1. YOUR NAME.: Martin Armenta
2. YOUR USERNAME.: seven_twentyone_k
3. List your attendance (how many classes missed? how many classes were you late to?). : I went to every class. I was 5 minutes late once and 10 minutes late once.
4. List the titles to each of the two movies, along with a synopsis of their themes. I also want you to list the "format" that you used for your two films. Give me a direct link to the film here. : On both movies I used Ulead and saved them as wmv files. The first movie was my midterm video. It was basically a video about everything that we went over in class to that point. The second movie is about Christian evangelism. My girlfriend and others went to Nicaragua a couple of months ago and the video is based on their pictures.
Video one (midterm): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uknT4dzPHF4
Video two (final): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8QnefpHPbg
5. Did you read both books (fully? skip-read? looked at the cover? we had to read books?): Yes, cover to cover.
6. What grade did you finally receive on the midterm?: A
7. What grade do you deserve in this class? Substantiate your answer.:Honestly, I took this class because I love to study religion. I would have done it for no grade, but considering that I am trying to maintain a strong gpa, I believe that I deserve an A. I read several more books besides the required readings, I spent over 15 hours on my novice videos, and I gave my best effort throughout.
8. List any extra credit or other circumstances that may help your overall grade.:I did my best for this class in every aspect.
9. Write a 1500 word autobiography that describes how religion, gender, or ethnicity has impacted your life.
As I grew up I only recall a handful of times that I heard “God” mentioned. When I was around 8 or 9 years old, my dad came into my room, drunk, and taught me and my brother how to say the "Our Father" prayer. I believe that was the first time God was introduced to me on a personal level. I guess they presentation of God by a rambling drunk had something to do with the fact that I couldn’t take God seriously. I don’t believe I ever said that prayer... A few years later, when I was 14 years old, my Aunt took me and my brother to the park because she wanted to talk. She had a Bible with her and she began to explain the mysteries of YHWH and the sacrificial redemptive blood of Jesus who prophetically died for my transgressions. I didn't understand anything that she was talking about and I don't remember what she prayed about. However, something about her passion sparked my interest.
At about that period in my life, I began to wonder about God. I remember being 16 years old and taking the bus to a Christian concert. The music was pretty good but when the man went up to speak, I didn't really understand what he was saying. At about that time I told my mom that I wanted to go to church and she took me to a place where people were gathered in a classroom at a school. This time, I actually remembered one specific thing that the preacher said. I recall the statement "If you need to stand up to reach deep into your pockets, then stand up so that you can give!" Yeah, that didn't sit well with me at all. I was in a place where I couldn’t take God seriously, yet, something inside of me couldn’t write God off. I once took a bus to Pasadena to the church where my aunt attended even though I didn’t know how I would get home. The music was, well, it was different than what I usually listened to. I liked it though. Once the little man went up to speak however, I didn't understand anything that he was talking about. I was curious, but their words kept falling on ears that could not comprehend.
Then one day, Easter morning to be exact, I was again invited by my aunt to her church. The preacher was talking about Jesus and his love. I felt something drawing me to his message, even though I could not understand the specifics, I understood that at some point in time, a man supposedly loved me enough to suffer for me. After he finished speaking, he invited those who wanted to know God to come to the front of the church. The next thing I remember was standing in front of the church being prayed for. As I left, I felt like something was about to change. As my aunt dropped me off, something did change. She told me that I was now a Christian and I couldn't dress in my baggy clothes anymore. She also told me that I had to lose my friends because Christians didn't have friends like the ones that I had. As I walked away from her car, I also walked away from her religion. If religion couldn't accept me, then why should I accept it?
The next couple years were very difficult for me. I went to church twice in those two years. Once I was high on speed and I was forced to go in order to get a ride home from a friend’s house. I remember feeling disgusted there because the Priest would chant something and then the people would respond with "Crucify him! Crucify Him!" Why were these "Christians" saying "crucify him" to Jesus? I mean, Jesus died for them, and they were joining with those who mocked him in the first place?! I began to realize that these people were ignorant blind sheep doing what they were told to do. Either that or they were a very sour bunch of Jesus-loving Jesus haters. The second time I went to church I went with my girlfriend at the time. I was bored. I didn't want to listen to the Priest going through the confirmation routine because I knew that once church was over, everyone was going to go drinking. Religion was a joke to everyone, including me.
However, regardless of how much I rejected church and religion, the curiosity in me drew me to the books of Proverbs and Psalms in the Bible. Regardless of how I felt about Church, scriptures hit me hard. The first chapter of Psalms painted a clear picture of my life as it was. Proverbs was funny to me. It called me wicked, proud and foolish. Normally, I would want to fight someone if they called me a fool but the Bible spoke to me as if it was concerned with my well-being. It warned me against hardship and it tried to protect me from dangers. Unlike the Church that was filled with judgment and ignorance, the Bible seemed to have the desire to lift me up and help me. I liked that. It reminded me of the story of Jesus on that Easter morning. Helpful, loving, wise. I continued to read Proverbs and Psalms from time to time and I would occasionally poke around the rest of the Bible. I couldn’t imagine trying to live up to it’s expectations, but it sure was an interesting read!
Then, something happened. When I was 17 years old, I was driving home in my 1977 Mazda RX-7. My brother just did a tune-up a couple of days earlier and I wanted to see how fast the car could go. It reached 100 MPH easily. As the speedometer climbed, I felt like I was in a race game. I was happy as a bug driving over 100 MPH on the freeway on the empty freeway. However, In the midst of my Speed Racer experience, I heard a strong, direct voice speak. I can’t explain it, I only have a crystal clear memory of the experience. Inside of my head, in the same place that my conscience speaks from, something told me to put on my seatbelt. The voice though was not the voice of my conscience. It was a voice that demanded my immediate obedience. I really can’t explain it, but at that point I could only heed the voice and I immediately put on my seatbelt. As soon as I heard the click, I looked at the speedometer, read 126 MPH, and then looked up. Within 20 seconds, my car hit a bump and the lines of the highway disappeared. I couldn’t figure out what was happening and shortly after, everything went black. From the police report and eyewitnesses, my car's tires lost their grip and I spun out at over 120 MPH. I flew past another car backwards (He was driving over 80 and I passed him, backwards), spun, and hit his Isuzu Rodeo. Then my car swiped the center divider, blindsided the rear of a truck, launched off the freeway embankment and slammed into a tree. I should have died. If I didn't put the seatbelt on, I would have had an excellent chance of being launched out of my car. The seatbelt saved my life… actually, that voice saved my life…
But what was it that caused me to put on my seatbelt at that moment? Instinct? Coincidence? Conscience? Did I Imagine it? It came seconds before my car lost it’s grip on the road. That voice bothered me, a lot…
The accident made me think about life, death, and the meaning of life. I was confused. I knew that I could have easily died that night, and for some reason I didn’t die. I wasn’t happy with life and I couldn’t put my finger on my problem. And then I ran into Fred…
Fred was a strange kid in High School. He was known for doing séances in order to raise dead rats back to life in an abandoned building. Honest truth. One day Fred stopped by my house as I was playing video games. He came in and I gave him a controller so that we could play against each other. I didn't realize it at the time, but Fred recently became a Christian. He would hang out and tell me about God and I would listen as I beat the crap out of him on the video game. Good times. I would listen and ask questions and he was more than happy to listen to my constant arguments and problems that I had with the religious fruits. Again, I don't remember anything that he said, to be honest, I wasn’t really listening because I was too busy talking crap about God an Church to see his response. One thing I do remember though is his sincerity and the way that he seemed to truly believe in what he was saying. He spoke as if God woke up up, directed him to my doorstep, and had a divine purpose for our conversations. It was strange, yet intriguing. I thought he was a little messed up in the head, entertaining, but still messed up in the head. He invited me to a Bible Study and Church. I invited him to a house party on Saturday night. I didn’t feel like going to Church, and I guess that he wasn’t really strong in his faith (HA! I knew it!) so he ended up going with me to the party. When we got there, I said the wrong thing to the wrong person and I was promptly arrested. None of my friends made it into the party that night, including Fred. Some say God works in mysterious ways. Well, if God was protecting Fred from the booze and the “friendly” females that night, he protected him at my expense.
A few days later in November 1995, after I spent a couple of days in jail, I went for a walk and I was talking to myself. I thought about what Fred was telling me about God. I thought about the rich wisdom in proverbs and psalms. I thought about why I rejected God and how I based my rejection on those who claimed to be followers and not on God himself. I thought about that night that I should have died. I thought about a lot of things, wondering why I should live another day. I looked up to the sky, wondering if a creator was out there. Was Jesus real? Was Allah real? What about all the Buddhists that live in Alhambra, California? They don’t believe in Jesus, but is that chubby guy with the oranges and incense around him real? As I looked into the sky, I closed my eyes and I said “God, Jesus, whoever you are, creator, if you are real, show me that you exist. And show me who you are. Please!” I opened my eyes, and waited. Nothing happened, so I went home.
I always thought that it was funny that once you begin to pray, things begin to happen.
I suddenly became exposed to several people, of several faiths. Fred introduced me to his Christian friends. A girl at school spoke to me about the Jehovah's Witness faith, while her littler sister introduced me to palm reading and mystics. Mormons began riding their bikes through my neighborhood. So many faiths, which one, if any, was the right one? I prayed for God to show me who he was, and now it was up to me to open myself up to these religious people. So, I began to go places that religious people gathered, like Bible study. One night at Bible study, Fred's Christian friend told me that Moses' son raped Moses while he was drunk. I said "really?! Wow, show me where it says that!" She looked at me as if I said something wrong. In fact, she couldn't show me because that was something that someone told her and someone else probably told that someone and on and on and on. It didn't take me long to realize that most religious people didn't have any idea what they were talking about. Fred liked to study the Bible but a few months after he first came to my house he left the state of California. I decided that if I wanted to know the truth behind these religions, I was going to have to read the writings for myself and take every “teachers” words with a grain of salt.
As I trying to learn about God, several months later I came to the realization that something was still missing. I could believe that Jesus raised from the dead and the wisdom of the Bible was great to live by, however, something was definitely missing. I didn't want to say it to anyone else, but I wasn’t completely convinced that God existed. I tried to read other writing to find what I was missing. I read about the Noble Truth's of Buddhism. I talked to that Jehovah's Witness girl about the differences with her faith. I tried to open myself up but it was a revolving door. They all made sense. They were all convinced that what they taught was the Truth (capital T). But, I was not convinced that any of it was true. I was not convinced that God existed. So, I made a decision that changed my life: I quit school and work and I went into a Christian drug rehabilitation house. I wasn't on drugs and I didn't even drink or smoke, but I wanted to see God do a miracle and what better place then a house of those who were truly sick!
I went into the home on July 3, 1996. The home required a 9 month commitment. I didn’t feel like telling them that I would leave once I was convinced that God was real (that was my little secret). Day one in the home, we sat outside and lifted weights. The home director read us some verses before dinner and that was a day. As I went to sleep, I tried to find the blanket that my girlfriend sewed for me. As I searched for it, I saw it under one of the other kid's heads. Freaking thieves!!! Whatever... I was here to see if God existed, so I would let it go. Weeks went by and I would follow the plan. I would pray for an hour each morning, read the Bible for 30 minutes a day, listen to a message, and then do some daily chores. As the days and then weeks passed, I realized that nobody really wanted to be there. People would sleep during prayer. Guys would go on the roof to smoke. The staff would curse under his breath and the home director seemed concerned with making as much money as he could from the labor of those who lived at the home. It didn't take long for me to realize that I wasn't going to see God do anything in this house because nobody wanted God to do anything. I was about to leave and I decided that I would fast (I read about fasting and it seemed that God would do things when people fasted). While I was fasting, I was outside sweeping and an old lady walked by. I told her "hello" and she smiled at me. She walked by me, looked at me, and then came back to me. She said something like “I just feel like I need to tell you that God has something very special for you." And then she kept walking.
I know that if you are a skeptic reading this, you can explain her actions as coincidence and that it didn’t necessarily have anything to do with God. However, at that time, it was more than enough for me to stay in that home for several more months. Some want God to speak to them in the thunderstorms, however, a simple whisper from him is more than enough for me.
As I stayed in that home, I decided that I would do my best to follow God. I wanted to do my part so that I knew that I made my best effort to seek him. If he said the last shall be first, then I would be the last person in line to get dinner, even if it meant missing a meal because the food ran out. If God said to love my enemies, I would try to forgive those who hurt me in the past. If God said to not lust after a girl, I would try not to stare at them (It didn't take much for me to lust back then). I was honest, even when I got in trouble for it. I did everything I could to do what the Bible asked me to do. For 9 months I was going to try to be pure of heart because the Bible said that "the pure of heart will see God." I just wanted to see Him. I just wanted to know that he existed.
