Happy easter!

[hajii]

They were showing "The Passion of the Christ" the other night, so I thought I'd take a look. Man, that is DEFINITELY the most violent film I have ever seen. I only watched for a while, when Pilate sentenced him, to where he was carring the cross. The scourging was VERY detailed and realistic. I am not Christian- oriented, but

believe the events probably happened much like that. I found myself repulsed by the images, I knew the story of course, but to see a divine being treated that way was so awful, i felt nauseous. I felt so guilty, to be a member of humanity.

The images stuck with me, and I realized I really didn't understand why it happened like that. I was talking to a Catholic today, and she explained it was about sacrifice, that Christ suffered so we wouldn't have to. I mean, I know the story, but WHY? It still doesn't make sense. From an eastern perspective, even less so. His humility, gentleness and understanding, in the midst of such an experience were an awesome example, but I am still unclear.

[cloud recluse]

They were showing "The Passion of the Christ" the other night, so I thought I'd take a look. Man, that is DEFINITELY the most violent film I have ever seen. I only watched for a while, when Pilate sentenced him, to where he was carring the cross. The scourging was VERY detailed and realistic. I am not Christian- oriented, but

believe the events probably happened much like that. I found myself repulsed by the images, I knew the story of course, but to see a divine being treated that way was so awful, i felt nauseous. I felt so guilty, to be a member of humanity.

The images stuck with me, and I realized I really didn't understand why it happened like that. I was talking to a Catholic today, and she explained it was about sacrifice, that Christ suffered so we wouldn't have to. I mean, I know the story, but WHY? It still doesn't make sense. From an eastern perspective, even less so. His humility, gentleness and understanding, in the midst of such an experience were an awesome example, but I am still unclear.

In the spirit of the season,I gotta say Im skeptical.I think Christ was your average jewish nationalist hoping to expel the Roman occupiers with divinely sanctioned militairy force.He failed,and was made an example of with the standard Roman punishment for rebels under the bloodthirsty Pontius Pilate. Paul ,the man who never met Christ, then reformulated the Jesus myth around standard pagan images of the dying-reborn sun god to serve his own psychological needs.When the Romans finally expel the Jews from Jerusalem ,the original Jesus movement collapses,& Pauls Rome-freindly version no longer has opposition. To see ANY creature treated that way is fucking disgusting And Jesus was as divine & as stupid as the rest of us .Sorry to rant,but you might be giving this myth more attention than it deserves.and now Ive got myself all worked up.stick with the Far Eastern perspective Hajji,dont but into this Middle-Eastern incoherency.Without even knowing you,I allready know your better than that. Regards,Cloud.

[hajii]

Wow, I never thought of it that way. I admit I don't know enough of the history behind it to discuss it as you do.

Yeah, lately I have been trying to reconcile the two schools of thought, and I'm not having much luck. The far eastern perspective FEELS much better, and has helped me progress. I always felt Christ was an enlightend teacher though. The mystical stuff in the Bible is buried, like the ancient Taoist texts, once you know how things work, it all makes sense

[thaddeus]

Wow, I never thought of it that way. I admit I don't know enough of the history behind it to discuss it as you do.

Yeah, lately I have been trying to reconcile the two schools of thought, and I'm not having much luck. The far eastern perspective FEELS much better, and has helped me progress. I always felt Christ was an enlightend teacher though. The mystical stuff in the Bible is buried, like the ancient Taoist texts, once you know how things work, it all makes sense

Visit a synogogue sometime and listen to the rabbi's sermons. I was born catholic and as a catholic we are brought up to take the bible literally. I have to say the average christian's understanding of the 'old testament' is like a kindergarten level. There is so much going on, so much nuance so much discussion around a single word in jewish tradition, that your appreciation for what is in there will never be the same. The kabbalists take the stuff to a university level. Not sure where I stand with that exactly, I have some mixed feelings, but the takeaway is that there is much more than meets the eye.

 

I agree with you regarding christ's teachings. Something happened and it was remarkable. I don't think it's a matter of taking sides like east or west to find truth. I think you are doing the right thing by looking beneath the surface. Sometimes digging deeper pays off, like the bottom of a paella.

 

Regarding your original question about the sacrifice. I always had the same question. It must be like a Koan.

Or it could just be someone's superficial understanding that gets repeated so much no one bothers to question it anymore. For me, i never understood what the sacrifice was. Apparantly jesus knew who he was and he would come back, etc. so what exactly was the sacrifice. I never got an explanation from all my discussions with born agains, etc. So perhaps it's something to meditate on and realize. There probably is no verbal explanation.

 

Good questions..

T

[Peregrino]

[hajii]

 

Unlike the fundagelical types, I don't take Christian *cosmology* seriously (as I am very much a defender of the Enlightenment, Darwin, the scientific method, etc.), but I do think that Christian *anthropology* has a lot to teach ethically, if you understand the tradition as an evolution of consciousness from an awareness of a violent, jealous God that demands sacrifice and warfare to that of a non-violent divinity that calls all of creation to participate in his/her/its life.

 

 

Peace,

Peregrino

 

This is getting interesting I have thought of this aspect myself, almost as though it is a DIFFERENT entity....

[Peregrino]

OK, if it's worth doing, it's worth delegating:

Are the Gospels Mythical?

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Rene Girard

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 1996 First Things 62 (April 1996): 27-31.

 

From the earliest days of Christianity, the Gospels' resemblance to certain myths has been used as an argument against Christian faith. When pagan apologists for the official pantheism of the Roman empire denied that the death-and-resurrection myth of Jesus differed in any significant way from the myths of Dionysus, Osiris, Adonis, Attis, etc., they failed to stem the rising Christian tide. In the last two hundred years, however, as anthropologists have discovered all over the world foundational myths that similarly resemble Jesus' Passion and Resurrection, the notion of Christianity as a myth seems at last to have taken hold-even among Christian believers.

 

Beginning with some violent cosmic or social crisis, and culminating in the suffering of a mysterious victim (often at the hands of a furious mob), all these myths conclude with the triumphal return of the sufferer, thereby revealed as a divinity. The kind of anthropological research undertaken before World War II-in which theorists struggled to account for resemblances among myths-is regarded as a hopeless "metaphysical" failure by most anthropologists nowadays. Its failure seems, however, not to have weakened anthropology's skeptical scientific spirit, but only to have weakened further, in some mysterious way, the plausibility of the dogmatic claims of religion that the earlier theorists had hoped to supersede: if science itself cannot formulate universal truths of human nature, then religion-as manifestly inferior to science-must be even more devalued than we had supposed.

 

This is the contemporary intellectual situation Christian thinkers face as they read the Scriptures. The Cross is incomparable insofar as its victim is the Son of God, but in every other respect it is a human event. An analysis of that event-exploring the anthropological aspects of the Passion that we cannot neglect if we take the dogma of the Incarnation seriously-not only reveals the falsity of contemporary anthropology's skepticism about human nature. It also utterly discredits the notion that Christianity is in any sense mythological. The world's myths do not reveal a way to interpret the Gospels, but exactly the reverse: the Gospels reveal to us the way to interpret myth.

