forgiveness = surrender

forgiveness .... its a sort of surrender. mayden wrote a post that inspired me .... strangely, i wrote this comment mere minutes before my own evil and ugly exchange with my brother. and so .... fitting i think, that i share it here, with all of you.

remember that jesus asked g-d to forgive those who put him to death. now that is an example of love that many of us will never completely succeed in emulating. but ... still, we must make the effort, mustn't we? christmas and easter seem pretty meaningless if we don't truly get the point of love ... and also get that love isn't something we do only when it works - feels good - for us. love is also something we do when it doesn't feel good. and that is hardest of all. remember, also, that forgiveness is like surrender. our society's media and messages indicate to us that forgiving is losing ... admitting defeat.

so ... someone wronged us. ok. and it hurts like a bitch. ok. do we dwell on that hurt and anger we feel? or do we pick ourselves up from the hatred and hurt cesspool and make a concerted effort to move on, positively and with grace? i have done a lot of soul searching and have decided with my life and family i will choose option 2. i regret that my choice is too late for my late sister, who died before i could make things right for her. remember, then, also, that the things we say to any one person could be the very last thing we say to them. perhaps if we approached every human interaction like that ...? a

s for the others of my siblings - who have inflicted what i thought at the time as unforgiveable hurts - i can love them from afar. live and let live. if i encounter them at a family function, well the room and the world is big enough for all of us. and really, family function are not all about me and how i feel (uncomfortable, to be honest) but about making our mum happy ... we will get hurt in life. that's inevitable, mayden. how we deal with that hurt is what will make all the difference. and make no bones about it - the surrender of forgiveness may not feel great. but life isn't always about feeling great. its just about feeling. and what we do with that feeling. sorry to be soooo long-winded and preachy.

i'm just sharing with you the wisdom i gained from having been in that place you are, feeling the feelings you're feeling. and just remember jesus entered the world humbly and without an fanfare. and so christmas should be ... no fanfare, no big fancy BS. that's what i wish for us all this christmas. regards dear mayden. thinking of you. love your husband. treasure him. i miss mine dearly. so dearly. realize how lucky you are to have your family there ... together. love the pink reefer ps. any situation we encounter in life can be made so much easier or more difficult simply by our reaction. i have learned this time and time again, the hard way.

dear g-d

please give me the strength and the patience to tolerate other humans ... i know, i know, they're your creations. but, dear g-d ... why so slow on the uptake? why can't they speak honestly? without all the flashy, fluffy rhetoric? why can't they follow direction? why can't they listen AND hear? why do they exclude? g-d ... why don't i fit in anywhere? i feel likeable, most of the time. so, why do i have no friends? how do i know who i can trust? who i can believe?

in a world full of bull shit it's so fucking hard, g-d, to smell the roses. really. i try. maybe not hard enuf. i see so much complacency, greed, ignorance, thoughtlessness. and just plain mean-ness. y'know? lack of compassion. g-d .... it makes me incredibly sad. when i think of it all ... i wonder ... how do you deal with the constant disappointments we present to you? your creation ... it lets you down ... falls short of the mark.

g-d ... grant me serenity ... patience and wisdom. remind me that its not a popularity contest. remind me that its not any sort of contest. remind me ... fill my heart with something good. something i can hold onto. something. that doesn't make me feel empty as soon as it touches me.

ratzo v'shov - run and return

ratzo refers to the soul's the passionate desire to transcend its material existence, to “run forward” and cleave to g-d. shov refers to the soul’s sober determination to “return” and fulfill its mission in the body, the resolve to live within the context of material reality.

the droplet yearns
for the source.
the spark craves
the great fire.
i can bear no longer
the darkness of the world

let us plunge
into the sea of nothingness
let the grains of our existence
melt within
his infinite being

he who first
carved my spark
from his blaze
desires not
the extinction of my candle
within his flame

rather he seeks
the searing tremor of my soul
longing
from afar, from the dark
towards his light.

