Reading Response 6

I very much enjoyed Tamari's Lepers, Lunatics and Saints. I was particularly interested with the account of Tawfiq Canaan; as Tamari stated, he is quite an overlooked figure. I found Canaan's brand of nativism to be revealing and enlightening; however, it is also a bit contradictory. Canaan represents his subjects as hailing from a "primitive" stock, much in the same way Enlightenment intellectuals discussed the African continent (Tamari 6). Canaan laments the disappearance of these "primitive features" (Tamari 14). The nativist discussion implicitly acts as a counter to Zionism; it is a subtle game of one-upping. In a movement to establish the longstanding "pure" primitivism, Canaan is essentially doing is "subjects" a disservice. To this end, I agree with Zakariyya Muhammed's rebuke of Canaanism, his positions on Zionism notwithstanding.

The contradiction arises from Canaan's acknowledgement of the peasantry's complexity, specifically with regards to religious syncretism. Canaan acknowledges that the peasantry's contemporary iteration of Islam pulls from ancient "ancestor-worship" traditions. Furthermore, Canaan notes certain root similarities in Abrahamic traditions, as well as common tradition divergent from Abrahamic custom. Thus, Canaan notes that contemporary culture is the summation of evolution and adaptation drawing from numerous sources. Canaan decries "modern" cultural influence (Ottoman period onward), while simultaneously establishing that contemporary culture is the product of "other" cultural influence. Essentially, Canaan is a reactionary against the same forces that formed the peasantry, in an attempt to urge the freeze of the peasantry's cultural development (not in the sense of advancement, but change due to influence/factors, etc). Interaction between cultures/narratives is not a recent phenomena. Canaan is correct in his assertion that his research subjects' culture is the product of thousands of years of history. However, he is unreasonable in believing that this process represents a dangerous anomaly.

Reading Response 5

This week's chapters were particularly interesting, given the introduction and elaboration of the Islamic narrative. Again, Armstrong illustrates the adaptive nature of religion, carrying over, tweaking and adopting aspects of previous religions. Islam represents the continuance of a different trend, though. Starting with Judaism's adaptation to place the sacred in the human sphere, the subsequent iterations of Abrahamic religions each increased the religion's respective universality and relevance in the profane aspect of life. Christianity furthered the transition towards incorporating the sacred into the human sphere by emphasizing a humanist based theology. Furthering this notion, Islam relocated the profane to the sacred space, connecting the two. Previous religions saw adherence as an aspect of a healthy life; however, material and non-material aspects were regulated by strict boundaries. Islam's infusion of dogma and profane tradition was revolutionary; it created a new frame through which to view daily actions.

I very much enjoy this history aspect of this book, because it is very important to recognize that these religions are not acting independently; rather, they are components of cultural and political happenings. Specifically, the aforementioned religions' adaptive ability and evolutionary nature is important to note when considering the region's political history. Removing religion from a specific cultural context and universalizing the dogma is an extremely powerful tool for building cohesion across a kingdom or empire. In this context, symbolized sacred locations are used to create consensus among a diverse population, as an empire would have. The community has a created common history. Creating uniformity among diverse populations is essential for maintaining the cohesion of an empire or kingdom. Furthermore, Islam's development only strengthened the political power of the state, by injecting theological, ruling-class determined perspectives into ordinary life. Of course, not every citizen is a strict adherent to religious (and thus, state) values and mores; however, this movement still represents a substantial increase in political power potential. This trend also represents a strong historical determinant. The rapid and extremely vast growth of Islamic based empires in the first millennium, combined with the religion's intense and pervasive nature still resonates very strongly in contemporary cultures.

On an unrelated note, I am glad Armstrong devoted elaboration to the (relative) tolerance of Islam in the described period. Where a change in the dominant religion often previously meant forced conversion, exile or death, Islam represented revolutionary trends. Too often the contemporary Arab-Israeli conflict is described as an irreconcilable aspect of 6000 years of conflict, when that is simply not true.

Reading Response 4

For this response, I would like to extend discussion from Response 2 regarding the fluidity of religion. Specifically, the selected readings further emphasize the adaptability of Judaism. After the destruction of the first temple, exiled Jews rationalized the destruction in a framework previously unused; this rationalization (destruction as divine punishment) allowed the continuity of the religion. The destruction of the second temple recreated the conditions for further adaptation. As Armstrong notes, "Jews would need all their creativity to survive this devastating loss" (Armstrong 155). I found it particularly interesting to learn about the (general) formation of present day Judaic theology. The most innovative and subsequently useful adaptation was the removal of the necessity of "temple". Previously, the region's religions were centered around a physical, sacred space. These early Jews removed the need for the temple and "placed" God firmly in the human realm, by encouraging "experiencing God in [their] neighbor". This effect was twofold. First, it insured that Judaism would retain continuity. No longer is the religion's success tied to the survival of physical space. As long as believers still adhered to the faith, the faith would survive. Second, this adaptation created a religion moved from the more mystical aspects of temple behavior. Regarding a neighbor as a reflection of God firmly plants the religion in the physical and human world.

