Final Visual Project: Life and Death

Death is a constant of human life therefore all religions have to incorporate it into their system of beliefs. The burial rituals of many religions actually symbolize the "long lasting moods" of the religion specifically the religions view of life. In the following series of photo we will look at the burial practices of several religions and examine how these customs echo the religions ideas on life. Because these rituals are different for every religion and can even vary greatly between the different religious sects, I will only talk about a few religions' customs.


I thought I'd start with something we all recognize, mummies. The Egyptians viewed their present life as the most important, meaning they didn't focus on the afterlife while they were still alive. Also death was not seen as an end but a rebirth. Mummification symbolizes this belief in life after death. A person's "ba" much like our concept of personality and with similar needs of the physical body would have to journey to reunite with that person's "ka" or life force to become an eternal spirit, an "akh". The body is the resting place of the "ba" thus it is important that body be preserved so that it can survive in the afterlife long enough for the person to become an "akh".





Many of the pictures found in tombs also reflect the idea of life after death. In this picture food is being set out for the "ka". Sometimes real food was also used. The "ka" doesn't actually eat the food but it is thought that the "ka" absorbs the life preserving energy. The life force goes into rest during the mummification and thus needs to be reactivated giving life and eventually joining the "ba". The painting on the tomb and the process of mummification both serve as symbols of the ancient Egyptians belief in life after death.





African religions differ by tribe and region, but many of them are founded on very similar ideas.
One of these ideas is symbolized by this photo of the San Bushman of the Kalahari in South Africa as they walk to the burial grounds of their ancestors. Most people believe that everyone experiences the same thing as an afterlife; there is no heaven and no hell and the closest thing to hell is not being able to join the ancestors. They believe any rewards or punishments come during life and the goal of life is to become an ancestor. Some groups show love and respect for the dead and others are fearful because the spirits can affect the living. In the picture of the San I think the second person from the right may be carrying either a sacrifice or some of the deceased belongs both of which are supposed to help the dead in their new life with the ancestors. The importance places on the spirits and the life as an ancestor helps to symbolizes the view that one isn't really dead until all the surviving relatives have died or no one is left to remember them.





Dancing in celebration at funerals is representative of the idea that death deepens one's relation ship with the world and grants one access to both the visible and invisible worlds. As mentioned above it is believed that the dead can affect the world of the living, so this dance is an attempt to prevent any negative effects of the death asking for the dead to not trouble the living and to reinforce the natural good in the world.

The video above and the photo to the right are both about sky burials in Tibet. Buddhism is the main religion in Tibet, and Buddhism teaches reincarnation. The rituals of the sky burial symbolize the ideas behind reincarnation as well as the Buddhist paramita (virtue) of generosity. A sky burial is essentially setting a body out for the birds to eat. It is called jhator, which literally translated is "giving alms to the birds". In the video from 1:12-2:13 one sees the bodies that are going to given. Since Buddhism believes in reincarnation, the body after the soul has left is empty and carries no meaning, therefore the body can be given to the birds in an act of great generosity. It is not unusual for the body to be cut into pieces then given to the birds. If you look closely at the picture you'll see a man carrying a knife which he has used to split open the bodies for the bird. When the birds don't eat all of the flesh, it is seen as a bad omen. This burial practice supports the Buddhist's view of the afterlife and the ideals outlined by the Buddhist religion.

This next video and photo are about the Islamic burial rituals. The video above is from the funeral of on of the religious leaders so the scale is larger than a normal funeral, but if you watch from :35-:49 you see people walking very briskly to the funeral. Their speed is not an attempt to beat the rush but a ritual present in all Muslim funeral procession. If they were to walk at a slow mournful tempo, it would indicate that they don't have faith in eternal life.

The photo to the right is of a young Muslim boy how has died. When they buried him, they will turn his face towards Mecca and place the body into the ground perpendicular to Mecca. Then at the end of the funeral the men help cover the grave and say "We created you from it, and return you into it, and from it we will raise you a second time". Muslims believe in a judgement day when God will decide who is going to heaven or to hell. The actions taken during a Muslim funeral symbolize their belief in eternal life.

