Intention

" The greatest care must therefore be taken to determine whether the expression that we are trying to understand is literal or figurative." ( Pg 85)

Quoted from On Christian Teachings, Augustine makes clear here and throughout Book 3 that there is ambiguity in the bible and we need to decipher the form of the expression before we can actually figure out what is being stated. If we do not realize that something is in fact a sign or a metaphor for something else, that is a problem. As Augustine states, " someone who attends to and worships a things which is meaningful but remains unaware  of its meaning is a slave to a sign" along with " the person who does not understand what a sign means, but at least understands that it is a sign, is not in fact subjected to slavery" (pg 74-75).  Overall, Augustine thinks, and rightfully so, that we need to know when a sign is actually being used because they are used so much in the bible. 

I think that this can relate to religious knowledge, on a larger level. Just as we should realize when a sign or metaphor is being used in the bible or Psalms, we (one who studies these texts and/or use them as part of their religion) also should be aware of the meaning of the overall texts. I do think it is important to adapt a modern outlook because things obviously change over time, but it is also crucial to understand the " intention of the writer through whom the Holy Spirit produced the part of the scripture" (87).  I think this relates to the historical outlook we used for discussion on the Psalms. If we didn't think about and learn how the texts were created and meant to be read, and just made up opinions and stories of our own to go along with the words, that wouldn't be very meaningful. History adds a level of  authenticity to the texts. The scriptures have certain meanings but can be read in other way that maybe produce different meanings. I don't think it is wrong to believe in anything you want to, but it is important to realize what meaning was initially intended. 

On Christian Teaching

In Book 2 of On Christian Teaching, Augustine explains how to read the Psalms and therefore how to understand them. He first talks about signs: "for a sign is a thing which of itself makes other things come to mind" ( pg 30). There are two types of signs, natural and given- problems arise with the given signs are in the form of obscure words and phrasing, which we definitely encountered in the Psalms. Theses ambiguities/ obscurities only occur, Augustine believes, because of the translation in language and " to correct any Latin manuscripts, Greek ones should be used" (pg 42). His explanation of signs and how the obscurities occur could be used to interpret the Psalms since there are many signs ( in the form of metaphors, for example) and many confusing passages that even Alter doesn't have figured out.

Later on in book 2, Augustine seems to go much more into a Christian direction and really shares his religious beliefs but in a way that seems he thinks they are the absolute truth. This is not helpful in interpreting the Psalms in an open way. (maybe it works well for a Christian studying the Psalms as their religious book- but not as a book to learn about religion and how it work just as how we are doing in class). Also, Augustine believes that non- Christian, or pagan writings are untrue when they are not glorifying God. I may be off on this, but it seems that Augustine is denouncing science as truth because he does so with the study of astronomy. Since those writing about science would not be including God in the reason/theory/creation of those thoughts, Augustine did not approve. He does not want those who read his book to concern themselves with ideas that don't fall in place with Christian beliefs and he states" do not venture without due care into any branches of learning which are pursued outside the church of Christ.... keep away too from the unnecessary and self indulgent institutions of mankind" ( pg 63).

I don't think that these ideas(in the paragraph above) are helpful for interpreting the scripture because they are too one-sided, but his information on signs, translations, and how to go about actually learning the text are helpful. Even though Augustine states that we need to watch out for problems in translations which can lead to obscurities in the text, I think we also need to watch out for Augustine and his very strong views.

Please, No More Matzo!

Passover ended a week ago today and there is still matzo sitting out at Downer.

No observing Jew would still be eating matzo now after eating it for the week of passover ( but then how many observing Jews are at Lawrence? and how many kept passover?) Last year when Downer did this ( yes, they did this last year and probably every year) I was sort of offended but didn't say anything to the Downer ladies. I told my mom about it and how it bothered me, but she didn't seem upset- she said they probably just wanted to get rid of it and hopefully people would eat it if it was sitting out to take. This answer didn't really change my opinion especially when its happening again this year.

Now for my rant:

Its not that matzo is some sacred religious thing that needs to be taken special care of- its more just the principal of it. When Passover it over, its not like I want any more of that, and it proves the point that while Downer is trying to seem conscious of religious practices, they don't really get it. Maybe its still sitting out because they don't know when Passover ended?

Also, I went to the Seder that Lawrence had at Lucy and sat with some people who thought they knew more about the religion than they really did. Its okay to not know information, but to act like you do isn't. And if one does want to be knowledgeable, learn!

On a side note, the matzo Downer has taste horrible ( which I know I shouldn't complain about because at least they have/had it), but then what else is new?.. its Downer.