- zvi yair -

dark caves and pillars of salt

currently i'm reading wrestling with angels - a jewish interpretation of genesis. amazing. utterly elucidating. glowing with wisdom. the authors of this book have simply cast a bright light on an ancient, divinely inspired writings - revealings its timeless messages. i'd heard many of these stories so many times before. being catholic, of course, i'd never heard the story of dinah. hmmm. funny, that. repression, thy name is deviant.

the tendril of wisdom i wish to impart here in this post relates to the story of lot and his wife leaving sodom. you know the deal - despite the angels telling them on more than one occasion to go forth and not look back - lot and his family delay and delay and then when they finally do leave, lot's wife looks back and then gets turned into a pillar of salt. what happens here, in this story? why the procrastination, despite numerous urges to leave and escape an impending inferno? what, about looking back, causes lot's wife to become the most inert and lifeless substance? perhaps it had to do with her disobedience? NOPE. simply put?

when lot's wife looks back, instead of 'going forth,' she becomes a haunting metaphor for the perils of inertia. her preoccupation with the past literally paralyzes her in the face of danger, freezes her in time ... attachment to material possesions, coupled with denial of evil, can create a fatal blind spot. lot's wife, and the legion of procrastinators who have followed her through history, teach us that we suppress our instinctual flight response at our own peril

the wisdom of lot's story does not end with his wife's demise. oh no. there's more. recall the story of lot in the dark cave? after g-d plucks him away from the brimstone and destruction of sodom, lot makes retreat into a dark cave. somehow, he cannot seem to rescue himself from himself. i see this as a sort of looking back, don't you? extend the wisdom of the story of lot's wife.

can one really go forth while hanging on? NOPE, that's just common sense. symbolically no difference exists between hanging on and looking back - they originate from the same energy of inertia. and so, focussing so much attention and energy on past offences, angst, upheavels - it closes our spirits and psyches off to the possibilities and potential of the present. and ... the future.

image originally uploaded by two crabs

in search of ? a contemplative post

i feel it. as i read more and more about judaic thinking, principles, the torah. my soul revels in the compassion for g-d, for humanity, that flies from each word.

In stark contrast to Christian dogma -- where marriage is seen as a concession to the weakness of the flesh, and celibacy is extolled as a virtue -- the Torah accords matrimony an exalted and holy position.

what a difference this makes! such a difference ... i will not elaborate much further at this point, but just say that my soul feels liberated at the underlying sentiment of the torah wrt marriage and sexuality. repression has no place in the torah. in fact, it commands healthy sexual intimacy for all married couples. one removes the villainous tinge from sex and sexuality when one promotes open healthy expression as natural and necessary, rather than a grotesque manifestation of human weakness.

think on it. how many rabbi's are sexual predators? and how many so-called catholic men of the cloth are sexual predators or deviants? and how does a man, a celibate man who has no family experience whatever, possess the experience and knowledge and wisdom to guide his laiety in matters of family living, child rearing, marital strife? what counsel could such a repressed, oppressed and sheltered man provide an average person?

and now, in my convoluted thought pattern, this takes me to the issue of jesus. the being whom christians call the 'christ' .... the messiah. i have done, and continue to do, some reading on the divinity of jesus. on his message. the notion of jesus as divine does, when one delves into the facts of the matter, seem at odds with various prophecies that existed regarding the messiah. ie - one of many small seemingly insignificant details - jesus, not being joseph's biological son according the gospels, does not then descend from the davidic line, then does he? puzzling.

when it logically causes one to call prophecies into question. is not the word of g-d constant and unchanging for all time? and does it not evoke confusion, to think of g-d in a human form? and ... on top of all this consider the social dynamics of the time. the followers which jesus picked did not follow the laws of their faith - had a diminished experiential knowledge and understanding than, say, your average judean jew would have possessed. and ... at the risk of superimposing 21st century values upon an ancient society, i want to ask - what of all the families that jesus basically encouraged his followers to abandon? i wonder ... its suspect. so many things just don't add up.

so ... that's some of it. i can say now that i don't believe in the divinity of jesus ... that he is the messiah. that's not to say he was not an important figure in judaic thinking ... just that calling him a 'son of g-d (man)' does not imply his divinity - it imples a titled traditionally bestowed upon ancient sages/rabbis - a title of respect, a title which honours a man for his wisdom in interpreting the law of g-d.

and ... well, given that jesus appeared himself sort of conflicted about the torah, i think it would even be a stretch to call him 'son of g-d (man).' one must remember, that to the jewish diaspora of his time, jesus seemed as revolutionary and extreme as, say, osama to the mainstream muslims. a charismatic, maverick outspoken individual who aspires to lead a revolution against the status quo and who represents manipulative disrespect for the law of g-d.