 

Jesus does, of course, compare his own story to certain others when he says that his death will be like the death of the prophets: "The blood of all the prophets shed since the foundation of the world may be required of this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah" (Luke 11:50-51). What, we must ask, does the word like really mean here? In the death most strikingly similar to the Passion-that of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah, chapters 52-53-a crowd unites against a single victim, just as similar crowds unite against Jeremiah, Job, the narrators of the penitential psalms, etc. In Genesis, Joseph is cast out by the envious crowd of his brothers. All these episodes of violence have the same all-against-one structure.

 

Since John the Baptist is a prophet, we may expect his violent death in the New Testament to be similar, and indeed John dies because Herod's guests turn into a murderous crowd. Herod himself is as inclined to spare John's life as Pilate is to spare Jesus'-but leaders who do not stand up to violent crowds are bound to join them, and join them both Herod and Pilate do. Ancient people typically regarded ritual dancing as the most mimetic of all arts, solidifying the participants of a sacrifice against the soon to be immolated victim. The hostile polarization against John results from Salome's dancing-a result foreseen and cleverly engineered by Herodias for exactly that purpose.

 

There is no equivalent of Salome's dancing in Jesus' Passion, but a mimetic or imitative dimension is obviously present. The crowd that gathers against Jesus is the same that had enthusiastically welcomed him into Jerusalem a few days earlier. The sudden reversal is typical of unstable crowds everywhere: rather than a deep-seated hatred for the victim, it suggests a wave of contagious violence.

 

Peter spectacularly illustrates this mimetic contagion. When surrounded by people hostile to Jesus, he imitates their hostility. He obeys the same mimetic force, ultimately, as Pilate and Herod. Even the thieves crucified with Jesus obey that force and feel compelled to join the crowd. And yet, I think, the Gospels do not seek to stigmatize Peter, or the thieves, or the crowd as a whole, or the Jews as a people, but to reveal the enormous power of mimetic contagion-a revelation valid for the entire chain of murders stretching from the Passion back to "the foundation of the world." The Gospels have an immensely powerful reason for their constant reference to these murders, and it concerns two essential and yet strangely neglected words, skandalon and Satan. . . .

 

(Continued at http://print.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft96...es/girard.html)

 

 

Mind you, while Girard applies his "mimetic theory" mainly to the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, I think his ideas about the imitative and illusive nature of desire and the "autonomous self" resonate with a lot of Buddhist sutras . . . Don't know how much I would apply it to Taoism though!

 

And now for the Gizoogle-fied version!

 

 

Are tha Gospels Mythical?

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Rene Girard

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 1996 First Rhymin' 62 (April 1996): 27-31.

 

From tha earliest days of Christianizzles tha Gospels' resemblance ta certain myths has been used as an argument against Christian faith wit da big Bo$$ Dogg. Wizzy pagan apologists fo` tha official pantheism of tha Roman empire denied that tha death-and-resizzles myth of Jesus differed in any signifizzles way from tha myths of Dionysus, Osiris, Adonis, Attis, etc., they failed ta stiznem tha ris'n Christian tizzle like this and like that and like this and uh. In tha last two hundred years, crazy ass nigga as anthropizzles hizzle discovered all over tha world foundizzle myths tizzle similarly resemble Jesus' Passion n Resurrizzles tha notion of Christianity as a mizzyth seems at last ta have taken hold-even among Christian drug deala , ya feel me?.

 

Perpetratin' wit some violent cosmic or social crisis, n hatin' in tha suffer'n of a mysterious victim (often at tha hands of a furious mob), all these myths conclude wit tha triumphal return of tha shot calla thereby revealed as a divinity aww nah. The kind of anthropolizzles research undertaken before World War II-in whizzich theorists struggled ta account fo` resemblizzles among myths-is regarded as a hopeless "metaphysical" failure by most anthropizzles nowadays . Drop it like its hot. Its failure seems, nigga not ta hizzy weakened anthropizzles skeptical scientific spirit, but only ta have weakened drug deala in some mysterious wizzle tha plausibility of tha dogmatic claims of religion that tha earlia theorists had hoped ta supersede dogg: if science itself cannot formulate universal truths of human nature, then religizzles manifestly inferior ta science-must be even more devalued tizzle we had supposed . Im crazy, you can't phase me.

 

This is tha contemporary intellectual situation Christian thinka face as they read tha Scriptures fo' sheezy. The Cross is incomparable insofar as its victim is tha Son of Giznod, but in every otha respect it is a human event. An analysis of thizzay event-explor'n tha anthropolizzles aspects of tha Passion that we cannot neglect if we takes tha dogma of tha Incarnation serioizzles only reveals tha falsity of contemporary anthropizzles skepticism `bout human nature fo' rizeal. It also utterly discredits tha notion tizzy Christianity is in any sense mythologizzles . Nigga get shut up or get wet up. The world's myths do not reveal a way ta interpret tha Gospels, but exactly tha reverse: tha Gospels reveal ta us tha way ta interpret miznyth.

 

Jesus does, of course, compare his own story ta certain otha whiznen he sez tizzy his death wizzay be like tha death of tha prophets n we out: "The n we out: blood of all tha prophets shed since tha foundation of tha world may be required of this generizzles fizzy tha blood of Abel ta tha blood of Zechariah" (Luke 11:50-51). What, we M-to-tha-izzust ask, does tha word likereally mizzy hizzle? In tha death most strikingly similar ta tha Passion-that of tha Doggy Stylin' Servant in Isaiah, bitch 52-53-a crowd unites against a single victim, jizzle as similar crowds unite against Jeremiah, Jiznob, tha narrators of tha penitizzles psalms, etc . I thought i told ya, nigga I'm a soldier. In Genesis, Joseph is cast out by tha envious crowd of his brotha n shit. All these episodes of violence hizzy tha same all-against-one structure.

 

Since Jizzay tha Baptist is a prophet, we may expect his violent death in tha New Testament ta be similar, n indeed Jizzay dies coz Herod's guests tizzay into a murderous crowd. Herod himself is as inclined ta spare John's life as Pilate is ta spare Jesus'-but pusha who do not stand up ta violent crowds is bound ta jizzy thizzay n jizzy tizzy both Herod n Pilate do ya dig?. Ancient thugz typically regarded ritual danc'n as tha mizzost mimeticof all arts, solidify'n tha particizzles of a sacrifice against tha soon ta be immolated victim. The hostile polarizizzle against Jizzy results from Salome's danc'n-a result foreseen n cleverly engineered by Herodias fo` exactly thizzay purpose.

 

There is no equivalent of Salome's danc'n in Jesus' Passion, but a mimetic or imitative dimension is obviously present. The crowd that pimp against Jesus is tha same thiznat had enthusiastically welcomed him into Jerusizzles a few days playa so i can get mah pimp on. The sudden reversal is typical of unstable crowds everywhere: gangsta thizzan a deep-seated hatred fo` tha victim, it suggests a wizzle of contagious violence.

 

Peta spectacularly illustrates this mimetic contagion. W-H-to-tha-izzen surrounded by thugz hostile ta Jesus, he imitates they hostility aww nah. He obeys tha same mimetic force, ultimizzles as Pilate n Herod paper'd up. Even tha thieves crucified wit Jesus obey that force n feel compelled ta join tha crowd ya feelin' me?. And yet, I think, tha Gospels do not seek ta stigmatize Peta, or tha thieves, or tha crowd as a whole, or tha Jews as a people, but ta reveal tha enormous brotha of mimetic contagion-a revelizzles valid fo` tha entire chain of hustla stretch'n frizzom tha Passion back ta "the foundation of tha world." The Gospels have an immensely powerful reason fo` they constant reference ta these murda, n it concerns two essential n yet strangely neglected words, skandalonnSatan.

