**this goes in the cyclops community chapter

A Perspective on Gangs
I developed a perspective on the nature of society and
gangs as a result of what I learned over the past three
years in the field. The elements of that perspective may
not be unique, but they do inform this book and should be
identified for that reason.
The Social Institutional Perspective
My academic training is as a sociologist and social
psychologist.
**When sociologists look at a city or town they see more
than the individuals who live there.
In addition to the built environment or physical
infrastructure (i.e., parks, streets, buildings), they see the
social institutions people have created - social institutions
which give meaning to the residents' lives and which help
them achieve personal and collective goals.
A social institution consists of a group of people organized
to achieve a unique goal.
**Families are organized to procreate (create new human
beings), to provide intimate nurturing, and help socialize
the society's children.
**Faith institutions identify and nurture positive social
values and help us answer such questions as "Why am I
here?," "What is the purpose of life?, and "Is there such a
thing as 'good' and 'evil'?"
**Commerce is a social institution designed to provide a
means of earning income while
**schools have developed to educate youth so that they
can communicate with and participate in the larger society

and find a means of employment.

Other social institutions - like the military, health care, the
media, government, and the criminal justice system - each
address a different set of problems and have unique goals
to accomplish.
A social institutional perspective is one which views
communities as a collection of these social institutions and
views the residents of the community as their members.
Where social institutions are present and healthy,
sociologists speak of social organization.
Where they are non-existent or weak, we speak of social
disorganization.
Gang members are most commonly found living in socially
disorganized neighborhoods. (Bowker and Klein, 1983;
Curry and Spergel, 1992; J. W. Moore, 1978, 1991; Short,
1990)
In neighborhoods with vital and robust social institutions,
informal controls exist which reduce the likelihood of
gang formation.
Family members,
school personnel, and
faith community leaders
provide these informal controls over the youth in their
charge.
Loosely speaking,
**informal social control refers to the
**capacity of a community or neighborhood to
police itself.
**Informal social control occurs, for example, when
**residents of a neighborhood are willing to
confront juveniles engaging in vandalism,
**report truancy to school authorities or
**play an active role in supervising teenage social

activity. (Weatherburn, 2001)

Areas with reduced levels of informal social control
have been found to have higher rates of crime and
violence. (Sampson et al., 1997)
**In neighborhoods characterized by social
disorganization, the social institutions which should be
providing informal control over their youth are not doing
so.
**The justice system, in most cases, is then required to
impose its formal social control through
arrests,
formal processing, and
court mandated treatment and punishment.
**so black neighborhoods are not policing their own
children, so the police are forced to do it!
When I told my colleagues I was going to ride with police
gang units and study gangs some of them asked "Why
bother? It's all about their families, isn't it?"
I had made a promise to myself that I would remain open
minded about such things, but common sense would seem
to have supported their conclusion. My experience in the
field turned all of that upside down.
What I've come to believe is that, from a social
institutional perspective,
**for a family to be healthy it must be supported by other
social institutions in the community
**and those social institutions must themselves be strong.
I liken this to a three-legged stool.
One leg is education (our schools),
the second leg is commerce (the world of work), and
the third leg is the faith community (values).

They each support and contribute to the strength of the

platform - the seat - which is the family. If any one of the
legs is weak or missing, the stool will fall.
To be more accurate, the stool would have to have more
than three legs. It would have one for each social
institution in the community (health care, media,
government, etc.). But the analogy is, I hope, clear.
For families to be healthy they need the support of
other social institutions in the community.
If a father or mother cannot find a meaningful job, if the
children do not get an education that makes them
employable, and if the values of the family are
undeveloped or socially inappropriate, what hope does
that family or child have for success?
Having healthy social institutions in the community,
however, is not enough. The family itself must be healthy.
In the Solutions section of Into the Abyss we will explore
various qualities of a healthy family.
**While most single-parent families produce children who
do not become gang members, there is a body of research
which suggests
**a disproportionate number of gang members come from
single-parent families,
**or they don't have parents, or their parents are lessthan-desirable role models (i.e., participating in child
abuse, violence, involved in substance abuse or gangs).
Insofar as the proposed link between gangs and
fatherless families is valid, one would expect that
communities with gangs would have more femaleheaded households than other communities and
that an increase in the number of female-headed
households would lead to an increase in the number
of gangs. Available data support both assumptions.
(Miller, 2001, page)

A social institutional perspective leads one to view

communities as a collection of social institutions and the
solutions to social problems in the community as
dependent upon the health of those social institutions.
That is the background against which this book was
written. It will attribute much of what is causing gang
formation to the social structure of the neighborhoods in
which they are found and, in similar fashion, will identify
solutions as being related to those social institutions.

Madeleine L'Engle
statue of madeleine l'engle in the
cyclops pantheon! dressed like
the woman in klimpt's 'the kiss'!
It has been suggested that The Summer of the Greatgrandmother be merged into this article. (Discuss)
Proposed since October 2013.

Madeleine L'Engle
L'Engle publicity photo from Square Fish Books
Born

November 29, 1918

New York City, NY, USA

Died

September 6, 2007 (aged 88)

Litchfield, CT, USA

Occupatio Writer
n
Nationality American
Period

19452007

Genres

Essays, poetry, Christian fiction, science fiction

Notable
work(s)

A Wrinkle in Time and sequels

Notable

Newbery Medal

award(s)

1963
Margaret Edwards Award
1998
www.madeleinelengle.com

Madeleine L'Engle (/mdln ll/; November 29, 1918

September 6, 2007;[1] ne Camp) was an American writer best
known for young-adult fiction, particularly the Newbery Medal-winning
A Wrinkle in Time and its sequels: A Wind in the Door, National Book
Award-winning[2][a] A Swiftly Tilting Planet, Many Waters, and An
Acceptable Time. Her works reflect both her Christian faith and her
strong interest in modern science.

Early life
Madeleine L'Engle Camp was born in New York on November 29,
1918, and named after her great-grandmother, Madeleine L'Engle,

otherwise known as Mado.[3] Her maternal grandfather was Florida

banker Bion Barnett, co-founder of Barnett Bank in Jacksonville,
Florida. Her mother, a pianist, was also named Madeleine.