The final two pictures are of Hinduism funeral rituals. Hindus believe like Buddhists in reincarnation, so similarly to the sky burials and unlike the Egyptians and Muslims the body does not need to be preserved. Hinduism practices cremation because they believe it helps to release the soul. One practice that demonstrates this idea is shown to the left. The skull is cracked open with a bamboo stick to let the soul out so it can be reincarnated. This practice demonstrates their beliefs in the afterlife.

After the remains of the body are taken care of the family turns its attentions to the needs of the soul. The family has a ceremonial meal where they make rice balls called pinda (pictured to the right). The rice balls are offered to the soul of the deceased to help it reach Yama the god of death. These ceremonies are thought to add to the merit of the dead. Again this custom shows how Hinduism views life and death, as part of cycle where the body is not important it is the soul that matters.

In conclusion, I hope this project has caused you to view burials in a different way, not just as traditions or customs, but as symbols of the religion's views on life and death.

Baha'i Faith

I watched the 15 min video history thing of the cathedral on the US Baha'i website, and I have to say I think it is very cool that the temple has major symbols from the major prophet based religions on it. The over view they gave of the religion in the video highlighted the main views of unity etc. In class it seemed like people felt the Baha'i were trying to in a sense cloak their true message with one of unity and openness similar to that of the unitarians universalists. I mean they felt the Baha'i made it sound like anyone can believe whatever they want, but I disagree. I think the Baha'i use the "it's the same message" as an argument in favor of their religion, and it is like all of the other world religions that believe their way is the right way. If you go to the home of the link on moodle (http://www.bahai.us/), then you will see my point I think. It states "The Essence of all the prophets of God is one and the same". It doesn't state all religions are right, but that at the core, in the beginning the were the same. Also of another cool side note if you put your mouse over the emblems for the different religions a verse written by that religion's prophet will show up and all of the verses from the different prophet have essentially the same message. I don't know if it changes or if it always says the same verses, but right now the message is the golden rule do unto other as you would have them do unto you.

At first glance my thought was wow, this is really tourism oriented then I realized I wasn't at the home page, so just for comparison here is the tourism page of the national cathedral http://www.nationalcathedral.org/visit/. I feel like the Baha'i faith acts the same way all of the other faiths act. The end message and rituals may be slightly different, but they all act towards the outer community from what I've seen in the same way.

Religion or Culture?

Our discussion on Friday about religions, cults, etc. makes me wonder about religion and culture. I know religion is part of culture but sometimes the way we talk about religion in societies make me wonder where culture fits. In Geertz's definition religion influences moods and motivations but I anthropology I learn about culture creating "powerful, pervasive, and long lasting moods and motivations". I suppose one could argue that the symbols that make up religion deal with "a general order of existence" where culture doesn't have to deal with that like consumerism. It's part of our culture but is not a religion, however it and religions have similar characteristics. Maybe I should be looking at culture as the umbrella and religion as one of the things under it, but their similarities confuse me I suppose. I don't think we can say the religion or culture came first, because I think there is evidence of both. In a previous class we talked about how churchs' positions on sex and marriage where probably adopted because of health and legitimacy issues. This ideas of health and whose child is whose and who gets what most likely existed in the society before the church just used it to connect with the people. One can assume similar ideas were behind the food laws of many different religions. I do think that establishing orders of existence came first with religion. Now it can considered cultural I think because we have orders of existence ideas that don't depend on religions, but that has only come with relatively recent scientific advancements. Religion has also shaped culture because some of it's values will be placed into society and effect things non-religious in nature. An example of this would be the effect of the Puritan values on our economic system. In many ways religion has infused itself into culture or culture borrows some previously religious symbol but meaning will change. One eaxmple we talked about in class was when the Jamaican tourism video used Bob Marley's song as a symbol of Jamaica not Rastafari.

Elements of New Religions

Especially in the case of Baha'i one can see that the leader is very important. Perhaps this book is a bit biased because it is a biography of Baha'u'llah (picture on the left) not a book about how Baha'i started, but this book makes Baha'u'llah seem like the reason Baha'i came into existence and was able to sustain itself. The same can be said for the Babis, without Baha'u'llah that movement would have collapsed too. As he moved to and from different places during exile, it seems like the Babis community in the city he left would fall apart without him and in the city he moved to he would build back up or create a Babis community. The impression I got from the book was that Baha'u'llah was kind of single-handedly keeping these Babis/Baha'i ideas afloat.