During my time there, I read through most of the Bible. I began to understand two things: first, the message of the Bible became very clear and second, I realized that most people who are “believers” have no idea what the Bible says. Also, as I was there, small coincidences continued to pile up. . One day I was outside sweeping and I looked at my shoes. They were dirty and the rubber was pulling apart at the sole. I stopped sweeping, looked up to the sky, prayed in my head and asked God for some new shoes, and went back to sweeping. I don't remember if it was that night or the next night but one of the kids in the home, a kid that disliked me came up to me and asked if I wanted a pair of shoes which were two weeks old. His mom bought them and he bought himself another pair so he didn’t need them. Did God answer my prayer again? Or was that just another odd coincidence? I wasn’t sure, so I kept sweeping. Little things like that kept happening. Either I was blessed by good karma, mother nature was favoring me, luck was swinging in my direction, or God was answering my prayers. None of these “coincidences” convinced me that God existed, however, in those months at that home, while I was giving me all, if God existed, I could definitely see his hand in my life.
After 8 months in the home I was allowed to leave if I wanted to. I thought about it and I left in order to go back to college. As I went back home, I sat and thought about those 8 months. I didn't see God heal a crack head. I didn't see a miracle or demons or anything. However, I could not deny that my heart was not the same as it was before I spent 8 months seeking God. The pain, anger, coldness was replaced with warmth, love and sensitivity. Not only was I a different person inside, those "coincidences" were questionable. I felt something as I prayed and worshipped but for all I knew, the goose bumps were from the cold air. And that old lady, she could have been from God. But then again, she could have just been a nice lady spreading cheer to random strangers. And that one time that I prayed for a girl’s sprained ankle which healed on her way home, maybe it wasn’t sprained in the first place. God did not prove himself to me, and after 8 months I realized that he may never “prove” himself to me.
The Bible says that without faith, we cannot please God. I have a problem with leaps of faith. For one, you can’t prove anything if a leap of faith is used in the process. Second, if we are going to surrender out lives to something, shouldn’t we have something more than faith?
It was at that point that I realized that the decision was mine to make. God’s existence had not been disproved, the Bible actually stands strong in light of criticism, and I could not rule out that God answered prayers, even though he didn’t make it obvious that he was responsible for giving me new shoes. At this point, I had to make a decision of faith, would I believe that God existed, or would I believe that there is no God?
Dr. Lane, you may call me a“cheap slut,” but I chose to believe in God by faith. And now, it isn’t a case of trying to prove God’s existence, but rather, the correct path to follow. If science should eventually prove that God does not exist, then I cannot deny facts. But, at this point, the Bible stands strong, true faith in God changes lives, and I have no reason to deny the hope that years of seeking have guided me to.
Religion has impacted my life and it has allowed my life to impact others. If I find out that I was wrong on that final day, I’ll still know that I did my best to be my best. However, if I find God’s embrace on that final day, then the step of faith that he asked for is more than “blind faith,” it is trust in one who loved me and who deserves my trust.
10. Why doesn't Brian Copeland consider himself a "genuine black man"?
The thing that motivated Brian to write this book was an anonymous letter stating that he was not a genuine black man. This statement seems to have really bothered Brian and it made him closely examine the trauma that he suppressed dealing with the issue of being black.
Black men seem to have a pre-determined expectation in the eyes of the general population. In some cases, the characteristics of an ideal black man are qualities which Brian does not possess. Growing up, he was not athletic as the famous black basketball and football players. At school, kids would initially think that he was a superior athlete since he was black and they would pick Brian first when choosing teams for a game. However, it wouldn't take long for the kids to realize that Brian was terrible at sports and coordination. Brian actually had no athletic talent and he would eventually become the last person picked to be on a team. Not only did Brian lack the desired qualities of a genuine black man, he had absolutely no desire to possess the negative traits which most would consider "black." A black man is thought to be violent, dishonest, and thuggish. Brian had a good heart and he was raised to be respectful by his mother. Instead of running around the streets with a gang, Brian served as an altar boy at his church. Even as an adult, Brian followed his heart instead of his skin. Instead of being a raunchy black comedian like most expect a black man to be, Brian kept it intelligent and corny. Black comedian's like Martin Lawrence would rather simulate a sexual adventure than discuss politics. And a black man would never do corny skits like getting strangers to "sing songs and eat bizarre things." That is white- comic Jay Leno-style humor, not black humor.
See, from the outside, Brian doesn't fit the racial profile that many attach to a black man and therefore he was considered to not be genuine as a black man. It is sad really. Growing up, Brian was rejected by those outside of his race because of who he was on the outside. To the white folks, Brian was as black as black can be with his afro hair and dark skin. It didn't matter that Brian was an 8 year old boy, to the white community; Brian was a hard-core menacing thug. This rejection had a heavy affect on Brian and he had a hard time coping with it throughout his childhood. He couldn't give up and move into a black neighborhood and go back to his "own kind" because his mother would not be pleased with him caving in and I am sure that Brian didn't want his mother to reject him. As much as it hurt, Brian stood his ground. He buried the pain of rejection, put on his game face, and trudged through life keeping that pain in a tightly sealed box. However, as an adult, Brian was had to face this rejection anew as he had to deal with his own race rejecting him for who he was on the inside. I am sure that Brian thought that he already dealt with the pain of rejection because of who he was, but now he had to deal with it again. This time, it was from the Black community.
I believe that Brian wrote this book to show whoever wrote that letter that there is no such thing "genuine black man." There are only genuine "people." Brian Copeland is a genuine person, who happens to be black. Nothing more, nothing less.
11. How did Brian Copeland cope with racism in his childhood?
To Brian, racism wasn’t something that could be avoided; it was part of his daily life. Once Brian moved to San Leandro, he was the automatic target. He didn't need to do something wrong in order to warrant abuse. Actually, all he had to do was stand there, and trouble would find him. When he first moved to San Leandro, a group of kids chased him and a police officer treated him like a criminal. It didn't take Brian long to realize that he was not liked solely based on his skin color. Brian made several adjustments to try to work through his situation of being an outcast.
First, Brian tried to avoid the problem. In order to do this, he avoided people. He found comfort and a sense of belonging in the fictional worlds of his comic books. In comic books, the outsider was usually a hero using his unique characteristics to save the world. I could only imagine the great times that Brian had in Gotham City, Metropolis and the Marvel Universe. At school, he tried to disappear. Brian would sit by himself and read books during recess. He purposely missed a couple of questions on every test in order to avoid acing all of his tests and standing out. I guess that Brian figured that if he couldn't deal with racial abuse if he wasn't noticed by those who would taunt him.
Another way that Brian tried to cope with racism was to be an individual who others could respect. Police Officers accused Brian of being a trouble-maker. Nuns hit him and lied about him. Even random strangers accused him of abusing their pets and causing mischief. Brian didn't want to be labeled as "bad" simply because he was black, however, it seemed that it was a label which he automatically inherited with his skin color. So, Brian decided to overcome the label which was given to him by re-labelling himself as a great young man. He became an altar boy at his church and altar boys are not only good, they are inspired by holiness. Brian also joined the boy scouts and racked up the merit badges one by one as he pursued excellence in character and conduct. Further, he verbally educated himself and tried to present himself as an adult whenever given the opportunity. Brian tried to overcome the negative assumptions that came with being black.
Finally, while reading about his adult life, it is clear that Brian also coped with racism by burying the pain. It hurt, and it hurt him deep. Sometimes Brian would walk home, happy as a clam, only to be the victim of a random beating for no apparent reason. People who didn't know his name would accuse him of being a crook, a liar, a thief... a bad "black" person. People of all ages from all backgrounds hated Brian without even giving him a chance. This rejection cut Brian, but he didn't know how to deal with the pain, so he buried it deep.
Brian was a good kid with a heart of gold. He dealt with the issue to the best of his ability but it wasn't until he was an adult that he finally began to find healing for his pain. As an adult he learned to let it out and express his pain with others. It is through this release that Brian was finally able to realize that he wasn't alone as a man who suffered from the trauma of racism.
12. What was the tipping point in Brian Copeland's life? What do you think made him come to grips with his past?
There is a very good insight into Brian's mind between pages 173-176. He discusses a friend who jumped to his death from the Golden Gate Bridge. As Brian talks about his friend's suicide, he says:
"Suicide has nothing to do with selfishness of 'taking the easy way out.' Suicide is the result of pain. It is the culmination of an anguish so great that you will do anything to make it stop."
Brian dealt with pain through his life and he never figured out a way to overcome the pain. He ran from it, denied it, and hid it deep in the dark shadows of his thoughts. However, as a successful adult, he realized that he could not run from the pain. Actually, the pain of racism seemed to worsen with time...
I think the tipping point came from two distinct angles. First, as Brian was enjoying life, sitting on a crapper, he overheard a random, faceless stranger downplay Brian's success by stating, "he's still a nigger." Brian worked harder than most men to be who he became in character and career yet, behind his back, people were still tearing him down. To them, it didn't matter if Brian became the greatest person to walk the planet because "he's still a nigger." I think this little comment broke Brian's heart. He realized that there was nothing that he could do to prevent people from judging him as a bad, worthless, nigger. Growing up, he knew who his enemies were and these people abused Brian verbally with no shame. But that nameless person who called Brian a nigger was not Brian's enemy. He was a man who bought Brian a whiskey in celebration of Brian's birthday. He was a smiling face. A friendly face. A random, generous, nice face. It wasn't an enemy this time, it was someone who presented himself as a friend. It was that nice guy who holds the elevator for Brian as he enters a lobby. It was the mailman who greets Brian on a Saturday afternoon. It was the fan who shakes Brian's hand and says "Nice to meet you! Can I get your autograph?!" That man in the bathroom represented the good people of the world. The guy who smiles at your face, only to call you a "nigger" behind your back. Heartbreaking!
The second thing that pushed Brian over the edge was another comment, but this time it was from his son. While walking around a hobby shop, Brian's son looked at him and said "Am I bad, daddy?" Those words must have stung because Brian knew exactly why his son asked that question. The world around us labels black as bad. At one point, Brian went into a dictionary and looked up the definitions of white and black. White was defined with words of fortune, purity, and holiness. Black was defined as harmful, damned, and bad. His son asked that question because of the color of his skin. He asked the same question that haunted Brian every day of his life. The question that stabbed a knife into Brian's heart which painfully twisted every now and then. To hear his son ask that question destroyed Brian. He saw the pain that his child would go through. He knew the enemy that his child was going to have to face. Brian loved his son as any father loves a child. However, Brian would not be able to protect his son from the cruel beast of racism which tormented Brian for all of these years. It killed Brian to know that there was nothing he could do to protect his son from the pain of being black.
However, at one point, Brian finally faced his demon head-on at with the help of his Grandma. There have been many people people who have said many things about being overcoming great obstacles, but Brian's Grandma gave him perfect advice. Her words were simply "Get your black @#$ up!" These words carried the weight of the world on them because her life was a life of a woman who would not allow the pain of this world to keep her down. She stood her ground regardless of life. When her body ached from weariness and hunger, she never gave up. Her words made Brian realize that as long as he had air in his lungs, he had fight in his blood. Pain comes to every person, young and old. But Brian could not give up. His grandmother didn't. His mother didn't. And Brian could not give up because he had to make sure that his children would not give up.
As Brian finally began to deal with his past, he allowed the healing to begin. He began to release the pain that was bottled-up and this release came in the forms of comedy, writing, and talking. As he opened himself up, he began to realize that he was not alone. The issues Brian dealt with regarding being black were issues that people dealt with being brown, yellow, and even white. The most important thing that I think he realized was that his ability fight through the pain inspired others who were on the verge of giving up. He suddenly became the strength for others who were desperate and hopeless. Even a warrior gets wounded, but the warrior that presses on through the pain leads others to victory. Brian Copeland is that warrior. He has survived a life of rejection and hatred due to his skin color. He still stands strong even when an ignorant stranger takes the weapon of racism and stabs "but he is still a nigger" right through Brian's heart. He has been knocked down, but he has not been knocked out. There is a lot of pain in this world that many will suffer from, including his children. However, the strength that is in Brian will strengthen others and help them defeat the beast of racism one battle at a time.
13. Why does Ken Wilber argue for a holistic or QUADRANT understanding of religion and spiritual life?.
Most of the scientific community view religion as something that is no longer mentally acceptable in light of scientific advancement. They believe that since religion cannot be proven, it is easily defeated by the hard-nosed proofs of science which are based on verifiable facts. Wilbur however believes that religion and science can co-exists and he explains this through his All Quadrant All Level model.