Her father, Charles Wadsworth Camp, was a writer, a critic, and a

foreign correspondent who, according to his daughter, suffered lung
damage from exposure to mustard gas during World War I (in a 2004
New Yorker profile of the writer, relatives of L'Engle disputed the
mustard gas story, claiming instead that Camp's illness was caused
by alcoholism.[4])

L'Engle wrote her first story at age five and began keeping a journal
at age eight.[5] These early literary attempts did not translate into
academic success at the New York City private school where she was
enrolled. A shy, clumsy child, she was branded as stupid by some of
her teachers. Unable to please them, she retreated into her own world
of books and writing. Her parents often disagreed about how to raise
her, and as a result she attended a number of boarding schools and
had many governesses.[6][page needed]

The L'Engles traveled frequently. At one point, the family moved to a

chteau near Chamonix in the French Alps, in what Madeleine
described as the hope that the cleaner air would be easier on her
father's lungs. Madeleine was sent to a boarding school in
Switzerland.

However, in 1933, L'Engle's grandmother fell ill, and they moved near
Jacksonville, Florida to be close to her. L'Engle attended another
boarding school, Ashley Hall, in Charleston, South Carolina. When
her father died in 1935, Madeleine arrived home too late to say
goodbye.[7]

Adulthood[edit]
L'Engle attended Smith College from 1937 to 1941. After graduating
cum laude from Smith,[8] she moved to an apartment in New York
City. In 1942, she met actor Hugh Franklin when she appeared in the
play The Cherry Orchard by Anton Chekhov.[9]

**L'Engle married Franklin on January 26, 1946, the year after the
publication of her first novel, The Small Rain.

**Later she wrote of their meeting and marriage, "We met in The
Cherry Orchard and were married in The Joyous Season."[8] The
couple's first daughter, Josephine, was born in 1947.
**'the cherry orchard' is where alicia's heart dies!

The family moved to a 200-year-old farmhouse called Crosswicks in

Goshen, Connecticut in 1952. To replace Franklin's lost acting
income, they purchased and operated a small general store, while
L'Engle continued with her writing. Their son Bion was born that same

year.[10] Four years later, seven-year-old Maria, the daughter of family

friends who had died, came to live with the Franklins, and they
adopted her shortly thereafter. During this period, L'Engle also served
as choir director of the local Congregational Church.[11]

Career[edit]
L'Engle determined to give up writing on her 40th birthday (November
1958) when she received yet another rejection notice. "With all the
hours I spent writing, I was still not pulling my own weight financially."

**Soon she discovered both that she could not give it up and that she
had continued to work on fiction subconsciously.[12]
**exactly! one cannot stop!

The family returned to New York City in 1959 so that Hugh could
resume his acting career.
**The move was immediately preceded by a ten-week cross-country
camping trip, during which L'Engle first had the idea for her most
famous novel, A Wrinkle in Time, which she completed by 1960.

It was rejected more than thirty times before she handed it to John C.
Farrar;[12] it was finally published by Farrar, Straus & Giroux in 1962.
[11]

In 1960 the Franklins moved to an apartment in the Cleburne Building

on West End Avenue; the apartment was sold by the estate for $4
million in 2008.[13]

From 1960 to 1966 (and again in 1989 and 1990), L'Engle taught at
St. Hilda's & St. Hugh's School in New York. In 1965 she became a
volunteer librarian at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, also in New
York. She later served for many years as writer-in-residence at the
Cathedral, generally spending her winters in New York and her
summers at Crosswicks.

During the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, L'Engle wrote dozens of books
for children and adults. One of her books for adults, Two-Part
Invention, was a memoir of her marriage, completed after her
husband's death from cancer on September 26, 1986.

Later years[edit]
L'Engle was seriously injured in an automobile accident in 1991 but
recovered well enough to visit Antarctica in 1992.[11] Her son, Bion
Franklin, died on December 17, 1999. He was forty-seven years old.
[14]

In her final years, L'Engle became unable to travel or teach due to

reduced mobility from osteoporosis, especially after suffering a
cerebral hemorrhage in 2002. She also abandoned her former

schedule of speaking engagements and seminars. A few

compilations of older work, some of it previously unpublished,
appeared after 2001.

L'Engle died of natural causes at Rose Haven, a nursing facility close

to her home in Litchfield, Connecticut, on September 6, 2007,
according to a statement by her publicist the following day. [15] She is
buried in the Cathedral Church of Saint John the Divine in Manhattan,
New York City, New York.

Religious beliefs[edit]
L'Engle was a very strong Episcopalian and believed in universal
salvation, writing that

**"All will be redeemed in God's fullness of time, all, not just the small
portion of the population who have been given the grace to know and
accept Christ. All the strayed and stolen sheep. All the little lost
ones."[16]

As a result of her promotion of Christian universalism, many Christian

bookstores refused to carry her books, which were also frequently
banned from Christian schools and libraries. However, some of her
most secular critics attacked her work for being too religious. [17]

Her views on divine punishment were similar to those of George

MacDonald, who also had a large influence on her fictional work. She
said

**"I cannot believe that God wants punishment to go on interminably

any more than does a loving parent. The entire purpose of loving
punishment is to teach, and it lasts only as long as is needed for the
lesson. And the lesson is always love."[18]

On writing for children[edit]

Soon after winning the Newbery Medal for her 1962 "junior novel" A
Wrinkle in Time, L'Engle discussed children's books in The New York
Times Book Review.[19]

**The writer of a good children's book, she observed, may need to

return to the "intuitive understanding of his own childhood", being
childlike although not childish.

She claimed, "It's often possible to make demands of a child that

couldn't be made of an adult ... a child will often understand scientific
concepts that would baffle an adult. This is because he can
understand with a leap of the imagination that [which] is denied the
grown-up who has acquired the little knowledge that is a dangerous
thing."
**Of philosophy, etc., as well as science, "the child will come to it with

an open mind, whereas many adults come closed to an open book.