Another important element that helped this movement was the non-violence. I think Baha'u'llah had experience enough violence from other religions that he knew it was not helpful to anyone. The fact that the Babis still had things in common with the main religion of the region was helpful and harmful. Helpful because you read in the book several stories about Baha'u'llah connecting with other religions through common characters such as the martyr Imam Husayn. Harmful because I think it scared the existing establishment. The creation of Baha'i was a long process. It is building upon the group the great Bab was leading so has been in the making for awhile.

Evolution of Bob Marley

Im Still Waiting - Bob Marley & The Wailers

Simmer Down - Bob Marley & The Wailers



The picture and two songs that I've posted above are from Marley's first albumThe Wailing Wailers, when he was part of group called The Wailers. The people playing in this group with him change through out his career. The Wailing Wailers was released in 1965. Marley would have been 20. From what I've read it sounds like Marley first close experience with Rastafari came when he left school to focused on music and befriended a famous rastafari Jamiacan singere Joe Higgs. However it should be noted that also on Marley's first album is a version of the song "One Love". His next albums comes 6 and 8 years later. You can hear some that some of his ideas are starting to fall into place, but he still isn't the Bob Marley that everyone knows. An example of this is the song 400 Years that is posted below.

400 Years - Bob Marley & The Wailers

In 1974 on the album Natty Dread we see the Bob Marley we are more familiar with, with songs like "No Woman No Cry", "Natty Dread", "So Jah Seh", etc. I still think his sound is a little different that what come later but ... I also think his lyric writing skills got better over time. I just thought it was interesting to see how his music changed over the years.

Rastafari Symbols

In the video on Rastafari some of the symbols I found were the signs posted around the village, the houses, the fire on top of the mountain, and the turban/dreadlocks. My interpretation of these symbols is not solely based on the video. I am applying the reading to video to assist in the understanding of the symbols. The signs with R/X placed around the village are I think perhaps the most symbolic of the Rastafari outlook on society, right over wrong and black over white. All of the houses being painted red, green, yellow, and black I also feel is symbolic of their homeland Africa. The fire on the mountain top that remain continually lit could represent the ever present divinity within everything and that connects everything. The video didn't say a whole lot about the significance of the turban that I could understand, but it did mention dreadlocks. The symbolism of the dreads in the video supports all that the book said about them but in the video you can see the dreadlocks are treated with a sort of reverence that show the importance of the dreads and what they stand for.

The rastafari life portrayed in the video is different than the way of life discussed in the book, but both are different than what I had envisioned. All I knew before this class was Bob Marley and pot smoking, but I never had a great understanding of how they fit together. From Marley's music I associated Rastafarian ideals with "one love" and equality and freedom. I was very surprised at the emphasis placed on violence, I expected something like Gandhi's peaceful resistance. I also didn't realize how strongly the rastafians felt about race. I knew it was a black power sort of thing, but I don't know how closed of it is to white people. Reading some of the comments on the video we watched I see that people have different opinions of whether or not white people can be rastafari. I've never before thought of rastafari as a religion probably because as the book says it is very individualized. Because of the "one love" idea I think that all races should be accepted, but if you look at the major ideas outlined in the book it becomes difficult to see these beliefs being adopted completely be whites. I think this race issue will have to be addressed in the rastafarian culture, because I think the younger generations are less likely to view whites as bad. However, I could see this issue being left up to the individual to decide and the elders not changing any ideology for it, but I do think the ideology takes a pretty clear stance on the race issue by associating all whites with Babylon.

Also just to leave thing on an interesting note... one of the mental images I have of Bob Marley is of him shaking his hair like he is in the picture to the left. Now after reading this book I have to wonder if this is Bob Marley caught up in the moment on stage or intentionally releasing the earthforce built up in his dreads to destroy Babylon.

The Charismatic Personality

Earlier this year I saw for the first time the movie Jonestown: The Life and Death of Peoples Temple. It is about Jim Jones and his following and everything leading up to their mass suicide. For a brief explanation of Jim Jones and his church read this http://www.religioustolerance.org/dc_jones.htm. It is just the basics but it will give you an idea of what was going on. The following videos are the first twenty minutes of the movie, but I hope after watching them you will see why I think Jim Jones is an example of the charismatic leader.

