|
|
Post by Al Truest on Mar 3, 2004 1:27:28 GMT
I apologize in advance for the length of this post. But in light of recent controversy over Mel Gibson's "The Passion" I wanted to share this article from Volume 8 Issue 4 (#32) of the Gurdjieff Journal.
I have never professed to be deeply religious. But, in order to be a truly enlighted and spirtual being; it is important for me to seek balance and truth. This article will hopefully coax you to think and maybe examine what you believe. Our collective consciousness will never wash away ignorance if we do not combine each drop of wisdom that we can distill and purify. So here it is. Please start a dialogue after you've read and digested the content:
There are periods in the life of humanity, which generally coincide with the beginning of the fall of cultures and civilizations, when the masses irretrievably lose their reason and begin to destroy everything that has been created by centuries and milleniums of culture. Such periods of mass madness, often coinciding with geological cataclysms, climatic changes, and similar phenomena of a planetary character, release a great quantity of the matter of knowledge.
Wars are not decreasing, they are increasing and war cannot be stopped by ordinary means. All these theories about universal peace conferences and so on, are simply laziness and hypocrisy. Men do not want to think about themselves, do not want to work on themselves; but think of how to make other people do what they want....War has many causes that are unknown to us. Some causes are in men themselves, others are outside them. One must begin with the causes that are in man himself. How can he be independent of the external influences of great cosmic forces when he is the slave of everything around him? He is controlled by everything around him. If he becomes free from these things, he may then become free from planetary influences.
Beings of one community began to pipe with full blast against beings of another community that 'Hasnamussian music' they call 'policy' i.e., they began to 'criticize each other,' 'to drown each other,' and so on, their aim being to create what is called 'prestige' amoung the local beings in relation to their own community.
There is just now proceding the process of final 'dispatch' of two of the great religions....one on the teaching of Saint Jesus, and the other, on the teaching of Saint Mohamed......They produced these 'wars' or 'crusades' only in order that this city Jerasalem - in which this Divine Teacher Jesus Christ had existed, suffered, and died - should be exclusively Christian; and during these crusades of theirs, nearly half of the beings of male sex of that continent (Europe} were completely destroyed....I already see in my mind's eye that before many of their years have passed, there will be on the spot where the planetary body of the Divine Jesus was buried, a place for parking contemporary cars.
The teaching of Jesus Christ [is] the religion and teaching upon which the highest individuals placed great hope.
- G.I. Gurdjieff
Whatever I/you think of this, there is a challenge here. How does the harmonic resonance of the message of love and forgiveness remain alive after 2000 years? Moreover how can the idolatry and ignorance surrounding religion spurn so much hate and violence?
Where are you? Are you truly free to express an independent thought on this subject? Or is it just easier to ___________ (fill in the blank. ) Is there even value in seeking the truth?
|
|
|
|
Post by Adey on Mar 3, 2004 1:46:57 GMT
I will respond - it needs thought first.
|
|
|
|
Post by Xanadu on Mar 3, 2004 2:08:28 GMT
I have wondered if the last temptation of Jesus shouldn't have been a "normal" life, but a glimpse at the destruction and pain caused in his name. Would he have felt his message was understood and that any of it was worthwhile?
Thanks for posting this Al. Good point of discussion. And by the way... will you be seeing the film and why? Only answer, by all means, if you feel comfortable.
This is for anyone to answer, but my intention, just as I believe Al's to be, is not meant to be provoking in an antagonizing manner. Only to provoke discussion and thought. Remember never discuss politics and religion with friends, right? Can we all maintain a thoughtful discussion without becoming juvenile about our beliefs?
|
|
|
|
Post by Al Truest on Mar 3, 2004 2:36:02 GMT
I have wondered if the last temptation of Jesus shouldn't have been a "normal" life, but a glimpse at the destruction and pain caused in his name. Would he have felt his message was understood and that any of it was worthwhile?