**This is one reason so many writers turn to fantasy (which children
claim as their own) when they have something important and difficult
to say."[19]

Awards, honors, and organizations[edit]

In addition to the numerous awards, medals, and prizes won by
individual books L'Engle wrote, she personally received many honors
over the years.[11] These included being named an Associate Dame
of Justice in the Venerable Order of Saint John (1972);[20] the USM
Medallion from The University of Southern Mississippi (1978); the
Smith College Award "for service to community or college which
exemplifies the purposes of liberal arts education" (1981); the Sophia
Award for distinction in her field (1984); the Regina Medal (1985); the
ALAN Award for outstanding contribution to adolescent literature,
presented by the National Council of Teachers of English (1986);[21]
and the Kerlan Award (1990).

In 1985 she was a guest speaker at the Library of Congress, giving a

speech entitled "Dare to be Creative!" That same year she began a
two-year term as president of the Authors Guild. In addition she
received over a dozen honorary degrees from as many colleges and
universities, such as Haverford College.[22]

**Many of these name her as a Doctor of Humane Letters, but she

was also made a Doctor of Literature and a Doctor of Sacred

Theology, the latter at Berkeley Divinity School in 1984.

In 1995 she was writer-in-residence for Victoria Magazine. In 1997

she was recognized for Lifetime Achievement from the World Fantasy
Awards.[23]

L'Engle received the annual Margaret A. Edwards Award from the

American Library Association in 1998. The Edwards Award
recognizes one writer and a particular body of work "for significant
and lasting contribution to young adult literature". Four books by
L'Engle were cited: Meet the Austins, A Wrinkle In Time, A Swiftly
Tilting Planet, and A Ring of Endless Light (published 1960 to 1980).
[24] In 2004 she received the National Humanities Medal[12] but could

not attend the ceremony due to poor health.

L'Engle was inducted into the New York Writers Hall of Fame in 2011.
In a 2012 survey of School Library Journal readers, A Wrinkle in Time
was voted the number two children's novel behind Charlotte's Web.
[25][26]

In 2013, a crater on Mercury was named after L'Engle.[27]

The Madeleine L'Engle Collection[edit]

Since 1976, Wheaton College in Illinois has maintained a special

collection of L'Engle's papers, and a variety of other materials, dating

back to 1919.[28] The Madeleine L'Engle Collection includes
manuscripts for the majority of her published and unpublished works,
as well as interviews, photographs, audio and video presentations,
and an extensive array of correspondence with both adults and
children, including artwork sent to her by children.

Bibliographic overview[edit]
L'Engle's best-known works are divided between the "Chronos" and
"Kairos" frameworks.[29]

The former is the framework in which the stories of the Austin family
take place and is presented in a primarily realistic setting, though
occasionally with elements that might be regarded as science fiction.
[

citation needed]

The latter is the framework in which the stories of the Murry and
O'Keefe families take place and is presented sometimes in a realistic
setting and sometimes in a more fantastic or magical milieu.[citation
needed]

Generally speaking, the more realistic Kairos material is found in the

O'Keefe stories,[citation needed] which deal with the second-generation
characters.

**However, the Murry-O'Keefe and Austin families should not be

regarded as living in separate worlds, because several characters
cross over between them, and historical events are also shared.
[

citation needed]

In addition to novels and poetry, L'Engle wrote many nonfiction works,

including the autobiographical Crosswicks Journals and other
explorations of the subjects of faith and art.

**For L'Engle, who wrote repeatedly about "story as truth", the

distinction between fiction and memoir was sometimes blurred.

Real events from her life and family history made their way into some
of her novels, while fictional elements, such as assumed names for
people and places, can be found in her published journals. [30]

**A theme, often implied and occasionally explicit, in L'Engle's works

is that the phenomena that people call religion, science, and magic
are simply different aspects of a single seamless reality.

Important L'Engle characters[edit]

Most of L'Engle's novels from A Wrinkle in Time onward are centered
on a cast of recurring characters, who sometimes reappear decades

older than when they were first introduced.

The "Kairos" books are about the Murry and O'Keefe families, with
Meg Murry and Calvin O'Keefe marrying and producing the next
generation's protagonist, Polly O'Keefe. L'Engle wrote about both
generations concurrently, with Polly (originally called Poly) first
appearing in 1965, well before the second book about her parents as
teenagers (A Wind in the Door, 1973).

The "Chronos" books center on Vicky Austin and her siblings.

Although Vicky's appearances all occur during her childhood and
teenage years, her sister Suzy also appears as an adult in A Severed
Wasp, with a husband and teenage children. In addition, two of
L'Engle's early protagonists, Katherine Forrester and Camilla
Dickinson, reappear as elderly women in later novels. Rounding out
the cast are several characters "who cross and connect": Canon
Tallis, Adam Eddington and Zachary Gray, who each appear in both
the Kairos and Chronos books.[29]

Selected works[edit]
Kairos[edit]
First-generation (Murry)[edit]
%

A Wrinkle in Time (1962; Newbery Award Winner) ISBN 0-37438613-7

A Wind in the Door (1973) ISBN 0-374-38443-6

A Swiftly Tilting Planet (1978) ISBN 0-374-37362-0 National

Book Award in category Children's Books (paperback).[2][a]

Many Waters (1986) ISBN 0-374-34796-4

Second-generation (O'Keefe)[edit]
%

The Arm of the Starfish (1965) ISBN 0-374-30396-7

Dragons in the Waters (1976) ISBN 0-374-31868-9

A House Like a Lotus (1984) ISBN 0-374-33385-8

An Acceptable Time (1989) ISBN 0-374-30027-5

Chronos[edit]
%

Meet the Austins (1960) ISBN 0-374-34929-0

The Moon by Night (1963) ISBN 0-374-35049-3

The Young Unicorns (1968) ISBN 0-374-38778-8

A Ring of Endless Light (1980) ISBN 0-374-36299-8 (Newbery

Honor Book)

The Anti-Muffins (1980) ISBN 0-8298-0415-3

The Twenty-four Days Before Christmas (1984) ISBN 0-87788843-4)

Troubling a Star (1994) ISBN 0-374-37783-9

A Full House: An Austin Family Christmas (1999) ISBN 087788-020-4)

The two Christmas books are shorter works, heavily illustrated but not
actually picture books . The events in each of these stories take place
prior to the events of Meet the Austins.

