Reading Response ch 8-13, week 3

"Human beings, man," is what I kept saying out loud, in bewilderment, as I progressed through this week's reading. We (I'm including myself in this grouping of all human beings) believe, say, and do some pretty weird things for reasons that we often cannot articulate. The concept on which I want to concentrate in this post is that of "that which was lost", since this seems to be what everyone in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is trying to "regain" somehow.

The words "return", "consolation", "hope", and "reconstruct" or "rebuild" appear often in this selection of chapters (in ch 8 especially) in reference to all three faiths. Everyone seems to be harkening back to a past where we were much holier, much more connected to the divine, much more at peace with each other. This vague yet pleasant-soudning past exists largely in the myths that we examined in the first section of chapters, so one must have faith that these narratives are the truth before one can deeply desire their reemergence to reality. Once one has established this belief in the way things were in the days of yore and this desire for them to return, one must conceptualize how that return would be possible. Does it include the participation of others? Is it up to the individual to recreate that divine connection for themselves? Are physical objects or places involved in this resurrection, or perhaps certain words or actions or mindsets? How else could a lost people experience god but through old traditions?

Julian saw Christianity as a "fragrantly casting off of hallowed [Pagan] traditions" (p. 193).

John latched onto Christ as "the fulfillment of the old Zion cult" (p. 158).

The Jewish zealots who committed mass suicide atop Masada (p. 156) clearly preferred death over assimilation with their Roman attackers.

The entire Islamic faith is described as "a quest for wholeness that was lost" (p. 218).

On p. 156 we see one answer to the question of how to restore a divine past, that of Rav Yohanan during Vespasian's rule: he taught that Jews could recreate their holy past not by finding a new place to perform sacrifices and rituals, but merely by studying the word of god and by acting mercifully toward all other humans.

Another answer is in part given on p. 191 when Armstrong addresses the idea that god "[took] the body" of Jesus, therefore establishing a human connection. This concept convinced millions--billions, even--that god identified with us and that it is not ridiculous for us to identify with god, as well.

Islam is described as "a realistic faith" because it gave "human beings…symbols on which to focus" (p. 221).

In fact, this is what all three of these faiths have done in one way or another, and that is why they all prevailed. Humans can't go on words alone. The connection to a physical entity of some sort is crucial to retain our attention and dedication to an idea. The "places [or things or people or pictures or WHATEVER] where god had touched our world" (p. 191) are where humans have chosen to place eternal spiritual meaning. These are the places that we revere as being able to transport us to that mystical, idealized past where we were closer to god.

So now I ask you:

Is there a myth or tradition to which you hold on because of some variation on the feeling of loss and longing and not-being-totally-whole? Why? How? What do you think about this?

Is it reasonable/practical/useful for humans to place spiritual significance on a place or thing or person and then base entire rituals and lifestyles around it? Why?

Why are we so obsessed with the past? Why do we yearn for what was when we don't even know if it ever was that way?

Let's Solve This Thing.

Despite the fact that most of you reading this post may not click on them, I'm including a couple of links here and here to some short essays that I have written regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and ways to resolve it.

Anyways.

     Remember that crazy study put out by some big scientific organization a while back that said that men think about sex every three seconds? That's me with this conflict. Needless to say I've gone through quite a number of opinions on how to bridge the Palestinian-Israeli divide, and still today my views are being shaped by conversations and experiences that I have, things I read in the news, or stories I hear about peacemaking in other regions. I expect my participation in this class will inspire still more changes, but I hope to communicate my current mindset in this post.
   
     It's incredibly difficult to even know where to begin when conceptualizing a possible solution to this conflict. To start off, do we look at where, when, and how this all started (and what that even means)? Do we draw up who-started-what charts complete with every war and rocket attack and civilian casualty on each side? Do we get intimidated by the heavy history books and the messy past of the region and just focus on what's happening at this very moment? And once we get past that part, let's address the question of who the "we" is that we're talking about. Who can actually make this happen? Who is able to most effectively broker a peace deal, or coax the Israeli and Palestinian populations into wanting to make peace with each other and believing that it's possible? As you can already see by the way I'm already tripping over my many thoughts regarding this issue, it's complicated. However, through the fog of unhelpful skepticism and the unreasonable, naive optimism and the damaging fundamentalism and radicalism that one is bombarded with when diving into the pool of information about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one vision remains in perfect view: peace is possible.

     There are parts of my mind that are drenched in Mediterranean sunshine and strewn with festive wreaths of olive branches when thinking about the future of Israel and Palestine because of the many formal and informal diplomatic initiatives going on currently, attempting to create the desire and motivation for peace on the person-to-person level as well as on a governmental level. There has been a growing trend over the past three decades or so in the area of grassroots peacemaking, using community building programs between Israeli and Palestinian youth to hopefully instill a sense of partnership and cooperation in the future leaders of the two nations.

