Mr. John, It Is Time To Say Goodbye To You

The Gospel of John has a long section of teachings just before Jesus gets crucified, compared with the Gospel of Marks. Jesus uses many metaphors to describe the relationships between him, God and sometimes his disciples. For example in verse 15:1, “I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.” This shows how Jesus is lead by his Father. How the Father raises Jesus. I think the important point here is that Jesus describes himself as a living instead of some kind of material. He has the potential to grow depending on God.

Another difference is that Jesus actually personally talks to God. In John he has only talked to God when he needs some miraculous power and just before being crucified. It starts in verse 17:1, “These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:” And he keeps on informing the God about his mission he has completed. He has probably done this because he is dutiful than the Jesus in Mark.

Finally, the last verse, “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.”(21:25) of the Gospel of John was original. It is written in first person that is not Jesus neither God. It is from a prospective of someone that is a follower of them, someone that is learning from them. This has never come up in John.

Dear John Where Did You Go?

One of the differences between Mark and John is the characters that they put the focus on. First of all, it doesn’t talk that much about the disciples as Mark did. And this totally new type of person came up. A perfect follower that has perfect faith on Jesus and God. We can see this in verse 11:27, “She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.” It is the first time in which Jesus didn’t say any kind of lesson back as a response.

Also, it is the first time in which I saw Jesus not saving someone that is sick. In verse 11:4, “When Jesus heard that, he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby.” Is this to balance out death and life? Or did God said to Jesus to let Lazarus die because he knew what would happen later on? Who knows, except God.

Finally, I would like to share this commandment of Jesus that I thought it was sweet, whether or not I liked it. It is presented in verse 13: 34, “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.” This line never came up in the Gospels of Mark. Jesus probably said this because he thinks love unite people and produce “light” as he describes himself. I was so surprised to hear love each other and not love God.

All About John Begins Right Here

The version of John has another focus of area than the gospels of Mark. John focuses more on how and why people should believe in Jesus and how to find the way to receive eternal life or forgiveness from God. For example in John 3: 8,

“The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.”

What this wants to say is that the re-birth of the spiritual life is something that you can’t earn only by seeking for it. I thought this was quite a radical idea compared with the beliefs Jesus taught previously. I mean, he has always taught that faith is the only and absolute power humans can posses.

Also in verse 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” Jesus talks about God and eternal life, in which Mark hasn’t mentioned about it as much. Mark has focused more in events in which shows that Jesus is the chosen one. He describes how he teaches his twelve sometimes naughty disciplines and followers and how faith and his ability make him be so powerful and confident.
Another description of God is mentioned in verse 4: 24, “God isa Spirit: and they that worship him must worship himin spirit and in truth.” For the first time I read an explanation of Him that is related to physical conception. This line has surprised me a bit actually. I had a misconception that one of the unique and an important characteristic of the Bible is that it has many rules and regulations. For example, in order to be a faithful follower of God, you need follow I-don’t-know-what rule. However, that is not it. One of the most faithful followers you can be is by being faithful inside your own heart. That the decorations you would have outside yourself is not as important as the real state inside of you.

Mr. Invulnerable

One of the most crucial stories of the Bible came up in the last chapters of Mark. The reborn of Jesus. He has suffered a lot through the whole process of being crucified. And yet, God didn’t punish the ones who caused harm on him, just like he tried to do to the three friends of Job. However, Jesus got to sit peacefully on the right side of God. So I guess it is all good.

In those chapters about the death of Jesus, I was forced to realize the power of a crowd as you can see in verse 15:15,

“And soPilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him,to be crucified.”

People become so powerful and scary when they loose their self control and become as one. It is non-stoppable. It is way scarier when these people are manipulated by some malicious person. For example the Nazis in the Holocaust. (I am truly aware that the Holocaust is a way more complex problem.)

One of the things that surprised me was in verse 16:11, “And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.” Jesus is mad because his disciplines didn’t believe the others when they said Jesus has come back to life. When he was the one who said to not believe anyone even if they say that he has come back from the death. Or is this part of the faith moral?

Mr. Faith-Is-Absolute

I was so surprised to see Jesus respond with confidence to any kind of trick question. Furthermore, he even made those malicious people nod and feel defeated. I was about to say, “High five Jesus!” but found that it might be quite disrespectful so I didn’t. Maybe one of the reasons why Jesus has such power over people is because he is truly the chosen. Because he has faith, he has confidence, that there is no way to trick him. I would like to be strong like him, some day.

Another thing that I have attracted my attention was a line of Jesus from verse 9:23, “Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.” He has said this over and over again throughout the whole section of Marks in the bible. However, it was not until this time, that the message has truly come to me. In Japan there are several sayings that talks about one’s mind. One of them is, “Most illness is psychosomatic.” Or “Salvation will come to those of who have faith.” Even in Ishmael there was this axiom that was about one’s mind; “The way will be found when there is will.” I think what Jesus wants to say is something similar to the ones mentioned above but more religious. Our mind is the core of all our actions, which means they affect our actions immensely. Therefore, I believe we can do most of the things that we think we can. (And off course appropriate amount of effort always comes along with the will.) But I never thought those included cursing. (“And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away.” 11:21)

One thing I found contradicting was this verse 10: 29,

“And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel’s,”
He has also said that in order to be good, one needed to respect and take care of his/her family. However, by leaving them, they are making his/her families suffer. I mean, the family member would need to work more in order to fill the space of that person. Or is this sacrifice of your own family necessary to save the rest of the people in the world?

Mr. Miracle

Have you heard of the saying, “Think before you speak/act”? The one that since you heard it too many times, you no longer pay attention to it? The one that sounds so obvious and easy but actually a hard one? I think the king that appears in chapter 6 have never heard of it and therefore ended up in a situation like that he would need to regret. “And the king was exceeding sorry; yet for his oath’s sake, and for their sakes which sat with him, he would not reject her.” (Mark, 6:52)
Actually, I think this type of mistake is unavoidable. The problem here was that he made a mistake in the timing of doing that gaffe. This story about the sinful king was a great lesson. I mean I learned that to be careful of when to make the inevitable mistakes.


Another I thing I thought was that I think Jesus has a high expectations on the Son of Man. He wants his disciplines to be like him and be disappointed, “For they considered not the miracle of the loaves: for their heart was hardened.” (Mark, 6:52) He expects them to be delighted when they are in danger of starving. Moreover, not likely Jesus, they don’t have the ability to cause miracle. Or “And he charged them straitly that no man should know it; and commanded that something should be given her to eat.” (Mark, 5: 43) Jesus has said this after experiencing people not making their promises of not telling anyone so many times.

Jesus said something like Gilgamesh in Mark, verse 8: 35, “For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s, the same shall save it.” He is mainly saying that one needs to live for the fame and not be afraid. It is just like the line Gilgamesh said when they were leaving to fight against the monster that protects the forest. Is it that the Bible was somehow influenced by Gilgamesh or is it something like the spontaneous invention? (The time in history that similar architecture was built around the same moment around the world.)

Mr. Jesus

Jesus. Is like a revolutionary. First of all, his abilities are supernatural. His teachings are radical compared with what people have been taught of. For example in verse 2: 27 & 28, “And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.” One can clearly see that he has some confidence in his words. Jesus has something that makes him not be afraid for what he says, for his actions. Not afraid to commit sins because man can forgive each other.
The reason why Jesus is so confident is because he has faith, according to him. I mean he said, “Why are ye so fearful? how is it that ye have no faith?” (Mark, 4: 40) When they were in the middle of a storm, drowning. But I think faith is not the only reason why Jesus is so confident. The supernatural abilities that he has, is doing some kind of help to his certainty, I believe. I think since he knows he can do something about it, he doesn’t need to be scared at all.
Jesus is like a hero that came on Earth to save the sinners and the unfortunates. He forgives them, and cures them. He tries to pass down the teaching through parables, etc. I think the whole point is to straighten the world and make it full with ‘good’ people. He even encourages people to enjoy the happiness they have now, “No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse.” (Mark, 2:21) Or more likely, to appreciate what they have.
Well, I will learn more about Jesus later on, I suppose.