This necessity of adaptation is further emphasized in The New Jerusalem. Similar to the Jews, early Christians had to contend with threats to theology. The argument over Jesus' degree of divinity highlights the malleability of religion, as well as the human aspect in its formation. As to be later seen, the Great Schism illustrates the results of an inability to agree on the nature (and goal) of a religion's adaptability.

I also appreciated Armstrong's emphasis on the importance of the human aspect in religious formation. In contemporary times, religion is largely regarded as a static, ancient relic. Principles were defined thousands of years ago with little change. One must remember that religions are reflections (and components) of culture. Individual actors very much affect the development of culture; religion is no exception. As noted, Judaism was formed due to identifiable policy decisions enacted by a select few. On a related note, I was particularly amused by Armstrong's noting that some of Jerusalem's citizens did not regard Jesus as divine, because they knew him since he was a child. Often, people forget that religious stories are often rooted, to one degree or another, in reality.

Weblog Journal Assignment 2

My personal identity is most reflected through a small collection of books I keep down at school. While too long to specifically enumerate, there are a few that are particularly revealing. My absolute favorite book, which I read at least once or twice a year, is the Autobiography of Malcolm X; I also have a poster to accompany it. Obviously, many of Malcolm's actions and teachings are not particularly relevant to me, in a strict sense. However, the attitude behind the actions are very defining. Malcolm's life was a series of transformations and rebirths. He was extremely steadfast in his actions and beliefs, carrying no fear of his own freedom of expression. He was not, though, adverse to change. Upon recognition of a negative worldview/series of actions/belief system/etc, he did not hesitate to admit his wrong and shift his view. I very much identify (and admire) these traits - willingness to transform/self betterment, conviction to beliefs but maintaining a willingness to admit a wrong and alter beliefs accordingly. A second book that epitomizes and reinforces my identity is Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. I very much identify with the book's notion that the world is not black and white; events and actions do not have one correct, universally recognized representation. One must always recognize the shades of grey in life's events.

While items that an individual selects as representative of is identity are important; I put more credence in items selected by other individuals. Identity is very much a constant dialogue. It has become a cliche to claim that "I don't let other people shape me/care what they think"; however, the representation of self seen by other individuals is often the most truthful. While we may have an "inner-identity", how outside individuals view and engage our public identity helps shape the actual identity. Whether it is pierogis mailed from my grandmother, pictures sent from my mom or movies gifted from my brother, many of my current possessions are representative of how I convey my identity - individuals, in this case, family members, imagine my identity and act upon it, sharing items that (they believe) are complementary to my identity. There is definite truth in how others consider your identity; these beliefs do not arise from nothingness.

Reading Response 3

I would like to continue the discussion from Monday, regarding the strengthening effects of exile. Particularly, I thoroughly enjoyed Armstrong's position on the exile, as expressed in Chapter 5. The exile had a profound effect on consolidating the faith of the Yaweh cult. As discussed, the religious form thus far had been a highly syncretic system. Within Babylonia, the exiles proceeded through various forms of culture shock. Some integrated, while others recessed into a stronger form of religion. In an effort to validate the destruction of the Temple (and its implications) within the religious paradigm, these exiles stressed the Law of Moses and "punishment" theory. This emphasis on the Law of Moses was substantial in creating the "present" iteration of Judaism. Furthermore, the creation of the "punishment" justification allowed the exiles to preserve the religion, despite an action (Temple destruction) that would have killed lesser gods. The justification also provided an impetus to please their god and return to the idealized "Promised Land", as to make amends and avoid future punishment.

In addition to consolidating the group's religion, the exile heightened the importance of Jerusalem and desire to return. The Babylonian's ripped Jerusalem from its usual controllers; this validated the Israelite claim to Jerusalem even more. By possessing Jerusalem, Babylon heightened its value. It also created a sense of "rightful ownership", with the "Promised Land" myth.

This effect is worth considering in relation to the present day conflict over Jerusalem. Both factions have been removed from a land they call "sacred". In an attempt to lock out one side or the other, each faction is only heightening the sense of ownership and desire to return in the other.

Reading Response 2

Would like to direct this response to two particularly striking aspects - discussion of space as sacred and continuity in religious tradition.

Armstrong, very early on, initiates an interesting discussion regarding the role of certain space as "sacred". I very much agree with her notions that humans naturally attempt to give items (or locations, etc) a deeper meaning; without a "meaning" an item is merely an item, incomparable and indistinguishable from any other "item". The ultimate (in relative importance) and historically most discussed "meaning" is rationale behind Earthly existence - cue: religion. Thus, cities infused with religious history or symbolism take on an importance that moves beyond mere representative symbolism and instead, epitomize the religion itself. Religious space is not the only space that can become scared or representative of a higher calling, though. While not strictly religious, one can observe a similar creation of "sacred space" in "revolutionary space". Small sections of land, such as Tafir Square or the Gdansk Shipyards, become sacred embodiments of higher causes. Much as sacred cities offered a conduit to the gods, revolutionary space offers a direct connection with the higher cause (or deeper meaning). Overall, Armstrong's first chapter raises a very crucial aspect regarding understanding Jerusalem and similar locations - humans' inherent needs to attribute meaning manifests itself in sacred space.