Jones clearly has the personality that is talked about in a charismatic leader. This is especially obvious when he is able to get his followers to leave their homes and loved-ones to travel across the country with him. He does get some of his authority from tradition,being a reverend in the church, but his power to break away from the mainstream religion and still keep his congregation comes from his charisma. Jones's movement also seems to fit Weber's theory in that it came about during a time of social unrest because of the fights for racial equality. Jones's church's strong stance on race and emphasis on having members of many races I think makes it hard to deny the effect that the attitudes and struggles faced by people of the times had on the creation of Jones's church. Eventually these ideas of equality spread not just to races but also economic statuses. Jones seem to pride himself on the fact that people from all different backgrounds. Some methods of routinization cal be found in Jones's church. The most obvious one I can think of is how his message is based off the bible. Like the Rastafarian movement he takes something familiar to everyone and frames it in a new light emphasizing certain parts. Despite using tradition as a way to routinize his church some flaws are that he is the only leader. Jones is in charge and has the final say in everything no one would be able to carry-on after him. Also he becomes much more radical over time, which will not gain him more followers. Finally Jones personally just looses it and so his church falls apart. I just thought it was interesting all of the people who could be considered charismatic leaders.

Making Ethiopia Special

This story from the Kebra Negast seems to me to be making Ethiopia into another Israel or holy land. I don't know the story of how Israel became the promise land and was chosen/given to people by god, how it became Zion, but this story is sort of doing the same for Ethiopia. I know we talked a bit about this in class already with New Jerusalem, but I think that the creation of a town referred to as New Jerusalem further demonstrates that an "Israel status" is what Ethiopia is trying to achieve. In the story this status change happens on page 35 when Solomon has a dream that the sun moves from Israel to Ethiopia. The dream even makes it sound as though Ethiopia will be a better place than Israel. "And He [the Sun] paid no heed whatsoever to Israel, and He ascended his former throne." I interpret this to mean the the Sun, or god's power maybe, now resides in Ethiopia, which is much better that Israel because the text states it has ascended its former throne. This story/dream also from my perspective is giving the Ethiopians some guidelines on behavior. When the Sun leaves Israel, the Israelites become angry, and they fight to destroy the Sun. Their actions further strengthen the Sun decision to leave I think, and so this serve as a lesson to Ethiopians that one they are worthy enough to be the throne for the Sun now and two that even when unfortunate things happen they must still behave in accordance with gods rules unlike Israel did. On a side note, that passage about what Israel did to the Sun reminds me a bit of the crucifixion of christ, but I could by reading too much into things.

























Also another tangent apparently Kebra Negast means Glory of the Kings in Amharic. We talked in class about how the monarchy in ethiopia was extremely strong, and it has just donned on me that this story not only establishes Ethiopia's status that I mentioned earlier but also is the background story of the monarchy. The new Israel status and the monarchy are a self-perpetuating system. The monarchy's power and Ethiopia's status are both supported by the other and their connection through this story.

Comment on Emily Kaplan's Blog About Numbers

I can't post this comment on Emily Kaplan's blog, but I wanted to share it so Emily if you get this it is in response to your post about numbers and what they symbolize. Here is the link to Emily's blog. The post I'm responding to is Symbolic Numbers on May 3. http://emilyskblog.blogspot.com/

I would agree with you that it is very interesting to see how the different religions interpret the same symbol differently. I'd also agree with you that religion is all about interpretation. I feel a bit like a broken record saying this but no two people find the exact same thing in religion. There can be no true religion because everyone's is different. Augustine acknowledges the interpretive difference when he says how wonderful it is the bible can be understood/interpreted in so many different ways. However Augustine would disagree with me when I say there can be no true religion because he claims that eventually everyone will end up in the same place, loving God and loving your neighbor.