I Think It Is Farewell Tao Te Ching

Dear Tao Te Ching. I think you are one of the origins of my culture. Probably that is one of the reasons why I feel so familiar with this writing and belief. However, I have found some lines I have never heard before from my culture that has enticed my heart. One of them is a metaphor for life. It is from chapter 53,


“Keeping to the main road is easy,
But people love to be sidetracked.”


Yes, I do have heard that metaphor of life and road. In the form of, “life is all about going into the sideways, taking the longer path.” But I have never thought of why. Why do we always walk into that narrow and winding path? I thought that it was because that’s the way that enriches you with experience. But do we take that path because we think it’s right to do so? The more I think about it, the more I am beginning to doubt the answer I always thought it was certain. Isn’t it that adventurous scent that makes us go towards it? Isn’t it that uncertainty of where it might lead to, that makes us be so curious? Isn’t it that scenario surrounding the path that makes us feel so enchanted? This line from Tao Te Ching has made me reconsider the answer that I thought it was definite.


I was surprised when I read the next line I want to share. You know why I was so surprised? Because I have asked about it to myself and thought it was too ridiculous to ask such a question. This line is written in chapter 57 and goes like the following,

“The more rules and regulations,
The more thieves and robbers.”

Well, what I have asked myself was that ‘are the laws and the rules motivating many of us to do what it prohibits us to do?’ Many people can have a warped mind. By being told that you can’t do it, the curiosity towards that whatever thing it is prohibited increases. Also by being told that you can’t do it so many times over and over again, you begin to want go against it. There are even people that just love situations that are in the edge of danger. I thought aren’t those rules tickling the heart of these people? But then soon after I asked myself, I thought; “Oh, don’t be stupid Mamiko. There are reasons to the existence of those laws. And think about the world without chains in our feet. We will be flying and the world might be in total chaos.”


Now, I would like to present with a line that I found interesting. It comes from chapter 64, and goes like this,


“A journey of a thousand miles starts under one’s feet,
So give as much care to the end as to the beginning.”



One of the reasons why I found interesting is that we, or maybe I, have always focused on how important is the ‘first step’. But if you think about it, the next steps that come after the first step is as important as the first one. I mean, one of the difficulties to accomplish something is to keep the spirit until the end. To not give up. In Japan we have this saying that goes “three days bonze”. It is used to describe a person that cannot continue doing whatever thing he/she has started and only lasts for about three days. (I am like this when I start a diary. When I see the dates I have written, the period of time between the first one and the forth one is about a year.) I would like to always keep in mind about this line in order to keep up my spirit until I finish up anything I’m doing.



To conclude up the whole story of Tao Te Ching the line from chapter 78,

“The truth often sounds paradoxical.”


was suiting. I mean, what Tao Te Ching said has mostly sounded so contradicting. Starting from how the opposite of each other defines each other it keeps on uniting many of the ideas that it seems it will never coexist in the same definition. The analogy of good & bad and black & white is one of the best examples. The ‘paradoxical truth’ continues with the description of a sage or a good person. Or “how the strong and stiff with fall” and “the soft and weak will overcome.” (Tao Te Ching Chapter 76)

I think I learned a lot and did several discoveries after reading this book of the Tao.
However, I guess that this post will be a farewell to Tao.





One more last thing I want to say is about this line from chapter 70. It’s rather a question than a opinion. For the first and last time in the entire book, the author uses first-person, “My words have ancient beginnings,” to what it seems to describe about Tao. What does this mean?

The Author of Tao Te Ching Is a Genius

Tao Te Ching is becoming the top religion (or principals?) in my list. I agree with most of what this book is saying and I like the part that it doesn’t have this specific role model that looks down at you. I would still need to analyze and evaluate it carefully before giving an opinion about this book though.

So, I would like to observe some pieces that got my attention.

Let me begin with a line from chapter 34, “It does not show greatness. And is therefore truly great.” Well, the line reminded me of this saying in Japan. Which goes like the following,

“Intelligent hawks hide their nails.”

It more or less means that the ‘the truly great ones don’t show their greatness.’ I think it is part of the culture of being conservative. (However, I also think that this saying shows the good side of being conservative. I mean, being conservative is not always good.) As you might have noticed, I do like the line from chapter 34 just as I like the saying. I think the more you try to show how great you are, the more you would look fake. Off course there are exceptions such as performance arts. But in general I think it is so true.

Another line that got stuck in my head was from chapter 44 that goes, “Gain or loss: Which is more painful?” I never realized how ‘painful’ it is to gain something until I was asked which one is more painful. Well, let me assess the terms gain and loss. Gaining something automatically means loosing something. For example, learning the academics intensely means loosing time to do other things than studying. (Whether or not it is worth using the time.) Or gaining opportunity and loosing friendship. However, loosing something doesn’t necessary need to mean gaining something too. This means if you gain something it will result zero. However, if you loose something it will result negative one. Or would it? When you loose something, does it mean it is because you have gained something? Does that mean that they are the same thing? I will say that gaining and loosing is not a matter of comparison for now.

Dear Tao Te Ching.

Tao Te Ching is revealing its religious side of it. Its strong characteristic of seeking for a specific superiority. We can clearly see this from chapter 21, “The greatest Virtue is to follow Tao and Tao alone.” In the Bible it is God, in Bhagavad-Gita it is Lord Krishna. Why do men seek for a specific superior existence? Why can’t they just do their best at all times? Is it because one can be more motivated if there is a specific goal in front of us? Or do the authors of these books write about such existence to make the readers more obedient? (Whether or not they exist or not)

Well, another question came up to my mind after reading Chapter 15, “Not seeking fulfillment, they are not swayed by desire for change.” But don’t you call ‘desire to change’ when you are seeking for this perfect Tao? Isn’t ‘desire’ the fuel to take an action of being detached? Or does this mean that in order to be ‘detached’ one needs to cut him self apart with any kind of desire? Personally, I think that’s not possible. As I said before, by trying to be like Tao you already have a desire. It may not be the same desire as wanting a material or wanting a love. But it is a boiling emotion.

Finally, I would like to share a line that made me think, which is from chapter 26, “To be restless is to lose one’s control.” This means, that in order to be in a ‘rest’ one needs to have a control of one’s self. Right? If that is true, I can interpreter that self-control is the way to become calmed. I should start doing this.

First Post of Tao Te Ching

I like what Tao Te Ching is saying about how things exist because of the existence of the opposite of it. It probably is this way because one of the ways people identify things is by comparing with others.
Well, I would like to share some of the axioms from this book reminded me with a discussion we did in class about good people.
For example, from chapter 3, “If nothing is done, then all will be well.” Think about it. Doing something for someone means that you are going in favor with that person. Going in a favor with a person automatically means going against another one. Therefore, if everyone doesn’t do anything for anyone, then there will be the so-called “peace”.
Now, if that is what I want or not is a different matter of fact. I personally think it will be boring if no one does something. I wish that things worth breaking that “peace” exists. And that I will be able to encounter with one. Even if it means I am running towards the opposite direction of illumination. I am not sure if I believe in it though.
Another axiom similar to the one mentioned above comes from chapter 7, “Through selfless action, he attains fulfillment.” In one word, I believe it is telling you to be detached. It sounds so similar to what Lord Krishna said from Bhagavad-Gita. Be detached and complete your duties. I think I am still young to be able to consider this as a possible way of becoming a better self. Because I totally don’t understand how one can say that you took whatever action you took because it was your duty. I do not understand how you can put your reasons for your own actions to something beyond your reach. I mean, it just sounds an excuse to whatever thing you are doing.
But please be aware that this is only a way of thinking of a student who still doesn’t know that many things. And I am very sorry for my immature and not responsible comments I have made in my response. I do apologize if this has offended someone somehow.