Other fiction[edit]
Katherine Forrester series[edit]

The Small Rain (1945), ISBN 0-374-26637-9

Prelude (1968), no ISBN, an adaptation of the first half of The

Small Rain

A Severed Wasp (1982), ISBN 0-374-26131-8

Camilla Dickinson[edit]
%

Camilla Dickinson (1951) ISBN 0-440-01020-9, later

republished as Camilla

A Live Coal in the Sea (1996) ISBN 0-374-18989-7

Genesis Trilogy[edit]
%

And It Was Good (1983) ISBN 0-87788-046-8

A Stone for a Pillow (1986) ISBN 0-87788-789-6

Sold into Egypt (1989) ISBN 0-87788-766-7

Stand-alones[edit]
%

Ilsa (1946) (no ISBN)

And Both Were Young (1949), ISBN 0-440-90229-0

A Winter's Love (1957), ISBN 0-345-30644-9

The Love Letters (1966), revised and reissued as Love Letters

(2000), ISBN 0-87788-528-1

The Other Side of the Sun (1971) ISBN 0-87788-615-6[31]

Certain Women (1996 [1992]) ISBN 0-374-12025-0

The Joys of Love (2008) ISBN 0-374-33870-1[32]

Note: some ISBNs given are for later paperback editions, since no
such numbering existed when L'Engle's earlier titles were published
in hardcover.'

Poetry[edit]
%

Lines Scribbled on an Envelope (1969)

The Weather of the Heart (1978)

A Cry Like a Bell (1987)

The Ordering of Love: The New and Collected Poems of

Madeleine L'Engle (2005; includes reprints from the above)

Nonfiction[edit]
Crosswicks Journals[edit]
%

A Circle of Quiet (1972), ISBN 0-374-12374-8

The Summer of the Great-grandmother (1974), ISBN 0-37427174-7

The Irrational Season (1977), ISBN 0-374-17733-3

Two-Part Invention: The Story of a Marriage (1988), ISBN 0374-28020-7

Other works[edit]
%

Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art (1982)

The Glorious Impossible (1990) ISBN 0-671-68690-9 ISBN 9780-671-68690-1

The Rock That Is Higher: Story as Truth (1993)

Penguins and Golden Calves: Icons and Idols in Antarctica and

Other Spiritual Places (1996, 2003)

Friends For The Journey (with Luci Shaw) (1997) ISBN 089283-986-4

Bright Evening Star:Mystery of the Incarnation (2001) ISBN 0-

87788-079-4
L'Engle, Madeleine (2001), Chase, ed., Madeleine L'Engle Herself:
Reflections on a Writing Life, ISBN 0-87788-157-X.

l'engle looks like ET!!!

Kill Buddhism

The End of Faith

Buddhisms philosophy, insight, and practices would
benefit more people if they were not presented as a
religion.
The ninth-century Buddhist master Lin Chi is supposed to
have said, If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.
Like much of Zen teaching, this seems
**too cute by half,
//assassins told, 'mr is too cut by half', and they find man
and cut him in half. paper really read ' too cute by half' and
from misinterpretation they murdered him
intentionally.//be careful how you practice to behave, it
could affect as you pass through how you interpret the
world//
but it makes a valuable point: to turn the Buddha into a
religious fetish is to miss the essence of what he taught. In
considering what Buddhism can offer the world in the
twenty-first century, I propose that we take Lin Chis
admonishment rather seriously. As students of the Buddha,
we should dispense with Buddhism.
This is not to say that Buddhism has nothing to offer the
world. One could surely argue that the Buddhist tradition,
taken as a whole, represents the richest source of
contemplative wisdom that any civilization has produced.
In a world that has long been terrorized by
**fratricidal Sky-God religions,
the ascendance of Buddhism would surely be a welcome
development. But this will not happen.

There is no reason whatsoever to think that Buddhism can

successfully compete with the relentless evangelizing of
Christianity and Islam. Nor should it try to.
The wisdom of the Buddha is currently trapped within the
religion of Buddhism. Even in the West, where scientists
and Buddhist contemplatives now collaborate in studying
the effects of meditation on the brain, Buddhism remains
an utterly parochial concern. While it may be true enough
to say (as many Buddhist practitioners allege) that
Buddhism is not a religion, most Buddhists worldwide
practice it as such, in many of the naive, petitionary, and
superstitious ways in which all religions are practiced.
Needless to say, all non-Buddhists believe Buddhism to be
a religionand, what is more, they are quite certain that it
is the wrong religion.
To talk about Buddhism, therefore, inevitably imparts a
false
//farts a sense of the buddha's teaching to others//steve
freudian slip
sense of the Buddhas teaching to others. //did it twice,
wonder if i'm dislexic, often read mixing right and left word
sounds, 'impart false' becomes 'farts'//glossalalia//reverse
speech//built in lie detector//
So insofar as we maintain a discourse as Buddhists, we
ensure that the wisdom of the Buddha will do little to
inform the development of civilization in the twenty-first
century.
Worse still, the continued identification of Buddhists with
Buddhism lends tacit support to the religious differences in
our world.

**At this point in history, this is both morally and

intellectually indefensible
**especially among affluent, well-educated Westerners
who bear the greatest responsibility for the spread of
ideas.
It does not seem much of an exaggeration to say that if
you are reading this article, you are in a better position to
influence the course of history than almost any person in
history.
**Given the degree to which religion still inspires human
conflict, and impedes genuine inquiry, I believe that
merely being a self-described Buddhist is to be complicit
in the worlds violence and ignorance to an unacceptable
degree.
It is true that many exponents of Buddhism, most notably
the Dalai Lama, have been remarkably willing to enrich
(and even constrain) their view of the world through
dialogue with modern science. But
**the fact that the Dalai Lama regularly meets with
Western scientists to discuss the nature of the mind does
not mean that Buddhism, or Tibetan Buddhism, or even
the Dalai Lamas own lineage, is uncontaminated by
religious dogmatism.
Indeed, there are ideas within Buddhism that are so
incredible as to render the dogma of the virgin birth
plausible by comparison. No one is served by a mode of
discourse that treats such pre-literate notions as integral
to our evolving discourse about the nature of the human
mind.
Among Western Buddhists, there are college-educated
men and women who apparently believe that Guru
Rinpoche was actually born from a lotus.