     The more somber parts of my mind are littered with dust and rubble from the enormous security wall and splattered with blood of all those who have died as a result of this stubborn conflict. There have been studies done on the attitudes of the youth in Israel and Palestine that have reported the increasing stubbornness on either side and the lessened motivation for and belief in a future resolution. Even without these surveys it is possible to observe the belligerent attitudes of both populations, their deeply rooted anger fueled by each subsequent Israeli settlement built or rocket launched from within Gaza or the West Bank.

     I do not believe that it is realistic to expect the Israeli and Palestinian people to come to the unanimous decision that enough is enough any time soon. I believe that, despite the incredible importance of popular opinion & national attitudes, that formal governmental peace agreements are just as important. You just can't have one without the other in this situation. I also believe that the actions of both Israeli and Palestinian leaders do not always (or even often) demonstrate what they say is a genuine desire for peace. So what is to be done?

     On the road to reconciliation, the peace train is going to have to make a few stops (roll your eyes, see if I care--I love Cat Stevens).
     The first stop (step? stop? so confusing.) will have to be at the grassroots level. The attitudes of both nations must be more optimistic, more trusting, and more inclusive before the next step of progress can be taken. Why? Because of the children! No matter how cliche it is, it is true that the children of today are the leaders (and the voting constituents) of tomorrow, so I see it necessary to focus on improving conditions for more peaceful mindsets in each population right now, right at this very minute.
     Next comes the guys in suits (this masculine language has a purpose--I'll address the issue of women in government in just a minute). Right now they're not doing their jobs. They're just not. Words mean nothing without action, and when action is lacking, the citizens need to rise up and demand it. I understand that this is easier said than done (remember five seconds ago when I said that talk is cheap?), but once the populations each become more strongly devoted to the pursuit of peace(which was stop #1 on the peace track), they will elect leaders who are, as well.
     In the past, a cheap, shiny tourist attraction on the path to peace has been *women*. Women's involvement in this particular region of the world has ranged from UN-appointed commissions/teams to tiny, independent, citizen-driven community development programs trying to create peace between Israelis and Palestinians. No matter how effective these programs had the potential of being, we never found out because they have always been nothing more than side projects to the formal process of peacemaking--a process from which women have been routinely and systematically (and shamefully) excluded.

I will continue to write more about this as the semester progresses, adding on as more ideas come to me. Thank you all for bearing with me as my mind races from one idea to the next--the bottom line is we can do this.
         

Discussion Response Week 3

I'll start this post off by saying once again how much I appreciate the open atmosphere in the classroom, facilitated by Noura and contributed to by all of the students. I love it and value it. I thought that the discussion today was interesting, but also somewhat superficial (maybe not the correct word). This was potentially because of our collective, relatively limited knowledge regarding ancient history, or potentially because we all seem to view "true history" in a similar regard (we've all seemed to agree that whatever "really" happened doesn't really matter because people believe what they believe is true and not much can be done to change that). Today seemed to me to be more of a summary, where we all pointed out different parts about each section that stood out to us. While I do think that there is value to that, I know that in the future I will make a conscious effort to come up with questions (and raise them in class) that push me to think more deeply about the material that we read, even if it is predominantly facts….upon facts upon facts. This will allow us to not only quickly review the sometimes difficult material that we read, but also explore the implications of what we've just learned in Armstrong's text and others.
I think it's very interesting that so far we have all had similar opinions regarding the issues of truth, history, respect, discussion/debate, the role that religion plays/should play in narratives & other opinions. This, to me, does not hint that we all think the same way or that we all view this topic through the same lens, but simply that we are all logical, thoughtful people who understand and respect the complexity of the thoughts and opinions formed around this and all other contentious issues (this is another reason why I feel so comfortable in class).
Looking forward to next week, I expect we will be benefitting immensely from having read these history-intensive chapters as we move on to more modern history. It is incredibly important to have a strong foundation of historical knowledge before going on to analyze current events.
Can't wait to see you guys tomorrow!