According to Wilbur's model, four quadrant's represent truths of life which are all part of a bigger picture. Science finds it's strength in that which can be physically proven. He calls this "narrow science" as it is based on the universal truths of Physics, Math, Chemistry, etc. Science greatly excels in these categories because the laws of physics and math are unchangeable truths for the most part. There is no doubt when scientific discoveries prove such verifiable facts as a rotating Earth or a cure for a disease. However, not all science can be categorized as narrow science. "Psychology, sociology, and linguistics" are not as concrete as the narrow sciences since their advancements usually cannot be physically proven. therefore they are labeled as "broad science." These sciences are based on scientific theory but they are not as definite and verifiable as the narrow sciences. Religion, unlike science, excels as "broad religion" which seeks to transcend oneself through spiritual transformation. Spiritual experiences cannot be scientifically proven, yet, they are authentic nonetheless. Wilbur realizes that narrow science cannot grasp the spiritual aspects of faith therefore narrow science cannot and should not judge religious experiences. Most scientists will reject religion altogether because it cannot be determined by narrow science but Wilbur teaches that we shouldn't throw out something that is true to people simply because it falls into a different quadrant of his model. According to Wilbur, his model "integrates deep religion with broad science by showing that deep spirituality is a broad science of the farther reaches of human potential." See, if religion is to be measured by scientific standards, then it should be measured by broad science's standards. And, when religion is compared to broad science, one realizes that spiritual activity transcends the mind and the measurable ability of man. With this, religion cannot be discarded because it is another truth within the big picture that we call life.
To Wilbur, science and religion co-exist and we shouldn't attempt to reduce one by the other's measurements. Religion shouldn't attempt to prove it's claims by scientific standards because science will always reject that which cannot be proven. Religion cannot be proven that the Earth flooded, therefore it makes no sense for religion to try to prove any miraculous claim by using unscientific methods and questionable reasoning. On the other hand, science cannot disprove God or spiritual experiences. Science may try to explain away spiritual activity, but it also fails because something that is personal, real and intangible cannot be disproved by scientific procedures. Science cannot measure experience.
Since it is determined that religion is something which has merit in and of itself, Wilbur argues that the study of religion should be studied holistically and not analytically. Spiritual experiences don't need to be explained in order to be authentic. The experience itself is outside of reason and human comprehension therefore it cannot be explained. Further, one must not limit religion to boundaries which deny alternative religions truths. Wilbur states that "future evolution will move beyond" what we now believe to be true and what we believe to be true today may be proven to be a lie tomorrow. Therefore, we must understand that all forms of religion have some truth to them and no religion is above another. As we open up to this point of reflection we become "more alive to Spirit's ever-present Presence." Wilbur calls this "constant consciousness" which is important in order experience spiritual transformation and reach "the doorway to God."
In conclusion, Wilbur goes through great lengths to prove that religion does co-exist with science and therefore religion must be accepted and embraced for what it is. As we open ourselves up to religious experiences, we must fight the urge to explain these experiences by measurements which cannot be used for spiritual truths. And, as we allow ourselves to understand religion holistically, we will have a greater understanding of the deeper truth which envelops religion, science, and everything else that exists.
Reference: http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/cowokev8_intro.cfm
14. How would Edward O. Wilson critique Ken Wilber's transpersonal psychology?
I just want to not that, according to Wilber, he no longer refers to himself as a transpersonal psychologist. He now refers to himself as doing “integral psychology.”
I believe that Mr. Wilson would completely dismiss Wilber's study because it carries no weight in regards to Wilson's reductionist approach. To Wilson, transpersonal study, or all study for that matter, can only be explained by outward influences based on underlying physical principles. He says that "the world is orderly and can be explained by a small number of natural laws." Wilber, on the other hand, searches into the interior elements of the mind because he claims that the interior plays an important role in understanding psychology. However, with nothing to reductively explain unseen interior theory, Wilber is forced to create his own explanations and system of interpretation. Although Wiber’s reasoning is exhaustively drawn out, it does not have evidentiary support for it’s claims. Wilber uses words like “evidence strongly suggest” but his evidence is based on personal assumption, not elemental truths. By explaining away his findings, Wilber’s research cannot be accepted by Wilson since scientific truths cannot be determined by assumption. Wilber’s science is guesswork and cheap logic padded with scientific terminology. It is pseudoscience!
Further, according to Wilson, religion and spirituality are products of the evolutionary process created in order to meet some sense of emotional need. He believes that inner spirituality has no truth outside of the evolutionary development process. During an interview he said “I do feel confident that there is no intervention of a deity in the origin of life and humanity.” Actually, let me clarify that: Wilson doesn’t believe that the physical world presents evidentiary truth for the existence of the transpersonal spirituality. Therefore, he has no convincing reason to believe in such self-validating claims. However, he tries to be an honest scientist and he wont go as far as to say that spirituality doesn’t exist. But, he will reject conclusions based on the assumption of spiritual realities because those realities lack physical evidence.
With this evidential deficiency, spiritual claims are not scientific in nature. The assumptions of the existence of spiritual realities is the basis of Wilber’s transpersonal psychology and therefore it is quickly rejected by Wilson because it does not have a true scientific foundation.
Reference: http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/int_psych_summ.cfm/xid,8552/yid,7930178
http://www.salon.com/books/int/2006/03/21/wilson/index2.html
15. How would a Wilberian purview critique the actions of Osama Bin Laden? Be sure to substantiate your answer.
A Wilberian would most likely attribute Bin Laden's mentality as a left-quadrant-based red/blue state of consciousness. Let me break that down:
The left quadrants are based upon interior realities. Maturity within each quadrant allows a person to grow into a fully developed individual. Spiritual insight and religious experiences are understood at progressive levels. However, as one excels within the left quadrants, he cannot neglect the right quadrants which deal with the exterior truths. In this we find Bin Laden’s error. He doesn’t attempt to understand life with an All Quadrant All Level perspective. He remains within the mystical left quadrant at the expense of the right quadrant development. Without growing in exterior knowledge, his reasoning and actions are unbalanced which, as we have seen, result in tragic consequences.
Further, according to Wilber, our actions and responses stem from a range of color-coded memes. The blue level provides a moral structure of good and evil. The understanding of life within this level of mysticism is usually guided by dogma and not evidence. In this case, the religion of fundamental Islam defines morality and values. The followers of Al Queda, being a blue-memetic society, adhere to this dogmatic measuring stick because it is the only truth they know. As Bin Laden and his followers remain loyal to their religious beliefs, they find a sense of purpose and destiny. However, within their beliefs they also find a sense of righteousness in dismantling the United State’s source of strength. To Bin Laden, the United States and it's Enlightened/Christian philosophy threatened his blue-memetic conscious level. Previously, The U.S. was considered a Christian nation and the Christian blue-memetic theology is heretical warranting damnation by Bin Laden’s set of beliefs. Having a Christian heritage is more than enough to provoke Bin Laden’s rage. However, to add fuel to the fire, the United States, through “postmodern pluralism”, is currently moving towards a rejection of religious ideology. The U.S. Enlightenment is a grene-memetic based ideology which insists that there is no Truth (capital T) and that all faiths and personal beliefs should be treated equally. This “postmodern pluralistic” movement is unacceptable those who are in the blue-level of consciousness because it basically rejects the blue-memetic level of individual definition and social (or rather, tribal) structure. To Bin Laden, the U.S. is and absolute evil which should no longer exist. In his eyes, his actions was a heroic act done against an enemy as the west is the major source of global evils and a perversion of noble truths.
Now, if you take this Blue level mentality, and mix it with the red stage of consciousness, you easily have a psychotic terrorist. The red level is defined as "feudalistic, vengeful, and filled with rage." Wilber states that the terrorists were "pathological red inflamed by distorted blue ideology." He said that their actions were so violent, that even "healthy terrorists" condemned their actions. Their rage and vengeance is ingrained in their psyche due to their dogma. According to Wilbur, their holy book the Koran, "remains medieval in it's outlook" and it "specifically condones--and on occasional commands--the killing of unbelievers." As they remain in the blue memetic level, their actions find justification through Islamic dogma. And, with red-memetic rage and violence fueling their passion, their resolve is strengthened and incidents such as 9/11 will continue for Bin Laden and his followers see themselves as heroes saving the world from the greatest evil, namely, the West. 16. How does the genealogical history of morality contribute to religious diversity?
The genealogical history of morality contributes to religious diversity by watering down any sense of absolutism which most religions proclaim. In other words, it weakens the strength of religion and loosens it's grasp.
Nietzsche book titled Geneology of Morals gives a look at morals from sense of geneology and not from a definite source/origin.
According to Neitzsche, morals are not absolute and through the different stages of human existence they have been redefined. At one point, it was considered good to be strong, sexual and able to kill. These were warrior traits which were highly honored. When these powerful people dominated society, they defined their own traits as good while considering the weak and the cowardly as bad. However, at some point, the weak and the cowardly were able to reevaluate morals and that which once was considered good suddenly became bad. As the weak became wise, they were able to convince the strong that the qualities of the weak were actually honorable while the qualities of the strong were evil and wicked. A reversal of morals had taken place! As a result, leaders of the weak began to dominate both the weak and the strong with authority rooted in hatred. They also possessed a perverted voyeuristic pleasure of causing hardship and watching others suffer under their authority. These "priests" would burden others with "bad conscience" as they convinced the people that they were guilty of a debt which they personally deserved due to "sin." Further, these priests condemned those who were not submissive to eternal hell and damnation. According to Neitzsche, if one would take a step back and consider the situation, the priests are perhaps the most evil and that which is currently considered to be "good" causes more personal harm to those that believe in the religious sense of morality.
From this perspective, religion no longer stands for that which is inherently proper and good. The religious definition of virtue may actually be a deceptive vice birthed in hatred and practiced in perversion. Further, the religious condemnation of those who do not obey may be a scare-tactic goal aimed at keeping the weak and the sick, weak and sick.
Much more can be said for morality from Neitzche's perspective. If morals are not absolute, then we cannot condemn a violent man for being violent as we cannot condemn a bird of prey for killing lambs. If it is in his nature, then it is what makes that person who he is. Moreover, although it is the weak who are slaves to religion, we cannot harbor resentment towards these individuals because they are weak and they are doing that which they, by nature, were created (used for lack of a better term) to do.
Overall, the main contributions that the genealogical history of morality makes towards religious diversity is that it offers enlightenment to both the atheist, and the theistic believer. To those who don't believe in God or absolute truths, it allows them to find a sense of who they are while relieving the "bad conscience" pushed on their conscience by hateful religious leaders. Further, it offers a non-theistic sense of purpose and belonging in contrast to the detestable nihilism which wanders in hopeless defeat. Finally, for those who do follow a religion, they are able to realize that their burden of guilt is self inflicted and, although they may find conform in the security of structured religion, they do not need to carry that burden which weighs so heavily upon them.
Reference: http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/genealogyofmorals/
http://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/Nietzsche/genealogytofc.htm
17. Given America's religious melting pot, what do YOU think is the best way to approach American religious diversity? Explain your reasoning.
"I may be wrong."
I believe that those words would be a great way to approach religion in America and throughout the world. From what I have seen, everyone has their own personal belief regarding religion and spirituality. Some are highly disciplined followers of their given faith. Others reject faith altogether and opt for alternate explanations. However, I haven't seen many people who are actually open to the possibility that their personal faith or belief is incorrect. I believe that if we were willing to accept the notion that we may have erred in our personal beliefs, then we would be more open to listen to each other instead of simply judging each other. When one's faith is challenged, they usually dodge the issue or become defensive. On the other hand, when someone is introduced to a new ideology, mental walls usually go up as they hold onto that which they believe without allowing themselves to truly understand the presented faith. I believe that if we allow ourselves to open up, and accept the fact that what we have been taught may not actually be the absolute truth, then we will able to communicate with each other in a way that benefits all.
18. Explain why religion will not disappear, even as we become more scientifically oriented?
The simple answer is that religion will not disappear because God exists and the potential advancement of man’s intellect will never be able to disprove that which is spiritually true.
The blind zealous faith of religious leaders from the past from the past allowed those who believe in science to think that they will some day overcome the teachings of all religions. For example, back in the 1600’s, Galileo presented the Catholic Church with his heliocentric theory. The Catholic Church responded by charging him with a crime because his theory contradicted scriptures found in Psalms, and Ecclesiastes. According to the Cathoic Church, scriptures clearly taught that "the Earth shall not be moved." Yet, through the years, it became fact that the Earth does indeed move in a cycle around the Sun and with this the Catholic Church’s claim was scientifically defeated. However, what science doesn’t realize is that the Bible wasn’t defeated. The scriptures which the Catholic Church used to condemn Galileo were misinterpreted with no regard to context or the original Hebrew language. The scriptures said “Surely the world is established, so that it cannot be moved. “ If the Catholic Church’s interpretation was correct, then they had more theological issues to worry about besides a rotating Earth. See, with their erroneous interpretation, any major earthquake would contradict their understanding of an "unmovable Earth." It was their erroneous interpretation which made the Bible appear to be erroneous. See, it wasn’t the Bible that had the error, merely the Catholic's errant understanding of scripture. Science has not proven the bible to be errant, it has only clearly shown that some people draw false conclusions by adding definitive beliefs to that which is not clearly taught in scripture. Regardless of the facts, due to the Catholics Church's error regarding Earth's rotation and their unjust treatment of Galileo, science believes that it’s discoveries have proven the Bible to be errant. With this, it is obvious to the scientific community that future advancements will continue to dismiss religious claims.