This is not the spiritual breakthrough that civilization has

been waiting for these many centuries.
For the fact is that a person can embrace the Buddhas
teaching, and even become a genuine Buddhist
contemplative (and, one must presume, a buddha) without
believing anything on insufficient evidence. The same
cannot be said of the teachings for faith-based religion.
**In many respects, Buddhism is very much like science.
One starts with the hypothesis that using attention in the
prescribed way (meditation), and engaging in or avoiding
certain behaviors (ethics), will bear the promised result
(wisdom and psychological well-being).
This spirit of empiricism animates Buddhism to a unique
degree. For this reason, the methodology of Buddhism, if
shorn of its religious encumbrances, could be one of our
greatest resources as we struggle to develop our scientific
understanding of human subjectivity.
The Problem of Religion
**Incompatible religious doctrines have balkanized our
world into separate moral communities, and these
divisions have become a continuous source of bloodshed.
Indeed, religion is as much a living spring of violence today
as it has been at any time in the past.
The recent conflicts in
Palestine (Jews vs. Muslims),
the Balkans (Orthodox Serbians vs. Catholic Croatians;
Orthodox Serbians vs. Bosnian and Albanian Muslims),
Northern Ireland (Protestants vs. Catholics),
Kashmir (Muslims vs. Hindus),
Sudan (Muslims vs. Christians and animists),
Nigeria (Muslims vs. Christians),
Ethiopia and Eritrea (Muslims vs. Christians),

Sri Lanka (Sinhalese Buddhists vs. Tamil Hindus),

Indonesia (Muslims vs. Timorese Christians),
Iran and Iraq (Shiite vs. Sunni Muslims), and the
Caucasus (Orthodox Russians vs. Chechen Muslims;
Muslim Azerbaijanis vs. Catholic and Orthodox Armenians)
are merely a few cases in point. These are places where
religion has been the explicit cause of literally millions of
deaths in recent decades.
Why is religion such a potent source of violence? There is
no other sphere of discourse in which human beings so
fully articulate their differences from one another, or cast
these differences in terms of everlasting rewards and
punishments.
Religion is the one endeavor in which usthem thinking
achieves a transcendent significance.
If you really believe that calling God by the right name can
spell the difference between eternal happiness and eternal
suffering, then it becomes quite reasonable to treat
heretics and unbelievers rather badly.
The stakes of our religious differences are immeasurably
higher than those born of mere tribalism, racism, or
politics.
Religion is also the only area of our discourse in which
people are systematically protected from the demand to
give evidence in defense of their strongly held beliefs.
And yet, these beliefs often determine what they live for,
what they will die for, andall too oftenwhat they will kill
for.
This is a problem, because when the stakes are high,
human beings have a simple choice between conversation
and violence.

At the level of societies, the choice is between

conversation and war. There is nothing apart from a
fundamental willingness to be reasonableto have ones
beliefs about the world revised by new evidence and new
argumentsthat can guarantee we will keep talking to one
another.
Certainty without evidence is necessarily divisive and
dehumanizing.
Therefore, one of the greatest challenges facing civilization
in the twenty-first century is for human beings to learn to
speak about their deepest personal concernsabout
ethics, spiritual experience, and the inevitability of human
sufferingin ways that are not flagrantly irrational.
Nothing stands in the way of this project more than the
respect we accord religious faith.
While there is no guarantee that rational people will
always agree, the irrational are certain to be divided by
their dogmas.
It seems profoundly unlikely that we will heal the divisions
in our world simply by multiplying the occasions for
interfaith dialogue. The end game for civilization cannot be
mutual tolerance of patent irrationality.
All parties to ecumenical religious discourse have agreed
to tread lightly over those points where their worldviews
would otherwise collide, and yet these very points remain
perpetual sources of bewilderment and intolerance for
their coreligionists. Political correctness simply does not
offer an enduring basis for human cooperation. If religious
war is ever to become unthinkable for us, in the way that
slavery and cannibalism seem poised to, it will be a matter
of our having dispensed with the dogma of faith.

A Contemplative Science
What the world most needs at this moment is a means of
convincing human beings to embrace the whole of the
species as their moral community. For this we need to
develop an utterly nonsectarian way of talking about the
full spectrum of human experience and human aspiration.
We need a discourse on ethics and spirituality that is every
bit as unconstrained by dogma and cultural prejudice as
the discourse of science is.
What we need, in fact, is a contemplative science, a
modern approach to exploring the furthest reaches of
psychological well-being. It should go without saying that
we will not develop such a science by attempting to spread
American Buddhism, or Western Buddhism, or
Engaged Buddhism.
If the methodology of Buddhism (ethical precepts and
meditation) uncovers genuine truths about the mind and
the phenomenal worldtruths like emptiness, selflessness,
and impermanencethese truths are not in the least
Buddhist. No doubt, most serious practitioners of
meditation realize this, but most Buddhists do not.
Consequently, even if a person is aware of the timeless
and noncontingent nature of the meditative insights
described in the Buddhist literature, his identity as a
Buddhist will tend to confuse the matter for others.
There is a reason that we dont talk about Christian
physics or Muslim algebra, though the Christians
invented physics as we know it, and the Muslims invented
algebra.
Today, anyone who emphasizes the Christian roots of
physics or the Muslim roots of algebra would stand
convicted of not understanding these disciplines at all. In
the same way, once we develop a scientific account of the
contemplative path, it will utterly transcend its religious

associations. Once such a conceptual revolution has taken

place, speaking of Buddhist meditation will be
synonymous with a failure to assimilate the changes that
have occurred in our understanding of the human mind.
It is as yet undetermined what it means to be human,
because every facet of our cultureand even our biology
itselfremains open to innovation and insight.
We do not know what we will be a thousand years from
nowor indeed that we will be, given the lethal absurdity
of many of our beliefsbut whatever changes await us,
one thing seems unlikely to change: as long as experience
endures, the difference between happiness and suffering
will remain our paramount concern.
We will therefore want to understand those processes
biochemical, behavioral, ethical, political, economic, and
spiritualthat account for this difference. We do not yet
have anything like a final understanding of such processes,
but we know enough to rule out many false
understandings. Indeed, we know enough at this moment
to say that the God of Abraham is not only unworthy of the
immensity of creation; he is unworthy even of man.
There is much more to be discovered about the nature of
the human mind.
In particular, there is much more for us to understand
about how the mind can transform itself from a
**mere reservoir of greed, hatred, and delusion
**into an instrument of wisdom and compassion.
Students of the Buddha are very well placed to further our
understanding on this front, but the religion of Buddhism
currently stands in their way.

