so fundamentally different outlook to the world that begs for attention and keen interest. The discourses aren’t like those of Western scriptures or even Western epics. The dialogue is always on thought, on belief, on action, which is like belief, but different, but the same, but both, but neither.

The Gita lives in a world of seeming contradiction and juxtaposition – at one point it’s action, at the other it’s inaction. At one point it’s duty, at the other it’s independence. At one point it’s rational inquiry, at another it’s leaping in faith. But these seeming contradictions, these juxtapositions are never portrayed or interpreted by the reader as bad at all. It’s as if the Gita is begging you to live in contradiction and confusion and to love it. It reminds me of Lao Tzu and the Tao Te Ching, which seems to embrace ambivalence.  And maybe that’s good, maybe that’s bad, maybe I’m unsure. The thought that you cannot know, perhaps, is the whole point.

But all the way through, the centrality of an inexplicable contentment runs. I don’t know what I mean in describing inexplicable contentment. There’s a sense I get in Arjuna and Krishna an apathy. An apathy of action, of feeling, of personality. But the Gita once again puts this in a good light. The reader never sees this apathy in a bad way – it’s blissful. It’s not selfish, it’s selfless. It’s not out of hate, it’s out of love. For what? For God? For duty? For love itself? Maybe there is no answer. The thought that you cannot know, perhaps, is the whole point.

Long story short, I’ll have to read it again sometime. The Gita loves not giving answers while seeming to give answers and changing them the next second. It loves to confuse you and throw you out and lure you in again. It has an almost magical quality to it, exploiting and manipulating its own seeming contradictions all for a blissful apathy all in the name of love for the sake of love. Or does it? And every time you throw it down in agony trying to figure out its message, you pick it right back up and try again, falling to its wonderful temptation…

(My reflections are by no means interpretations, as I refrained from pretending I can)

(A quote from Gita by J Oppenheimer, inventor of the Atomic Bomb)

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Mountain Trek of Life: an analogy

Imagine a mountain. You are on this mountain, and you know you are on the mountain. Side by side with you is the rest of the people on the Earth. For the purpose of this, there’s five of you, and not the rest of humanity. Looking up, you and your buddies can make out that there’s a peek above the clouds- you can’t really see it, but you know there’s a peak there.

For whatever reason, you are trying to get to the top of the mountain. Something is up there that you want, and you don’t know what, why, or how, but you want to get there. You are going to trek.

—————————————————

When it is said to them: “Come to what Allah hath revealed; come to the Messenger”:
They say: “Enough for us are the ways we found our fathers following.” what!
even though their fathers were void of knowledge and guidance? Al Qur’an 5:104

You’ve got a few buddies next to you. You talk to your buddy, Lucas:

You: “Say, Lucas, what do you think is up on that mountain?”

Lucas: “Well, my parents told me that our god is up there. It’s a legend that’s been passed down my families for ages, and I actually had a great great grandparent that made it to the top and talked to him.”

You: “A god or the God? That doesn’t make any sense at all anyways. Why should there be? And you know, legends are usually not true at all. What do you think, Max?”

Max: “Up where? I don’t see a peak. You guys are talking crazy, we don’t know if this mountain peaks at the top, or just rounds up like a hill. The clouds make it too difficult to determine, so stop speculating and just live.”

You: “Max, I’m pretty sure I can make out a peak. The rest of us can, too.”

Nolan: “Well, I’ve been reading a bit lately, and Max, you’re being silly – all mountains have peaks, even if I haven’t seen the top of this one. I also read that apparently the higher you get the colder the temperature tends to be. So I don’t know what’s up there, but it’s sure to be cold!”

You: “That’s all you know? There’s so many unknowns, how do you live with it?! Me, I’m making an educated guess. I swear, with these binoculars, I can make out a tree up there. Have a look.”

Max: “I don’t see it. Too cloudy.”

You: “Well, David, what do you think?”

David: “Why bother looking? If there’s a peak, who says its worth checking out? If there isn’t, so what?”

On this mountain of life, you have five friends looking up trying to decide what’s at the peak. We can call the summit Absolute Truth – whatever that may mean. Now, you four buddies decide to go up and see who’s right.To Lucas, that’s what his forefather have been telling him (faith?). To Max, there’s no way to be sure there’s a peak, and thus there’s no Absolute Truth (relativism). To David, there’s no way to be sure and there’s no reason to care (“indifferent” relativism). To Nolan, he knows some things, but he’s not too sure about the rest, except it has to be something following the rules of what’s down in the valley (science-only materialism). For you, it’s a bit ambiguous,  but you are making educated speculation – guesstimation (via a mix of science, faith, intuition, etc).

Lucas takes the path his forefathers took – it’s dangerous, treacherous, and doesn’t look effective, but he’s banking on it anyway.

Nolan pulls out a compass and a notebook, figuring out what’s best, not seeing any immediacy to anything at all.

Max listens to the ideas, but doesn’t like any and takes a nice, convenient path – not sure if it or any path at all makes it anywhere.

David listens to the ideas, but doesn’t bother to get up either, watching everyone else approach the mountain in curiosity but not adventure.