 

The traditizzle English translation of frontin' blizzay is far superior ta timid recent translations, fo` tha Greek skandalondesignizzles an unavoidable obstacle that somehow becomes mizzle attractive (as well as repulsizzles each tizzle we stumble against it. The first time Jesus predicts his violent death (Matthew 16:21-23), his resignizzles appalls Peta, who tries ta instill some worldly ambition in his playa . Chill as I take you on a trip: Instead of imitat'n Jesus, Peta wants Jesus ta imitate him. If two niggaz imitate each otha's desire, tizzle bizzle desire tha same object. And if they cannot share this object, they wizzay compete fo` it, each ridin' simultaneously a model n an obstacle ta tha crazy ass nigga . Keep'n it gangsta dogg. The compet'n desires intensify as model n obstacle reinforce each otha, n an escalation of mimetic rivalry follows; admiration gives way ta indignation, jealousy, envy, hatred, and, at last, violence n vengeance . Aint no killin' everybodys chillin'. Had Jesus imitated Peta's ambition, tha two thereby would hizzy begun weed-smokin' fo` tha leadership of some politicized "Jesus Movement." Sens'n tha brotha Jesus vehemently interrupts Bitch: "Get: behind me, Satan, you is a skandalonta me."

 

The mizzle our models impede our desires, tha more mobbin' they become as models like a tru playa'. Scandals can be sexual, no doubt, but they is not primarily a hustla of sex any more than of worldly ambition. Tizzle M-to-tha-izzust be defined in terms not of they objects but of they obstaclizzles escalizzle mimetic rivalry that is tha sinful dynamics of human conflict n its psychic misery cuz I put gangsta rap on tha map. If tha problem of mimetic rivalry escapes us, we may mistakes Jesus' prescriptions fo` some social utopia . Ill slap tha taste out yo mouf. The triznuth is hustla thizzat scandals is sizzay a threat tizzle nuttin' should be spared ta avoid tizzle. At tha fiznirst H-to-tha-izzint, we should abandon tha disputed object ta our rivals n accede even ta they mizzy outrageous demands; we should "turn tha otha cheek."

 

If we choose Jesus as our model, we simultaneously choose his own model, God tha Fatha. Hav'n no appropriative desire, Jesus proclaims tha possibility of freedom frizzay scandal. But if we choose possessive models we find ourselves in endless scandals, fo` our real model is Satan so jus' chill. A seductive shot calla who suggests ta us tha desires most likely ta generate rivalries, Satan prevents us from ballin' baller he simultaneously incites us ta desire in tha dogg pound. He turns into a diabolosHustla word that designizzles tha obstaclizzle of mimetic rivalry). Satan is skandalonpersonizzle as Jesus makes explicit in his rebuke of Peta.

 

Since mizzle human saggin' do not follow Jesus, scandals mizzy happen (Matthew 18:7), proliferat'n in ways tizzle ought ta endanga tha collective survival of tha human race-for once we understand tha terrify'n powa of ballin' mimetic desire, no society seems capable of stand'n against it. And yet, though many societies perish, new societies manage ta be biznorn, n quite a few established societies manage ta find ways ta survive or regenerate ridin' in mah double R. Some counterforce mizzy be at work, not powerful enough ta terminate scandals once n fo` all, n yet sufficient ta moderate they impact n keep them unda some control n shit.

 

This counterforce is, I believe, tha mythologizzles scapegoat-the sacrifizzle victim of myth yaba daba dizzle. Wizzle scandals proliferizzles human be'n become so obsessed wit they rivals that they lose sight of tha objects fo` W-H-to-tha-izzich they compete n begin ta focus angrily on one hustla so jus' chill. As tha borrow'n of tha model's object shifts ta tha borrow'n of tha rival's hatred, acquisitive mimesis turns into a mimesis of antagonists so i can get mah pimp on. More n more individuals polarize against brotha n brotha enemies until, in tha end, only one is left. Coz everyone believes in tha guilt of tha last victim, they all tizzy against him-and since that victim is now isolated n helpless, tizzle can do so wit no danga of retalizzles. As a result, no enemy remains fo` anybody in tha community n' shit. Scandals evaporate n peace returns-for a while fo' real.

 

Society's preservizzles against tha unlimited violence of scandals lies in tha mimetic coalition against tha single victim n its ensu'n limited violence. The violent death of Jesus is, humanly speak'n, an example of this strange process bitch ass nigga. Before it begins, Jesus warns his disciples (and especially Playa that tizzle wizzle be "scandalized" by him (-M-to-tha-izzark 14:27). This use of skandalizzlesuggests thizzay tha mimetic force at wizzy in tha all-against-one violence is tha same violence at wizzle in mimetic rivalries between individuals crazy up in here. In steppin' a riot n saggin' a crowd, tha Crucifizzles is an example of cathartic victimizizzles. A ho-slappin' detail in tha gospel makes clear tha cathartic effects of tha mimetic hustla allows us ta distinguish them fizzle tha Crucifizzles Christian effects . Boom bam as I step in the jam, God damn. At tha end of his Passion account, Luke writes, "And Herod n Pilate became niggaz wit each otha that vizzle day, fo` before this tizzle had been at enmity wit each other" (23:12). This reconcilizzles outwardly resembles Christian communion-since it origizzles in Jesus' death-and yet it has nuttin' ta do wit it . Aint no L-I-M-I-to-tha-T. It is a cathartic effect rooted in tha mimetic contagion.

 

Jesus' persecizzles do not realize that they influence one anotha mimetically. Their ignorance does not cancel they responsibilizzles but it does lessen it cuz its a pimp thang: "Father, cuz its a pimp thang: forgive them," Jesus cries, "for they knizzay not wizzle they do" (Luke 23:34). A parallel statement in Acts 3:17 shows that this miznust be interpreted literally. Peta ascribes ta ignorance tha behavior of tha crowd n its leada . Put ya mutha fuckin choppers up if ya feel this.. His personal experience of tha mimetic compulsion thizzay possesses crowds prevents him friznom regard'n himself immune ta tha violent contagion of victimizizzles in all flavas.

 

The role of Satan, tha personificizzle of scandals, helps us ta understand tha mimetic conception of tha Gospels cuz its a doggy dog world. To tha question How can Satan cizzast out Satan? (Mark 3:23), tha wanna be gangsta is unanimous victimizizzles . You'se a flea and I'm the big dogg. On tha one hand, Satan is tha instigator of scandal, tha force tizzle disintegrizzles communizzle on tha otha hiznand, he is tha resolizzles of scandal in unanimous victimizizzles. This triznick of last resort enables tha prince of this world ta rescue his possessions in extremis, when tizzle is too badly threatened by his own disorda. Being both a principle of playa n a principle of baller Satan is truly divided against himself droppin hits.