I think people should see this film and discuss it though. I believe that the true message of love and peace can find you anywhere. Jew, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist - whatever. I believe that all cultures have arrived at a universal truth. We have embodied our spirtual leaders with ressurection stories, miracles and divine wisdom. The differences in the unifying truth of these sects are the frail human distortions associated with pride and ignorance.We're all friends at the end of the day. If I am taught that God is a loving "Father" (Mother works for me as well) then he must have more capacity for compassion and forgiveness than I could ever hope for. If this is true then, I will not be tortured for eternity for being in the wrong 'club.' |
|
|
|
Post by Al Truest on Mar 3, 2004 3:04:15 GMT
I will respond - it needs thought first. I look foward to the discussion. I really don't mind talking religion as long as someone is not trying to 'save me'. |
|
Sven Golly
Moving
"In the night you hide from the madman you're longing to be"
Posts: 800
|
Post by Sven Golly on Mar 3, 2004 3:38:55 GMT
What is best about men is desirous to have embodied in a tangible being of our own species and experiences, and is of solace and comfort to exhault these universal truths. So who is "Lord of the Flies?"  Sorry, Zan asked that we not be juvenile.  But what else but wit and opposable thumbs seperates us. Quite seriously, in this vein, do men have dominion over animals - or are we stewards of their well being. Thanks Al for your Heavy thoughts. You read us Gurdjieff and Jesu. That hits me in the parietal fontanelle.  |
|
|
|
Post by Al Truest on Mar 3, 2004 23:10:14 GMT
Well drat.  I was looking foward to more commentary here. Maybe it takes more time,  I do want to add that I can not discount the power of positive energy in all of this. i.e. prayer, karma premonition - whatever. Also I liked the challenge by Sven to examine the role of man as having dominion over the Earth, and all it's resources. I'm waiting...  |
|
|
|
Post by Adey on Mar 4, 2004 2:32:12 GMT
Do my best with this Al, but I can't promise major insight.
Your post, a quote by the heaviest of Kate's teachers, makes 2 points really. One is the aggression of man, and our tendency to desire control, and two is about the use of religion either conciously or subconciously to achieve this.
Now I don't have a problem with religion as a concept, but I do have a problem with extremism. Unfortunately, because of the importance of the former to many individuals, the latter is always a potential tool by which they may be manipulated. Appeal to a fundamental belief, and it is possible to break down any civility and humanity (always a thin layer) in most people. Of course it needn't necessarily be religion, nationality is a good card to play as well. Think of socialist Germany in the 1930s, think of the Yugoslavians, the Satelite Soviet states, the major African tribes, celtic Catholicism etc. You get the picture.
Religious fundamentalism (and I am focusing on this), has been around forever. What was more extreme than the requirements of God in the old Testament? But people have a need to believe in something and thats where we are vulnerable despite our education and scientific progress " Give me the Karma Mama " indeed.
I have not made a detailed study of the Koran, but I know that it's main teachings are not unlike those of the New Testament, with just a few elements of the vengeful old. There is for example, an equivalent sentiment/commandment/teaching/rule, whatever, to the biblical testament number 1 - " Thou shalt not kill ".
In theory, there should be no ultimate conflict between these 2 oldest religions. It seems to me, that the main tool is to select a reference, frequently obscure, that seems to support your agenda. Your Holy men are primed with it, and it is used to control the believers. If it means war, then so be it.
You don't even need to promote conflict with another host religion. Internecine conflicts exist in Christianity of course. Only 10 years ago, Catholics were killing Protestants (and vice versa) in Ireland. Some extremists in that country are still at it (aided it has to be said by the money of certain civilised countries who chose to look the other way - untill they decided to get real about what terrorism actually meant).
And why? It's always about control isn't it - keep the faithful in line even if it means subverting the obvious truth... In this, the charismatic leader recognises the need for people to be led. Don't believe it? Lets go back to 30s Germany: " Heads we're dancing - tails it's war ".
AT makes the point about being in the right club to avoid damnation - a pretty powerful incentive to behave inhumanely...
I'm sure we could go on for weeks about this stuff - this is my little contribution.
|
|
|
|
Post by Al Truest on Mar 4, 2004 3:30:23 GMT
Thank you Adey. I knew you would post something insightful and thought provoking. I posted the article in an effort to help achieve balance and enlightenment.
I want to hear and know all sides. The truth is generally somewhere in the middle. Extremism, Fundamentalism, Terrorism - if it ends in ism it's often on the left or right fringes of the truth. What is so complex though, are all the variables that can be based on a simple truth.
Ignorance power and pride are tools of the great manipulators of the masses. We succumb to their devices without even being aware of the proccess. The conservative and liberal political leaders in our democracies, though better than the alternative forms of government, are mostly puppets of corporations and special interests.