Creationism VS Revolution Theory

By all means, E.K. Hornbeck is guilty for teaching the revolutionary theory about humans because it goes against the Butler Act, a law that states no public teachers should teach any kind of theory that contradicts the explanation written in the Bible. This law especially refers to the revolutionary theory of humans stated by Charles Darwin. However, his punishment shouldn’t be a grave punishment because of several reasons.


First of all, the theory of human evolution doesn’t totally go against the bible as Henry Drummond said. From Genesis 1: 3-5,

“And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.”

we can see that God created Day and Night on the first day. However, He does not specify how long the “day” is. This means, one day might have not being the 24 hours we think it would, but it might represent 10 million years. Do you see where we are getting at? Creationism and the Theory of Revolution can coexist in the terms of time.


Furthermore, it was God who gave us the ability to think. He has made us specially to rule over the world He has created according to Genesis 1: 26,

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”

God has given us the right to think. The right to put some logical thoughts to the events happening in our surroundings. Why would E.K. Hornbeck need to be severely punished for using the right God has given to him, to us. Additionally how does Harrison Brady know what is right or wrong?

Science has widened our view. We need to balance modern and traditional in order to have a better quality. We need to keep the old, good traditions but also incorporate the new, great facilities. It’s like mixing blue and red to come up with a even beautiful color, violet.

Goodbye Confucius.

The Master talks more about what a Good person should do which will make them good leader. The book often uses the term common people and scholars. And describes how people like them, scholars, affect the common people. This might be because intellectuals had more power in the politics at the time of Confucius.
Well, one of the lessons of Master that drove my attention is in chapter 17:8,

“The Master said, ‘Zilu! Have you heard about the six (virtuous) words and their six corresponding vices?’
Zilu replied, ‘I have not.’
‘Sit! I will tell you about them.
‘Loving Goodness without balancing it with a love for learning will result in the vice of foolishness. Loving wisdom without balancing it with a love for learning will result in the vice of deviance. Loving trustworthiness without balancing it with a love for learning will result in the vice of harmful rigidity. Loving uptightness without balancing it with a love for learning will result in the vice of intolerance. Loving courage without balancing it with a love for learning will result in the vice of unruliness: Loving resoluteness without balancing it with a love for learning will result in the vice of willfulness.’

The key terms here are “learn” and “balance”. Surprisingly, balance is a word I have always ended up with whenever I thought of something. For example, the balance between giving up and accepting; working and playing; sharing and reserving; dreaming and being realistic; etc. Even good things needs to be balanced. According to Confucius it is learning which balances out things. Maybe it is because the knowledge one wants to learn is infinite just like rain. However, I believe learning is not only factor that balances out things. I think the opposite of it, it’s what balances out things. Black and white, fire and water, good and bad. One can identify dark because there is light. One can identify good because there is bad. And so-on. This happens because comparing is one of the most common ways to recognize things, I think. I mean, think about it. Heroes wouldn’t exist if there is no bad.


Another quote I liked is from chapter 15: 28, “The Master said, ‘When the multitude hates a person, you must examine them and judge for yourself. The same holds true for someone whom the multitude love.’” What Master wants to say here, is that never get influenced by what the others say. This is a hard thing to do. Or at least for me it is. And I think it is one of those lessons that sounds so obvious and easy, but hard to do. Such as “trust yourself.” Or “make your words into action.” (Actually, they don’t sound that easy.) Well, anyways I like most of things Master mentions. However, I sometimes doubt if that’s because they are similar to my culture. Or because I really do like what Confucius is saying, without any pre-culture influence.

When There Is Will, The Way Will Be Found

After reading some more chapters from the book of Confucius Analects, I realized how each chapter is more or less independent. Well, obviously one needs to read the whole book to understand more in depth about what Confucius wanted to saying. But each chapter explains certain thing and is understandable without reading other chapters. One of the lines that got my attention is from chapter 7:8,

“The Master said, ‘I will not open the door for a mind that is not already striving to understand, nor will I provide words to a tongue that is not already struggling to speak. If I hold up one corner of a problem, and the student cannot come back to me with the other three, I will not attempt to instruct him again.”

It may sound harsh what the Master is saying. However, I believe that his toughness can train his disciplines very well. I mean, masters exists to teach but students also need to do something to be prepared for whatever lesson the master would give. The students need to be willing to do their job that will get them ready. And I think the Master is talking about does preparations that are part of the learner’s job.

Another part I like is from chapter 7:30, “The Master said, ‘Is Goodness really so far away? If I simply desire Goodness, I will find that it is already here.’” It reminded me of this quote from Ishmael that said something like, “the way will be found if there is will.”

What is Good?

The definition of a “good person” is a theme that can be discuss about for hours. And yet, not come up with a conclusion that everyone can agree with. Well, also in the book of Confucius the definition of “good” is discussed. For example in chapter 4:6,

“The Master said, ‘I have yet to meet a person who truly loved Goodness or hated a lack of Goodness. One who truly loved Goodness could not be surpassed, while on who truly hated a lack of Goodness would at least be able to act in a Good fashion, as he would not tolerate that which is not Good being associated with his person.’
‘Is there a person who can, for the space of a single day, simply devote his efforts to Goodness? I have never met anyone whose strength was insufficient for this task. Perhaps such a person exists, but I have yet to meet him.’ “

Actually, this part of the chapter is not talking about the definition of goodness but about humans’ influence on each other. I think what the first part is saying is similar to the saying that goes like, “revenge only produces more revenge.” A negative feeling will never be able to produce anything positive. But positive attitudes have all sorts of possibilities.
What I have interpreted from the second part of this chapter is; what is important is the continuation of whatever thing you are doing. I mean, Master is saying that everyone can start doing a thing. But it is an ability, to finish the thing you are doing. I personally think that this is hard. This continuation requires patience for a long time. And patience for a long time is one of my weak points I need to overcome.


As a closure, I would like to talk about this metaphor used in the analects which I liked. It comes form chapter 6: 17, “The Master said, ‘Who is able to leave a room without going out through the door? How is it, then, that no one follows this Way?’” It shows how Master thinks that the “way” is something so easy to do and hard to not do. It seems that the “way” is the door to the room, which probably represents something similar to heaven in the bible and illumination in Buddhism.

Yes Finally the Last Post for Reading a Bible

These four songs that are dedicated to God indicate the QUESTions we discussed in class; is there unfairness in the world? If there is why?
At least, it answers one of the questions, “Is there unfairness in the world?” As you can see, all the three characters are talking to God, with the hope of salvation. However, only the character from chapter 23 gets to get the “goodness and mercy” from God. What about the others? They all seem to have absolute faith towards God. The one from Psalm chapter 137 asked about how to sing the song of LORD God. He one from 51 asked for the salvation of his soul. The one of 42 asked for the chance to see Him. What was the difference between them and the one that is receiving God’s mercy? Was there really a difference?
From the previous stories, I believe it is chosen by randomness or better said by God’s likeness. For example, in Job. He was chosen to be the one punished because God wanted to make a point with Satan. The reason why it was Job was because he was one of the (one of the) one who was “righteous”. Which was one of the conditions Satan mentioned.
As a conclusion, I would say that unfairness exists due to the random choosing.

David Has Such an Interesting Personality.