this modified buddhism, science of meditation and

science in general, though not materialism, even
materialistic inclination of science, is the way of the
cyclops

they keep herds of sheep to eat and make clothes

from

Q. What is the only food that doesn't spoil?A. Honey

*women are the most powerful force, because they have the most
immediate, impulsive urge/need, a need of the physical world, to
gestate a baby, and although the simplest goat is to procreate, it is the
most logically powerful because there is the least distance between
the two points, the demand and the demander, since it requires no
thought at all. thus, women are the stupid boulder pushers who
motivate and crush mankind.
=volcanic land, family cave

mind travel-gnostics

Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on

society.
ch 39 cyclops lesson, river, money
money is not made, it is collected
the service is a petal
reaching an arch of people
those people pay for the use of the service

entrepeneurism is the creation of 'services' that services multiple

people,
collecting money from them,
which is a sort of money machine
service = petal
creation = funnels money to service creator
Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no
meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning...
we all find it hard to face the nightmare. surpassing the nightmare,
we must find joy and love anyway.
the nightmare: is that we are not the ones looking through a
kalidescope at others, they are observing us, and we are inside the
kalidescope
ancient tree archangel
black willow-aspirin
freedom belongs to people who are happy. don't fight for freedom,
accept and find happiness.
% Tempori parce!
% Translation: "Save time!"
39 the cyc are the Time Savers, or Time Keepers, or Guardians of
Time, Inhabitatants of Fateland

% Dum vivimus, vivamus!

% Translation: "While we live, let us live!"
% Homo cogitat, Deus iudicat.
% Translation: Man proposes but God disposes..
% Meaning: Things often don't turn out as you have planned.
cycl war against thought
Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound

the other.
% Non nobis solum nati sumus
% Translation: "We are not born for ourselves alone
% Meaning: Each one of us carries a responsibility for the whole world.
A friend is someone who knows all about you and still loves you.
eon knows jon, and forgives him his advantages
doing what the DESIGN of the MACHINE wants is PREY BEHAVIOR;
MAKING the machine DO WHAT IT CAN, WHAT YOU WILL, is predator
behavior [me flying a jet fighter, Joe flying a jet fighter]
-textualists: written constitution
-ninth amendment; reads 'rights beyond rights listed in this
constitution'
-original sin is slavery; mistakes of the founding fathers are fixed
with AMENDMENTS
cyclops women have no head eyes
but one eye on each palm!!!
facing palm psychically in eye!!!
capitalism is the great egypt.
the pyramid is the business model (problem solver = top = eye =
see solution) = future = cyclops
eagwhar is cyclops brother!!!
'thinking' causes you to lose self-righteousness; therefore, Thinkers
must become Pharoahs (who merges with Osirus), and all else must
be self-righteous and have hearts lighter than the feather of truth (or
does 'hearts lighter than the Feather of Truth mean never lie? or
DECEIVE?) I think those not weighted with stones of deception [lava
pebbles in ash water weighing down a shroud, the shroud is the
Spirit ~ or is it Woman?]
% Nocere facile est, prodesse difficile.

% Idiomatic translation: Do not think that one enemy is insignificant, or

that a thousand friends are too many.
cyc system of life

% In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas

% Translation: "In necessary things unity, in doubtful things liberty, in all
things charity" (often misattributed to St Augustine).

% "Now he has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me.
That means nothing. People like us, who believe in physics, know
that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a
stubbornly persistent illusion."
cyc father dies sky burial Now he has departed from this strange
world a little ahead of me
'dreaming suicide'
slave rope pulled by bitch dogs with rows of tits swaying
**like twins who founded rome drinking from bitches teets**
I see him doing farmer things. I'm flying a piece of steel (in the sky) that's amazing. (breaks the laws of nature and physics, is Godlike).
old societies
mother nature, mother society
conquered to
mother nature, father society
currently
neutered nature
father society
**
proper is
mother and father nature
mother and father society
obviously, since we are a part of both, by all nature

**
nature was woman because giving,
like waterfall,
and dark side was taking,
like hungry dog pack murdering in the black night

**it seems
murder is when it happens to a being you know
killing is when it happens to a being you don't know
father nature

For Attractive lips, speak words of kindness.

For lovely eyes, seek out the good in people.
For a slim figure, share your food with the hungry.
For beautiful hair, let a child run their fingers through it once a day.
For poise, walk with the knowledge that you never walk alone.
People, more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived,
reclaimed, and redeemed. Remember, if you ever need a helping
hand, you will find one at the end of each of your arms.
As you grow older, you will discover that you have two hands, one
for helping yourself and the other for helping others.
eon knows what to do inside of the time because he is filled with the
Holy Spirit
-which opens his eyes so he can see - he does not KNOW, but he
CAN ENVISION (SEE, IMAGINE)

geometric = need thinking = stress produced

linear = want thinking = ease/coasting/idling = thinking fly (fly
thinking, fly as in fly wheel)
another type of geometric thinking
absence or neglect is dark death here
emotional thinkingunpredictable logic of women
can be tracked, aligned with, better than predicted

can be predicted
a turning of the tide is dark death here, an attitude change, a
sudden exision
If you want to be a writer, you must do two things above all others:
read a lot and write a lot.
to be alive,
experience a lot
believe in yourself a lot
% "Imagination is more important than knowledge."knowledge is
important, imagination is just more important
%
% Any change, even a change for the better, is always
accompanied by drawbacks and discomforts
%
% I would maintain that thanks are the highest form of thought; and
that gratitude is happiness doubled by wonder.
%
%
% You've gotta dance like there's nobody watching,
% Love like you'll never be hurt,
% Sing like there's nobody listening,
% And live like it's heaven on earth.
%
% history is discovery
% life is nothing but the jell impregnated with grains of discovery.
%
%
% live by principle of Goodness, which is honored and respected most
places
%
% never be unaware, or at ease for too long, for this causes injustice, as
a bull in a china shop
%
% poem 'I sold my daughter for 100 wan'
%
% 'I am to Tibet what Tibet is to the world'
%
% It's a Michigan [congolese]tradition -we don't share, we don't
communicate.
%
%

You will receive a body. You may like it or hate it, but it's yours to keep for the entire p
You will learn lessons. You are enrolled in a full-time informal school called, "life."