Journal 1

      Since I'm writing this post so incredibly late (WHOOPS), I have the perspective of already having read Armstrong's first 7 chapters and her introduction, and this reading assignment has set the final stone in the foundation of the course for me. Coming into class on the first day I was expecting to find other students who were as passionate about Israeli-Palestinian relations as I am, and that's what I found. As for the professor, I had no idea what to expect. I had heard amazing things about the course, but only expressed in vague generalities--I had no concrete descriptions off of which to develop expectations. I was ecstatic at the end of the first class, feeling trusting and confident in Noura's knowledge of, passion for, and balanced approach to this topic. After reading Armstrong's chapters that were assigned last week, I feel as if I am carrying around in my backpack a treasure trove of easily digestible historical information and critical, objective observations about a subject that I was once too wrapped up in to make myself. I know that this book and this class will push me more that I've been pushed before to question why I think the way that I do, why I care about the things that I care about, and what implications and consequences that has.
     The concept that (paraphrasing Armstrong) many peoples' connection to a physical place is potentially entirely mythical is one that I've never felt comfortable acknowledging or addressing in conversation. Only in the privacy of my own mind have I most often entertained the jarring possibility that everything I grew up learning and believing and feeling is not real. I can't say definitively whether or not my journey away from religious observance of Judaism has impacted my views of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because at the same time I was going through a period of intellectual transformation, as well, reading more and learning more independently than I had the previous decade and a half or so.
     This practice of keeping a blog and reading each others' thoughts and opinions is incredibly exciting to me. I appreciate having a space where we can individually reflect on what we learn and discover in class because this is a complicated and heavy topic and it's important to keep track of where we are personally with the information we explore. There is rarely a moment where I feel intimidated or afraid of sharing my personal opinion, but it helps when I'm in a space where I feel accepted, respected, and safe. I feel perfectly comfortable in class--everyone seems so nice and genuine and interested in having meaningful discussions--and I believe that this open atmosphere will lend itself to exciting discussions in the coming months.
     Todah rabah, shukran, thank you, Noura and everyone in class--I can already tell that I'm going to really love this semester spent learning with and from you all.

Week 3

Coming from the Christian community, Karen Armstrong seems, at the outset, to be an appropriate objective analyst of the different connections that Jews and Muslims (and Christians) draw between Jerusalem and their core identities. After reading the introduction and these first several chapters, it is clear through her meticulous detailing of events and her untinted view of the history of the region that she really is giving her readers an objective look at this city that has been at the focal point of so much of human history. The many maps included in the book represent the borders drawn during every observable time period, and this inclusion of so many iterations of the Holy Land demonstrates visually how complicated the question is of "who Jerusalem belongs to".

Beginning the book by describing introductions to Jerusalem from both her Israeli and her Palestinian friends and colleagues, Armstrong shows how people often "see the same symbol in entirely different ways". She muses on the fact that people can interpret myths and facts differently, and people can ascribe different meanings to places and events based upon their individual points of reference created by years of different experiences. This acknowledgment lets us know that Armstrong is acutely aware and respectful of the differing narratives and claims of "legitimacy" that both Israelis and Palestinians hold in regards to Jerusalem. When she eventually states the purpose of her book, which is to ask why Jerusalem is considered "holy" by Muslims and Jews (she provides the Christian answer), it is already clear that she has a genuine fascination with this phenomenon and a true desire to learn where conceptions of holiness ("sacredness") come from in these two religions/peoples. 

Her observations (about objectivity being difficult, the deep sense of loss/incompleteness driving the connection to a physical place, myths being important whether they're true or not, and the indirect experience of the divine, etc) are remarkably deep and succinct at the same time. They resonated with me as true, as concepts that I myself had considered before and come to similar conclusions about but that I had never been able to articulate as well as she does in her introduction. This feeling of familiarity shows how much effort Armstrong put into getting to the root of human thought and emotion--complex ideas like the ones she presents here are rarely easily communicated like they are in this book.

The first words of the first chapter, ZION, are "WE KNOW NOTHING about the people who first settled in....the city of Jerusalem". What an excellent way to set the tone to a book that is preparing to be honest, straightforward, objective, and historically accurate. I agree completely with the assessment of those who see this book as being objective because it really is (there is nothing "at stake" for Armstrong, seeing as her Christian connection to Jerusalem is not what is being questioned or analyzed by this book). For example, Armstrong addresses mythology(included in this category, necessarily, are biblical stories) in her introduction as being "an ancient form of psychology, because it describes the inner reaches of the self with are so mysterious and so fascinating to us", and then continues on to analyze Jewish and Muslim narratives of history with this critical lens. Her mentioning of biblical stories and her immediate questioning of them was similar to the skepticism with which Pressman addressed biblical accounts of events. Her clear value of the cultures of both Israeli and Palestinian, both Jews and Muslims, was reminiscent of the respect that Khalidi and Hasan-Rokem had for both peoples.

Before I conclude, I would also like to share some of my favorite parts of her introduction that got me immediately addicted to her writing style (and earned her my full trust and respect):

*history is a dimension of the present.

*people are obsessed with "who had done what first".

*"they see Jewish Jerusalem rising phoenix-like from the ashes of Auschwitz".

*"everybody will have to make sacrifices; everybody will have to compromise in the interests of peace"

*at the heart of devotion to a physical place is a yearning for reconciliation and wholeness that the pain of living deprives us of.