The character of David surprises me a lot. Specifically, his loyalty and faith towards God is so strong, it makes him strong in mentality, is what surprises me the most. The chapter that showed this aspect of him the most was in 15:26, “But if he thus say, I have no delight in thee; behold, here am I, let him do to me as seemeth good unto him.” His faith is so absolute that he thinks God is the one who chooses his own destiny. Probably, this is one of the reasons why God loves David so much. Because David will do whatever thing God wants to do and will accept anything that will happen wrong.
Another characteristic of him that impressed me was his size of his heart. David not only welcomed back one of this sons that killed the other son, but he grieved for that same son that was trying to overthrow him. He was able to grief because he has accepted the fact that his son was trying to betray him. Now, drawing the line between accepting and giving up is a challenging thing to do. Or at least I think so. Let’s say, you have ‘accepted’ the fact that you don’t have the ability like Beethoven. Therefore, decided to play the piano as a hobby and not try as hard as before, when you believed you come become a great pianist. How can you say that that ‘acceptance’ was not an excuse for ‘giving up’? I often hear that humans’ abilities are limitless. But I also believe that the talents are distributed differently among us. Which means some of our potentials are limited. I guess I will conclude that the balance between accepting certain things and not giving up is one of the greatest challenges I would need to overcome some day.

David. It is all about David.

Here comes David, the perfect one. The one that has such an big heart that can mourn for the someone that was trying to kill him, as shown in The Second Book of Samuel 1: 12, “And they mourned, and wept, and fasted until even, for Saul, and for Jonathan his son, and for the people of the LORD, and for the house of Israel; because they were fallen by the sword.” Moreover, he not only has such a big capacity in his heart, he is really loyal to God. David killed the so called alien, to show how much respect he has towards Him by killing the man that finished off the sufferance of Saul.
By making produce so many children of humans God has made a complex society. He is causing all the problems and fighting between people. Was this what God wanted? Or is this the consequence of wanting a creature that was made out of his likeness. I think God just lost control over humans since the day Adam and Eve ate the fruit of knowledge.

Humans Seek For Mystery.

Humans have always been attracted to those of who has a strength we don’t have. Whether the strength that person or creature has is used for good or bad. Why are we enticed by so many things that we don’t have and will never have? This aspect of humans is shown in Job 41:33, “Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear.” Why is it that we always seek for the things we have never experienced? I believe this only happens to humans, which has made us be greedier, because animals such as zebras and lions make a perfect natural life-cycle. Maybe the reason why humans seek for things we can’t reach is because we have this tendency of wanting to explore. (I think we can see this in our human history of conquering.) And if we loose the “thing” to explore, we loose the energy of enthusiasm or the reason to ‘live’. (Because we tend to act from logic. Why were we born? For what? What is our mission? Etc.) So, maybe that is why we look for areas we will never reach, in order to let our fire keep on burning until we die.
Well, maybe my guess is right because I think the reason why many people believe in god is to have an explanation about the things we don’t know yet. Such as the born of life.

Elihu, Is a Master of Convincing People.

Picture from: http://oneyearbibleimages.com/elihu.jpg


For this reading response, let me try to analyze the roles of the characters in Job. All of them are organized in a way to persuade the readers about the absolute authority of God. First of all, Job. His character tells us that pretending to be “perfect and upright” (Job 1:1), is not enough to gain wisdom from God. Showing all the process of questioning, doubting and complaining towards God prepares the setting for one of the most important character, Elihu. The three friends of Job also help set up the stage for Elihu. By giving variation to the reaction towards the punishment of Job, the author succeeds to evoke many types of readers.
Finally, Elihu, the character that is so young but knows so much about God. He is the key character, I believe. By listing only the great things God has done to humans, like mentioned in Job 32:8, “But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.” Elihu proves how God is so different from us, humans, who are ignorant. (However, this line is not precisely correct. God didn’t give us the understanding. Humans have stolen it from God against his will.) Also Elihu only mentions the terrible consequences when one is “ignorant”. He also uses pathos, for example in Job 33:13, “Why dost thou strive against him? for he giveth not account of any of his matters.” He makes the actions of Job as the most terrible and mean thing you can do. He makes Job seem that he is the most annoying person who lacks the gracefulness towards God. Even if he was just punished because he was randomly chosen by Satan to prove his point.

Freewill doesn't exist. I believe.

One of the abilities that debate requires is public speech. In theory, we learned that a good speech requires flexibility, stability, volume, content and strategy. But it was a totally different experience to actually make it into action. By observing the people speak, I was able to learn some things for my next turn.

1. Eye contact
2. Not rush when speaking
3. Good volume is a when it doesn’t echo that much that makes your ear uncomfortable but it does expand so that the people in the back can hear you.
4. Be comfortable with what you are talking. Read as less as possible.
5. Even if you don’t believe what you are saying, say it with confidence.
6. When giving a example, it is convincing when you give a daily example that you know about.





Well, at the end of the debate about freewill, I was fully convinced that freewill doesn’t exist.

Job, the first one who questioned God.

Picture from: http://www.wga.hu/art/b/blake/09job.jpg


Job”, has introduced us one of the QUESTions that we learned at the beginning of the course, “why does injustice exist?” I saw this question from Job 7:20, “I have sinned; what shall I do unto thee, O thou preserver of men? why hast thou set me as a mark against thee, so that I am a burden to myself.” According to the passage, Job was chosen to be tested, because GOD wanted to make sure that what Satan was saying was not true. In other words, injustice was born out of the doubtfulness of the GOD towards human beings. He wanted to test the humans and Job was chosen because that was who Satan mentioned to prove his point. But the direct cause of his sufferings is mostly because of the anxiety of God.

It was a long long long reading.

Picture from: http://www.seanet.com/~realistic/mosesten.jpg

One of the great differences in Exodus 3-20 and Genesis 1-34, is the attitude of GOD. In Exodus, God is trying to control His people with fear, by showing His supernatural powers and authorities through Moses and Aaron. The God himself makes the heart of Pharaoh hardened as mentioned in several chapters including 7. By making him disobey Him, LORD God is able to show examples to the people what happens when one goes against the God. All kind of disasters can come, such as mentioned in Exodus 8:2, “if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs:”

There is also a difference in the punishments Gad has done from Genesis and Exodus. In Exodus, the pain comes in more gradually, and effectively, leaving some creepy sensations about the happening. In comparison, the punishments in Genesis are instant and scarcely noticed by the people who get punished. For example, the town that was vanished by God, they couldn’t even notice the pain since it happened so fast and so sudden. But in Exodus, the people who get chastised, they get to see the whole process slowly. A positive way of thinking at it, is that the people in Exodus, get a second chance after some more suffering.

It was a long, long, chapter.

Reading through 27- 34

After men and women ate the fruit of knowledge, and obtained the knowledge of good and evil, the world became more complex. The knowledge given to the humans is just like giving dynamite to a baby. They don’t know how to use it, but they have it. What it has produced is a world full of complex problems. For example in Genesis 27: 36, “And he said, Is not he rightly named Jacob? for he hath supplanted me these two times: he took away my birthright; and, behold, now he hath taken away my blessing. And he said, Hast thou not reserved a blessing for me?” Or in Genesis 29: 30-32:
“[30] And he went in also unto Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.
[31] And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren.
[32] And Leah conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Reuben: for she said, Surely the LORD hath looked upon my affliction; now therefore my husband will love me.”
The complexity of the relationships between people, even caused the born of killers due to emotional reasons, as mentioned in Genesis 34: 25, “And it came to pass on the third day, when they were sore, that two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah's brethren, took each man his sword, and came upon the city boldly, and slew all the males.”
Finally, due to the amount of mistakes and problems happening on Earth, the word “sin” has appeared in the bible for the first time in Chapter 31: 36, “And Jacob was wroth, and chode with Laban: and Jacob answered and said to Laban, What is my trespass? what is my sin, that thou hast so hotly pursued after me?”

Genesis 25 and 26.