There are no mistakes, only lessons. Growth is a process of trial, error, and experimen
The "failed" experiments are as much a part of the process as the experiments that u
"work."

Lessons are repeated until they are learned. A lesson will be presented to you in vario
until you have learned it. When you have learned it, you can go on to the next lesson.
Learning lessons does not end. There's no part of life that doesn't contain its lessons.
alive, that means there are still lessons to be learned.

"There" is no better a place than "here." When your "there" has become a "here", you
simply obtain another "there" that will again look better than "here."

Other people are merely mirrors of you. You cannot love or hate something about ano
person unless it reflects to you something you love or hate about yourself.

What you make of your life is up to you. You have all the tools and resources you need
you do with them is up to you. The choice is yours.

Your answers lie within you. The answers to life's questions lie within you. All you need
look, listen, and trust.
You will forget all this.
%
%
% It is not that I'm so smart. But I stay with the questions much
longer.
%
%
% I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to
please everyone.
%
%
outward facing palm IS a type of eye!!! so cyclops woman eye in
hand is a proper metaphor
cyclops women have no head eyes but one eye on each palm
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is

not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily

angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil
but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always
hopes, always perseveres.
others are not me, so do free to be happy
including damage to others (be yourself, it's ok to damage others)

first stage mind (child)

anarchy, chaos
second stage (social sophisticated)
conclusive, finds answers, finds meaning, INVENTS GOD
third stage mind (sophisticated free)
finds answers, can accept unknown answers, can accept IMPOSSIBLE
ANSWERS, (like no god, universe doesn't revolve around any one
thing)
sources of life > love, collecting, sorting, organizing
EVERYTHING is destruction []death[]
every CHOICE is destruction
I believe its the end of the world; I guess we'll pretend
On the highest throne in the world, we still sit only on our own
bottom.
i still sit on my bottom
people who need something,
rely on something,
like the rules of the desert
for the aboriginees
or the bible for old
americans []aquarians[]
cannot return an enlightened conversation,
their perceived and real

prudence []which save them from some dangers[]

hinders
them from some options
I believe that imagination is stronger than knowledge. That myth is
more potent than history. That dreams are more powerful than facts.
That hope always triumphs over experience. That laughter is the
only cure for grief. And I believe that love is stronger than death.
ralph, and he is incorrect
Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.
-seven minutes at a time, or all day > archeologist of Time, ticking
[ticki g; the missing letter appears as a missing tooth on a gear, the
word is a gear, words are the gears of the tinkerer] away layers of
Time, opening up pockets of Time, lost Days
-increments of Time should be capitalized; like Time is capitalized,
Days, etc...
-archeologists of Time versus architects of Time (poets versus
emperors)
-hopefully the scope of theft is breathtaking, and the Art is.
Don't judge each day by the harvest you reap but by the seeds that
you plant.
mirror time travel
mirror business
good business is time travel where you remain now
the American flag should be black, should be private, secret, not
flown or instead of flown trailed sideways under the skein light of the
darkness of night, because free people owe allegiance to nothing,
and noone
The end of man is knowledge, but there is one thing he can't know.
He can't know whether knowledge will save him or kill him. He will
be killed, all right, but he can't know whether he is killed because of
the knowledge which he has got or because of the knowledge which
he hasn't got and which if he had it, would save him.

It is perfectly true, as philosophers say, that life must be

understood backwards. But they forget the other proposition, that it
must be lived forwards.
once upon a time the Eye of Fate was good and the world teemed
with prosperity.
something happened and he changed to the bed.
(He felt trapped into hopelessness).
the allegory of the cave = the allegory of inside the skull = the
allegory of the evolution of man = the allegory of the evolution of
conscious man
The things you do for yourself are gone when you are gone, but the
things you do for others remain as your legacy.
stoicism = think of death to appreciate today
stoicism-cyclopses are stoics-see death but should not avoid it
the ends ARE the means...steve
the means ARE the ends
The hunger for love is much more difficult to remove than the
hunger for bread.
the hunger for love is much more difficult to quench than the hunger
for bread, since love, being invisible, we see as unnecessary
thousands of candles can be lighted from
a single candle, and the life of the candle
will not be shortened. happiness never
decreases by being shared.
buddha
One is happy once one knows the necessary ingredients of
happiness: simple tastes, a certain degree of courage, self denial to
a point, love of work, and above all, a clear conscience.

Sometimes God allows what he hates to accomplish what he loves.

evolution of man
stonehenge was a scientific study of time
first evolution
intelligence brings time away from eating
second evolution
time allows research and development = inventions
third evolution
inventions allow nearly total time
fourth evolution
time now = search for like minds
fifth evolution
search for like minds = preservation versus destruction at theory
level

time seeks conglomeration

Those who are willing to be vulnerable move among mysteries.
work like you're never gonna die; worship like you're gonna die
tomorrow.
be free like you're gonna die tomorrow
the language of happiness : when speaking, what is said leads
listener to feel free
[]therefore, the language of happiness must be TRUTH[]
the language of happiness is truth
The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop
me.
vigilance is the price of safety, freedom, community.

wisdom and enlightenment cannot be taught - but the CAN be

witnessed
Dave believes we all have to forgive each other. combine this with
masters and slaves theory, and you can see why he chose
management. blake - the cut worm forgives the plow

We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a

habit.
spirit is true, but if want to stay in material universe, must attend to
material.
1-master matter through groups (groups stronger than individual,
but led by penultimate individual)
2- satisfy self inside group by free thinking
there was a
natural human arrangement/organization (like/dislike)
then
OVERLORD ORGANIZATION (taxation, land zoning, laws)
human arrangement was more like
banana bunches,
niches of reciprocal approval
maybe like church crowds today?