Particularly, I was most struck by the apparent continuity in religious tradition. Religions did not and do not rise from nothingness. Contemporary forms of religion represent a millenia old process of incorporation, adaptation and reformation. Contemporary religions' competition seems almost meaningless when considering the common origins of the religions, especially when common theological origins contradict a religion's contemporary values/theology. Armstrong's recount very much presents religion as a constant cultural process. As humans try to make sense of the mysterious natural world, they create narratives to give context and explanation. As cultural norms and perceptions change, these explanations change similarly. From this, Armstrong notes the Kingdom of Israel's adaptation of the "old gods" (Baal/El) and slow transformation to a monotheistic system, with remnants of the old narratives still present. One has difficulty grasping the concept of one religion's "rightness" over another, considering the Abrahamic religions emerged from the same ancient, polytheistic tradition.

Reading Response 1

To an individual, like myself, with little background in Jerusalem's history, these readings serve as an excellent introduction. It becomes immediately apparent that Jerusalem is, perhaps unfortunately, wrought with immeasurable and incredible complexity. Dumper's article succeeds in establishing the unnatural nature of this complexity. Jerusalem is a city of little tangible positive attributes, from an economic and resource/environment perspective. Villages and towns with rough, mountainous terrain and resource scarcity should not reach "international city" status. However, Dumper and the other authors make known that Jerusalem is truly unique.

As cultures take control of a region, the region is imparted with the dominating culture's various traits; furthermore, the region (in this case - city) becomes a part of the culture's history. In the case of Jerusalem, various religious have placed keep symbolical elements firmly in the city's domain. Specifically, Rubin and Dumper elaborate the chronology of this sustained cultural contribution. These contributes elevate Jerusalem to a crucial symbol for numerous cultures and their respective religions. Each author emphasized that this importance infuses the city with a mysterious and almost mythological aura.

The diverse (and often contradictory) nature of the different cultural claims creates the city's complexity. The symbolical importance of the city ensures that the city becomes a definite actor in the lives of those who revere the city's representations. In recent times, as Dumper and Pressman note, the city has become infused into national and international political dialogue, thus furthering the city's complexity.

The accounts of the city and region's history is certainly interesting; however, this information should not be the primary "benefit" of the articles. One must realize and appreciate that this complexity has created innumerable distinct narratives concerning the city. From these readings alone, one article's title firmly claims ownership of one narrative (...Arab perspective), while Rubin's article primarily focuses on the history of the Jewish narrative. While consensus certainly exists on many aspects of the city and its history, other aspects are defined in dozens of different ways by dozens of different perspectives. Further reading into the subject should be accompanied by an attention to the narrative being represented by the author.

Weblog Journal Assignment 1

I was initially attracted to this course due to its format. I am a firm believer that education's future will be tied to the emergence and increasing availability of instant connection technology. The syllabus indicates that this course contains numerous aspects that I hope soon become norm - direct communication and interaction (and thus, knowledge exchange) between culturally and geographically diverse students. First hand interaction with real, live "sources" is extremely valuable. This interaction, combined with our class' active use of internet tools is a hopeful beacon for future education.

Of course, any first time class will have ripples as it is adapted to a new environment. I expect problems to arise; however, I do not think they will inhibit progress. Individuals not well adapted to online community norms may have difficulty initially. There exists the obvious obstacle of mastering a new technology. Additionally, some students may find it difficult to engage in discussion (and criticism) through digital means; the "facelessness" of the internet changes the dynamic of interpersonal relations.

There also exist difficulties with the course's subject matter itself. As noted in the Suad Amiry readings, the nature of Jerusalem raises difficulties in its study. Jerusalem is very much a battered city. Decades of recent war and occupation have altered the city's fabric; research sources have been displaced, unwilling to cooperate or are, in extreme cases, no longer living. Furthermore, Jerusalem is immensely symbolic and important, for innumerable reasons. Individuals have a very "set" perception of Jerusalem and are unwilling to explore new "truths" or dialogue if conflicting with previously held notions. These difficulties express themselves in the representation of Jerusalem. The cultural and political fabrics of Jerusalem are intertwined and overlap, conflict and, depending on who one asks, contradict each other. Thus, one must have to tread quite delicately to represent Jerusalem with parity and equality. These difficulties were apparent in the Folklore festival's cancellation. The group, against all odds, managed to generally pull together a representative Jerusalem honoring the various political and cultural fabrics; however, available funding generally was on behalf of a specific (unequal) representation of Jerusalem. Furthermore, logistics were hampered by the issues effecting research, as mentioned above.