Picture from: http://identity33.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/genesis4.gif


In these two chapters, Chapter 25 and 26, we can see some of the lines that can indicate the beginning of the western culture. One is mentioned in Genesis 25: 10, “The field which Abraham purchased of the sons of Heth: there was Abraham buried, and Sarah his wife.” From this line, we can say that the custom of burying people near their beloved one has already developed. Not surprisingly, in Japan too, people prefer to be buried in the same place as their partner. This is probably because most people in Japan believe in after life and reincarnation. But in the bible, I believe it is the first time that it mentions about something that can indicate the thought about after life. I mean, if they believed that your spirit will just evaporate after you die, they wouldn’t endeavor to be buried in the same place. That means, they at least believe that there will be something after death.

Another thing I found is in Genesis 25: 23:
“And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.”
This indicates, the necessity of difference. But why did the god wanted to make a difference? Not as diversity but as strong and weak? Is it to bring order in the society? To bring relationship of master and servant in the community? Later on in the Bible, it doesn’t say anything for me to be able to narrow down my answers. Also from Genesis 26: 3:
“Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father;”
We can see that the tradition of inheritance has already been a tradition.

A different thing that I noticed, not about customs, is the tendency of humans. The tendency of repeating things. For example in Genesis 25: 27, “And the boys grew: and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob was a plain man, dwelling in tents.” It’s like Cain and his brother, being agriculturist and hunter. Another example is in Genesis 26: 9 and 10:
“And Abimelech called Isaac, and said, Behold, of a surety she is thy wife: and how saidst thou, She is my sister? And Isaac said unto him, Because I said, Lest I die for her. And Abimelech said, What is this thou hast done unto us? one of the people might lightly have lien with thy wife, and thou shouldest have brought guiltiness upon us.”
Isaac is doing the same thing as his father, Abraham, did.

To Mr. Tangen

I have editted the blog entry with the title of "The list of names and their ages was odd."

Oh Lord God...

In these chapters, several different events have happened. The punishment to a town, the sacrifice of Abraham, and the born of nations. But they have one thing in common. It shows how LORD God, is becoming more human-like. The first one appears in chapter 17, “Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.” By making exceptions, by choosing favorites, he is being more near attachments. (and I also discovered that this was why priests in some church can’t get married. Not only to be pure, but because of the story of Abraham.) What he has produced out of his attachment is inequality. We can see that through chapter 18, “That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes: Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five?” He has also corrupted Abraham, “Then Abimelech called Abraham, and said unto him, What hast thou done unto us? and what have I offended thee, that thou hast brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? thou hast done deeds unto me that ought not to be done.
For the LORD had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, because of Sarah Abraham's wife.” (ch.20) I mean, it actually says it in chapter 22, “And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.”

I got quite sleepy while reading this.

After Chapter 10 in Genesis, LORD God is becoming more attached. We can see it from Chapter 13, “And the LORD said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward: For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.” He acts based on his preferences, he is choosing out of likeness. What is it that it’s making him become more human like? First of all, why did he plant the tree of knowledge on earth, if he knew that the humans were greedy and unpredictable sometimes? Expectations for someone, is a sign for emotions, for feelings. By making his likeness into something real, or at least, physically real, did His feelings evoke? I would need to read more carefully in order to find out the answer.

Since now on humorous poem is my biggest enemy.

Inspiration vs Laziness



The elder god of inspiration is not with me
However the great god of laziness is with me.

The relationship between me and the lazy-god
is just like Adam from The Sistine Chapel and god

Strong but invisible like a mighty department
But it’s not good at all since it’s full of attachment

The list of names and their ages was odd.

For this reading response I would like to make some connections with other literature I have read or saw. Well, the first book it came up to my mind was Ishmael. I remember Daniel Quinn made some references with the story of Adams and Eve, and the sons of them. Now that I know who they are and what their role is, I understand what Ishmael was talking about better. So, Adams and Eve are more or less the parents of the human race. And the sons are our ancestors. Cain, the agriculturist, sounds more a like to us.

The story of Noah and his boat is so famous that many authors incorporate it now-a-days into their stories. In one of the Japanese anime, it used it as an analogy to say that the world is unfair. One of the characters who were a homosexual said that only couples of man and woman had the right to go on to the Noah’s boat and people like him couldn’t go. He said that the world is unfair just like that. As you can see in Genesis chapter 7 verse 2, “Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.” Which I think it’s a unique way of looking at the story of Noah. Well, it is not exactly unfair that only couples can go in because there is a reason to it, the purpose to be able to breed. But it is surely not equal, when talking about rights. Oh well, I enjoy unique thinking. Talking about unfairness, one of the ways to control people is by fear. In this case, the fear of being punished for the community you live. People will peer pressure the ones that will cause the punishment, and in that way, there will be organization in the society.

Questions, questions, questions. My mind has overflooded.

Among all the things mentioned in Genesis Chapter 1, there are two things that are odd from the others. The darkness and water which were first mentioned in line 2. These two are the only things that God hasn’t created by himself. They are the only subsistence that existed when God was still a “Spirit of God” as said in Gen. 1 line 2. Later on in the chapter, God is trying to conquer or rather control the darkness and water with his creations, “…and God divided the light from the darkness.” (Gen. 1 line 4), “And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness” (Gen 1. line 18), “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” (Gen.1 line 6) But I ended up asking myself, why was darkness and water the chosen ones to be the existence that God hasn’t created? Why didn’t the author of the bible say God also created darkness and water? The only possible answer I could come up with was because he feared it. Because men, or the humans, fear for the things we can’t see, for things we can’t even have the feeling that we are “controlling” them.

Now that we have a guess on why darkness and water have existed before God, one of our next questions is why were we, I mean by humans, created last? Is it because God wanted to prepare the perfect stage for our show time? Genesis Chapter 1 says we were the only creatures made out from God’s taste or likeness. It says that we were born to conquer the world God has made. However, LORD God doesn’t want Adams to gain the knowledge of good and evil. Does this mean he wants us to “subdue” the world he made without knowing what is good and evil? What is the purpose of doing so? Just to see a evolution? A unknown development? I think that there is not enough information to jump into conclusions, so I would wait and see what will come out in the next several chapters.

Rapping the story.

In Baucis and Philemon I saw a contradiction. In the story of Midas, it teaches that we shouldn’t be greedy and that money and the materials around us do not lead to happiness. We can see that through what happened with Midas. He gained the ability to turn anything into gold, which represents the greediness of people. As a payment for that ability, he lost his daughter, which represents relationships between people, the heart of the people. However, in the story of Baucis and Philemon, Baucis and Philemon gained a better life in a sense that there are better quality materials around them, for sharing what they have with people who don’t have. The idea of bigger house and perfection is stuck to our minds like oil. Even the gods offered such materialistic things.

Let's be original.

Poem inspired by Metamorphoses, Phaeton



The lack of friends, support, belief, and love.

Has made a big distress to son of sun.

This lead to cause the life on earth, like dove,

Completely vanish just like eating bun.

Love. Is the theme

Phaeton

This scene of Phaeton, the one when his friend didn’t believe that the sun was the father of Phaeton, reminded me of the question that has also been in my mind but couldn’t answer. I always thought, how do people figure out what the others are saying is true? I mean we decide to think that “it is not true” when what the others are saying is not what you wanted or when it doesn’t sound reasonable to you. Just like how Epaphus couldn’t believe what Phaeton was saying. If I was in his position, I would also doubt if what Phaeton was saying is true. But when I think about the question I mentioned previously, I end up feeling quite sad, or maybe lonely is a better word to describe that feeling. What if what the others were saying was actually true and I couldn’t believe them just because of my ignorance? How sad would it be that no one can believe you? So, I always end up concluding that I should try my best to believe whatever thing someone important to me is saying, without being a fool that believes lies. Which will be quite a mess.