"Conceptual Blending and Analogy" and Religion

Gilles Fauconnier's article "Conceptual Blending and Analogy" explains how people seem to innately understand analogies or metaphors. He examines this with an experiment involving a computer. People are able to move and grasp objects on the computer like they would in reality because they apply some of the concepts from real life to the computer and ignore the characteristics of the computer that don't fit. This is conceptual blending. A simpler explanation in my opinion would be something like this, the ability to apply varying levels of concepts, depending on what is needed, from one activity to another. It is a natural thing for humans to automatically do this and so it follows that it would be natural for this to be a frame through which people understand their religions. The psalms uses analogies many times that people seem to clearly understand such as referring to people as sheep or making the story of one person's life an analogy for the rules of God and also their own lives.  Fauconnier discusses briefly in his article how people find analogies based on their personal backgrounds such as the latter psalms metaphor I just mentioned.  We too have talked about this issue in class several times that people all people interpret things differently no two people share the exact same views, ideas, interpretations, etc. Augustine also addresses people's innate ability to analyze as well as views things differently from one another when he exclaims how wonderful of God it was ti create a work, the bible, that can be interpreted in an infinite amount of correct ways as long as the end result of love god love your neighbor remains.  The journeys are all different but everyone will meet at the same place in the end, with god.  If one were to plug religion into the example Fauconnier gives about the boat race with the ghost boat and the present one it might be something like this.  Religious texts are the ghost boat and a person's ideas and experiences are the present boat. Our minds conceptually blend the two with the result not being a comparative boat race, but how the religious text fits into our lives and what message we interpret it as telling us.

Sam Harris

We watched an interview with Sam Harris in class on Friday, and I was very interested in his ideas. The video above is Harris telling us a bit about his background and how 9/11 sparked these recent interests in religion. I agree with some of his ideas about religion and how heavily people base judgements off of it, but at the same time I feel he is speaking in extremes and not being understanding. In this video and his other videos I've watched I always get the impression that he thinks what he believes is right and everyone else is unintelligent for believing in religion. I'm glad that he has learned about other religions and didn't make a blanket judgement like I think many people today do , but I still think Harris is discounting some of the elements of religion. He talks about how people in the US turned to religion after 9/11, and I don't think that is such a bad thing. As I stated above once we start basing all of our decisions on religious ideals that is a problem, especially in a country where not everyone shares those ideals. However comfort is a function of religion. Many of the psalms we read were written as a way to find comfort and reassurance. Even the ur-religions and mounds served to proved comfort to their creators.

If you are interested in more of what Sam Harris has to say check out http://www.samharris.org/. On the website he has links to interesting recent articles on religious topics.

The Psalms Through Saint Augustine

Saint Augustine's suggestions offered in his second book are good suggestions when reading in anything not just religious texts, so yes they could most certainly be applied to the Psalms. When Augustine talks about needing knowledge to correctly interpret stories, this can directly apply to our class reading the psalms. If I knew more about the history of Jerusalem or more bible stories, I would be much better at understanding the references in the Psalms. There is also the general knowledge about that time of certain plants or animals or practices that we would not pick up on simply because we don't know everything about their way of life. Another idea of Saint Augustine's that seems evident in the Psalms is that ideas are repeated. If there is a passage that you don't understand in the Psalms it's ok because it is extremely likely that the ideas expressed in that passage are also expressed in another psalm that is probably easier to understand. This sentiment was expressed in class on Monday. Several people mentioned that they felt the subject matter of the Psalms was a bit repetitive. Lastly Augustine's idea of cross referencing translations to extract the true meaning of the author was used in our reading of the Psalms. The footnotes on multiple occasions provided explanations for why Alter chose the words he used and what other translator have chosen to give the reader a greater understanding of the verse .

Blessing of the Animals

Today on cnn.com I stumbled upon this picture accompanied by the caption in bold.

Sabine Bradley carries her two green iguanas, Munchkin and Lola, after they were sprinkled with holy water by Cardinal Roger Mahony at the annual Blessing of the Animals in Los Angeles, California, US.

In class we were talking about how a function of religion is to divide animals and nature from humans, and I felt this blessing ceremony gave an interesting message about how animals are treated. I had never heard about the Blessing of the Animals before, so I did a bit of reading on the subject. For what I've been able to find it seems that several Christian sects and some Jewish practice this ritual. From what I can tell the animals are brought to church and sprinkled with holy water along with the usually readings from the bible or psalms and singing. The general message is one of thanks to god for these animals and all they do for us and also to asking god to protect the animals. This kind of prayer would make since in times when lots of people were heavily dependent on their livestock. Many people believe this ceremony is for St. Francis of Assisi’s love for all creatures, but it is still under dispute. St. Francis' feast day is on Oct. 4 so some groups have the blessing corresponding times, but the ceremony in Los Angeles pictured above does not. It takes place in the spring. Most of the websites that mention the blessing of the animals say something about the relationship between god, people, and animals. One site even had a quote from the bible I think saying that god gives the birds food and shelter and he will do the same for us, so we shouldn't worry about the material but on serving/honoring god because god will provide what we need as he does with the animals. I thought that bible verse was an interesting way to justify worshiping god and not worrying about being poor or hungry.