However, I am fully convinced that as we become scientifically advanced, the only thing that science will do is intellectually solidify that which the Bible clearly teaches (within the scope of science, of course). It will also continue to expose errant religious teachings based on misinterpreted scripture. Science has already confirmed some clear Bible teachings. For example, the Biblical vegetarian diet of Genesis has been scientifically proven to be quite healthy. Further, the Bible present’s God as existing outside of space and time. Einstein discovered that time bends at certain speeds and his theory of relativity suggests that, at some point, time actually began. From a Biblical perspective, time was “created.” Einstein’s studies provid substantial evidence for the theological belief in an eternal God who exists outside of time. Way to go Einstein!
Currently, Science has theories which, if proven true, will reject the existence of God. Evolution, if proven true, would void the Biblical account of creation and the genealogy of mankind. However, evolution makes logical leaps which will never be proven true because the pieces don’t quite fit together and they never will. It is a well thought out theory, but, it is only a theory based on that which is assumed. The theory of evolution has constantly been tweaked and re-tweaked. And, when a theory starts to make sense, another scientific discovery such as the increasing rate of the expansion of the cosmos throws a monkey-wrench into current scientific theories. I believe that as science advances, it’s greatest accomplishment will be to exhaust all possible explanations of existence until it comes full circle towards the truths claimed in the Bible. 19. How would Ken Wilber argue against Wilson's intertheoretic reductionism?
Wilber believes that “the world is full of "holarchies, as opposed to hierarchies.” Basically, he believes that reality is defined by “twenty tenants that characterize all holons.” And, these holons are complete in and of themselves. Scientific truths are valid, however, other holons such as spirituality exist. And, since these exist on different levels, we cannot use one to try to validate, or invalidate, the other. Spirituality, which cannot be determined scientifically, does not lose it’s credibility through scientific advancement because spirituality is a complete holon and these holons are part of a bigger picture. Science, spirituality, and other holons co-exist as “building blocks of existence.”
With this, Wilber would see that Wilson confines his understanding to the limitations of narrow science and therefore he is unable to confirm broad spiritual truths. Science and spirituality come in two different forms: narrow and broad. Narrow science is based on the exterior, physical world. Physics, Chemistry and Biology are all defined as narrow science. Broad sciences on the other hand are “subjective and interpretive” and they take a scientific approach to understanding human conscience. Psychology, sociology, and anthropology fall within this category because they can’t determined absolute truths based on evidence, however, their study does help develop our understanding of humanity. Spirituality, on the other hand, is not physically tangible so it cannot be studied via narrow scientific methods. The problem that Wilber would have with Wilson is that Wilson tries to define everything by narrow science, regardless of the scope and limitations of narrow science. If one wants to study spirituality with science, one must go the same route as broad science and study it at the broad religious level. This transformative spirituality seeks to transcend oneself into a state of “nondual unity consciousness that is beyond the ego.”
Basically, the study of broad religion extends to the furthest reaches of broad science. It fullness stretches beyond that which we can comprehend or conceive. The limited understanding that we do have is only that which our limited human abilities can grasp. If broad science can barely mentally grasp spiritual realities, how could narrow science physically prove that which is spirit?
It cannot.
One cannot use narrow science reductionism to study the unseen because spirituality is not physical and, in contradiction to what Wilson teaches, it does not depend on humanistic evolution. Weber uses the term “flatland” as “the belief that only matter (or matter/energy) is real, and that only narrow science has any claim to truth.” Wilson’s way of thinking would be considered “flatland” because his mentality rejects the interior-based left quadrant and it attempts to define the interior based on the exterior. Since the exterior is limited on determining interior truths, the left-quadrant holons are rejected and, from Wilson's reasoning, one is left with an incomplete understanding of reality.
Reference: http://www.tamilnation.org/books/Unfolding/wilbur.htm
http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/cowokev8_intro.cfm/xid,3303704/yid,28914399
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holon_%28philosophy%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AQAL
20. What was the most valuable thing you learned this semester?
This class was loaded with so many valuable things that I cannot chose a specific thing which I value most. You forced me to learn how to make digital movies which actually helped me to communicate in a whole new arena. I agree with you that digital movies are the way of the now, and you helped me to catch up to the now. Further, you made me read things that I wouldn't ordinarily read and with that, I now have a wider scope of religions and atheist. I still admit that my overall knowledge is pretty weak, but at least the scope of weakness stretches further than it did before taking your class. You formally introduced me to Nietzsche and I will soon read some of his other writings when time permits. You also attacked my faith in class and through the writings of others. I always appreciate watching my faith intellectually challenged because it allows me to sift truth from garbage. So, even though it was difficult to remain calm at times, it was nice to hear the "other side" of the coin.
I could honestly go on and on about the valuable things that I learned this semester but I'll stop here. Your class was great. Challenging, but great.
21. According to Stephen Jay Gould, why is it so difficult to know the evolutionary "function" of religious belief? Hint: think of "spandrels" (or unintended secondary effects).
Stephen Jay Gould's doesn't believe that each characteristic of man, beast, or other living creature has developed through evolution as an adaptive result to ensure survival. He uses the example of spandrels to develop his argument. Spandrels are the corner areas between the arched doorways and the dome-shaped mosaic pictured above. According to Gould, the spandrels were painted after the mosaic within the dome was completed. The cornered area would have been an empty gap had the artist not added the additional design to this area. The point Mr. Gould makes is that spandrels play no functional part in the actual intended design. They were actually added as an after-though to fill in a gap. In much the same way, some of that which exists today may have no functional purpose and they may actually be unintended secondary effects with no benefit or purpose. An example used is the tiny front arms of the Tyrannosaurus. Most evolutionist will try to create a defining explanation for these arms and, through the process of evolution, explain why they were short and the specific purpose they served. However, all explanations of science (ranging from helping to stand upright to titillating female partners) are found wanting. Further, the very fact that popular science tries to explain every detail, regardless of the strength of their argument, shows their unwillingness to admit that some characteristics may have come into existence without rhyme or reason. Gould insists that some things cannot be explained as if they serve a evolutionary purpose. Within this category we find religion.
Regarding religion, Gould has a underlying belief about it's relationship to science. He doesn't see the two as being at war with one another. Gould states that although some truths are exclusively scientific in nature, there are some truths that are not scientific and there are places where science cannot go. According to Gould, "The net of science covers the empirical universe: what is it made of (fact) and why does it work this way (theory). The net of religion extends over questions of moral meaning and value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry." He calls this "non-overlapping magisterial" or NOMA.
Since religion and evolution do not overlap, religion does not necessarily serve as an evolutionary function and it cannot be explained by scientific reasoning. It may very well serve as a sort of spandrel. It isn't part of the original process of evolution, however, it has come into existence filling in a gap that science could not reach. Many may come up with explanations regarding the purpose of religion but if it wasn't part of the original painting, then it's true purpose or reason may have nothing to do with adaptation or natural selection. Gould is not arguing that religion is true, nor is he arguing that it does not exist. His point is that we cannot assume that religion serves as a function of evolution. It may very well be an unintended secondary effect with no rhyme or reason within the greater scheme of natural selection.
Reference: http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_noma.html
http://bostonreview.net/BR24.5/orr.html
http://ethomas.web.wesleyan.edu/wescourses/2004s/ees227/01/spandrels.html
http://atheism.about.com/library/quotes/bl_q_SJGould.htm
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/gould_fact-and-theory.html
22. Go on a field trip to one religious center (be sure you haven't been there before) and write up a report about what you experienced there. 1000 words minimum. .
Today I went to the Self-Realization Fellowship Lake Shrine Temple in Pacific Palasades, California. It took me over an hour to get there as I fought through tough memorial day traffic. Once I got to the place, I felt somewhat out of place. I have never been to a center such as this so I had no I idea what to expect. The first thing I did was I walked up to the entrance and made sure that I wasn’t breaking any rules. No pets, check. No bathing suits, check. Cell phone off, semi-check. Ok, I was ready to go in.
As I walked around the bookstore I was surprised to see the waterfall, shrines, windmill, scenery, gardens, etc. It was overwhelming at first, so I went to the visitor center and gave the lady a confused look on my face. She responded with a leaflet which briefly described the center. I looked at the leaflet, then decided to give the place a walk-through before I read it. I wanted to experience the surroundings myself first before I read about the specifics.
First I walked into a house with a windmill on it. It said the be quiet, so I tip-toed in. Two people were in there, silently staring forward. At the front of the room were 6 pictures. Oddly enough, one of them looked like Jesus. Under the pictures were fresh flowers. To the left was another picture of a man with his own set of flowers. I sat there for a minute and listened to the waterfall. There was a distinct smell that I couldn't make out. Some smells make you feel like you are at a certain place or that you should do a certain thing. I wondered what this smell signified. I would have asked one of the people in there, but I was supposed to be quiet, so I quietly excused myself.
I continued to walk around the path and I noticed that there were several benched set out. I sat on one and I noticed that it was placed in such a way that you could see the waterfall, a shrine on top of the hill, and some semi-circle structure across the water. I decided to head for that structure because it looked like it was really old. As I continued walking I came across a scripture on the wall. It said "Be still and know that I am God" Psalms. Further down I saw the scripture for Luke 10:27 posted. And even further quotes from people I didn’t know were posted. This place seemed to integrate several faiths in some way or another.
As I approached the semi-circle, I saw a shrine in the center. The writing next to it said that Gandhi's ashes were inside. I stood there for a second. Actually, I was standing there for quite some time and I tried to "be still" as the posted scripture stated. I heard birds. I also head a waterfall. I think the motorcycle driving by snapped me out of it because at that point I began to inspect the area. I tried to understand what this place meant to other people. Maybe it is a sort of "holy ground" to some. I don’t know. But, thinking about the importance of this plot of ground, I began to wonder if I should even be standing there. I didn't know if I was allowed to be on the grass, so I scurried out of there. I walked around some more and noticed people meditating, some taking pictures, and a group of overweight older people chit chatting and being silly. I guess they didn't read the "please be quite" sign.
I walked back to the visitor center and I noticed five pillars. Each one had a different major faith on it with flowers below. Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. At this point, I decided to read the leaflet.
I guess that Yoganandi believed in finding the good within each religion. He must not have been well versed in these religions though because there is no way that they can ever be in harmony with each other. I understand his effort and spiritual desire, and I cannot fault him for trying. Peace, tranquility, God… the realization center tried to turn these fleeting desires into a reality.
At this point, a lady came out of the visitor center and asked if anyone would like to go onto a tour of the temple on the hill. She walked us through a mini-museum with the history of the place as well as items once owned by Yoganandi. Then she walked us over to a cactus and she pointed out that the cactus had no thorns. She said that the person who grew the cactus spoke peace into the cactus so it never had a need to grow thorns. I must admit, besides Gandhi's ashes, that was the second most interesting thing about that place. I need to further research thorn less cacti but, for the time being, her story was interesting and intriguing. Next, she walked us up to the temple. Inside a girl was playing the piano. We walked in and the girl stopped playing so that we could experience the "silence." I sat there for a few minutes in the silence. It reminded me of Big Bear on top of the mountain where you couldn't hear anything but the wind. I saw a little book behind the seat in front of me and I grabbed it. Inside were songs written by Yoganandi. Some were about finding God. Others were about Jesus. I wondered how much Yoganandi knew about Jesus. I wondered how much he knew about anything actually. He seemed like a nice guy, but I didn't get a sense of awe from his songs. I don''t know, maybe I needed to spend some more time there. I don’t know…
After I left the temple I thanked the lady for the tour and walked back to my car. I sat there for a second thinking about the place. I wondered about the 5 pillars with different religions. I wondered if Yoganandi read through the holy literature from each great faith, or if he was only vaguely familiar with their teachings. I wondered if people at this place could actually find "silence" even though traffic constantly invades their quiet setting. I wondered why they would have Jesus on the wall if Jesus didn't teach about combining faiths. He actually was pretty narrow with his teachings and his path towards salvation. Finally, I wondered what these people who were meditating would talk about if I engaged them in conversation. I didn't really talk to anyone because I didn't want to break someone's silence. Oh well, maybe another time when I go to the beach I'll stop by again and see if some of my questions can finds answers. Until then, I had a nice time at the center and I am happy that I was able to visit and enjoy the scenery and pleasant surroundings.