There is true evil in the world though. It can creep up on us if we don't stay vigilent. I listen to right wing talk radio and fundamentalist preaching at least a couple of hours a week while I drive. It motivates me to defend my values. Conversely, I read the liberal slant in some newspapers and watch some left wing cable broadcasts on occasion. It seems though that I gravitate to National Public radio and television, and select publications such as from the referenced article.
Art, beauty and music play such a key role in the brotherhood of man. The universal concepts and truths, the poetry of motion, the bringing down the racial and cultural barriers and so on..... Artist's like Kate Bush, Peter Gabriel, Joe Zawinul, Loreena McKennett to name a few, are as important as philosophers and teachers as they are as muscians. The truth they bring is pure. It is from the heart and it endures. The journey is made more pleasant and fulfilling for the vistas that they open for us. But you must open your eyes and your heart to the varied cultural influences and challenging ideas that they present.
Your duty in life is to leave behind positive energy. (my humble opinion, not an edict) Has your life made a difference? Love and kindness need no script. If the church or religion help you find kindred souls and messages, then more power to you. I won't consider you a sheep or a pawn. And you needn't be. You can find peace in the fold. But, there are many paths to find the way. I chose to find it in beauty and harmony. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Adey on Mar 4, 2004 21:31:14 GMT
So by exposing yourself to some of this stuff, you are forewarned - and forewarned is forearmed. Good tactic if you've the stomach and/or the patience to wade through the vile rhetoric. Oh yes I certainly agree - there is real evil out there and sometimes it's soooo insidious. It starts small, look to your media because there's no such thing as independent news..
I am seeing examples daily in the UK at the moment, with the readership of National daily titles being primed to hate the outsider - there is talk of our shores being 'swamped' by asylum seekers, with inaccurate figures to 'prove' we are taking more than our fair share.. Honestly it's nasty stuff and some people are lapping it up. Our Northern towns are starting to see a small but significant lurch into rampant racism it seems. The British National Party have managed to lever one of their odious Councillors on to the local council in one city and are threatening other 'successes'. I wonder if Europe in 1933 felt something like this.
I don't know if art is the answer, and perhaps I'm oversimplifying AT's point. It sure feels better than hate and it does appeal to those things in us which are good. But it can only inspire and enlighten us if we are prepared to let it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Xanadu on Mar 5, 2004 0:28:55 GMT
Sorry if this is an abrupt change in direction... (I have read the previous and will address the points more thoroughly later) but I would like to ask a question. One I feel pertains to the topic and to artists in general.
Just to preface this, I have been having a discussion about this all day (a joke at my workplace is "today's thesis is ___, let's discuss") and mainly brought about by the intense interest in Gibson's film.
I, and many of us, understand that this film is supposed to be intended as entertainment. Isn't that the original intention of all art, and if it transcends, to move emotionally or provoke thought? Apply this to Gibson's intentions which seem vague. What could be the motive for a Roman Catholic Extremist to make a film that really only depicts the crucifixion? To shame other religions? To spread Gospel? Obviously he is not qualified to teach in an accurate manner, and hasn't claimed to.
So taken a step further... if artists tackle subjects like politics, religion and history, what responsiblity do the have to society? If the creation is meant to be taken as "a fictionalized depiction" shouldn't it be deemed so from the beginning? Gibson is wavering on this topic (based on the Sawyer interview). My "utopian idea" is that some moral personal censorship should have taken place as this idea was conceived, acknowledging his resposibility to the ignorant in society. Narrow minded born-agains are already praising this as true and uplifting, actual accounts of his death. It's the religious equivalent of watching Cold Mountain if you want facts about the Civil War or closer, Braveheart for Scottish history. If artist's are going to be given such power to wield over society's mass consciousness, shouldn't it be considered beforehand the possible repercussions? The power to influence though is staggering.
I suppose I am being idealistic. I will compare this to another pop-star/songwriter. Phil Collins has said that when recording he plays the recordings on the worst/most average cassette deck available, before the pressing. In his mind, the mix should sound good here, then it will sound great anywhere. He has considered the masses and how they will interpret the sound before he releases it. He has become aware of his responsibility as a musician. This is only for pop music. How should someone attempting to portray the death of Jesus consider his work?
|
|
|
|
Post by Al Truest on Mar 5, 2004 1:52:15 GMT
I don't know if art is the answer, and perhaps I'm oversimplifying AT's point. It sure feels better than hate and it does appeal to those things in us which are good. But it can only inspire and enlighten us if we are prepared to let it.