Psalm 18

In Psalm 18, God is intimidating and seems violent. The images of fire and smoke, usually linked to hell, are associated with God in this poem. It states:" for smoke rose from His nostrils and fire from His mouth consumed, coals blazed up around Him." God has taken on a different role in this psalm than in other ones- here he is very much meant to be feared by all, while in others, he is a helper, healer, and forgiver.

There are a lot of nature images and metaphors in the Psalms but in this one, it seems nature is being used in a different way. Through his affect on nature, God is putting fear into people such as, " lightning bolt shot", "channels of water were exposed and the world's foundations laid bare", and " the earth heaved and shuddered." Nature also fears God. While God has created both nature and humans, he also has the power to destroy, which is the fear he is instilling. He has so much power and is now showing how he can use it (which seems negative).

The Psalm is affective because it is not saying that God will hurt all, but that he will harshly punish those who are the "enemies" ( those who the speaker of the psalm refers to as the opposition- wrongdoers, those who are faithless, etc). The speaker will be given a "shield of rescue" but " the God who grants vengeance to me and crushes people[the enemies] beneath me"- God will not come to the rescue of the enemies and therefore those who read this psalm will not want to be included in the "enemies."

I do think the image of God in Psalm 18 is alarming but that helps in its purpose- to convince those who read it to follow the rules set out by God and to fear his power by doing good and being faithful.

Also, I don't think it is problematic that elements of this God have been borrowed from other religious traditions. It only furthers the importance in the religion because it has connections to other religions and more depth. When religions are tied, the people in those groups may have similar beliefs and hopefully can get along rather than have tension and anger.

Sheol vs. Purgatory

Both Sheol and Purgatory seem like a waiting room where your final fate is unknown; really this isn't the case. Two very basic definitions provided by yourdictionary.com:

Sheol: a place in the depths of the earth conceived of as the dwelling of the dead

Purgatory: any state or place of temporary punishment, expiation, or remorse

From these definitions, these words don't seem to have any religions connotations; in fact, what makes their definitions is from the religious beliefs of those who believe in these places-Sheol and Purgatory.

In the Jewish religion, Sheol is the resting place for the dead whether or not one has been a bad or a good person. Jews believe that rewards and punishments will be given to people in this world, not the afterlife( basic beliefs of Judaism can be found here ). Psalm 37 talks about how the evil doer will be punished and that the Lord will reward those that do good. In relation to the Old Testament, this is punishment and rewards in the present life, not the next one.

Since the Psalms are also part of the Christian bible, where heaven, hell, and purgatory have a place, the words of Psalm 37 may be read in a different way (meaning those rewards and punishments can relate to where someone will spend eternity).

I did some research ( aka wikipedia) and from my understanding, purgatory is where people go who are not quite accepted into heaven but could be once they undergo a purification process, which is painful and involves a cleansing fire. It seems like one would want to get in and out of Purgatory fairly quickly to then move onto heaven, whereas Sheol is not a transition place, but rather The place. But, I can see why purgatory and Sheol may seem similar - they both have a sort of neutral quality to them.

It doesn't seem that in today's society the average person daily thinks about and is concerned with their afterlife ( maybe I'm wrong...?), like how it seems those who wrote the Psalms where. Obviously times have changed but basic human instinct/emotions/ inner thought probably has not. Many it has to do with people becoming less and less involved in religion which then translates over into thinking less about "life" after life, because that is more spiritual than scientific.

Psalm II

Psalm II written in the "Bay Psalm Book", the earliest book printed in America, is the same psalm as the one in "The Book of Psalms" but there are many differences between the two. Psalm II in the "Bay Psalm Book" was translated by two early Americans, Richard Mather and John Eliot (wikipedia.com), and therefore portrays how early Americans felt about the Psalms and their life/current situations at the time. 

The most noticeable change in this psalm is the language/writing style which is in old English. Also, the phrasing is different which has a substantial effect on the feel of the poem. I think that this version of Psalm II is more conducive to group participation which was probably very popular with early Americans in their newly established communities. The psalm feels more poem-like than the version of psalm II in "The Book of Psalms"  would maybe make it easier to recite together. 

Also, in this version Psalm II, there is a warning, but it seems more of a warning to the Kings and Princes (that the early Americans have just left or escaped from in their different European homeland countries). The Psalm is warning the monarchs to watch out for what the Lord will do to them and also what these early Americans will do back to the kings. " Let us asuner break their bands, their cords bee from us throwne" is in this version and not in quotes in the text, meaning it is being said by the Americans, whereas in " The Book of Psalms" version, the Kings and Princes say " Let us tear off their fetters, let us fling away their bonds!" In that version, that statement is in quotes meaning the monarchs said it ( but this is also just an interpretation of Robert Alter, the translator). I do think this all holds some significance because the early Americans did not include quotes for a reason- they wanted to be the ones to state those words again the kings that use to control them. 