Anyway, this blessing of the animals makes me wonder if this ceremony is another way to enforce the division between man and animal thus further asserting our human dominance, or if this ceremony brings animals or maybe just domestic animals a step closer to god than we thought. To me sprinkling holy water on animals makes my think of baptism, so I think that this is a way to maybe make animals "more religious" by bringing them closer to god.

Below: Cardinal Roger Mahony splashing holy water on a snake. Mahony has been in charge of this blessing of the animals in Los Angeles for the last 20 years.

In my last post I discussed that religion is a process. Ideas are constantly borrowed, built upon, and made into something different in religion all the time. So in response to the question is it problematic that elements of this God have been borrow from other religions traditions, I say no, it just shows where Christianity came from. God's public image has changed multiple times since his conception. Johnathan Edwards' sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" illustrates the view of God as a wrathful God. Today this view is not a popular one today. Most people today I think see God as compassionate. Most of the psalms portray God in neither a compassionate or angry light. They show God as a person who defends/saves his people and gives them the power to fight their enemies. The psalms imply that if you don't follow God's laws then you should be afraid of the consequences, but it doesn't strike in me the same way that Edwards' sermon does.

"What Religion Are You" Quiz

I found this quiz on the internet. You answer the questions according to the directions, and the results show you which religion is closest to your beliefs. I'm taking it with a grain of salt but I thought it was interesting.

Here's the link: http://www.selectsmart.com/RELIGION/

Where Does Religion Come From?

There are so many religions in the world, and no one has the exact same beliefs despite what religion they are. To me this seems to indicate that religion is man made, and I suppose I really mean that all of the religions today are man made. I think that there is something intangible about the world that links everything together, and I guess you could call that a higher power, but I think that this power applies to everyone equally and doesn't require anything to work; it is innate. People can realize that our actions affect everyone and act accordingly or they can not think about it when they make decisions. Religions, as Ali pointed out in class, tended to make "rules and stories" to enforce behavior for some purpose other than strictly this is what god said, like the marriage rules. As I've said before, religion and its rituals serve to reinforce to hierarchy or social structures in societies. An example of this would be witchcraft in certain societies in Ghana. Since people do not want to be accused of witchcraft it serves as a check on deviant behavior, and it enforces society's structure because you aren't allowed to accuse the aristocrats.Also religions borrow or build upon other religions. The first or second day of class I think we said religion was a process, and this evolution of religion shows that religion is at least strongly affected by the changing factors in society, if not a direct result. An example of building upon other religions can be found in the similarities between bible stories and Sumerian stories that are thousands of years older than the Old Testament. The following are lines taken from Babylonian cuneiform compared to lines from the bible story of Noah. Babylonian cuneiform: The gods decide to make a flood. The God Ea warns Artarthasis to build a ship. Artarhasis is to take his family and animals aboard. The flood turns mankind into clay. The ship grounds on Mount Nisir. Artarhasis learns when the waters have subsided by sending out a dove, a swallow, and a raven. He offers sacrifice to the gods. The gods smelled the sweet savor. The god Enlil blesses Artarhasis and his wife. From Genesis: The Lord decides to destroy wicked mankind. The Lord warns Noah to build an ark. Noah is to take his family and animals aboard. The flood destroys all flesh. The ark comes to rest on the Ararat Mountains. Noah learns when the waters have subsided by sending out a dove, a swallow, and a raven. he offers sacrifice to the Lord. The Lord smells the pleasing odor. God blesses Noah and his sons. In other religions too, one sees lots of symbols that are borrowed.

Because of the wide varieties of religion, and the process in which they are created I believe religion according to Geertz's definition is man made.

Psalm II

I think the second psalm generates a similar feeling for its original readers and for the early Americans that of assurance, "God is on their side". The Jews and early Americans faced slightly different problems and that is where I think the psalm could take on a different meaning from each group. America was fighting over land with the Native Americans, but there is also the tension between the Americans and British over independence.