 

The famous portrayal of tha mimetic murda of Jiznohn tha Baptist occurs-in B-to-tha-izzoth Mizzark n Matthew-as a curious flashback. By beginn'n wit an account of Herod's hustla pimpin' hold of tha rumor of John's resurrizzles n only thizzay going back in time ta narrate John's death, Mark n Matthew reveal tha origin of Herod's compulsive belief in his own decisive participizzles in tha murda. The evangelists give a mobbin' but preshizzous example of mythic genesis -of tha perpetratin' powa of violence, of its ability ta found culture. Herod's belief is vestigial, ta be sure, but tha fact tizzle two Gospels mention it confirms, I think, tha evangizzles authenticity of tha doctrine that grounds mythology in mimetic victimizizzles.

 

Modern Christians is often made uncomfortable by this false resurrizzles that seems ta resemble tha true one, but Mark n Matthew obviously do not share they embarrassment. Far friznom cruisin' tha similarizzles they attract our attention ta them, mizzle as Luke attracts our attention ta tha resemblance between Christian communion n tha unholy reconcilizzles of Herod n Pilate as a result of Jesus' death. The evangelists see sum-m sum-m very simple n fundamizzles that we ourselves should see. As soon as we become reconciled ta tha similarizzles between violence in tha Bible n myths, we can understand how tha Bible is notmythicizzle tha reaction ta violence recorded in tha Bible radically baller frizzom tha reaction recorded in myth paper'd up.

 

Beginn'n wit tha story of Cain n Abel, tha Bible proclaims tha innocence of mythical victims n tha guilt of they wanna be gangsta n shit. Liv'n afta tha widespread promulgizzles of tha gospel, we find this natural n neva pause ta thizzink tizzy in classical myths tha opposite is true so sit back relax new jacks get smacked: tha persecizzles always seem ta have a valid cause ta persecute they victims . Keep'n it gangsta dogg. The Dionysiac myths regard even tha most horrible mobbin' as legitimate so show some love niggaz. Pentheus in tha Bacchaeis legitimately slain by his nigga n sista, fo` his contempt of tha god Dionysus is a fault serious enough ta warrant his death ya dig?. Oedipus, too, deserves his fate. Accord'n ta tha mizzay he has truly iced his fatha n married his wanna be gangsta n is thus truly responsible fo` tha plague thiznat ravages Thebes. To ciznast him out is not merely a permissible action, but a religious duty n we out.

 

Even if they is not accused of any crime, mythical victims is still supposed ta die fo` a good cause, n they innocence makes they deaths no less legitimate. In tha Vedic M-to-tha-izzyth of Purusha, fo` instance, no wrongdo'n is mentionizzles tha tear'n apart of tha victim is nonethizzles a holy deed. The pieces of Purusha's body is needed ta create tha three bootylicious castes, tha mainstay of Indian society n shit. In myth, violent death is always justified.

 

If tha violence of myths is purely mimetizzles it is like tha Passion, as Jesus says-all these justificizzles is false aww nah. And yet, since tizzle systematically reverse tha tizzle distribizzle of innocence n guilt, such myths cannot be purely fictional where the sun be shinin and I be rhymin'. They is lies, certainly, but tha specific kind of lie called fo` by mimetic contagion-the false accusation that spreads mimetically throughout a disturbed human community at tha climax wizzle scandals polarize against tha single scapegoat whose death reunites tha community. The myth-mak'n machine is tha mimetic contagion thizzay disappears behind tha mizzy it generizzles bitch ass nigga.

 

There is nuttin' secret `bout tha justificizzles espoused by myths; tha stereotizzle accusations of mob violence is always available wizzy tha search fo` scapegoats is on. In tha Gospels, howeva, tha trippin' machinery is F-U-Double-Lizzy visible coz it encounta opposition n no longa operates efficiently dogg. The resistance ta tha mimetic contagion prevents tha mizzyth from tak'n shape . Keep'n it gangsta dogg. The conclusion in tha light of tha Gospels is inescapable: myths is tha voice of communizzles tizzle unanimously surrenda ta tha mimetic contagion of victimizizzle cuz its a doggy dog world.

 

This interprizzles is reinforced by tha optimistic end'n of myths. The conjunction of tha guilty victim n tha reconciled community is too frequent ta be fortuitous so bow down to the bow wow. The only possible explanation is tha distorted representizzles of unanimous victimizizzles. The violent process is not effective unless it fools all witnesses, n tha proof tizzle it does, in tha case of myths, is tha harmonious n cathartic conclusion, rooted in a perfectly unanimous murda now pass the glock Anotha dogg house production..

 

We hear nowadays thizzay behind every tizzy n every event, there is an infinite baller of interprizzles all more or less equivalent. Mimetic victimizizzles makes tha absurdity of this vizzle manifest fo' sheezy. Only two possible reactions ta tha mimetic contagion exist, n they makes an enormous difference. Brotha we surrenda n join tha persecut'n crowd, or we resist n stand alone. The fizzirst way is tha unanimous sizzay deception we call mythology so show some love niggaz. The second way is tha road ta tha trizzuth followed by tha Bible like a tru playa'.

 

Instead of sippin' victimizizzle on tha victims, tha Gospels blame it on tha gangsta with the S-N-double-O-P. What tha myths systematically hide, tha Bible reveals. This difference is not merely "moralistic" (as Nietzsche believed) or a matta of subjective choice; it is a question of T-R-to-tha-izzuth n shit. Whizzay tha Bible n tha Gospels say T-H-to-tha-izzat tha victims should have been spared, they do not merely "take pity" on them. Tizzle puncture tha illusion of tha unanimous victimizizzles that foundizzle myths use as a crisis-solv'n n reorder'n device of human communizzles , betta check yo self.

 

When we examine myths in tha light of tha Gospels, even they mizzost enigmatic features become intelligible ya feelin' me?. Shot Calla fo` example, tha disabilizzles n abnormizzles tizzle seem always ta plague mythical heroes. Oedipus limps, as do quite a few of his fellow heroes n divinizzles fo' real. Motherfucka have only one leg, or one arm, or one eye, or is blind, hunchbacked, etc. Killa still is unusually tall or unusually shiznort. Some have a hatin' skin diseaze, or a body odor so strong T-H-to-tha-izzat it plagues they neighbors crazy up in here. In a crowd, even minor disabilizzles n singularizzles W-to-tha-izzill arizouse discomfort and, should trouble erupt, they possessors is likely ta be selected as victims. The preponderance of cripples n freaks among mythical heroes must be a statistizzles consequence of tha tizzy of victimizizzle tizzy generizzles mythology. So too tha preponderance of "strangers": in all isolated groups, baller arizouse a curiosity tizzle may quickly turn ta hostility dur'n a panic. Mimetic violence is essentially disorizzles deprived of valid causes, it selects its victims accord'n ta minuscule signs n pseudizzles that we may identify as preferizzles signs of victimizizzles fo shizzle.

 

In tha Bible, tha false or insignizzle causes of mythical violence is effectively dismissed in tha simple n ridin' statement, They hated me witout a cause (John 15:25), in whizzay Jesus quotes n virtually summarizzles Psalm 35-one of tha "scapegoat psalms" that literally turns tha mob's mythical justificizzles inside out . They call me tha black folks president. Instead of tha mob speak'n ta justify violence wit causes that it perceives as legitimizzles tha victim speaks ta denounce tha causes as nonexizzles.

 

To explicate archaic myths, we need only follow tha method Jesus recommends n substitute this witout cause fo` tha false mythical causes. In tha Byzantine Empire, I understand, tha Oedipus tragedy was read as an analogue of tha Christian Passion. If true, those early anthropizzles were approach'n tha R-to-tha-izzight problem fizzy tha wrong end. Their reduction of tha Gospels ta an ordinary myth snuffed tha evangizzles light wit mythology. In orda ta succeed, one must illuminate tha obscurity of myth wit tha intelligence of tha Gospels.