You talk with Nolan bit, but find his assertions a bit dubious on the math, and aren’t too sure how to fix it. You attempt Lucas’s path, but keep Nolan’s ideas in mind. You don’t really consider Max, however, because you’re quite sure you see a peak up there.

Lucas ridicules the rest of you, not following the word of generations of intelligent human beings. Max ridicules the rest of you, relying on a conclusion that isn’t conclusive (is there a peak?). Nolan ridicules the rest of you, not using the laws of actual nature. David ridicules the rest of you, trying anything at all. And you ridicule the rest, being too rigid one way or the other.

Somehow, along the way, you all but David meet up again at a juncture by a river. At this point, neither of you is sure what to do. Lucas doesn’t know what path his forefathers took, Max doesn’t care too much, Nolan is out of ideas for calculation, and you have no methodologies from the others to use. For whatever reason or the other, some of you turn left and the others turn right. But you do not criticize each other, since no one really can justify the choice they made. They merely picked because they had to.

—————————————————

I’ve always found the analogy extraordinary – here we have different philosophies and ways of life guiding people up the mountain of life, and a measure to how those of differing opinions should treat each other. At the departure, the different characters chose different directions because of their philosophical reasoning. At the junction, the different characters chose different directions from no legitimate reason besides the fact that they had to. From that lens, we can see when it is appropriate to criticize, and when it is appropriate to “agree to disagree”. 

An example (albeit poor) of the junction could be a chosen lifestyle: “to get married or not to get married, that is the question!”. Neither necessarily has a certain worldview attached to it, a certain idea of existence or morality. Meanwhile a question such as”to love or not to love, that is the question!” comes with a bundle of legitimate questions on life. More daring examples can fit one way or the other: homosexuality, suicide, nihilism, patriotism.

Likewise, this addresses the question of empathy. Nolan may have found a complex trigonometric reasoning for a certain path up the mountain, but you may not be good at math. Nolan doesn’t bother explaining, then, and gives you the ultimatum to blindly follow or reject. Doing either can make sense: if you relent that Nolan is exceptional at math or if you refuse to disobey your own reasoning. And both choices are understandable from Nolan’s perspective. Likewise, one can see where another comes from on a question such as, “who’s the good guy in the Iraq war?

Another use for the analogy is looking at intellectual arrogance. There are some who would insist that they have reached the peak of the mountain, that they look down on the others and try to guide them up. Those who say so, or act like so, see themselves at the Absolute Truth already. But I feel uncomfortable with those who assert or act so, as if they hold some

And what is this common purpose? What is this Absolute Truth? Depending on the context, the truth is God, the best answer, the Prime Mover, the ultimate reality, the ubermensch, the eternal abode. It is a perfect morality, a grand scheme of things, the equation that makes everything work. It is the secret of life, the universe, and everything. secret access (ski lift) to the top that no one else has, that they can present themselves as above the rest for the enlightenment they hold. We are trekkers up the mountain, but none of us are there. And in realizing that, we must see that our perception of Truth, our method to Truth, our pondering of the existence of a Truth, is really just an educated guess, or a leap of faith, or a surrender to ignorance. In the end, it is speculation after speculation, working in tangent or against, all for a common purpose.

And in that light, perhaps we can see the dangers of cultural imperialism, of rigid absolutism, of religious dogmatism. We cannot claim the top of the mountain, nor that we have the answers for every juncture. By no stretch of the imagination can we thump around our Bibles or our latest Krauss book declaring knowledge to something so distant and so cloudy. What we can say is that we are searching, and that we are looking, and that we are speculating and leaning on one idea or the other. In that light, we can see a new humanity of humility, of shared values, of similar goals. The atheist and the terrorist, the psychopath and the Pope are all looking for the same answers and for the same objective: that peak. The peak of the mountain trek, the secret of life, the universe, and everything, is common to almost all of us…but only if we choose to trek together.

NOTES:

  • Mountain trek analogy can be for many things besides life.
  • None of this applies to a true, ambivalent, indifferent relativist 
  • I adapted this analogy from Tariq Ramadan from one of his books, except that I don’t know which and I can’t find it either on Google or in anything I have.

If Kerry Wants To Make Peace in the Middle East…

…He Should Just Put God In Charge…

The real problem is symbolic. Jerusalem, beyond being a real place, is a very symbolic place. It’s too symbolic for its own good, perhaps, but it is what it is. Because of this, neither side can countenance concessions in matters of principle. Even were Israeli or Palestinian leaders to consider such a thing, rabid partisans of one side or another—probably both—would crucify them for all their trouble. (I use the word advisedly.) It’s just not possible to divide a mystical whole. Things or places with the aura of eternity floating about them somehow defy the law of integers.

The two sides—and others with an interest like Hashemite Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Christians of various descriptions—can far more easily swallow a no-national-sovereignty solution. Human nature being what it is, it’s much easier to accept not having something if your rival doesn’t have it either…

God is on a shelf

God is on a shelf,

That one reads every Sunday.

God is on the desk,

That one studies after work.

God is on the internet,

That one browses on Facebook.