In our translation the psalm uses the word nations, but the Bay Psalm Book the word used is heathen. Now heathen has a negative connotation, and I think of it as something like savage; however, heathen originally meant a person who isn't Christian or of any religion. I think in this cause we can guess that heathen refers to anyone not Christian. The Native Americans were not Christian, and with this psalm the Americans could have rationalized their taking of the Indians land. In the psalm God says "Aske thou of me, and I will give the Heathen for thy lot." It's as if god has said "Go and take their land. I'm giving to you."

Another change that generates feelings relevant to the American Revolution is the wording of line three. This line in my opinion is very ambiguous, but the the Bay Psalm Book seems less so. When it states "their cords bee from us throwne", I get the impression the "us" has been imprisoned, and God's power will help to them escape. Similarly the Americans have been subjugated by the British and hope that God will be on their side and help to save them.

Finally on line 12 of the Bay Psalm Book it says "kisse yee the Sonne", which I think may refer to Jesus the son of God. If this is the case, it illustrates Christianity's rise and also gives us an idea of the beliefs held by the Americans at this time.

This feeling of assurance I think can also be seen in other early American ideas such as Manifest Destiny. These ideas about God persist even today as evident in Bob Dylan's song "With God on Our Side" which is posted below with the lyrics, and also in George Carlin's routine "God Bless America", also posted below.



With God On Our Side
Oh my name it is nothin'/ My age it means less/The country I come from/ Is called the Midwest/ I's taught and brought up there/ The laws to abide/ And that land that I live in/ Has God on its side.

Oh the history books tell it/ They tell it so well/ The cavalries charged/ The Indians fell/ The cavalries charged/ The Indians died/ Oh the country was young/ With God on its side.

Oh the Spanish-American/ War had its day/ And the Civil War too/ Was soon laid away/ And the names of the heroes/ I's made to memorize/ With guns in their hands/ And God on their side.

Oh the First World War, boys/ It closed out its fate/ The reason for fighting/ I never got straight/ But I learned to accept it/ Accept it with pride/ For you don't count the dead/ When God's on your side.

When the Second World War/ Came to an end/ We forgave the Germans/ And we were friends/ Though they murdered six million/ In the ovens they fried/ The Germans now too/ Have God on their side.

I've learned to hate Russians/ All through my whole life/ If another war starts/ It's them we must fight/ To hate them and fear them/ To run and to hide/ And accept it all bravely/ With God on my side.
But now we got weaponsOf the chemical dustIf fire them we're forced toThen fire them we mustOne push of the buttonAnd a shot the world wideAnd you never ask questionsWhen God's on your side.

In a many dark hour/ I've been thinkin' about this That Jesus Christ/ Was betrayed by a kiss/ But I can't think for you/ You'll have to decide/ Whether Judas Iscariot/ Had God on his side.

So now as I'm leavin'/ I'm weary as Hell/ The confusion I'm feelin'/ Ain't no tongue can tell/ The words fill my head/ And fall to the floor/ If God's on our side/ He'll stop the next war.

Mound Fun Fact and a Thought about Science

If you remember talking about the Poverty Point mound complex in Louisiana, here is a fun fact about them. To build the complex would have taken more than three million man-hours of labor with hundreds, maybe thousands, of people hauling dirt in baskets in an organized, planned effort.

Also an idea that I don't want to forget so I'm going to write it down. Is a function of religion to give us a soul? Do we have souls and what are they? Has science explained the soul? All of the religions I can think of deal with a soul, something spiritual. I think if we are going to call science a religion we should answer some of these questions.

Truth

Since this post can be about whatever thoughts we have about religion I choose to write about truth. When I listen to people talk about their religion, my biggest question is how can you tell other people that their beliefs are wrong and yours are right. At least most of the Christians that I have spoken to say that you have to believe in Jesus to get into heaven ... so most of the world is going to hell? I can't agree with that. People from many different religions all think that their religion is the truth, but is any religion true? This is why I like Geertz's definition that says "an aura of factuality", because no religion is actually fact. No one religion can be proven completely true.