 

If unanimous victimizizzles reconcizzles n nigga societies in direct proportion ta its concealment, thizzay it mizzle lose its effectizzles in direct proportion ta its revelizzles. W-H-to-tha-izzen tha mythical lie is publicly denounced, tha polarizizzles of scandals is no brotha unanimous n tha social catharsis weakens n disappears. Instead of spendin' tha communizzles tha victimizizzle M-to-tha-izzust intensify divisions n dissensions n' shit.

 

These disruptive conseqizzles should be felt in tha Gospels and, indeed, they are. In tha Gospel of J-to-tha-izzohn, fo` instance, everyth'n Jesus does n sez has a divisive effect if you gots a paper stack. Far F-R-to-tha-izzom downplay'n this fizzact, tha author repeatedly draws our attention ta it . Snoop heffner mixed with a little bit of doggy flint. Similizzles in Matthew 10:34, Jesus says, "I have not come ta bring peace, but a sword." If tha only peace humanity has ever enjoyed depends on unconsshizzous victimizizzles tha consciousness thizzat tha Gospels bring into tha world can only destroy it motha fucka.

 

The image of Satan-"a liar n tha fatha of lies" (John 8:44)-also expresses this opposition between tha mythical ballin' n tha evangizzles reveal'n of victimizizzle. The Crucifizzle as a defeat fo` Satan, Jesus' prediction thizzay Satan "is pimpin' ta an end" (Mark 3:26), implies less an orderly world T-H-to-tha-izzan one in whiznich Satan is on tha loose. Instead of conclud'n wit tha reassur'n harmony of myths, tha New Testament opens up apocizzles perspectizzle in tha synoptic Gospels equally wit tha Book of Revelizzles. To reach "the peace thiznat surpasseth all understanding," humanity mizzy give up its old, partial peace founded on victimization-and a bootylicious deal of turmoil can be expected . Aint no L-I-M-I-to-tha-T. The apocizzles dimension is not an alien element that should be purged fizzle tha New Testament in playa ta "improve" Christianizzles it is an integral pizzle of revelizzles.

 

Satan tries ta silence Jesus through tha very process that Jesus subverts. He has good reasons ta believe T-H-to-tha-izzat his old mimetic trizzick should stizzay produce, wit Jesus as victim, wizzy it has always produced in tha past: one mizzy mizzay of tha usual type, a closed system of mythical lies . Slap your mutha fuckin self. He has good reasons ta believe tizzle tha mimetic contagion against Jesus will prove irresistible once again n thizzay tha revelizzles wizzle be squelched.

 

Satan's expectations is disappointed. The Gospels do chillin' tizzy tha Bible had done before, perpetratin' a victimized prophet, a wrongly accused victim. But tizzle also universalize this rehabilitizzles fo' real. They show that, since tha foundation of tha world, tha victims of all Passion-like bitch have been victims of tha same mimetic contagion as Jesus. The Gospels makes tha revelizzles complete. They gizzle ta tha biblical denuncizzle of idolatry a concrete demonstrizzle of how false gods n they violent cultural systems is generated. Thisis tha trizzuth perpetratin' fizzy mytholizzles tha trizzuth thizzay subverts tha violent system of this world . Tru niggaz do niggaz. If tha Gospels were mythical themselves, they could not provide tha knowledge that demythologizzles mythology . Real niggas recognize the realness..

 

Christianizzle playa is not reducible ta a logical scheme. The revelizzles of unanimous victimizizzles cannot involve an entire community-else there would be no one ta reveal it. It can only be tha achievement of a dissent'n minority bold enough ta challenge tha official truth, n yet too small ta prevent a near-unizzles episode of victimizizzle fizzle clockin'. Sizzuch a minorizzle nigga is extremely vulnerable n ought normally ta be swallowed up in tha mimetic contagion fo all my homies in the pen. Humanly speak'n, tha revelizzles is an impossibility.

 

In mizzay biblical texts, tha dissent'n minority remains invisible, but in tha Gospels it coincides wit tha group of tha first Christians. The Gospels dramatize tha human impossibility by insist'n on tha disciples' inability ta resist tha crowd dur'n tha Passion (especially Peta, who denies Jesus three times in tha High Priest's courtyard). And yet, hustla tha Crucifixizzles should have made bitch worse thizzan baller pathetic handful of clockin' suddenly succeeds in doing wizzle they had been unable ta do when Jesus was stiznill there ta hizzle them upside yo head: boldly proclaim tha innocence of tha victim in open defiance of tha victimiza, become tha fearless apostles n missionizzles of tha early Church.

 

The Resurrizzle is responsible fo` this change, of course, but even this mizzay amaz'n miracle would not have sufficed ta transform these men so completely if it had bizzle an isolated wonda ratha than tha first manifestizzles of tha redemptive bitch of tha Cross. An anthropolizzles analysis enables us ta say that, just as tha revelizzles of tha Christian victim diffa fizzle mythical revelizzles coz it is not rooted in tha illusion of tha guilty scapegoat, so tha Christian Resurrizzles diffa frizzom mythical ones coz its witnesses is tha thugz who ultimately overcome tha contagion of victimizizzles (sizzuch as Gangsta n Paul), n not tha thugz who wanna be gangsta ta it (such as Herod n Pilate) . Relax, cus I'm bout to take my respect. The Christian Resurrizzles is indispensable ta tha purely anthropolizzles revelizzle of unanimous victimizizzles n ta tha demythologiz'n of mythical resurrizzles.

 

Jesus' death is a source of grace not coz tha Brotha is "avenged" by it, but coz Jesus lived n died in tha nigga thizzay if adopted by all, would do away wit scandals n tha victimizizzles thizzat follows fizzle scandals . Wussup to all my niggaz in the house. Jesus lived as all men should live in orda ta be united wit a God Whose true nature he reveals.

 

Obey'n perfectly tha anti-mizzle prescriptions he recommends, Jesus has not tha slightest tendency toward mimetic rivalry n victimizizzles fo my bling bling. And he dies, paradoxically, coz of this perfect innocence now motherfuckers lemme here ya say hoe. He becomes a victim of tha process frizzom which he will liberate mankind now motherfuckers lemme here ya say hoe. When one dawg alone follows tha prescriptions of tha kingdom of God it seems an intolerable provocizzles ta all those who do niznot, n this dawg automatically designizzles himself as tha victim of all men. This paradox F-U-Double-Lizzy reveals "the sin of tha world," tha inability of dawg ta fizzle himself fizzy his violent ways.

 

Dippin' Jesus' life, tha dissent'n minority of those who resist tha mimetic contagion is really limited ta one mizzle Jesus himself-who is simultaneously tha most arbitrary victim (coz he deserves his violent death less tizzy anyone else) n tha least arbitrary victim (coz his perfection is an unforgivable insult ta tha violent world) hittin that booty. He is tha scapegoat of choice, tha lamb of God W-H-to-tha-izzom we all choose unconsciously even when not aware of mackin' any victim.