*peoples' connection/OBSESSION to/with Jerusalem is arguably purely mythical--could there be a truer yet more threatening statement that one could utter? I don't think so. Good for you, Armstrong.

*"the sacred has never been experienced directly...", rather, it is often experienced through a physical space/place, and Jerusalem is that place for three religions. 

*the concept of imitate dei because we feel incomplete.

*there are 2 parts to religion: 1. experiencing the divine, and 2. manifesting that connection into compassionate actions within our physical spheres of existence.

I have really enjoyed the Bernard Lewis books that I've read, and I also respect Peter Beinart as a credible and objective author regarding the Israeli Palestinian conflict.

Questions:
1. For anyone in class who have never before encountered huge amounts of detailed historical information about such a tiny physical space, how do you view Jerusalem's complicated history?
2. How does each person relate to different myths? Do you have myths that you believe in that you never before considered were myths? How do you handle uncertainty in this regard?
3. In the context of personal story/narrative-telling, when was a time where you felt that you were really being listened to? When have you really listened to someone else? What was the outcome?

I cannot wait to get to the rest of this book! Excellent choice, Noura--thank you!

Week 2 - HISTORY

Khalidi made a point of emphasizing that "the historian cannot afford to ignore what people believe simply because it is not verifiable using rigorous historical methodology", and also that "Jewish, Christian, and Muslim beliefs...must be considered with the utmost gravity".

These are crucial points that must be acknowledged as rules when listening to historical or cultural narratives, especially in this context.

When engaging in discussions (often arguments or debates) about the "original inhabitants" (Khalidi, p.1) of an area, the old adage about the tree falling in the forest applies: if a certain people were the "original inhabitants" of an area, but no one engaging in the debate today believes that, does it matter that they lived there at all? No, it doesn't. What matters is the beliefs of the parties engaging in the debate of what is historically accurate, and unfortunately these beliefs are often staunchly held and sometimes based in inaccurate/non-verifiable sources such as religious texts. I appreciate his recognition of the practice of taking narrative as common sense/indisputable fact.

The Rubin and Dumper pieces were pleasant, easily digestible, objective pieces of historical summarization--I don't have much to say about them other than the fact that they are good texts to include in a historical context.

The Pressman piece was a perfect assignment for this class, one I've encountered before, and one that is difficult for me to read simply because it is sad. It is sad that colonialism/imperialism played a part in the manifestation of the concept of Zionism, it is sad that Palestinian leadership has been so completely abysmal and ineffective, and it is sad that today we still only seem to be getting further and further away from peace. I am a proud Jew and a proud "anti-settlement Zionist", a label I made for myself, and after a lifetime of one-sided pro-Israel indoctrination it was difficult for me to face (about 5 years ago), acknowledge, and process the truth that the founding of my beloved homeland was not all rainbows and blue and white butterflies (Israeli flag reference). From this text spring countless issues, questions, gut reactions, feelings, memories both personal and cultural/shared....
What are peoples' experience with the narrative of the state of Israel/Palestine?
What are your reactions when confronted with the gruesome details of the decades of fighting?
What personal connections do you have to this conflict that influence your feelings and opinions?
Many of my close friends claim (to my dismay) that there is a fundamental flaw in the concept of Zionism. What do you think?
How was your weekend(trying to lighten up the mood a bit after our discussion tomorrow, which is sure to be rich and fascinating and exciting and sad and heavy)?

Hello!

Three things that, upon meeting me, can be immediately understood about me are that I love meeting new people, I appreciate having meaningful discussions with good friends or just people I meet at the library or on the bus, and that I'm passionate about almost everything (whether my feelings are positive or negative they are more than likely very strong and carefully thought out).

Things that may not be immediately apparent are that I have an intense desire to impact the world as positively as I can in every way that I can, that I love yoga, music, art, and nature, that I have an extremely introverted side, and that a current goal of mine is to write a series of zines about the Israeli-Palestinian relationship, narratives, & the peace process.

My biggest strength is appreciating the value of things around me and directing/using/sharing that appreciation in various ways.

My biggest weakness is insecurity--it keeps me from doing things from which I would benefit greatly (and that I wouldn't be as bad at as my insecurities lead me to believe).

I speak four languages and I'm working on a fifth.

I am a vegan-- I love vegetables and fruits almost as much as I love my family. Maybe more.

Something that excites me is the thought that one can expand one's frame of reference, perspective, and perception of the world through education and cultural immersion and therefore be able to better communicate and cooperate with new people, creating understanding, respect, and peace where it could not have otherwise existed.

My name is Sophie Shiloh and I can't wait to meet you and learn from you/with you in this course!