Effigy Mounds

The Effigy Mounds built in the Late Woodland Period are a good example of Geertz's definition of religion. The mounds are part of a system of symbols that influences thoughts and behavior and provides the Native Americans with explanations and ideas about their world. First we can prove that the effigy mounds are not shaped because it is more aesthetically pleasing, but that they are in fact symbolic. This is shown by the connection between the shapes of the mounds and the pictures found on pottery and the repetition of those pictures both on pottery and in the form of mounds. It is also clear that the ideas symbolized affect the peoples actions, for example in the building of the mounds or the rituals and ceremonies of the people that center around the mounds. Finally the mounds and their symbols give an order of existence or division of the world. This can be seen by the locations of the mounds. The world is divided into three parts the Upperworld and the Lowerworld of water and earth. The symbols for the upperworld are birds, the water are panthers, turtles, and lizards, and the earth are most commonly bears or buffalo. Mounds in these forms are built where their world is meaning upperworld symbols are built on hills or higher elevations, water symbols are built close to the water and the earth symbols are in the land in between the water and upperworld symbols. The locations of the effigy mounds reinforce that order of existence.

Connecting Us to the World

I think another important element of religion and one of the candidates for why religion began is connections. The function of religion or more broadly one's set of beliefs is to connect the person to the world, other people, nature, etc. Religion and beliefs not only connect people to each other and their surrounding, but also put everything in context. Religion provides a framework for how to look at the world. This framework can be seen by the "dividing line" between nature and man that we discussed in class. One could explain different people's actions by understanding their religion. For example a religion whose gods or god are/is part of the environment, like gods of the sun or moon or animals, will look and treat the world differently than a religion whose god is removed from the environment. Christianity serves as a good example of this. For Christian's God is in a far removed place called heaven or resides within a person therefore the relationship is between God and the person, and the environment doesn't affect it. This removal causes a disconnect between people and their surroundings; however, part of this disconnect also comes from living removed from nature. It is interesting to look at how religion changes as societies become more complex, stratified, and urban. In hunting-gathering tribes one finds beliefs in zoomorphic gods (animals/plants) for example totems, and they worship natural phenomena. These tribes identify with instead of worship spiritual beings. In societies that practice horticulture, where the people have more control over their environment, one finds beliefs in anthropomorphic (humanlike) gods. Here man manages plants and animals and deities control natural phenomena. Finally in religions found in states, the gods are more powerful. Only in states is the belief in an omnipresent, all-knowing,all-powerful god present. State religions enforce social order and stratification. Commonly they stress the brevity of life with promises of reward in the afterlife, so the oppressed turn to religion and the hope that afterlife holds better things. It is clear that these different belief systems cause their followers to view the world differently and illicit different responses because of how the religion has connected the person to the world. Grizzly Man illustrates this idea as well in Timothy Treadwell's beliefs. Timothy's beliefs connect him differently to the world, and thus he acts differently. One can also interpret the paleolithic art as an attempt to connect to the world. How religion connects us to the world may be the most important aspect of religion, and possibly that search for a connection led to the advent of religion.

First Post

I'm not entirely sure how to start this post. I don't know how formal these posts should be or if they should be structured or if I can just ramble about my thoughts so bear with me. And I pick to just ramble about my thoughts until someone tells it's supposed to be done differently.

The hypothesis of altered states being the universal origin of religion is an interesting one and makes me wonder when and why altered states were removed from certain religions. I also wonder if people will start using this argument as a reason to legalize certain drugs, but that is beside the point. I'm a bit skeptical of the altered state's argument, that shaman fly or are driven into the ground during their "trips" making caves a connection to another world. This skepticism comes mainly from the fact that I have not been in any altered states so I don't know if this up or down sensation really happens.

In true liberal arts fashion I suppose, I think that a combination of all the theories is probably the most accurate option. I also think that there is no way all of prehistoric western Europe had one religion, so trying to find one is a silly idea. Beliefs vary from individuals, families, and communities. Two people may both consider themselves Christian, but they will not have the exact same beliefs nor will they have the same rituals, so we should acknowledge that difference in the first homo sapiens as well. About 50,000 years ago homo sapiens brains were "rewired", and it is only after that time that we see the beginnings of language, symbols, arts, etc. I agree with Clottes and Williams that there would have been some sharing of symbols and ideas but I do not think that necessarily means the symbol or idea held the same meaning in different communities. For example the symbolic hand gesture thumbs-up exists in both American and Australian culture, but in Australia it is an insult, where as in America it is a positive gesture.

Finally I wish that Clottes and Williams would have provided more facts to back up the theories they describe. I would have liked to know what animals are placed where in the caves if that evidence supports the structural theory or what animals show up in what regions and in what amounts if that information is important in evaluating the totem or hunting theories by that.

I look forward to our class discussion on this article.