2. YOUR USERNAME.: seven_twentyone_k
3. List your attendance (how many classes missed? how many classes were you late to?). : I went to every class. I was 5 minutes late once and 10 minutes late once.
4. List the titles to each of the two movies, along with a synopsis of their themes. I also want you to list the "format" that you used for your two films. Give me a direct link to the film here. : On both movies I used Ulead and saved them as wmv files. The first movie was my midterm video. It was basically a video about everything that we went over in class to that point. The second movie is about Christian evangelism. My girlfriend and others went to Nicaragua a couple of months ago and the video is based on their pictures.
Video one (midterm): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uknT4dzPHF4
Video two (final): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8QnefpHPbg
5. Did you read both books (fully? skip-read? looked at the cover? we had to read books?): Yes, cover to cover.
6. What grade did you finally receive on the midterm?: A
7. What grade do you deserve in this class? Substantiate your answer.:Honestly, I took this class because I love to study religion. I would have done it for no grade, but considering that I am trying to maintain a strong gpa, I believe that I deserve an A. I read several more books besides the required readings, I spent over 15 hours on my novice videos, and I gave my best effort throughout.
8. List any extra credit or other circumstances that may help your overall grade.:I did my best for this class in every aspect.
9. Write a 1500 word autobiography that describes how religion, gender, or ethnicity has impacted your life.
As I grew up I only recall a handful of times that I heard “God” mentioned. When I was around 8 or 9 years old, my dad came into my room, drunk, and taught me and my brother how to say the "Our Father" prayer. I believe that was the first time God was introduced to me on a personal level. I guess they presentation of God by a rambling drunk had something to do with the fact that I couldn’t take God seriously. I don’t believe I ever said that prayer... A few years later, when I was 14 years old, my Aunt took me and my brother to the park because she wanted to talk. She had a Bible with her and she began to explain the mysteries of YHWH and the sacrificial redemptive blood of Jesus who prophetically died for my transgressions. I didn't understand anything that she was talking about and I don't remember what she prayed about. However, something about her passion sparked my interest.
At about that period in my life, I began to wonder about God. I remember being 16 years old and taking the bus to a Christian concert. The music was pretty good but when the man went up to speak, I didn't really understand what he was saying. At about that time I told my mom that I wanted to go to church and she took me to a place where people were gathered in a classroom at a school. This time, I actually remembered one specific thing that the preacher said. I recall the statement "If you need to stand up to reach deep into your pockets, then stand up so that you can give!" Yeah, that didn't sit well with me at all. I was in a place where I couldn’t take God seriously, yet, something inside of me couldn’t write God off. I once took a bus to Pasadena to the church where my aunt attended even though I didn’t know how I would get home. The music was, well, it was different than what I usually listened to. I liked it though. Once the little man went up to speak however, I didn't understand anything that he was talking about. I was curious, but their words kept falling on ears that could not comprehend.
Then one day, Easter morning to be exact, I was again invited by my aunt to her church. The preacher was talking about Jesus and his love. I felt something drawing me to his message, even though I could not understand the specifics, I understood that at some point in time, a man supposedly loved me enough to suffer for me. After he finished speaking, he invited those who wanted to know God to come to the front of the church. The next thing I remember was standing in front of the church being prayed for. As I left, I felt like something was about to change. As my aunt dropped me off, something did change. She told me that I was now a Christian and I couldn't dress in my baggy clothes anymore. She also told me that I had to lose my friends because Christians didn't have friends like the ones that I had. As I walked away from her car, I also walked away from her religion. If religion couldn't accept me, then why should I accept it?
The next couple years were very difficult for me. I went to church twice in those two years. Once I was high on speed and I was forced to go in order to get a ride home from a friend’s house. I remember feeling disgusted there because the Priest would chant something and then the people would respond with "Crucify him! Crucify Him!" Why were these "Christians" saying "crucify him" to Jesus? I mean, Jesus died for them, and they were joining with those who mocked him in the first place?! I began to realize that these people were ignorant blind sheep doing what they were told to do. Either that or they were a very sour bunch of Jesus-loving Jesus haters. The second time I went to church I went with my girlfriend at the time. I was bored. I didn't want to listen to the Priest going through the confirmation routine because I knew that once church was over, everyone was going to go drinking. Religion was a joke to everyone, including me.
However, regardless of how much I rejected church and religion, the curiosity in me drew me to the books of Proverbs and Psalms in the Bible. Regardless of how I felt about Church, scriptures hit me hard. The first chapter of Psalms painted a clear picture of my life as it was. Proverbs was funny to me. It called me wicked, proud and foolish. Normally, I would want to fight someone if they called me a fool but the Bible spoke to me as if it was concerned with my well-being. It warned me against hardship and it tried to protect me from dangers. Unlike the Church that was filled with judgment and ignorance, the Bible seemed to have the desire to lift me up and help me. I liked that. It reminded me of the story of Jesus on that Easter morning. Helpful, loving, wise. I continued to read Proverbs and Psalms from time to time and I would occasionally poke around the rest of the Bible. I couldn’t imagine trying to live up to it’s expectations, but it sure was an interesting read!
Then, something happened. When I was 17 years old, I was driving home in my 1977 Mazda RX-7. My brother just did a tune-up a couple of days earlier and I wanted to see how fast the car could go. It reached 100 MPH easily. As the speedometer climbed, I felt like I was in a race game. I was happy as a bug driving over 100 MPH on the freeway on the empty freeway. However, In the midst of my Speed Racer experience, I heard a strong, direct voice speak. I can’t explain it, I only have a crystal clear memory of the experience. Inside of my head, in the same place that my conscience speaks from, something told me to put on my seatbelt. The voice though was not the voice of my conscience. It was a voice that demanded my immediate obedience. I really can’t explain it, but at that point I could only heed the voice and I immediately put on my seatbelt. As soon as I heard the click, I looked at the speedometer, read 126 MPH, and then looked up. Within 20 seconds, my car hit a bump and the lines of the highway disappeared. I couldn’t figure out what was happening and shortly after, everything went black. From the police report and eyewitnesses, my car's tires lost their grip and I spun out at over 120 MPH. I flew past another car backwards (He was driving over 80 and I passed him, backwards), spun, and hit his Isuzu Rodeo. Then my car swiped the center divider, blindsided the rear of a truck, launched off the freeway embankment and slammed into a tree. I should have died. If I didn't put the seatbelt on, I would have had an excellent chance of being launched out of my car. The seatbelt saved my life… actually, that voice saved my life…
But what was it that caused me to put on my seatbelt at that moment? Instinct? Coincidence? Conscience? Did I Imagine it? It came seconds before my car lost it’s grip on the road. That voice bothered me, a lot…
The accident made me think about life, death, and the meaning of life. I was confused. I knew that I could have easily died that night, and for some reason I didn’t die. I wasn’t happy with life and I couldn’t put my finger on my problem. And then I ran into Fred…
Fred was a strange kid in High School. He was known for doing séances in order to raise dead rats back to life in an abandoned building. Honest truth. One day Fred stopped by my house as I was playing video games. He came in and I gave him a controller so that we could play against each other. I didn't realize it at the time, but Fred recently became a Christian. He would hang out and tell me about God and I would listen as I beat the crap out of him on the video game. Good times. I would listen and ask questions and he was more than happy to listen to my constant arguments and problems that I had with the religious fruits. Again, I don't remember anything that he said, to be honest, I wasn’t really listening because I was too busy talking crap about God an Church to see his response. One thing I do remember though is his sincerity and the way that he seemed to truly believe in what he was saying. He spoke as if God woke up up, directed him to my doorstep, and had a divine purpose for our conversations. It was strange, yet intriguing. I thought he was a little messed up in the head, entertaining, but still messed up in the head. He invited me to a Bible Study and Church. I invited him to a house party on Saturday night. I didn’t feel like going to Church, and I guess that he wasn’t really strong in his faith (HA! I knew it!) so he ended up going with me to the party. When we got there, I said the wrong thing to the wrong person and I was promptly arrested. None of my friends made it into the party that night, including Fred. Some say God works in mysterious ways. Well, if God was protecting Fred from the booze and the “friendly” females that night, he protected him at my expense.
A few days later in November 1995, after I spent a couple of days in jail, I went for a walk and I was talking to myself. I thought about what Fred was telling me about God. I thought about the rich wisdom in proverbs and psalms. I thought about why I rejected God and how I based my rejection on those who claimed to be followers and not on God himself. I thought about that night that I should have died. I thought about a lot of things, wondering why I should live another day. I looked up to the sky, wondering if a creator was out there. Was Jesus real? Was Allah real? What about all the Buddhists that live in Alhambra, California? They don’t believe in Jesus, but is that chubby guy with the oranges and incense around him real? As I looked into the sky, I closed my eyes and I said “God, Jesus, whoever you are, creator, if you are real, show me that you exist. And show me who you are. Please!” I opened my eyes, and waited. Nothing happened, so I went home.
I always thought that it was funny that once you begin to pray, things begin to happen.
I suddenly became exposed to several people, of several faiths. Fred introduced me to his Christian friends. A girl at school spoke to me about the Jehovah's Witness faith, while her littler sister introduced me to palm reading and mystics. Mormons began riding their bikes through my neighborhood. So many faiths, which one, if any, was the right one? I prayed for God to show me who he was, and now it was up to me to open myself up to these religious people. So, I began to go places that religious people gathered, like Bible study. One night at Bible study, Fred's Christian friend told me that Moses' son raped Moses while he was drunk. I said "really?! Wow, show me where it says that!" She looked at me as if I said something wrong. In fact, she couldn't show me because that was something that someone told her and someone else probably told that someone and on and on and on. It didn't take me long to realize that most religious people didn't have any idea what they were talking about. Fred liked to study the Bible but a few months after he first came to my house he left the state of California. I decided that if I wanted to know the truth behind these religions, I was going to have to read the writings for myself and take every “teachers” words with a grain of salt.
As I trying to learn about God, several months later I came to the realization that something was still missing. I could believe that Jesus raised from the dead and the wisdom of the Bible was great to live by, however, something was definitely missing. I didn't want to say it to anyone else, but I wasn’t completely convinced that God existed. I tried to read other writing to find what I was missing. I read about the Noble Truth's of Buddhism. I talked to that Jehovah's Witness girl about the differences with her faith. I tried to open myself up but it was a revolving door. They all made sense. They were all convinced that what they taught was the Truth (capital T). But, I was not convinced that any of it was true. I was not convinced that God existed. So, I made a decision that changed my life: I quit school and work and I went into a Christian drug rehabilitation house. I wasn't on drugs and I didn't even drink or smoke, but I wanted to see God do a miracle and what better place then a house of those who were truly sick!
I went into the home on July 3, 1996. The home required a 9 month commitment. I didn’t feel like telling them that I would leave once I was convinced that God was real (that was my little secret). Day one in the home, we sat outside and lifted weights. The home director read us some verses before dinner and that was a day. As I went to sleep, I tried to find the blanket that my girlfriend sewed for me. As I searched for it, I saw it under one of the other kid's heads. Freaking thieves!!! Whatever... I was here to see if God existed, so I would let it go. Weeks went by and I would follow the plan. I would pray for an hour each morning, read the Bible for 30 minutes a day, listen to a message, and then do some daily chores. As the days and then weeks passed, I realized that nobody really wanted to be there. People would sleep during prayer. Guys would go on the roof to smoke. The staff would curse under his breath and the home director seemed concerned with making as much money as he could from the labor of those who lived at the home. It didn't take long for me to realize that I wasn't going to see God do anything in this house because nobody wanted God to do anything. I was about to leave and I decided that I would fast (I read about fasting and it seemed that God would do things when people fasted). While I was fasting, I was outside sweeping and an old lady walked by. I told her "hello" and she smiled at me. She walked by me, looked at me, and then came back to me. She said something like “I just feel like I need to tell you that God has something very special for you." And then she kept walking.
I know that if you are a skeptic reading this, you can explain her actions as coincidence and that it didn’t necessarily have anything to do with God. However, at that time, it was more than enough for me to stay in that home for several more months. Some want God to speak to them in the thunderstorms, however, a simple whisper from him is more than enough for me.
As I stayed in that home, I decided that I would do my best to follow God. I wanted to do my part so that I knew that I made my best effort to seek him. If he said the last shall be first, then I would be the last person in line to get dinner, even if it meant missing a meal because the food ran out. If God said to love my enemies, I would try to forgive those who hurt me in the past. If God said to not lust after a girl, I would try not to stare at them (It didn't take much for me to lust back then). I was honest, even when I got in trouble for it. I did everything I could to do what the Bible asked me to do. For 9 months I was going to try to be pure of heart because the Bible said that "the pure of heart will see God." I just wanted to see Him. I just wanted to know that he existed.