 

Wizzle Jesus dies alone, abandoned by his apostles, tha persecizzles is unanimous once again. Were tha Gospels try'n ta tell a mizzyth, tha trizzuth Jesus had tried ta reveal would then be buried once n fo` all n tha stage would be set fo` tha triumphal revelizzles of tha mythologizzle victim as tha divine source of tha sippin' of society through tha "good" bustin' violence thizzay puts an end ta tha bad mimetic violence T-H-to-tha-izzat had threatened tha society . Boom bam as I step in the jam, God damn.

 

If sizzay a death-and-resizzle mizzle is not wizzy happens this time-if Satan in tha end is foiled-the immediate cause is a sudden burst of courage in tha disciples. But tha strength fo` thiznat did not come F-R-to-tha-izzom themselves. It visibly flows fizzle tha innocent death of Jesus with my forty-fo' mag. Divine grace makes tha disciples more like Jesus, who had announced before his death that they would be helped by tha Holy Spirit of truth. This is one reason, I believe, tha Gospel of John calls tha Spirit of God tha Paraclete, a Greek word tizzy simply means tha brotha fo` tha defense, tha gangsta of tha accused before a tribunal. The Paraclete is, among otha ho-slappin' tha counterpart of tha Nigga: tha Spirit of Triznuth who gives tha definitive refutizzles of tha satanic lie hittin that booty. Tizzy is why Paul writes, in 1 Corinthians 2:7-8: "We: impart a secret n hidden wisdom of God n shit. . . . None of tha brotha of this age understood this; fo` if tizzle had, they would not have crucified tha Lord of glory."

 

The true Resurrizzle is based not on tha mythical lie of tha guilty victim who deserves ta dizzle but on tha rectificizzles of that lie, whizzay comes fizzle tha true God n which reopens channels of communicizzles mankind itself had closed through self-imprisizzle in its own violent cultures. Divine grace alone can explain why, playa tha Resurrizzles tha disciples could become a dissent'n minority in an ocean of victimization-could understand tizzle what they had misunderstood earlia: tha innocence not of Jesus alone but of all victims of all Passion-like hustla since tha foundation of tha world.

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rizzy Girard is tha Andrew B . Slap your mutha fuckin self. Hammond Professor Emeritus of French Language, Literatizzles n Civilizizzle at Stanford University. His many books include Violence n tha Sacred nTh'n Hidden Since tha Foundation of tha World.

[hajii]

Yo, P-dog, that's deep man, I be buggin'

[cloud recluse]

Not even remotely impressed by the Girard bit ( and trying to read Gizoogle hurt my tiny brain ).Certainly the narratives of the New Testament cater to the desperations brought about by the structure of the ego,but the recurring 'mimetic' similarities are the results of deliberate rewrites ! Incidents in the New Testament were DELIBERATELY & consciously rewritten to match Old Testament prophecies & evoke Old Testament comparisons.Thats not to say that the authors didnt have 'noble' motives,but they were writing decades after the events in question that they themselves never witnessed. As for "the rising Christian tide",you have GOT to be kidding!The various different groups associating themselves with Christ sputtered along insignificantly until Emperor Constantine saw sociopolitical advantage in one particular form & violently enforced it.It was a rising Roman tide that needed a new civic religion,ironically because the very success of the pagan mystery-cults had made themselves moribund.Being too elitist,the average citizen wasnt up to them anymore.Pauls "Christianity" was a nice easy option that also offered a clear cut social program.Political opportunism & social engineering gave us Christianity as we know it.Its a good lesson in how the ego weaves stories,and how tyrants create religions,but theres little spiritual depth in the scriptures themselves.

 

 

I do believe there is a lot of contemplative gold in the Christian tradition, despite the contradictions of the Bible and the many sins of historical Christendom. On the contemplative side, there's the Gospel of John, then the non-Biblical works of Christian contemplatives (or "mystics") over the ages: Boethius, Meister Eckhart (a fave of DT Suzuki), the anonymous author of the Cloud of Unknowing, St. John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, Julian of Norwich, Thomas Merton, Thomas Keating, etc.

 

 

Peace,

Peregrino

 

 

 

I do believe there is a lot of contemplative gold in the Christian tradition, despite the contradictions of the Bible and the many sins of historical Christendom. On the contemplative side, there's the Gospel of John, then the non-Biblical works of Christian contemplatives (or "mystics") over the ages: Boethius, Meister Eckhart (a fave of DT Suzuki), the anonymous author of the Cloud of Unknowing, St. John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, Julian of Norwich, Thomas Merton, Thomas Keating, etc.

 

 

Peace,

Peregrino

I dont deny that the subsequent tradition was sufficient for individual contemplatives to function within it,but that is more DESPITE the tradition,not because of it.And it was careful to contain any mystic in large asylums,oh...Im sorry,that should be "monasteries". ..to prevent the social ramifications of mysticism upsetting the status quo.And just look at Meister Echarts struggles to interpret his own experinces as "Christian"! Didnt fare too well,did he?! Regards,Cloud.

[cloud recluse]

Im really getting worked up over this topic,arent I? Sorry,perhaps its just the excess of chocolate

[Cameron]

Violet Crumble Bar!!!!???

 

 

*Cam's favorite Australian Candy*

[Peregrino]

Cloud (my mimetic rival--ha ha! ),

 

I don't have a big emotional investment in defending the institutional forms of historical Christendom and its more Constantinian impulses, nor do I believe that the Biblical authors all wrote from absolutely unmixed motives, but I do think there is an evolving consciousness evident both in the texts (again, often in spite of rather than because of any institution-building agenda) and in the development of spiritual practice in the West in subsequent centuries. The thing I like about Quakerism (although I'm not an absolute pacifist) is that it brought contemplation to the people, "a priesthood of all seekers," without keepin' it locked up in the monasterizzles!

 

Maybe there are other influences that have heightened Westerners' sense of solidarity with victims (e.g. the realization that slavery is a grievous evil, women are not mere chattel, etc.), but movements to abolish such victimization have relied on Biblical interpretation as much as the parties interested in maintaining the status quo have relied on their own (sacrificial) interpretation of the text.

 

I see the Enlightenment as a healthy impulse to further de-mythologize Christianity and religion in general, although that's not to say that in the name of rationalism many irrational upheavals have not taken place over history (e.g. the excesses of the French Revolution or Stalinist communism).

 

Of course, Buddhism has centuries on Christianity in teaching solidarity with the suffering, but its influence on Western perspectives is a much more recent historical phenomenon. Thomas Merton's friendship with Thich Nhat Hanh was very interesting in that respect--too bad I can't think of too many contemporary examples of such fruitful East-West inter-religious solidarity.

 

P-t'tha-eace, from West to East!

Peregrino

[cloud recluse]

Cloud (my mimetic rival--ha ha! ),

 

COOL,a "mimetic rival",Ive never had one of those before (I think ).Its like a new toy Youve raised a really tricky point.While thers certainly been a development in thought occuring within the cultural matrix of "Christendom",using the text as a reference,is there any development in the text itself ?I dont deny the text has been used to support worthwhile things,but Im skeptical those things were intended by the authors. However,you might be interested in Jungs archetypal interpretation in ANSWER TO JOB,tracing a development of self awareness in the figure of Job,that then demands a reciprocal deepening on the part of a till-then-unconscious Yahweh.I dont hold with it myself,but if you havent read it yet,take a look.

 

Violet Crumble Bar!!!!???