spiritual awakening

i'm having one. its breathtaking. to wade through the wisdom of ages. to come face to face with the thoughts, ideas, stories of the most brilliant and respected sages of ancient history, of present-day. to live in this era - this era in which information avails itself so widely among the populace - its such a privilege. the ideas of so many swirl all around me. i only need reach out and grab. and scrutinize. and attend, distantly.

and ... i'm doing just that. the word 'israel' apparently means struggle with g-d. i really believe i feel the essence of what that means - what that struggle feels like and whence it resonates. i tumbled into the world and landed in a microcosm veiled by an ultra-catholic filter. the cult of catholicism. an institution which strives to keep its believing masses uninformed - like faithful zombies with no capacity for scrutinizing - one cannot scrutinize what one does not fully know.

all the questions i had. ignored, all of them. one mustn't ask such questions - its a sign of your weakness of faith. we must just believe, even if it doesn't make sense. that was the standard party line. and ... well, now it just does not suffice. its a cop out. so i'm on a quest. to quench this thirst i have for knowledge of g-d. i've poked thru the summa theologica by aquinas. the logical inconsistency of the trinty, the notion that illogical propositions are 'mysterious' and therefore, worthy of faith -- these i found untenable.

i have discovered maimonides and his guide for the perplexed - a stunning, stunning and brilliant work. light years ahead of his time - in terms of his description of the universe, the notion of planets, circular motion, atoms, and description of laws of nature that remind one of the so-called newton's laws of motion. and in all this, yes, a brilliant discussion of the nature and essence of g-d.

i read a lucid, well written refutation of the classic christian proof-texts re: messiahship of jesus in why the jews rejected jesus, written by david klinghoffer. wow. inspiring to see such a lucid explanation ... such clear answers to questions i have had for so long. the questions that i always got told pointed to my weakness of faith. inspiring. incredibly inspiring.

and then i began to read about kabbalah on the bus ride back home. (yes, finally after three hours i managed to drag myself away from the library). i only read a few pages. but, even just opening my mind and heart to the words and sentiments contained within the pages i held, even this filled me with a strange ecstatic sort of rapture. not a physical feeling. an essential sensation - a psychic sensation.

and so ... that's it. the awakening. or, more accurately, its beginning.

image originally uploaded by panic-embryo

compassion escaping

compassion escapes me.
right at this moment.
pain. silent, inert rage
fill me.
that’s it.
this sense of worry i have?
could that be a trace of love?
or …?
love … where did it go?
i feel empty of anything
save despair
and a fervent desire
to disengage
from humanity
g-d - are you?
i seek the truth
humanity
seems far too vile
to have come from
anything divine
compassion … escapes … me.

on omniscience, omnipotence and manipulation

so? what’s the verdict? on G-D? omnipotent? or master manipulator? or … does this discussion beg the question of spirituality? on one level, i’m inclined to observe this dialogue i’m having with myself as silly. i mean … why ask the questions? why contemplate the things i really ‘don’t get’ … if i’m not really sure of the g-d entity’s existence? and then, on another level. it makes sense. my need to have this here dialogue about the god entity.

even though i remain noncomittal on the whole g-d belief thing, i absolutely realize that its seared into the fabric of my person … of my self. so … i can choose to disregard the possibility of the god entity altogether. just throw the baby out with the bath water because of the hypocrisy of catholicism and christianity. because of my anger and respulsion at the abuses of power and belief. and deny myself a most important and deeply personal philosophical investigation. clearly, i have reasoned for myself that value of this discussion i have begun here in touching god. so … where does that leave me?

well, it leaves me …. still not prepared to commit, in writing, to belief in a g-d entity. still skeptical of the notion that prayer makes a difference in a situation’s outcome. still viewing prayer and religious ritual as comfort rituals. repititive actions that we can do in times of stress to derive comfort. as opposed to spiritual satellite-links to g-d. and still wondering. this belief in a g-d entity? does it make things seem more meaningful? does it comfort us, to think of some omnipresent, omniscient entity that rules and creates us all? and that altruistically has all our best interests at heart? and … how can will really be free, then, if the omnipresent one lurks about, manipulating the circumstances of our existence?