During my time there, I read through most of the Bible. I began to understand two things: first, the message of the Bible became very clear and second, I realized that most people who are “believers” have no idea what the Bible says. Also, as I was there, small coincidences continued to pile up. . One day I was outside sweeping and I looked at my shoes. They were dirty and the rubber was pulling apart at the sole. I stopped sweeping, looked up to the sky, prayed in my head and asked God for some new shoes, and went back to sweeping. I don't remember if it was that night or the next night but one of the kids in the home, a kid that disliked me came up to me and asked if I wanted a pair of shoes which were two weeks old. His mom bought them and he bought himself another pair so he didn’t need them. Did God answer my prayer again? Or was that just another odd coincidence? I wasn’t sure, so I kept sweeping. Little things like that kept happening. Either I was blessed by good karma, mother nature was favoring me, luck was swinging in my direction, or God was answering my prayers. None of these “coincidences” convinced me that God existed, however, in those months at that home, while I was giving me all, if God existed, I could definitely see his hand in my life.
After 8 months in the home I was allowed to leave if I wanted to. I thought about it and I left in order to go back to college. As I went back home, I sat and thought about those 8 months. I didn't see God heal a crack head. I didn't see a miracle or demons or anything. However, I could not deny that my heart was not the same as it was before I spent 8 months seeking God. The pain, anger, coldness was replaced with warmth, love and sensitivity. Not only was I a different person inside, those "coincidences" were questionable. I felt something as I prayed and worshipped but for all I knew, the goose bumps were from the cold air. And that old lady, she could have been from God. But then again, she could have just been a nice lady spreading cheer to random strangers. And that one time that I prayed for a girl’s sprained ankle which healed on her way home, maybe it wasn’t sprained in the first place. God did not prove himself to me, and after 8 months I realized that he may never “prove” himself to me.
The Bible says that without faith, we cannot please God. I have a problem with leaps of faith. For one, you can’t prove anything if a leap of faith is used in the process. Second, if we are going to surrender out lives to something, shouldn’t we have something more than faith?
It was at that point that I realized that the decision was mine to make. God’s existence had not been disproved, the Bible actually stands strong in light of criticism, and I could not rule out that God answered prayers, even though he didn’t make it obvious that he was responsible for giving me new shoes. At this point, I had to make a decision of faith, would I believe that God existed, or would I believe that there is no God?
Dr. Lane, you may call me a“cheap slut,” but I chose to believe in God by faith. And now, it isn’t a case of trying to prove God’s existence, but rather, the correct path to follow. If science should eventually prove that God does not exist, then I cannot deny facts. But, at this point, the Bible stands strong, true faith in God changes lives, and I have no reason to deny the hope that years of seeking have guided me to.
Religion has impacted my life and it has allowed my life to impact others. If I find out that I was wrong on that final day, I’ll still know that I did my best to be my best. However, if I find God’s embrace on that final day, then the step of faith that he asked for is more than “blind faith,” it is trust in one who loved me and who deserves my trust.
10. Why doesn't Brian Copeland consider himself a "genuine black man"?
The thing that motivated Brian to write this book was an anonymous letter stating that he was not a genuine black man. This statement seems to have really bothered Brian and it made him closely examine the trauma that he suppressed dealing with the issue of being black.
Black men seem to have a pre-determined expectation in the eyes of the general population. In some cases, the characteristics of an ideal black man are qualities which Brian does not possess. Growing up, he was not athletic as the famous black basketball and football players. At school, kids would initially think that he was a superior athlete since he was black and they would pick Brian first when choosing teams for a game. However, it wouldn't take long for the kids to realize that Brian was terrible at sports and coordination. Brian actually had no athletic talent and he would eventually become the last person picked to be on a team. Not only did Brian lack the desired qualities of a genuine black man, he had absolutely no desire to possess the negative traits which most would consider "black." A black man is thought to be violent, dishonest, and thuggish. Brian had a good heart and he was raised to be respectful by his mother. Instead of running around the streets with a gang, Brian served as an altar boy at his church. Even as an adult, Brian followed his heart instead of his skin. Instead of being a raunchy black comedian like most expect a black man to be, Brian kept it intelligent and corny. Black comedian's like Martin Lawrence would rather simulate a sexual adventure than discuss politics. And a black man would never do corny skits like getting strangers to "sing songs and eat bizarre things." That is white- comic Jay Leno-style humor, not black humor.
See, from the outside, Brian doesn't fit the racial profile that many attach to a black man and therefore he was considered to not be genuine as a black man. It is sad really. Growing up, Brian was rejected by those outside of his race because of who he was on the outside. To the white folks, Brian was as black as black can be with his afro hair and dark skin. It didn't matter that Brian was an 8 year old boy, to the white community; Brian was a hard-core menacing thug. This rejection had a heavy affect on Brian and he had a hard time coping with it throughout his childhood. He couldn't give up and move into a black neighborhood and go back to his "own kind" because his mother would not be pleased with him caving in and I am sure that Brian didn't want his mother to reject him. As much as it hurt, Brian stood his ground. He buried the pain of rejection, put on his game face, and trudged through life keeping that pain in a tightly sealed box. However, as an adult, Brian was had to face this rejection anew as he had to deal with his own race rejecting him for who he was on the inside. I am sure that Brian thought that he already dealt with the pain of rejection because of who he was, but now he had to deal with it again. This time, it was from the Black community.
I believe that Brian wrote this book to show whoever wrote that letter that there is no such thing "genuine black man." There are only genuine "people." Brian Copeland is a genuine person, who happens to be black. Nothing more, nothing less.
11. How did Brian Copeland cope with racism in his childhood?
To Brian, racism wasn’t something that could be avoided; it was part of his daily life. Once Brian moved to San Leandro, he was the automatic target. He didn't need to do something wrong in order to warrant abuse. Actually, all he had to do was stand there, and trouble would find him. When he first moved to San Leandro, a group of kids chased him and a police officer treated him like a criminal. It didn't take Brian long to realize that he was not liked solely based on his skin color. Brian made several adjustments to try to work through his situation of being an outcast.
First, Brian tried to avoid the problem. In order to do this, he avoided people. He found comfort and a sense of belonging in the fictional worlds of his comic books. In comic books, the outsider was usually a hero using his unique characteristics to save the world. I could only imagine the great times that Brian had in Gotham City, Metropolis and the Marvel Universe. At school, he tried to disappear. Brian would sit by himself and read books during recess. He purposely missed a couple of questions on every test in order to avoid acing all of his tests and standing out. I guess that Brian figured that if he couldn't deal with racial abuse if he wasn't noticed by those who would taunt him.
Another way that Brian tried to cope with racism was to be an individual who others could respect. Police Officers accused Brian of being a trouble-maker. Nuns hit him and lied about him. Even random strangers accused him of abusing their pets and causing mischief. Brian didn't want to be labeled as "bad" simply because he was black, however, it seemed that it was a label which he automatically inherited with his skin color. So, Brian decided to overcome the label which was given to him by re-labelling himself as a great young man. He became an altar boy at his church and altar boys are not only good, they are inspired by holiness. Brian also joined the boy scouts and racked up the merit badges one by one as he pursued excellence in character and conduct. Further, he verbally educated himself and tried to present himself as an adult whenever given the opportunity. Brian tried to overcome the negative assumptions that came with being black.
Finally, while reading about his adult life, it is clear that Brian also coped with racism by burying the pain. It hurt, and it hurt him deep. Sometimes Brian would walk home, happy as a clam, only to be the victim of a random beating for no apparent reason. People who didn't know his name would accuse him of being a crook, a liar, a thief... a bad "black" person. People of all ages from all backgrounds hated Brian without even giving him a chance. This rejection cut Brian, but he didn't know how to deal with the pain, so he buried it deep.
Brian was a good kid with a heart of gold. He dealt with the issue to the best of his ability but it wasn't until he was an adult that he finally began to find healing for his pain. As an adult he learned to let it out and express his pain with others. It is through this release that Brian was finally able to realize that he wasn't alone as a man who suffered from the trauma of racism.
12. What was the tipping point in Brian Copeland's life? What do you think made him come to grips with his past?
There is a very good insight into Brian's mind between pages 173-176. He discusses a friend who jumped to his death from the Golden Gate Bridge. As Brian talks about his friend's suicide, he says:
"Suicide has nothing to do with selfishness of 'taking the easy way out.' Suicide is the result of pain. It is the culmination of an anguish so great that you will do anything to make it stop."
Brian dealt with pain through his life and he never figured out a way to overcome the pain. He ran from it, denied it, and hid it deep in the dark shadows of his thoughts. However, as a successful adult, he realized that he could not run from the pain. Actually, the pain of racism seemed to worsen with time...
I think the tipping point came from two distinct angles. First, as Brian was enjoying life, sitting on a crapper, he overheard a random, faceless stranger downplay Brian's success by stating, "he's still a nigger." Brian worked harder than most men to be who he became in character and career yet, behind his back, people were still tearing him down. To them, it didn't matter if Brian became the greatest person to walk the planet because "he's still a nigger." I think this little comment broke Brian's heart. He realized that there was nothing that he could do to prevent people from judging him as a bad, worthless, nigger. Growing up, he knew who his enemies were and these people abused Brian verbally with no shame. But that nameless person who called Brian a nigger was not Brian's enemy. He was a man who bought Brian a whiskey in celebration of Brian's birthday. He was a smiling face. A friendly face. A random, generous, nice face. It wasn't an enemy this time, it was someone who presented himself as a friend. It was that nice guy who holds the elevator for Brian as he enters a lobby. It was the mailman who greets Brian on a Saturday afternoon. It was the fan who shakes Brian's hand and says "Nice to meet you! Can I get your autograph?!" That man in the bathroom represented the good people of the world. The guy who smiles at your face, only to call you a "nigger" behind your back. Heartbreaking!
The second thing that pushed Brian over the edge was another comment, but this time it was from his son. While walking around a hobby shop, Brian's son looked at him and said "Am I bad, daddy?" Those words must have stung because Brian knew exactly why his son asked that question. The world around us labels black as bad. At one point, Brian went into a dictionary and looked up the definitions of white and black. White was defined with words of fortune, purity, and holiness. Black was defined as harmful, damned, and bad. His son asked that question because of the color of his skin. He asked the same question that haunted Brian every day of his life. The question that stabbed a knife into Brian's heart which painfully twisted every now and then. To hear his son ask that question destroyed Brian. He saw the pain that his child would go through. He knew the enemy that his child was going to have to face. Brian loved his son as any father loves a child. However, Brian would not be able to protect his son from the cruel beast of racism which tormented Brian for all of these years. It killed Brian to know that there was nothing he could do to protect his son from the pain of being black.
However, at one point, Brian finally faced his demon head-on at with the help of his Grandma. There have been many people people who have said many things about being overcoming great obstacles, but Brian's Grandma gave him perfect advice. Her words were simply "Get your black @#$ up!" These words carried the weight of the world on them because her life was a life of a woman who would not allow the pain of this world to keep her down. She stood her ground regardless of life. When her body ached from weariness and hunger, she never gave up. Her words made Brian realize that as long as he had air in his lungs, he had fight in his blood. Pain comes to every person, young and old. But Brian could not give up. His grandmother didn't. His mother didn't. And Brian could not give up because he had to make sure that his children would not give up.
As Brian finally began to deal with his past, he allowed the healing to begin. He began to release the pain that was bottled-up and this release came in the forms of comedy, writing, and talking. As he opened himself up, he began to realize that he was not alone. The issues Brian dealt with regarding being black were issues that people dealt with being brown, yellow, and even white. The most important thing that I think he realized was that his ability fight through the pain inspired others who were on the verge of giving up. He suddenly became the strength for others who were desperate and hopeless. Even a warrior gets wounded, but the warrior that presses on through the pain leads others to victory. Brian Copeland is that warrior. He has survived a life of rejection and hatred due to his skin color. He still stands strong even when an ignorant stranger takes the weapon of racism and stabs "but he is still a nigger" right through Brian's heart. He has been knocked down, but he has not been knocked out. There is a lot of pain in this world that many will suffer from, including his children. However, the strength that is in Brian will strengthen others and help them defeat the beast of racism one battle at a time.
13. Why does Ken Wilber argue for a holistic or QUADRANT understanding of religion and spiritual life?.
Most of the scientific community view religion as something that is no longer mentally acceptable in light of scientific advancement. They believe that since religion cannot be proven, it is easily defeated by the hard-nosed proofs of science which are based on verifiable facts. Wilbur however believes that religion and science can co-exists and he explains this through his All Quadrant All Level model.