Another warning to the kings is later on in the Psalm: " And now yee Kings bewise, be learn'd yee Judges of th'earth/ Serve yee lord with reverence, rejoyce in him with feare." I feel that overall this version is more of a warning of the Lord's power to the Kings that the early Americans just left but are still being controlled by (early European colonies) rather than the people. 

Mississippi civilization

The early Native American civilizations of the Mississippi were quite developed. The one that interests me the most was Aztalan, which was a famous Mississippian site in Wisconsin.

Aztalan was huge for its time- 15 acres. It was enclosed by walls and had watchtowers which show that this civilization was trying to keep others out and/or keep its people in. This is very significant because it shows that there were various groups in the same general vicinity that would be competing with each other. Also, there may have been ethnic or religious tensions.

In Aztalan, there was a large enough population for food storage and agriculture to be necessary. Many people living in the same place required a system to be created to manage the food production and distribution. These people were not just hunters and gathers but possibly farmers and traders to get the food they need to survive. Also, the evidence from the site shows that religion was very important to the people of Aztalan. Burials have been found in the area, with one especially important one called the " princess" burial- a young woman buried with belts of beads wrapped around her. This is significant because " In historic times, the Mississippians of the southeastern US traced family descent through the female line, and women appear to have had much social power" (159) which is very different from the European, (and many other cultures), idea of male dominant societies.

Overall, the society of Aztalan was very complex especially for its time, much more than I believe people originally thought(especially since the idea of Native Americans being " savages" was such common thought).

In the end, the tragedy is that Aztalan "evaporated" (162). If it had survived longer, would we have more information today or even a continuation of what the people of Aztalan started?

System of Symbols

Geertz's definition of religion: A system of symbols which acts to est. powerful, pervasive, and long lasting moods and motivations in men by formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic.

The effigy mounds in WI are a religious symbol for the Ho-Chunk (who created them).

The mounds were sometimes created in the shape of humans or animals and sometimes contained human burials. It is important to note that the mounds were in the shape of animals because different animals/images had important meanings to Native Americans. "Bird imagery, representing the upper-world in cosmology of Native Americans, carries through to the modern day, appearing in such forms as thunder birds" ( page 83). Bird symbols represented the upper-world and the lower-world was shown with symbols of bears (earth)and water spirits (water).

In " Indian Mounds of Wisconsin," Mallam states that " most effigy mounds fall into three classes corresponding to the three natural realms- air, earth, and water...because of this, he theorized that mounds had been built to symbolize and ritually maintain balance and harmony with the natural world" (page 113). The religion of the Native Americans at this time was all about their connection with the natural world and the resources it provided- therefore, it only makes sense that the mounds they built to bury the dead were natural images so that the people buried in the mounds would still be connected to nature even after their life on earth.

The book states (118) the the Ho Chunk are divided into three groups headed by the thunderbird, bear, and water spirit which is important because not only does it define the parts of the natural world, but it is also the most common types of effigy mounds. The effigy mounds very much reflect the system of symbols set up by the Ho- Chunk not only for their religion, but for their entire way of life.

The Shaft of Dead Man

Although most of our discussion was on the elements of religion and then how they relate to the Ur- religion, the cave drawing of the "Shaft of Dead Man" really stuck out in my mind from the class.

The scene of the painting at the back of Chamber of Engraving at the Cave of Lascaux plays out like this...

A detailed picture of a bison with spears through him and his intestines hanging out.... next to a simply drawn man (who may be a Shaman) with a bird shaped head and a beak for a mouth.. who was probably holding a stick with a bird on top of it that resembles the man's held (but that stick now lies next to the man, maybe after the struggle with the bison)... and nearby is a rhino who is also drawn in detail.

I find it very interesting that the animals ( except for the bird) are drawn in detail when the human is not. Maybe there is less care and respect for man than there is for animals at this time because of all that animals provide. The bird and the man look similar in the drawing (both with single lines making up their drawings) and maybe represent each other.

This piece of art seems to be telling a story of a specific event, more so than the other cave drawings we have seen from the Cave of Lascaux.

I wonder why humans aren't drawn in more pictures, just how a shaman is in this one; if religion is so important, wouldn't more pictures of shamans be present?

Also, since animals are revered, why was a bison shown in such a defeated state?