God is on a notebook,

That one stumbles on in class.

God is on a phone,

That beeps every while.

 

Knowledge and ignorance

and sorrow and happiness

and family and money

and food and work

and life and death

and fun and play

is in our minds –

but not God,

oh no…

God is on a shelf

That one reads every Sunday.

 

'if there is a …

“If there is a god, he will have to beg for my forgiveness.”

Found carved into the wall into the wall of a concentration camp, author unknown

 

Flooding in Saudi Arabia: Russia Today

Check out these Facebook comments to Russia Today’s article on the flooding that went on in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. It’s interesting how you can get the perspectives of people via social media. Russia Today is very international, but it’s basically a well-known Russian news company that primarily does English, Spanish, Arabic, and Russian. Primarily English. They currently go by “RT” (Russia Today was their former name that they’ve distanced themselves from), but I’ll use it anyway.In my humble opinion, they are slightly Russian-biased as is CNN being American biased. But internally for Russian media, they are fairly centrist.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10151996254199411.1073741879.326683984410&type=1

Here are some of the highlights of people’s responses. Notice the random references to Syria, United States, Israel, God, terrorism, women, and…Selena Gomez. I might do this again sometime:

I fear religious leaders will blame women who claimed their rights. God was angry. lol

Maybe this will wash away the rats they harbour, fund n send to Syria

Uhm geoengineering, they pumped water into the stratosphere, those home made clouds will hit more countrys… murica..

the answer for supporting terrorists…

This rain is a message to the hypocrisy in Arabia Saudi to straight out and do the right things and stop lying on others to the maximum that they start to believe their own lies. I asked G-d to punish Arabia Saudi and Qatar as well for the blood they caused to be shed in Syria. Arabia Saudi is the biggest Syrian enemy and soon you will be punished by us, the Syrian people

amen sister! let those wahhabi pigs wash away into a pile of shit where they belong. the absolute scum of the earth, those salafi wahhabi. TFEH!

MAY ALLAH DESTROY RIYADH
( centre of illuminati)

the main thing that characterize those who hate islam is their hypocrisy, they never look at the mirror, they ignore the horrors done by their countries/ citizens and start blaming islam for a minor thing. I’m sure islam and all muslims support peace & women’s right to drive…etc but those haters will blame all muslims for what 0.000001% of muslims are doing

£5.00 says they’ll blame it on women drivers, just like they do for earthquakes

Maybe God is sending a message that he is fed up of homophobia, inequality against women, wealth, greed etc….

America and Israel are behind this H.A.A.R.P I knew they were going to turn against Saudi Arabia HAHAHAHAHA wake up people America can control the weather

Why does Selena Gomez hate Saudi’s?

Note: this is H.A.A.R.P: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program

Perspectives on the Concept of Love in Islam

http://www.al-islam.org/perspectives-concept-love-islam-mahnaz-heydarpoor

“What! Did you then think that We had created you in vain?” – – al Qur’an (23:115)

What’s up with “A Reason for God”?

 

I made a post called “The Reason for God“, reviewing a book written by Timothy Keller. I didn’t think much of the post, and I don’t think there was anything all too brilliant about it. Granted, there were a few comments, but nothing major. For some reason though, this post has gotten a helluva lot of traffic:

In the months we’ve been blogging, this has been the most famous post of all time, not including the home page. It’s had 181 views (our home page has had 676), and even weirder, most of those views are recent. Compare it to the second most famous post of all time, “Why I am not a Christian.” This was a long post, pretty in depth, and had lots of comments. But it only received traffic for a small window of time – especially when Arkenaten reblogged it and I posted on Hakeem Muhammad. Check out it’s traffic, and compare:

 

What’s up with this? It doesn’t make any sense. Not that we’re complaining, but it’s weird. The amount of traffic it gets, going from 26 views in July to 63 views in October (and we’re only half done with this month) is a strange progression. Arkenaten, cducey, White Pearl, do you guys have any thoughts? I’ve looked through my search references and such, and I can’t find any clues to why this is going on. Perhaps it’s just that good of a post after all. Cheers.

 

Lux

Trust in God and Tawhid- Imam al-Ghazali

Hamza Yusuf is a modern Islamic Scholar.
Al Ghazali was a medieval Islamic Philosopher.

Healing Hearts

The video clip posted below is taken from one of Shaykh Hamza Yusuf’s lectures: “The Critical Importance of Al-Ghazali in Our Times”. Shaykh Hamza in this 2:25 min video clip touches upon what Imam al-Ghazali meant when he spoke about Trust in God and Tawhid. I would encourage you to listen to the clip (and the whole lecture if you can, but this clip in particular). For me, this clip pretty much sums everything up. I think once we get our heads around this thing Imam al-Ghazali wrote about and Shaykh Hamza narrates (which doesn’t happen overnight), we will be able to deal better with the situations and circumstances God places us in. It’s not an easy thing, but hey, who said this life was meant to be easy? But we strive, and strive, and persevere, and try to build our understanding which ultimately gives us the strength and…

View original post 418 more words

“Preach the Gos…

“Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.” –Francis of Assisi

A 12th century patron saint of Italy