According to Wilbur's model, four quadrant's represent truths of life which are all part of a bigger picture. Science finds it's strength in that which can be physically proven. He calls this "narrow science" as it is based on the universal truths of Physics, Math, Chemistry, etc. Science greatly excels in these categories because the laws of physics and math are unchangeable truths for the most part. There is no doubt when scientific discoveries prove such verifiable facts as a rotating Earth or a cure for a disease. However, not all science can be categorized as narrow science. "Psychology, sociology, and linguistics" are not as concrete as the narrow sciences since their advancements usually cannot be physically proven. therefore they are labeled as "broad science." These sciences are based on scientific theory but they are not as definite and verifiable as the narrow sciences. Religion, unlike science, excels as "broad religion" which seeks to transcend oneself through spiritual transformation. Spiritual experiences cannot be scientifically proven, yet, they are authentic nonetheless. Wilbur realizes that narrow science cannot grasp the spiritual aspects of faith therefore narrow science cannot and should not judge religious experiences. Most scientists will reject religion altogether because it cannot be determined by narrow science but Wilbur teaches that we shouldn't throw out something that is true to people simply because it falls into a different quadrant of his model. According to Wilbur, his model "integrates deep religion with broad science by showing that deep spirituality is a broad science of the farther reaches of human potential." See, if religion is to be measured by scientific standards, then it should be measured by broad science's standards. And, when religion is compared to broad science, one realizes that spiritual activity transcends the mind and the measurable ability of man. With this, religion cannot be discarded because it is another truth within the big picture that we call life.
To Wilbur, science and religion co-exist and we shouldn't attempt to reduce one by the other's measurements. Religion shouldn't attempt to prove it's claims by scientific standards because science will always reject that which cannot be proven. Religion cannot be proven that the Earth flooded, therefore it makes no sense for religion to try to prove any miraculous claim by using unscientific methods and questionable reasoning. On the other hand, science cannot disprove God or spiritual experiences. Science may try to explain away spiritual activity, but it also fails because something that is personal, real and intangible cannot be disproved by scientific procedures. Science cannot measure experience.
Since it is determined that religion is something which has merit in and of itself, Wilbur argues that the study of religion should be studied holistically and not analytically. Spiritual experiences don't need to be explained in order to be authentic. The experience itself is outside of reason and human comprehension therefore it cannot be explained. Further, one must not limit religion to boundaries which deny alternative religions truths. Wilbur states that "future evolution will move beyond" what we now believe to be true and what we believe to be true today may be proven to be a lie tomorrow. Therefore, we must understand that all forms of religion have some truth to them and no religion is above another. As we open up to this point of reflection we become "more alive to Spirit's ever-present Presence." Wilbur calls this "constant consciousness" which is important in order experience spiritual transformation and reach "the doorway to God."
In conclusion, Wilbur goes through great lengths to prove that religion does co-exist with science and therefore religion must be accepted and embraced for what it is. As we open ourselves up to religious experiences, we must fight the urge to explain these experiences by measurements which cannot be used for spiritual truths. And, as we allow ourselves to understand religion holistically, we will have a greater understanding of the deeper truth which envelops religion, science, and everything else that exists.
Reference: http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/cowokev8_intro.cfm
14. How would Edward O. Wilson critique Ken Wilber's transpersonal psychology?
I just want to not that, according to Wilber, he no longer refers to himself as a transpersonal psychologist. He now refers to himself as doing “integral psychology.”
I believe that Mr. Wilson would completely dismiss Wilber's study because it carries no weight in regards to Wilson's reductionist approach. To Wilson, transpersonal study, or all study for that matter, can only be explained by outward influences based on underlying physical principles. He says that "the world is orderly and can be explained by a small number of natural laws." Wilber, on the other hand, searches into the interior elements of the mind because he claims that the interior plays an important role in understanding psychology. However, with nothing to reductively explain unseen interior theory, Wilber is forced to create his own explanations and system of interpretation. Although Wiber’s reasoning is exhaustively drawn out, it does not have evidentiary support for it’s claims. Wilber uses words like “evidence strongly suggest” but his evidence is based on personal assumption, not elemental truths. By explaining away his findings, Wilber’s research cannot be accepted by Wilson since scientific truths cannot be determined by assumption. Wilber’s science is guesswork and cheap logic padded with scientific terminology. It is pseudoscience!
Further, according to Wilson, religion and spirituality are products of the evolutionary process created in order to meet some sense of emotional need. He believes that inner spirituality has no truth outside of the evolutionary development process. During an interview he said “I do feel confident that there is no intervention of a deity in the origin of life and humanity.” Actually, let me clarify that: Wilson doesn’t believe that the physical world presents evidentiary truth for the existence of the transpersonal spirituality. Therefore, he has no convincing reason to believe in such self-validating claims. However, he tries to be an honest scientist and he wont go as far as to say that spirituality doesn’t exist. But, he will reject conclusions based on the assumption of spiritual realities because those realities lack physical evidence.
With this evidential deficiency, spiritual claims are not scientific in nature. The assumptions of the existence of spiritual realities is the basis of Wilber’s transpersonal psychology and therefore it is quickly rejected by Wilson because it does not have a true scientific foundation.
Reference: http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/int_psych_summ.cfm/xid,8552/yid,7930178
http://www.salon.com/books/int/2006/03/21/wilson/index2.html
15. How would a Wilberian purview critique the actions of Osama Bin Laden? Be sure to substantiate your answer.
A Wilberian would most likely attribute Bin Laden's mentality as a left-quadrant-based red/blue state of consciousness. Let me break that down:
The left quadrants are based upon interior realities. Maturity within each quadrant allows a person to grow into a fully developed individual. Spiritual insight and religious experiences are understood at progressive levels. However, as one excels within the left quadrants, he cannot neglect the right quadrants which deal with the exterior truths. In this we find Bin Laden’s error. He doesn’t attempt to understand life with an All Quadrant All Level perspective. He remains within the mystical left quadrant at the expense of the right quadrant development. Without growing in exterior knowledge, his reasoning and actions are unbalanced which, as we have seen, result in tragic consequences.
Further, according to Wilber, our actions and responses stem from a range of color-coded memes. The blue level provides a moral structure of good and evil. The understanding of life within this level of mysticism is usually guided by dogma and not evidence. In this case, the religion of fundamental Islam defines morality and values. The followers of Al Queda, being a blue-memetic society, adhere to this dogmatic measuring stick because it is the only truth they know. As Bin Laden and his followers remain loyal to their religious beliefs, they find a sense of purpose and destiny. However, within their beliefs they also find a sense of righteousness in dismantling the United State’s source of strength. To Bin Laden, the United States and it's Enlightened/Christian philosophy threatened his blue-memetic conscious level. Previously, The U.S. was considered a Christian nation and the Christian blue-memetic theology is heretical warranting damnation by Bin Laden’s set of beliefs. Having a Christian heritage is more than enough to provoke Bin Laden’s rage. However, to add fuel to the fire, the United States, through “postmodern pluralism”, is currently moving towards a rejection of religious ideology. The U.S. Enlightenment is a grene-memetic based ideology which insists that there is no Truth (capital T) and that all faiths and personal beliefs should be treated equally. This “postmodern pluralistic” movement is unacceptable those who are in the blue-level of consciousness because it basically rejects the blue-memetic level of individual definition and social (or rather, tribal) structure. To Bin Laden, the U.S. is and absolute evil which should no longer exist. In his eyes, his actions was a heroic act done against an enemy as the west is the major source of global evils and a perversion of noble truths.
Now, if you take this Blue level mentality, and mix it with the red stage of consciousness, you easily have a psychotic terrorist. The red level is defined as "feudalistic, vengeful, and filled with rage." Wilber states that the terrorists were "pathological red inflamed by distorted blue ideology." He said that their actions were so violent, that even "healthy terrorists" condemned their actions. Their rage and vengeance is ingrained in their psyche due to their dogma. According to Wilbur, their holy book the Koran, "remains medieval in it's outlook" and it "specifically condones--and on occasional commands--the killing of unbelievers." As they remain in the blue memetic level, their actions find justification through Islamic dogma. And, with red-memetic rage and violence fueling their passion, their resolve is strengthened and incidents such as 9/11 will continue for Bin Laden and his followers see themselves as heroes saving the world from the greatest evil, namely, the West. 16. How does the genealogical history of morality contribute to religious diversity?
The genealogical history of morality contributes to religious diversity by watering down any sense of absolutism which most religions proclaim. In other words, it weakens the strength of religion and loosens it's grasp.
Nietzsche book titled Geneology of Morals gives a look at morals from sense of geneology and not from a definite source/origin.
According to Neitzsche, morals are not absolute and through the different stages of human existence they have been redefined. At one point, it was considered good to be strong, sexual and able to kill. These were warrior traits which were highly honored. When these powerful people dominated society, they defined their own traits as good while considering the weak and the cowardly as bad. However, at some point, the weak and the cowardly were able to reevaluate morals and that which once was considered good suddenly became bad. As the weak became wise, they were able to convince the strong that the qualities of the weak were actually honorable while the qualities of the strong were evil and wicked. A reversal of morals had taken place! As a result, leaders of the weak began to dominate both the weak and the strong with authority rooted in hatred. They also possessed a perverted voyeuristic pleasure of causing hardship and watching others suffer under their authority. These "priests" would burden others with "bad conscience" as they convinced the people that they were guilty of a debt which they personally deserved due to "sin." Further, these priests condemned those who were not submissive to eternal hell and damnation. According to Neitzsche, if one would take a step back and consider the situation, the priests are perhaps the most evil and that which is currently considered to be "good" causes more personal harm to those that believe in the religious sense of morality.
From this perspective, religion no longer stands for that which is inherently proper and good. The religious definition of virtue may actually be a deceptive vice birthed in hatred and practiced in perversion. Further, the religious condemnation of those who do not obey may be a scare-tactic goal aimed at keeping the weak and the sick, weak and sick.
Much more can be said for morality from Neitzche's perspective. If morals are not absolute, then we cannot condemn a violent man for being violent as we cannot condemn a bird of prey for killing lambs. If it is in his nature, then it is what makes that person who he is. Moreover, although it is the weak who are slaves to religion, we cannot harbor resentment towards these individuals because they are weak and they are doing that which they, by nature, were created (used for lack of a better term) to do.
Overall, the main contributions that the genealogical history of morality makes towards religious diversity is that it offers enlightenment to both the atheist, and the theistic believer. To those who don't believe in God or absolute truths, it allows them to find a sense of who they are while relieving the "bad conscience" pushed on their conscience by hateful religious leaders. Further, it offers a non-theistic sense of purpose and belonging in contrast to the detestable nihilism which wanders in hopeless defeat. Finally, for those who do follow a religion, they are able to realize that their burden of guilt is self inflicted and, although they may find conform in the security of structured religion, they do not need to carry that burden which weighs so heavily upon them.
Reference: http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/genealogyofmorals/
http://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/Nietzsche/genealogytofc.htm
17. Given America's religious melting pot, what do YOU think is the best way to approach American religious diversity? Explain your reasoning.
"I may be wrong."
I believe that those words would be a great way to approach religion in America and throughout the world. From what I have seen, everyone has their own personal belief regarding religion and spirituality. Some are highly disciplined followers of their given faith. Others reject faith altogether and opt for alternate explanations. However, I haven't seen many people who are actually open to the possibility that their personal faith or belief is incorrect. I believe that if we were willing to accept the notion that we may have erred in our personal beliefs, then we would be more open to listen to each other instead of simply judging each other. When one's faith is challenged, they usually dodge the issue or become defensive. On the other hand, when someone is introduced to a new ideology, mental walls usually go up as they hold onto that which they believe without allowing themselves to truly understand the presented faith. I believe that if we allow ourselves to open up, and accept the fact that what we have been taught may not actually be the absolute truth, then we will able to communicate with each other in a way that benefits all.
18. Explain why religion will not disappear, even as we become more scientifically oriented?
The simple answer is that religion will not disappear because God exists and the potential advancement of man’s intellect will never be able to disprove that which is spiritually true.
The blind zealous faith of religious leaders from the past from the past allowed those who believe in science to think that they will some day overcome the teachings of all religions. For example, back in the 1600’s, Galileo presented the Catholic Church with his heliocentric theory. The Catholic Church responded by charging him with a crime because his theory contradicted scriptures found in Psalms, and Ecclesiastes. According to the Cathoic Church, scriptures clearly taught that "the Earth shall not be moved." Yet, through the years, it became fact that the Earth does indeed move in a cycle around the Sun and with this the Catholic Church’s claim was scientifically defeated. However, what science doesn’t realize is that the Bible wasn’t defeated. The scriptures which the Catholic Church used to condemn Galileo were misinterpreted with no regard to context or the original Hebrew language. The scriptures said “Surely the world is established, so that it cannot be moved. “ If the Catholic Church’s interpretation was correct, then they had more theological issues to worry about besides a rotating Earth. See, with their erroneous interpretation, any major earthquake would contradict their understanding of an "unmovable Earth." It was their erroneous interpretation which made the Bible appear to be erroneous. See, it wasn’t the Bible that had the error, merely the Catholic's errant understanding of scripture. Science has not proven the bible to be errant, it has only clearly shown that some people draw false conclusions by adding definitive beliefs to that which is not clearly taught in scripture. Regardless of the facts, due to the Catholics Church's error regarding Earth's rotation and their unjust treatment of Galileo, science believes that it’s discoveries have proven the Bible to be errant. With this, it is obvious to the scientific community that future advancements will continue to dismiss religious claims.