Eros and Psyche

I like the idea of Eros being blind. Love makes you lose your self-control, distracts you from being objective, and makes you be greedier. Or at least that what I think it causes you to be, probably because I am still a child.
Anyways, in the story it shows how the people for immortality. They see eternal as happiness. We can clearly see this from page 75, “Yes, And further, he gives Psyche a special potion and she becomes immortal. Then he declares that their marriage will last forever.” (Metamorphoses, Eros and Psyche) and later A says, “It has a very happy ending.” (p.76 Metamorphoses, Eros and Psyche)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85Luny2ei7o

*Please watch or listen to this music as a background music.



There were quite a lot of messages in these two stories, Myrrha and Pomona & Vertumnus. One was the beauty and importance to be you. We can see that from the story of Pomona & Vertumnus, “When at last the god revealed himself just as he was, much to his surprise, he had no need of words, Little Pomona was happy with what she saw, unadorned and undisguised. Soon enough, the vine was clinging to the tree.” (Metamorphoses, Pomona & Vertumnus, p.62) This message of “be yourself” is ironic since the society of civilization sometimes requires being someone else, it requires the necessity of hiding some of your characters or desire to fit in to the society.
Another message is that some unavoidable and impossible to solve thing or situation exists. The whole love problem of Myrrha is so. She falls in love with the person she most shouldn’t. Sadly, it was her father who caused this. He was the one who “seized Myrrha for a passion.” And this is also another message, “think well before you act.” In this case it’s wish, rather than act.
Finally, one of the last messages is that love is something you can’t control. Out of this message, I think it will depend on the audience to decide whether that love is a good or bad thing. One might think, “oh then love should definitely be something I should avoid,” or “I knew that! Love is like energy. It makes people move and take an action.” Or maybe other more things.

Erysichthon and Orphes & Eurydice

Erysichthon

So after all there is a reason for why people began to believe in gods. Not only to explain the things we can’t explain with our knowledge, but to make some order in their country or nation, to teach some moral lessons to the people. The line that made me think of this is the following,

Erysichthon: cut it down
Narrator: Sir, that tree is centuries old-
Erysichthon: We need the wood, cut it down.
Narrator: Sir, this is a sacred grove; and this tree is beloved by Ceres.

Metamorphoses, Erysichthon, p.33

Well, I hypothesize that the author of this story wanted to teach a lesson to the audiences, through a fiction story.

However, it was surprising to hear a lesson, “do not cut down a tree”, from a culture that was more a conqueror and agriculturist. For me, it sounded ironic to hear such things from someone that was actually part of a community in which no longer lives with the nature in harmony. Or maybe it was that the author tried to make a change on the way his society lived.



Orpheus and Eurydice

Maybe life is just like Orpheus and Eurydice. Or better say our goal of life, our desire. Our goal in our lives is more or less the reason or the purpose to live. It’s so hard to accomplish and maybe its existence is something like a ghost that we never notice it. Just like Eurydice couldn’t recognize Orpheus at the end.

Alcyone and Ceyx

One of the things we, the humans, most fear is death, or the insecurity after death. And people have come up with many ideas or beliefs to overcome this horror. The story of Alcyone and Ceyx is indeed one of the ideas to shoo away the anxiety we feel. The story about two lovers who unite together even after death.
One of the great roles that this story plays is not only a function as a broom to sweep away the anxiety towards death. It not only sweeps away, but it makes you accept it as part of the life-cycle on earth. We can see that from, “For the dead body was changing, restored to life, and renewed as another seabird.” (Alcyone and Ceyx, p.32) We can see it tries to bring in peace among the audiences who reads the stories.

comparison of the interpretations of Metamorphosis

“How was life born on earth?”
This is a popular but yet to be answered questions, that is my theme for this blog today. Many theories are out there, including scientific and religious, but none of them are proven right neither wrong. But people continue discussing about it and believing it. Today I would like to compare the two interpretation of Metamorphosis written by Ovid that explains the origin of Earth, one by Mary Zimmerman and the other by Mary M. Innes and Frank Justus Miller.
First of all, Zimmerman writes in the form of a play. She wrote two possible ways to explain the origin of life. One that says, at the beginning there was only one whole thing, and it began to separate, creating the world we know now. The other one goes the opposite way. It says that the world started as blank and things began to just pop out. Either way, Zimmerman explains it through a conversation with many people, including a scientist. On the other hand, the one translated by Mary M. and Frank J., sounded more religious and absolute.

Creation

Before listening to this exercise that explains about the born of earth, I thought the slower the conversation is spoken, the easier it will be to understand. But, thanks to this listening exercise, I discovered that it is not. I discovered that the balance between slow and fast is the best. Well, so when I was thinking about the techniques for a speech, I remembered about my Spanish class. About the five minute speech we needed to do as a final project. So, for that project I searched how a “speech” should be, and I remember it was something like,

-Good volume, tone, speed.
-Know well about the subject you are talking.
-Be confident.

And more things. After hearing the speech about the “creation of Earth”, I now have a better understanding on what a good speech means.

Now, I think I should better be talking about the text. It was interesting to hear an answer that was a mixture of science and religion for the question, "How was Earth born?" Ovin, the author, talked about atoms and mass, when he talked about the existence of god. Specifically, he used the term god for things that is not discovered yet with our technology. However, it was still a surprise to see the coexisting of religion and science.

Conclusion....for Bhagavad-Gita.

Bhagavad-Gita mainly explained about how we should seek for Krishna, the “god of the gods”, and the different types of people on earth. I must not say my personal opinion about the observation that the author does about the world and god, but must objectively evaluate how this text can affect the audiences.

I would like to mention several of the possible effects this story can give. One of the most main influences it would give, is that people will be more businesslike, or at least try to be like that. Or a better of way of saying it, more objective I guess. Since they are “Freed from attachment,” (The Third Teaching, p.44) as described in the book. My personal opinion about this is that maybe the world would be more peaceful, but also probably more boring. But maybe not. I mean who knows? Maybe it’s worth trying, if possible.

Anyways, another consequence it might lead to is the increase in number of the people that will participate in violence under the belief of salvation or god. Actually, we discussed this in class, therefore might not count as one. However, it is one of the influences that we should keep in mind. Well, I think this might happen because the book says killing the physical body is not something you should hesitate to do if you are a warrior since the embodied self will never be destroyed.

Another outcome might a temporary confusion. The book frequently classifies people into three types and be offensive to the people who don’t have the “knowledge” and “understanding” about Krishna. For example, “When a fool cannot escape dreaming, fear, grief, depression, and intoxication, courage is darkly inert” (The Eighteenth Teaching, p.140). Being accused for what has been your life and yourself will surely bring confusion. Even if what Krishna is saying is true. It will be a hard time when one begins to question if what you have done was all wrong and this might lead to doubtfulness about yourself, which surely is a moment of uncertainty and anxiety.

I would like to actually see how readers have reacted to this text.

Drawing for teachings 17 & 18, The Bhagavad-Gita

Teachings 11 & 15 The Bhagavad-Gita

For these teachings, I will write down the question I came up with while reading and try to answer it as I keep on reading.

-Why is Lord Krishna keep on persuading Arjuna to kill? Or does killing have some kind of other meaning?

What I think, is that Krishna is telling Arjuna to kill all his doubts, his sense. Since war represents life, the enemy or the “cousin” probably represents the feelings.

-Why was Arjuna chosen to get the privilege of seeing the initiate form of Lord Krishna?

It is probably because Arjuna has the heart to care for others, the love towards others before thinking about himself.

“Your mind full of love,” (p.107) “Not through sacred lore, penances, charity, or sacrificial rites can I be seen in for that you saw me.” (p.108)

-What does the tree mentioned in teaching 15 represent?