 

 

*Cam's favorite Australian Candy*

Oh god i wish it was!I havent actually seen Violet Crumble for ages Just the abundance of Easter eggs at the moment.

[Peregrino]

Jung's OK, although I have far less interest in him now (and same goes for the Jungian Joseph Campbell) than I do in investigators of religious history who actually put a premium on the "history" (according to the term's Greek etymology--"inquiry"--as opposed to fable-weaving). Your comments on Roman history are therefore more valuable than any "archetypal" insights that one can cull from myths to suit individual psychological needs.

 

I don't folllow Girard on every point (he is, finally, a Christian apologist, although a highly unusual one--his conversion is the result of an investigation that began in the spirit of Enlightenment skepticism); I do, however, find the spirit of his inquiry useful in separating therapeutic mythology from verifiable fact. With only a few exceptions in non-Christian Western traditions (e.g. the myth of John Barleycorn) is there an emphasis on the *innocence* of the sacrificial victim, and therefore a de-mystification of scapegoating mechanisms in general, as you find in the Gospel narrative. That's why I believe the Gospels do indeed contain radically liberating lessons, however long it has taken for such lessons to take root among Christians themselves.

 

Can you elaborate more on the practices and beliefs of the pagan mystery cults? I've heard lots of high praise sung to them by the likes of Nietzsche, but again, I'm interested in the historical facts of those beliefs and practices rather than any romanticized notions--another instance in which Joseph Campbell is not a reliable source for me!

[cloud recluse]

Thers still debate & uncertainty about a lot of the Mysteries of course,they wernt exactly a forthcoming crowd.But in relation to Christian origins,you seem to have a situation where Constantine needed a single religion that tapped into the general theme & mystique of the Mysteries,but was open & accessible to the average citizen.The Mysteries were renowned for ardous initiations & trials,they were unapologetically elitist.Pauline Christianitys sacraments & publically open theologies were simply 'easier'.The Cults usually revolved around themes of a dying-reborn god who transcends wordly limitations.By re-enacting the gods trials,often painfully,the initiate partakes of the gods power.The Christian got Christs Redemption through far easier means,a mere baptism & profession of creed.The Cults often neglected any kind of broader social philosophy & couldnt counteract Roman decadence,whereas the Christians had a clear social vision.The very success of the Mystery Cults made them part of an elitist establishment that desperately needed overhauling.The prime example is of course Mithraism,the Cult of choice for the militairy & the early churches main rival. Now the Mysteries werent the only rivals ,as there was also the Stoics.But once again,the Christians were able to provide a more appealing answer to the qustion of individual morality,the Holy Spirit could make you innately stoic,as well as having a vision of social enagement that the typically Roman hyper-individualism of the Stoics had difficulty with....Anyhow,this is all just off the top of my head,you might have to give me a few days to come up with up to date references in what is still a contested feild Regards,Cloud.

[cloud recluse]

Actually ,Ive just realised I can give you a reference right now. Look for "Pagan Origins of the Christ Myth",should take you to the POCM site.Its chock full of historical references & reviews of published research . Regards,Cloud.

[Peregrino]

Thanks, Cloud--I'll take a look into it and some other sites I've stumbled onto, and do my best to sift through whatever seems to be fringe scolarship from either the debunkers' or the apologists' camps. (Note that "fringe" does not simply equal a minority viewpoint for me, but rather refers to assertions unwarranted by evidence, e.g. most conspiracy theories.)

 

Ah, I should clarify something about mimetic theory--not all mimetic theorists are religiously affiliated. For example, Eric Gans, who applies MT to all kinds of human institutions--even the origin of language itself--is a secularist and atheist. He has an interesting article on "The Chinese Dao of Language" here: http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw243.htm

 

(Insert secret hand signal here),

Peregrino

[sean]

Fascinating discussion here. I'm currently coming around the bend for another full circle with Christianity and Catholicism (something you do when you've been raised Catholic and attended 12 years of private Catholic school ) Been perusing Brother David Steindl-Rast, Father Thomas Keating, Father Sean OLaoire, Brother Wayne Teasdale, Father William Menninger.

 

Sean

[cloud recluse]

 

..I should clarify something about mimetic theory--not all mimetic theorists are religiously affiliated...

Hmmm.Im not sure if I have really understood mimetic theory.I may have leapt to conclusions,as I did find the Girard bit unsatisfactory & it provoked a bit of a sugar-fueled reaction in me( yes,Ill try the twinkie defence).I am admittedly wary of anything trying to sidestep important historical data,especially in regards to something that has impacted our world as much as the Judeo-Christian creed. Regards,Cloud.

[Peregrino]

Hey Cloud,

 

Girard is big on ascertaining verifiable historical data--the big debates for me revolve more around the data he might have left out (e.g. MT's resonance with Buddhist ideas) rather than the integrity of the data he presents. For what it's worth, you can read his take on mimetic desire without the explicit Christian apologetics in his first major book, _Deceit, Desire, and the Novel_ (which, as you can tell from the title, is more a work of literary criticism, with lots of non-Freudian psychology thrown in). In DDN he debunks the romantic myth of the autonomous individual and highlights the extent to which he believes most desires are socially mediated--i.e. "mimetic," or the result of our imitating others. THAT is where I find the parallels to Buddhism to be fascinating.

 

For Girard's applicaton of MT to religion and mythology in general, from a wholly _anthropological_ perspective, I would recommend _Violence and the Sacred_. Love it or hate it, it was a ground-breaking book.

 

Finally, if you can handle the full-blown apologetics, there is _Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World_, in which he elaborates his "non-sacrificial" reading of the Bible, positing an evolution of consciousness away from sacrifice (in the sense of immolation rather than self-renunciation) and towards a more loving (if not still fully realized) ethic in the J-C Scriptures.

 

Eric Gans, the aforementioned secular humanist, is also a favorite mimetic theorist of mine, and I would highly recommend his _Science and Faith_. Somehow both believers and non-believers get a lot out of his take on the social role of religion, the deferral of resentment and violence, and the evolution of institutions towards greater pluralism and accommodation for individual preferences. His website Anthropoetics has a lot of great articles. I particularly recommend his columns, "Chronicles of Love and Resentment" (where I found his take on "The Chinese Dao of Language" mentioned above).

 

And oh yeah--here are some links to articles that DO apply MT to Eastern religions and philosophies:

http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0102/china.htm

http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0801/xunzi.htm

http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1101/webb.htm

 

OK, work is calling . . . But let me just pause a moment further to thank Sean and all the posters for making this such an informative and life-enhancing forum!

 

Happy trails,

Peregrino

[cloud recluse]

 

--here are some links to articles that DO apply MT to Eastern religions and philosophies:

 

Thanx Peregrino.Just took a quick look then & they look promising regards,Cloud.

[cloud recluse]

Hey Hajii,do you feel like youve unleashed a dark & virulent antichristian upon this thread Seriously though,Ive been rereading my posts & comparing my fairly intense statements with everyone elses far calmer ones.If anyone out there has been disconcerted by my language I do apologize.Ironically,I have been influenced quite positevley by Christians in various aspects of my life,and I have no problem with people drawing inspiration from the Christ SYMBOL as such.Just wanted to make that clear Regards,Cloud.