However, I am fully convinced that as we become scientifically advanced, the only thing that science will do is intellectually solidify that which the Bible clearly teaches (within the scope of science, of course). It will also continue to expose errant religious teachings based on misinterpreted scripture. Science has already confirmed some clear Bible teachings. For example, the Biblical vegetarian diet of Genesis has been scientifically proven to be quite healthy. Further, the Bible present’s God as existing outside of space and time. Einstein discovered that time bends at certain speeds and his theory of relativity suggests that, at some point, time actually began. From a Biblical perspective, time was “created.” Einstein’s studies provid substantial evidence for the theological belief in an eternal God who exists outside of time. Way to go Einstein!
Currently, Science has theories which, if proven true, will reject the existence of God. Evolution, if proven true, would void the Biblical account of creation and the genealogy of mankind. However, evolution makes logical leaps which will never be proven true because the pieces don’t quite fit together and they never will. It is a well thought out theory, but, it is only a theory based on that which is assumed. The theory of evolution has constantly been tweaked and re-tweaked. And, when a theory starts to make sense, another scientific discovery such as the increasing rate of the expansion of the cosmos throws a monkey-wrench into current scientific theories. I believe that as science advances, it’s greatest accomplishment will be to exhaust all possible explanations of existence until it comes full circle towards the truths claimed in the Bible. 19. How would Ken Wilber argue against Wilson's intertheoretic reductionism?
Wilber believes that “the world is full of "holarchies, as opposed to hierarchies.” Basically, he believes that reality is defined by “twenty tenants that characterize all holons.” And, these holons are complete in and of themselves. Scientific truths are valid, however, other holons such as spirituality exist. And, since these exist on different levels, we cannot use one to try to validate, or invalidate, the other. Spirituality, which cannot be determined scientifically, does not lose it’s credibility through scientific advancement because spirituality is a complete holon and these holons are part of a bigger picture. Science, spirituality, and other holons co-exist as “building blocks of existence.”
With this, Wilber would see that Wilson confines his understanding to the limitations of narrow science and therefore he is unable to confirm broad spiritual truths. Science and spirituality come in two different forms: narrow and broad. Narrow science is based on the exterior, physical world. Physics, Chemistry and Biology are all defined as narrow science. Broad sciences on the other hand are “subjective and interpretive” and they take a scientific approach to understanding human conscience. Psychology, sociology, and anthropology fall within this category because they can’t determined absolute truths based on evidence, however, their study does help develop our understanding of humanity. Spirituality, on the other hand, is not physically tangible so it cannot be studied via narrow scientific methods. The problem that Wilber would have with Wilson is that Wilson tries to define everything by narrow science, regardless of the scope and limitations of narrow science. If one wants to study spirituality with science, one must go the same route as broad science and study it at the broad religious level. This transformative spirituality seeks to transcend oneself into a state of “nondual unity consciousness that is beyond the ego.”
Basically, the study of broad religion extends to the furthest reaches of broad science. It fullness stretches beyond that which we can comprehend or conceive. The limited understanding that we do have is only that which our limited human abilities can grasp. If broad science can barely mentally grasp spiritual realities, how could narrow science physically prove that which is spirit?
It cannot.
One cannot use narrow science reductionism to study the unseen because spirituality is not physical and, in contradiction to what Wilson teaches, it does not depend on humanistic evolution. Weber uses the term “flatland” as “the belief that only matter (or matter/energy) is real, and that only narrow science has any claim to truth.” Wilson’s way of thinking would be considered “flatland” because his mentality rejects the interior-based left quadrant and it attempts to define the interior based on the exterior. Since the exterior is limited on determining interior truths, the left-quadrant holons are rejected and, from Wilson's reasoning, one is left with an incomplete understanding of reality.
Reference: http://www.tamilnation.org/books/Unfolding/wilbur.htm
http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/cowokev8_intro.cfm/xid,3303704/yid,28914399
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holon_%28philosophy%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AQAL
20. What was the most valuable thing you learned this semester?
This class was loaded with so many valuable things that I cannot chose a specific thing which I value most. You forced me to learn how to make digital movies which actually helped me to communicate in a whole new arena. I agree with you that digital movies are the way of the now, and you helped me to catch up to the now. Further, you made me read things that I wouldn't ordinarily read and with that, I now have a wider scope of religions and atheist. I still admit that my overall knowledge is pretty weak, but at least the scope of weakness stretches further than it did before taking your class. You formally introduced me to Nietzsche and I will soon read some of his other writings when time permits. You also attacked my faith in class and through the writings of others. I always appreciate watching my faith intellectually challenged because it allows me to sift truth from garbage. So, even though it was difficult to remain calm at times, it was nice to hear the "other side" of the coin.
I could honestly go on and on about the valuable things that I learned this semester but I'll stop here. Your class was great. Challenging, but great.
21. According to Stephen Jay Gould, why is it so difficult to know the evolutionary "function" of religious belief? Hint: think of "spandrels" (or unintended secondary effects).
Stephen Jay Gould's doesn't believe that each characteristic of man, beast, or other living creature has developed through evolution as an adaptive result to ensure survival. He uses the example of spandrels to develop his argument. Spandrels are the corner areas between the arched doorways and the dome-shaped mosaic pictured above. According to Gould, the spandrels were painted after the mosaic within the dome was completed. The cornered area would have been an empty gap had the artist not added the additional design to this area. The point Mr. Gould makes is that spandrels play no functional part in the actual intended design. They were actually added as an after-though to fill in a gap. In much the same way, some of that which exists today may have no functional purpose and they may actually be unintended secondary effects with no benefit or purpose. An example used is the tiny front arms of the Tyrannosaurus. Most evolutionist will try to create a defining explanation for these arms and, through the process of evolution, explain why they were short and the specific purpose they served. However, all explanations of science (ranging from helping to stand upright to titillating female partners) are found wanting. Further, the very fact that popular science tries to explain every detail, regardless of the strength of their argument, shows their unwillingness to admit that some characteristics may have come into existence without rhyme or reason. Gould insists that some things cannot be explained as if they serve a evolutionary purpose. Within this category we find religion.
Regarding religion, Gould has a underlying belief about it's relationship to science. He doesn't see the two as being at war with one another. Gould states that although some truths are exclusively scientific in nature, there are some truths that are not scientific and there are places where science cannot go. According to Gould, "The net of science covers the empirical universe: what is it made of (fact) and why does it work this way (theory). The net of religion extends over questions of moral meaning and value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry." He calls this "non-overlapping magisterial" or NOMA.
Since religion and evolution do not overlap, religion does not necessarily serve as an evolutionary function and it cannot be explained by scientific reasoning. It may very well serve as a sort of spandrel. It isn't part of the original process of evolution, however, it has come into existence filling in a gap that science could not reach. Many may come up with explanations regarding the purpose of religion but if it wasn't part of the original painting, then it's true purpose or reason may have nothing to do with adaptation or natural selection. Gould is not arguing that religion is true, nor is he arguing that it does not exist. His point is that we cannot assume that religion serves as a function of evolution. It may very well be an unintended secondary effect with no rhyme or reason within the greater scheme of natural selection.
Reference: http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_noma.html
http://bostonreview.net/BR24.5/orr.html
http://ethomas.web.wesleyan.edu/wescourses/2004s/ees227/01/spandrels.html
http://atheism.about.com/library/quotes/bl_q_SJGould.htm
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/gould_fact-and-theory.html
22. Go on a field trip to one religious center (be sure you haven't been there before) and write up a report about what you experienced there. 1000 words minimum. .
Today I went to the Self-Realization Fellowship Lake Shrine Temple in Pacific Palasades, California. It took me over an hour to get there as I fought through tough memorial day traffic. Once I got to the place, I felt somewhat out of place. I have never been to a center such as this so I had no I idea what to expect. The first thing I did was I walked up to the entrance and made sure that I wasn’t breaking any rules. No pets, check. No bathing suits, check. Cell phone off, semi-check. Ok, I was ready to go in.
As I walked around the bookstore I was surprised to see the waterfall, shrines, windmill, scenery, gardens, etc. It was overwhelming at first, so I went to the visitor center and gave the lady a confused look on my face. She responded with a leaflet which briefly described the center. I looked at the leaflet, then decided to give the place a walk-through before I read it. I wanted to experience the surroundings myself first before I read about the specifics.
First I walked into a house with a windmill on it. It said the be quiet, so I tip-toed in. Two people were in there, silently staring forward. At the front of the room were 6 pictures. Oddly enough, one of them looked like Jesus. Under the pictures were fresh flowers. To the left was another picture of a man with his own set of flowers. I sat there for a minute and listened to the waterfall. There was a distinct smell that I couldn't make out. Some smells make you feel like you are at a certain place or that you should do a certain thing. I wondered what this smell signified. I would have asked one of the people in there, but I was supposed to be quiet, so I quietly excused myself.
I continued to walk around the path and I noticed that there were several benched set out. I sat on one and I noticed that it was placed in such a way that you could see the waterfall, a shrine on top of the hill, and some semi-circle structure across the water. I decided to head for that structure because it looked like it was really old. As I continued walking I came across a scripture on the wall. It said "Be still and know that I am God" Psalms. Further down I saw the scripture for Luke 10:27 posted. And even further quotes from people I didn’t know were posted. This place seemed to integrate several faiths in some way or another.
As I approached the semi-circle, I saw a shrine in the center. The writing next to it said that Gandhi's ashes were inside. I stood there for a second. Actually, I was standing there for quite some time and I tried to "be still" as the posted scripture stated. I heard birds. I also head a waterfall. I think the motorcycle driving by snapped me out of it because at that point I began to inspect the area. I tried to understand what this place meant to other people. Maybe it is a sort of "holy ground" to some. I don’t know. But, thinking about the importance of this plot of ground, I began to wonder if I should even be standing there. I didn't know if I was allowed to be on the grass, so I scurried out of there. I walked around some more and noticed people meditating, some taking pictures, and a group of overweight older people chit chatting and being silly. I guess they didn't read the "please be quite" sign.
I walked back to the visitor center and I noticed five pillars. Each one had a different major faith on it with flowers below. Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. At this point, I decided to read the leaflet.
I guess that Yoganandi believed in finding the good within each religion. He must not have been well versed in these religions though because there is no way that they can ever be in harmony with each other. I understand his effort and spiritual desire, and I cannot fault him for trying. Peace, tranquility, God… the realization center tried to turn these fleeting desires into a reality.
At this point, a lady came out of the visitor center and asked if anyone would like to go onto a tour of the temple on the hill. She walked us through a mini-museum with the history of the place as well as items once owned by Yoganandi. Then she walked us over to a cactus and she pointed out that the cactus had no thorns. She said that the person who grew the cactus spoke peace into the cactus so it never had a need to grow thorns. I must admit, besides Gandhi's ashes, that was the second most interesting thing about that place. I need to further research thorn less cacti but, for the time being, her story was interesting and intriguing. Next, she walked us up to the temple. Inside a girl was playing the piano. We walked in and the girl stopped playing so that we could experience the "silence." I sat there for a few minutes in the silence. It reminded me of Big Bear on top of the mountain where you couldn't hear anything but the wind. I saw a little book behind the seat in front of me and I grabbed it. Inside were songs written by Yoganandi. Some were about finding God. Others were about Jesus. I wondered how much Yoganandi knew about Jesus. I wondered how much he knew about anything actually. He seemed like a nice guy, but I didn't get a sense of awe from his songs. I don''t know, maybe I needed to spend some more time there. I don’t know…
After I left the temple I thanked the lady for the tour and walked back to my car. I sat there for a second thinking about the place. I wondered about the 5 pillars with different religions. I wondered if Yoganandi read through the holy literature from each great faith, or if he was only vaguely familiar with their teachings. I wondered if people at this place could actually find "silence" even though traffic constantly invades their quiet setting. I wondered why they would have Jesus on the wall if Jesus didn't teach about combining faiths. He actually was pretty narrow with his teachings and his path towards salvation. Finally, I wondered what these people who were meditating would talk about if I engaged them in conversation. I didn't really talk to anyone because I didn't want to break someone's silence. Oh well, maybe another time when I go to the beach I'll stop by again and see if some of my questions can finds answers. Until then, I had a nice time at the center and I am happy that I was able to visit and enjoy the scenery and pleasant surroundings.