The tree represents the desire that exists in our heart, I think. It talked about how the roots are deep in, which might mean that desire is something that is hard to get rid of.

“Nourished by nature’s qualities, budding with sense objects;…..Cut down this tree that has such deep roots with the sharp ax of detachment.” (p.123)

-What duality is Krishna talking about?

I couldn’t find the precise text that indicated the answer to this question. However, I believe the duality Krishna is talking about, is the two sides all people have. The bad and the good side of one.

-Why does the Lord go to the living world.

In order to teach about the true insight and how he is the supreme good.

“Lord of All, I see no end, or middle or beginning to your totality.” (p.99) “Arjuna, thus I have taught this most secret tradition; realizing it, one has understanding and his purpose is fulfilled.” (p.126)

Teachings 7-9 The Bhagavad-Gita

This is a song called reincarnation, and I thought it would be great if this can serve as the BGM of this response.



Okay, for this response, I decided to list the things that I was surprised about or noticed, and the key points that attract the audiences to believe what Lord Krishna says.

The things that I was surprised about were,

-Krishna saw life or reincarnation as some kind of punishment. This was rather shocking than surprising though. If I don’t have the memories of my past life, I will be glad to have a new life and be able to experience more.
“Reaching me, men of great spirit do not undergo rebirth, the ephemeral realm of suffering; they attain absolute perfection.” (p.81)

-Science already knew what we were made of during the time when the book was written.
“…smaller than an atom,..” (p.80)

-Maybe, this might be the origin of Buddhism or the origin of this philosophy might have been Buddhism. Honestly, I don’t know so much about Buddhism, but I have heard of the belief that after death one goes to the place where you think you are going to.
“Votaries of the gods go to the gods, ancestor-worshippers go to the ancestors, those who propitiate ghosts go to them, and my worshippers go to me.” (p.89)

-I think this is the image that most religions have towards gods. It is so mysterious.
“I know all creatures that have been, that now exist, and that are yet to be; but, Arjuna, no one knows me.” (p.76)


Now, the possible key terms that motivates the readers to believe in Lord Krishna.

-“Men who know me as its inner being inner divinity, and inner sacrifice have disciplined their reason; they know me at the time of death.” (p.77)

This motivates the audiences to not be afraid of death. It also attracts people because it says that one can only find him at the end of your life. Since it doesn’t give concrete promise that will come true until death, there is less possibility for the chance of a follower of this philosophy to disobey it.

- “You will be freed form the bonds of action, from the fruit of fortune and misfortune”(p.89)

This line definitely persuades others. I think many people are afraid from things that they know they have no control at all, because we, the humans, tend to want to control everything. So, one of the things people are scared of is things that they know they can’t do anything about it; the fortune and misfortune.

-“Arjuna, know that no one devoted to me is lost." (p.89)

By saying this, this philosophy achieves to widen its audience. And widening its audience means increasing the amount of followers.

The Bhagavad-Gita Teachings 3-5

Well, Lord Krishna continues to explain about “disciplined knowledge” leading to “inner joy”. The author is succeeding in explaining how “supreme good”(p.45) is suppose to be by making one of the characters question it and doubt it. “If you think understanding I more powerful than action, why, Krishna, do you urge me to this horrific act? You confuse my understanding with a maze of words; speak one certain truth so I may achieve what is good.” (p.43) By making a character ask something that the reader might ask, the author is accomplishing to stand in a position as a teacher and “explain” what the “truth” is. “So sever the ignorant doubt in your heart with the sword of self-knowledge, Arjuna! Observe your discipline! Arise!”(p.57) Also by having another character, he is giving a pause and rest to the readers during his explanation, so that the audiences wouldn’t get tired.

Another thing that I noticed is the tendency of people’s thoughts. The teachings in The Bhagavad-Gita continuously repeated the word, “good”, “higher good” and “supreme good”. This reminded me of what Daniel Quinn said in Ishmael; that the civilized people ate the fruit that gave us the knowledge of good and bad, but that we don’t know how to use them correctly.

Well, this is all I want to write for now, and I hope Arjuna goes against what Lord Krishna says. I would like to know the consequence for being “ignorant” and having “attachments”.

Second Teaching, The Bhagavad Gita

In this chapter, it constantly explained about the true insight. It talked about how the acceptance of everything brings peace. (p. 40 “When suffering does not disturb his mind, when his craving for pleasures has vanished, when attraction, fear, and anger are gone, he is called a sage whose thought is sure.” P. 42 “When he renounces all desires and acts without craving, possessiveness, or individuality, he finds peace.”) But I think the peace that the teaching is talking about comes from the numbness of feelings. Surely, anger comes from desire, and anger may cause confusion. Having no desire might lead to the lack of angriness lack of disorder. But desire and anger is what makes people become stronger. The desire of wanting to become stronger, the anger towards the unfairness, is what makes people move forward. I mean, what joy is Krishna talking about when being blind of the other side of love? The joy that he doesn’t need to be disheartened by any kind of happening? If he is “freed” from any kind of desire, love, hatred, then what is he fighting for in the “sacred duty”? To vanish all of those who doesn’t have the understanding he has? I believe that the acceptance is not being numb to your feelings, to step on them as if they don’t exist. But to suffer with them and feel the pain.

Response to The First Teaching of Bhagavad Gita

The first teaching talked about war, the desire to be savage, and the conscience that thinks logically and stops your wild nature. In this first passage, we were able to clearly see what makes our society in order; all the laws and rules that tangle us up; the duty or responsibility as a citizen that we are given; the consciousness of our own reputation. We can see this from page 28, “When the family is ruined, the timeless laws of family duty perish; and when duty is lost, chaos overwhelms the family.” And from page 29, “This discord drags the violators and the family itself to hell; for ancestors fall when rites of offering rice and water lapse.”
These factors are still used successfully in our modern society. However, it seems that this chains that keep us from doing what ever we want, is somehow choking us. I have the impression that they are like a double-edged sword. It is helping kill or destroy our enemy, but also giving the same price to ourselves. I wonder if there is anyway we can live together without the frustration due to the chains that we are keeping ourselves form flying away.

Gilgamesh Response

After all, Gilgamesh is all about how civilization started and how it should be. It is a tale full of the culture during the Mesopotamian age, the origin of the western culture. It is clear that the story is based on the idea of divine rights and existence of gods that rule the world.

We can see that the author believes “knowledge” is what made the civilized people superior to others. This is descried by Enkidu, when he was trying to change his wild life to the one in the city. ( p.8-9…But in the mind of the wild man there was beginning a new understanding. … “Enkidu, now you are beautiful as a god.) Now, what is the “knowledge” the author is talking about. I personally think it’s talking about the wisdom, about the knowledge of the gods and how to conquer the world. (p3. …who knew the way things were before the Flood….p 4…Gilgamesh the banguard and the rear guard of the army, Shadow of Darkness over the enemy field….. p 65..Utnapishtim…you were admitted to the company of gods, who granted you eternal life…..p 66…The voice of Ea telling me the secret…..”Utnapishtim, son of Ubartutu, ….Seek life instead of riches, save yourself….safe from obliteration in the flood.”

It also seemed that the story was made to manipulate its readers or give a hint for the survival as a citizen of the civilization at that era. For example, by showing the king is the absolute power and that no one should doubt it. (p. 4 …Gilgamesh the strongest one of all, the perfect, the terror……p 14 …‘You are the strongest of all….Enlil has made you sovereign over the city.’) It also says that having a big family leads to happiness. ( p 91.. ‘How is it with the man who has one son?’ ‘I have seen the man. He sits by the wall and weeps.’…..p 92… ‘How is it with the man with seven songs?’ ‘As if he were a companion of the gods he sits upon a throne and listens to music.’) Probably the main reason to have a big family meant more possibility of survival for the culture in case of any emergencies or danger.