[Peregrino]

No offense taken here, Cloud--I appreciate your input. I'm generally thick-skinned and try to take in opposing viewpoints as extra data to consider, rather than personal attacks, as much as possible. (That's the ideal, anyway!) Also, there's much that goes under the label "Christianity" (esp. the fundamentalist variety) that I have absolutely no desire to defend at all.

 

Here's an idea: in the interest of mutual exhortation and the hope of increasing consciousness rather than "winning arguments" one way or another, why don't you recommend a good book on the POCM, and I'll make a vow to read it by the end of the summer? You could in turn try Girard's _Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World_ (since that's his book that is most explicitly pro-Christian AND gives a good overview of MT . . . and gives his own take on the POCM theory and what he deems to be the romanticizing biases of the 19th & 20th century recuperations of paganism you'll find in Nietzsche, Jungianism, Joseph Campbell, New Age, etc.--and the sacrificial agendas of said biases).

 

I would especially dig a pro-POCM book that takes Girard's theories into mind. I do find Girard's theories to be consistently sound in explaining the rise and role of religion--and unlike what I've found in most academic scholarship, his insights actually have an amazing practical application to my daily life! HOWEVER, precisely because I do not want to become complacent, and want to honor the Enlightenment spirit of objective investigation, I am more than willing to give a fair look at other perspectives.

 

Mind you, a POCM book that doesn't take Girard into account would be fine too--as long as it's not written by the likes of Bubba Free John! (Hehe . . . Or whatever the hell he calls himself these days! He'd be an interesting topic for another thread on another day!)

 

So, how about it? Rather than being disheartened by this discussion, I find it most stimulating!

 

Peace,

Peregrino

[cloud recluse]

No offense taken here, Cloud--I appreciate your input. I'm generally thick-skinned and try to take in opposing viewpoints as extra data to consider, rather than personal attacks, as much as possible. (That's the ideal, anyway!) Also, there's much that goes under the label "Christianity" (esp. the fundamentalist variety) that I have absolutely no desire to defend at all.

 

Here's an idea: in the interest of mutual exhortation and the hope of increasing consciousness rather than "winning arguments" one way or another, why don't you recommend a good book on the POCM, and I'll make a vow to read it by the end of the summer? You could in turn try Girard's _Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World_ (since that's his book that is most explicitly pro-Christian AND gives a good overview of MT . . . and gives his own take on the POCM theory and what he deems to be the romanticizing biases of the 19th & 20th century recuperations of paganism you'll find in Nietzsche, Jungianism, Joseph Campbell, New Age, etc.--and the sacrificial agendas of said biases).

 

I would especially dig a pro-POCM book that takes Girard's theories into mind. I do find Girard's theories to be consistently sound in explaining the rise and role of religion--and unlike what I've found in most academic scholarship, his insights actually have an amazing practical application to my daily life! HOWEVER, precisely because I do not want to become complacent, and want to honor the Enlightenment spirit of objective investigation, I am more than willing to give a fair look at other perspectives.

 

Mind you, a POCM book that doesn't take Girard into account would be fine too--as long as it's not written by the likes of Bubba Free John! (Hehe . . . Or whatever the hell he calls himself these days! He'd be an interesting topic for another thread on another day!)

 

So, how about it? Rather than being disheartened by this discussion, I find it most stimulating!

 

Peace,

Peregrino

Well ,"THINGD HIDDEN.." does sound attractive,not in the least by virtue of its critique of Nietzsche,Jung & Campbell(Having once been overly smitten with them,any critique in that area grabs my attention).I just have to find a copy!What precisely are you looking for with POCM?Pagan predecessors,Scriptural exegesis,early church histiry ?Its a pretty broad area.And no,none of it will be from "Bubba-Who -Am-i-This-Week".Actually,I just prefer to call him Frank,it was good enough for his parents,and a thread on him is a great idea. Regards,Cloud

[Peregrino]

What precisely are you looking for with POCM?Pagan predecessors,Scriptural exegesis,early church histiry ?Its a pretty broad area.

 

Damn, I just lost my carefully worded reply! Hmmph, will try to recover my thoughts . . .

 

Any book that systematically makes the POCM argument while taking into account potential objections would be a good start . . . Also, any POCM arguments that give evidence of pagan predecessors whose myths affirm the INNOCENCE of the dying and resurrecting god--THAT is where Girard claims the Gospel story breaks decisively from the past. He's not scandalized by the similarities between the Gospels and the pagan predecessors that Nietzsche and others like to bring up, but it is where the DIFFERENCES begin that the matter becomes crucial. The Gospels highlight the INNOCENCE of Christ as the sacrificial victim, unlike previous traditions with morally ambiguous divinities (e.g. Dionysus, or "trickster" gods like Loki) whose immolations justify a social order based on scapegoating mechanisms. (Girard claims that innumerable myths contain traces of the violent foundational mechanisms behind their respective cultures, e.g. Romulus and Remus, Cain and Abel, and lots of non-Western deities such as Tikarau of the Tikopia, the founder of the Dogon culture, the founder of the Ojibwa, etc.)

 

Note that historical Christendom has not always been exemplary in propounding this non-sacrificial reading of the Gospels--obviously! Jews themselves were amongst the first victims of the Casaero-Papist tradition. This is not lost on Girard either--the absolute renunciation of scapegoating impulses is indeed a dramatic evolutionary leap for us human animals, and the traditionally pagan cultures in which Christianity took root have obviously resisted the more radical implications of a non-violent divinity. This is evident in traditional doctrines absurdly claiming that God the Father killed his own Son as revenge against sinful humanity . . . as opposed to the realization that Christ died because of the all too HUMAN reaction to the scandalous revelation of their culture's widespread collusion with scapegoating violence. "God" didn't kill the messenger "he" sent--scandalized human beings did because they could not tolerate the messenger's demystification of their sacrificial business-as-usual. The Jewish people (nor the Romans, for that matter) have no special guilt in the matter of Christ's death--the idea is that ANY human community would react scandalously and murderously to the revelation of its bloody foundations. (Interestingly enough, Thich Nhat Hanh said in _Living Buddha, Living Christ_ that there's nothing "inferior" to him about the violent death of Christ vs. the peaceful passing of the Buddha--that indeed, Buddha himself would have been killed when facing such a violent, angry mob too.)

 

The demystifying impulse in Western cultures in recent centuries, AWAY from such transcendentally sanctioned violence, owes everything--according to Girard--to the demystifying logic of the Gospels themselves, even if such logic now often expresses itself in a more "atheistic" or "scientific" discourse. Of course, this is not to say that the old, violent, "primitive" sacred has been completely abandoned among those calling themselves "Christians"--any fundamentalist wearing a Last Supper T-shirt with the logo "This Blood's for YOU!" will confirm it!

 

What else . . . I am also greatly interested in any testimony from pre-Christian pagan thinkers (polytheistic, Pythagorean, Stoic, etc.) who vociferously denounced any and all religious justifications of violence--whether in ritual sacrifice or any other socially sanctioned form. I can say this of the Buddha, but I'm talking about the West here . . .

 

I mentioned John Barleycorn as one possible Western exception in which the dying and resurrecting god is explicitly lamented for his innocence, but the folk songs that re-tell the old myth might have been influenced by later Christian contact; then again, maybe not--I'd love to get some credible data.

 

OK, enough of these now-scattered thoughts. (If only you could have read the "lost gospel" of my original draft--har har!)

 

Yours in pacific mimesis,

Bubbagrino