Art is not the answer. It is a goal and a direction. To look for beauty in the hideous - To find the truth amoungst the lies. - This is the answer.
Zan's comments fit right in at this point. I have not seen the "Passion of the Christ" Yet there are those on either extreme that have latched on to it for leverage. Whatever Mr Gibson's motive's were, the project is not evil. "Truth is forever absolute"..."opinion is truth filtered through the moods, the blood and the disposition of the spectator" (Wendell Phillips) I'll quote one more great thinker (Thoreau) "It takes two to speak the truth. One to speak it, and another to hear."
I used to have this as my signature here. "Love is sublime. It finds beauty in the profane. It exhaults mankind to it's highest form" I try to live by this. It makes altruism a bit easier as well. I will often fail and become petty or vindictive; but, my core belief will usually correct my course.
So if Mel Gibson is a right wing Zealot, or just seeking the truth, each of us is responsible for righting the course of what we do with these external forces. With freedom comes the right to be an idiot, bigot or whatever. The speeding traffic of ideas and agendas must be negotiated. We know to watch for cars before we cross the street. We must learn to watch for out of control drivers on the wrong side of the proverbial road.
I have said before that consequence is the most verifiable universal truth. Your actions and reactions are what will change the world. Ten million butterflies flapping their wings will cause a hurricane. The combined will and resolve of a nation can flood an adversary. So remember how you fit into the scheme. Do you calm the waters or cause them to boil over?
It is naive though to think that everyone will adopt this philosophy. Real evil in the world must be resisted. Education and communication must be spread to all people. Power brokers will fight to keep control, but as the internet and satelite communications become more widespread, things will improve. When software becomes readily available to translate the internet and telephones, then the inherent good in the brotherhood of man can emerge.
In our hearts we know what is right. Justice and freedom are the by-products of truth; and Art is my north star. |
|
|
|
Post by Adey on Mar 5, 2004 2:15:21 GMT
This is a really intersting and valid point Xan. How much accuracy does an artist owe to the General Public?
You made a good point about Phil Collins's efforts to ensure that his audience hear a good representation of his music. Yes he has clearly given thought to those that will listen to his efforts. (I might say though, that perhaps there's an element of Ego, as well as altruism there)
I think that it is less easy in the field of filmaking or similar endeavours when the purpose is the telling of history. Clearly the Director and maybe the Producers have a greater impact than the lead actor(s). I should say at this point that I know nothing of Gibson's film and that the controversy has passed me by - was Gibson the director as well?
Certainly I agree with your point generally, that all the artists involved in a major historical production owe a duty of care.
This was bought home to me in a Road to Damascus style revelation, when I went to see the film Titanic. Now, I am one of those wierdos that remain fascinated by the story of the great ship and her passengers. As a result I have read extensively on the subject, and know a great deal about the last moments of the ship. When the 1st Officer Lightoller character is seen to draw his revolver and apparently fires on the Steerage passengers, I almost leapt out of my seat. Furiously I whispered to my wife "thats wrong, thats just wrong and it's not fair". Immediately my thoughts were with the later family of Lightoller and of his historical reputation. I trust that readers see my point.
Representing history is as you say fraught with dangers.
Surely a huge disclaimer about any claims of historical accuracy is an absolute pre-requisite.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adey on Mar 5, 2004 2:23:55 GMT
In our hearts we know what is right. Justice and freedom are the by-products of truth; and Art is my north star. |
|
|
|
Post by Al Truest on Mar 5, 2004 2:28:41 GMT
Certainly I agree with your point generally, that all the artists involved in a major historical production owe a duty of care. I disagree wholeheartedly. Literary device and Poetic liscense are tools of the trade. If you want to get your history from the movies good luck. An artist can skew the events how he or she choses. The market place and critics will expose the agenda or find a new perspective. Reputation and career length will be determined by their viability. Art is provocative and owes no explaination. Find the truth or lies on your own. That's freedom. |
|
Sorry, Zan asked that we not be juvenile. 
But what else but wit and opposable thumbs seperates us. Quite seriously, in this vein, do men have dominion over animals - or are we stewards of their well being.
I was looking foward to more commentary here. Maybe it takes more time, 
I do want to add that I can not discount the power of positive energy in all of this. i.e. prayer, karma premonition - whatever. Also I liked the challenge by Sven to examine the role of man as having dominion over the Earth, and all it's resources. I'm waiting... 