As a conclusion I would say that the Mesopotamian culture is the origin of the western culture. However, not all the values are still inherited today, such as the meaning of death. In Gilgamesh, death represented fear. But in most of the culture nowadays, death is heaven, the home of the Gods where one can find eternal peace. Overall, it was a new discovery for me, to actually see how the belief from the origin of civilization, Mesopotamia, is still taking its roots to our culture.


Picture from http://www.expotrade.com.ar/sites/expotrade/images/stories/prensa/arbol.jpg

Tablet 11 Gilgamesh response

This tablet has reminded me of how old the story was written and how it has become the source of our belief and imagination. For example, the story about the flood sounds alike to the story about “Noah’s ark”. Since Gilgamesh was written before than the Hebrew bible, I believe the story of Noah was somehow influenced by Gilgamesh. I have also seen the term abyss in many medias, such as movies and Japanese cartoons.
It is incredible to know that many of our beliefs about god and the world are originated from the Mesopotamian mythology or culture. I was surprised by the fact that even though technology and ideas has changed a lot throughout the history, our belief about our existence and god haven’t changed that much.

Gilgamesh tablets 9 & 10, response.

These two tablets left me with several questions. After reading how miserable Gilgamesh has converted because of his friend’s death, I am beginning to wonder if it is actually true that people become stronger when there is someone you love and can trust from the deepest place of your heart. I mean, I have heard that when one falls in love, that person becomes so important that your mind is invaded with that only person, both in a good and bad way. And not being able to control yourself is quite a dangerous condition. Before Gilgamesh met Enkidu, he was the strongest of all. But now look at him. He is just a miserable man that is hanging on his glory past.

However, it is also true that Gilgamesh has accomplished many other things with Enkidu. This fact, lead me to a second question: If one decides to live alone, for what would he/she live? For his/her glory? But who would he/she share his happiness with? The description of how it is to have someone trustable aside you and how it is to loose that person has thrown me to a maze of thoughts.


Apparently, I crushed with another question after finishing up tablet 10. “How can we balance acceptance and the strong will of not giving up?” Accepting the death of someone sounds a reasonable action. But accepting one’s limit sounds both reasonable and unreasonable. It sounds manly. Nonetheless, it also sounds an excuse to give up. I hope these questions would be answered later on in the story of Gilgamesh.

Response to Gilgamesh tablet 7 & 8

This is a short summery of the story until tablet 7&8.



Death is something that lives near you, something part of you. But a thing you don’t want to usually see or admit. In tablet 7 and 8, death has finally arrived as a depressing loss. Before that two important characters have died; Huwawa and the Bull of Heaven. But both of them were representing the power and victory of Gilgamesh and Enkidu.

By showing Gilgamesh weeping as shown in page 44, “‘It is Enkidu, the companion, whom I weep for, weeping for him as if I were a woman.”, (Gilgamesh) the author shows that Gilgamesh is a human, even if he is half god. Depicting the weakness of “the strongest of all” is an important strategy to make the superhero character familiar to the readers. Winning a person’s sympathy helps readers feel closer with the character. This existence of half god but also half human may motivate audiences to be either strong like Gilgamesh or Enkidu or believe in their leaders that are “strong with storm heart” just like Gilgamesh and Enkidu. Which would have been an important factor in the era when the tablets were written down.

Response to table 6, Gilgamesh

Finally in tablet 6, I am beginning to like the story. Only because of Ishtar. In this tablet, finally the intelligence of Gilgamesh is striking with the contrast of Ishtar’s “foulness”. I like how the goddess goes against Gilgamesh using the Bull of Heaven. Additionally, the influence Ishtar gives to whom she loved just like a witch is interesting. Finally, I think her selfishness shows a simple but great lesson, think about the consequences of your actions.

Response to "Gilgamesh tables 4 & 5"

The journey of Gilgamesh and Enkidu to the Cedar Forest was inscribed in these tablets. All written in sets of two lines. Through these tablets, you can realize how the author values the god and think of it as the absolute existence. It is impressive how right and wrong, good and bad is divided clearly; the Guardian of the Forest as the bad one and Gilgamesh as the hero, who killed a living that offered to be the guardian of the trees. Another impressive fact is Enkidu’s positive way of thinking. It is amusing how he interprets the dreams to something fortunate and convenient for them.

As a king and the strongest of all, I think Gilgamesh should have accepted Huwawa. As shown through the teamwork of Gilgamesh and Enkidu, variety of characteristics and talent is necessary for the society to flourish and be ready for anything. In my opinion, Gilgamesh could have welcomed Huwawa and make a stronger nation. Moreover, as the strongest of all, he was capable of accepting the demon and make it to one of the strength of his. Therefore, I propose that the ending of tablet 5 should show Gilgamesh's wide heart by describing how he would accept Huwawa.

I guess I will have a hard time trying to understand the feelings of the characters.




Picture from : http://www.dur.ac.uk/j.h.haubold/pictures/gilgamesh-killiingalion1.jpg

Gilgamesh Tablet 2 & 3

After reading the tablets one through three from Gilgamesh, I honestly couldn’t understand why Enkidu decided to accept Gilgamesh because he was stronger than him. Where did his anger towards Gilgamesh’s action that went against his morals go? Is strength more valued than your own beliefs? Or is it only that I am being too picky? I think I will have a hard time trying to understand Enkidu’s feeling.

However, I like how the book Gilgamesh depicts different perspectives for one event, and still keeping the focus to Gilgamesh. For example, when Gilgamesh began to say he would venture into the Cedar Forest. There were people who would support him and people who would warn him. Another thing I like about the book is the “man’s nature” illustrated in the book, which is the desire to explore. I believe the aspiration towards unknown things has made us keep on moving in the area of technology and knowledge. (Not saying good neither bad.)


picture from : http://www.crystalinks.com/gilhumbaba.jpg

After reading "Asian Rambling"...

A.The title of the blog is “Asian Rambling from a life in China”.

B.The blog is about the author’s life and his opinion or feeling towards it. It’s a personal diary.

C.This title is fitting the blog since the blog talks about all his experience and feelings in a random way and order.

D.The blogger offers information by explaining his experiences. But since the objective of the blog is to write as a diary, one wouldn’t read it to obtain “information”.

E.I liked the blog “Weblog Wonna Be” more than I did “Asian Rambling from a life in China”. This is because “Weblog Wonna Be” was much easier to read and his/her unique personality stood out in an interesting way.

F.It was neither good nor bad. It can be improved by writing some catchy key words to entice readers.

About "blogs" in general

A. The word “blog” originally comes from the term “web log” or “weblog”. Peter Merholz was the one who turned that term to “we blog” and then “Blog”.

B. The writer might object to a book about blogs because they are totally different things. The purpose of the book is to stay in the story unlikely blogs, which their function is to go beyond their own blog. Also there are much illegal or offensive information written in blogs that can’t be posted on books. Finally, one of the most important reasons is that blog is all about links and it is not possible to put all those information from different areas into one book.

C. Blogs these days became handful to everyone who uses internet since there’re many services to make up your own page. Also the purpose of the blog in general has changed. Now a days, most people do blog to be linked rather than to give people useful links.

D. I might prefer to read a blog rather than a book because it has many links to more information.　But one may need to doubt the objectivity of a blog because in a blog you can write whenever and whatever way you want to without saying your name. The information might be biased.

E. Looking for Catharsis

F. Blogs that mention about Ishmael by Daniel Quinn.

http://scienceguy288.wordpress.com/2010/01/17/science-soul-book-review-ishmael/

http://peopleandresourcesfire.blogspot.com/2009/12/ishmael-by-daniel-quinn.html

http://peopleandresourcesearth.blogspot.com/2009/12/ishmael-by-daniel-quinn.html