as you can see, i’m very confused. and i feel this g-d entity thing worthy enough to warrant close inspection. more close inspection. i owe it to myself. to self-elucidate. for so many years i heard the ‘party line’ each sunday, at the ‘party meetings’ that my parents called ‘mass.’ and the indoctrination continued at school, where we learned of the sort of treatment which the loving institution of g-d (read: the catholic church) gave to those individuals who questioned the paradigm force fed to us all. it makes me think of something a very wise man wrote only recently.

and still. i feel no closer to the answers i seek. i’ve muddied the waters. but, then, perhaps i’ve looked at this wrong. perhaps the answers i seek lie in my method of uncovering them. perhaps the answer does not lie in some gleaming ark. or some rustic piece of wood. or some ancient fortress in rome. perhaps the answer lies in the journey itself? perhaps the answer … perhaps it IS the journey?

and so, my question has morphed in the following. why the need to assign omnipotence and omnipresence to g-d? why blindly submit to manipulation and then call it reverence to the absolute truth?

surely more than one path leads to rome, don’t you think?

God and religion ~ the jury's out

yep. i can safely say that here. i dunno. honestly. what the fuck do i regard as fact? what the fuck do i regard as fiction? years and years of blind, merciless and cruel ::exclusionary:: indoctrination have left a gaping burn hole on my heart. on my soul. along with suspicion. and defiance of the existing self-delegated authorities. and then … the JC figure pops into my head.
i’m thinking of JC. a maverick of his era, for sure. shunned, in fact, condemned, by the religious authorities of that time for heresy, blaspheming. not married, in an era which expected, required even, men his age to marry. and he kept companionship with several other males. what. what. what, would we think of such an individual by today’s standards? would we think he’s gay? and … does it matter? and … does JC matter? i mean, in the grande scheme of things?
does it frighten us to apply contemporary standards to ancient biblical times? does it assist us in advancing our goals? i have awareness that i’ve used “US” here. only for convenience, really. i don’t consider myself part of that US. but, the old paradigm, seared into one’s being, ain’t so easy to erase from this self. at any rate, what of applying today’s standards to societies that existed millenia ago? if this makes mohammed a pedophile, then surely, it must also make joseph and god himself one, too. for … mary was but a child, by today’s standards - barely old enough to give consent to any sexual union - be it with another human or with the holy spirit. and now back to my comparison of societal standards … does it make JC gay?
and this leads to a very interesting thought that catholicism - i keep myself closed in the catholic box here because that’s the paradigm i know very well - has based itself upon sexual repression. one only need look to the horrific abuse at mount cashel school for boys in the maritimes to face the ugliness of catholicism’s dirty little secrets. dirty. that’s a word i think of when i think catholic. manipulation. of the power dynamic. oppressive. in its subjugation. of the flesh. of humanity. this subjugation of sexuality. this repression of a most powerful and most beautiful primordial behaviour. don’t you think its twisted? sick? DYSFUNCTIONAL? i wonder … did JC intended for his ‘church’ to erect itself in this manner? did he intend for his institution to grow to such largess as currently? and with such carnage?
of the world today. of so-called christians today. what would JC think? what would he feel? if he could see? see into the reality of human existence? and the hypocrisy of christianity. christians who burned joan of arc at the stake. and then several hundred years later canonized her to sainthood. hypocrisy. hearts filled with hatred. all in the name of JC. what would he think? would he give a free express pass thru heaven’s pearly gates, to all those mothers who abandoned their dying, AIDS-ravaged sons? would he give out special edition halos to all those who exclude others in his name? would men who rape little boys receive an exemption from condemnation because they wear a roman collar?
i wonder. i wonder. that’s all. i guess that makes me a heretic, then?

thinking about religion

ok. so, first post about this stuff. i’m trying something new. religion. theism. its shaped my person. the child i was once. the woman i’ve become. i don’t subscribe to a religion, really. in my mind the jury’s out on this god thing.
furthermore i think all those out there who pad their own egos and self interest in the name of their god are just as guilty as those they condemn as sinners, blasphemers and fallen angels. case in point - the vatican. just some other types of politicians. exploiting the belief system of the masses to forward their own political and personal agendas.
ok. that’s all i’m gonna say for a first post.
oh wait. one more thing. i wonder why is it forbidden to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge? what is it that god does not want us to know? that’s where i’m at with religion and belief in god.