We are not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we
are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be.
replace god with univers

dead fingers talk

cyc fingers dead fingers talk burroughs compare use of fingers to

text ie talk

plants grow 1000 generations per summer (no, 1000x1 generation),

which is where we got our 'family tree' idea!!! many of our ideas are
genius ideas reinterpreted
//the proper way to community//
there is no happiness; it is manufactured ::: untrue, but you must
work for yourself
% These intersecting
eon thinking about lives of people, how to disentangle them to set
them free

the cyclopses teach

% WOMEN HAVE THE POWER OF KINGS BETWEEN THEIR LEGS, AND
INEVITABLY A KINGDOM THERE AS WELL (SEE CLOCKS)
% ** THEY KNOW AND MEASURE ALL LIFE IN PRACTICAL UNITS (FROM
CLOCKS)
//we are water clocks, but body fluid clocks//
recreate 'community' as jews do, but for 'citizens of the universe'
//no, citizen of the Earth//there are many references to 'i am citizen of
the world'//
39 - earth community
everything is always working.
if it's not working for you, it's working some other way
charles bliss - statue of
man who created polio vaccine and gave it away for free - statue of
red sand missiouri
landscape for eaghwar, inverted storm cloud
Eaghwar's fire is the energy of reality; creates matter, which halts Time
incoherence - Eon is magical, impossible//impossibility//!!!

the sacred geometry of the self (there are different geometries =

priority rules)

very little good has ever come from an Absolute Shall

money is everything but people
if you think you must choose money over a person,
you have to understand that
that is a choice, not an unwritten law.

About Shambhala
Shambhala Vision
It is the Shambhala view that every human being has a
fundamental nature of goodness, warmth and intelligence. This
nature can be cultivated through meditation, following ancient
principles, and it can be further developed in daily life, so that it
radiates out to family, friends, community and society.
In the course of our lives, this goodness, warmth and intelligence
can easily become covered over by doubt, fear and egotism. We
tend to fall into a kind of sleep or stupor, believing in the
conditioning we have as the ultimate truth, and coming under the
sway of fear. The journey of becoming fully human means seeing
through fear and egotism, and waking up to our natural
intelligence. It takes kindnessto ourselves and othersand
courage, to wake up in this world.
The journey of awakening is known as the path of the warrior, as
it requires the simple bravery to look directly at ones own mind
and heart. The essential tool for doing this is mindfulness
meditation. As we continue on the Shambhala path, we learn

many other practices, to help us break through the ancient crust

of ego and awaken to the joy of fully living in this world.
Awakening and opening, we discover the world to be naturally
sacredpure and full of beauty. We begin to see clearly the
goodness and wisdom of others, and to feel compassion to help
them in myriad ways.
Shambhala vision is rooted in the contemplative teachings of
Buddhism, yet is a fresh expression of the spiritual journey for
our time; it is available to practitioners of any tradition. Our
lineage draws on the wisdom of the Kagyu and Nyingma schools
of Tibetan Buddhism as inherited by founder of Shambhala,
Chgyam Trungpa, and his son and spiritual heir, Sakyong
Mipham. In the mid-1970s Chgyam Trungpa began to introduce
teachings on Shambhala vision, based on his encounter with the
Western world, and on the specific wisdom imparted from the
Buddha to King Dawa Sangpo, the first sovereign of the
legendary kingdom of Shambhala. This tradition teaches how to
live in the secular world with courage and compassion.
Buddhism offers methods to clarify our mind, open our heart,
and face the realities of human life, while the Shambhala
teachings offer practices for rousing our life force and connecting
with the natural power and energy of the phenomenal world. The
combination of these wisdom traditions offers a contemporary,
effective spiritual path. Following it, we can reclaim our natural
birthright of wisdom and compassion, and work with others to
bring about the best in human society.

"In essence, the emphasis of the Buddhist path is to help us attain

enlightenment, and the emphasis of the Shambhala path is help us
create and maintain a good society. When we put these two
together, we have the Shambhalian Buddhist view of enlightened
society."

Sakyong Mipham

Shambhala Community
Shambhala is a global community. There are more than 170

centres and groups around the world, as well as thousands of

individual members. Shambhala Meditation Centres offer courses
in meditation and other contemplative arts and disciplines, and
also host community gatherings, celebrations, and family events.
In community life, we endeavor to put into practice the principles
of courage and compassion. This helps us to experience daily life
as a constant opportunity for spiritual practice and social service.
At Shambhala Meditation Centres, we offer a comprehensive path
of meditation practice and study. This path leads to the
cultivation of personal qualities beneficial in daily life and in
service to others. Our programs include in-depth study of the
Buddhism, Shambhala Training, as well as a variety of
contemplative arts and disciplines. Shambhala Meditation Centres
also regularly host visiting teachers from the Kagyu and Nyingma
schools of Tibetan Buddhism and from other Buddhist and
contemplative traditions. Shambhala has rural practice centres in
Colorado, Vermont, upstate New York, Nova Scotia, and France
where we offer week and month-long retreats and intensives for
students at all levels, as well as weekend programs.
In Shambhala, we strive to foster a welcoming atmosphere free
of prejudice and to develop an inclusive and enlightened society
with facilities fully accessible to all persons. Although some of our
programs and events are open only to those who have fulfilled
certain prerequisites, everyone is welcome at our centre
regardless of religion, spiritual tradition or teachers, path of
practice, opinions, class, nationality, culture, ethnicity, race,
language, age, gender, sexual orientation, or physical, perceptual
or mental abilities. Our Meditation Centres and Groups around
the world are committed to creating a practice, study, and work
environment in which all individuals are treated with respect and
dignity.
Read more about diversity in Shambhala

About Shambhala

being creative
and efficient
at the same time
is batting out of the park
over the fence
a celestial curveball
hurled by none other than god yourself.
bullying is an act of war
for defending your friends your self and loved ones against those who
would harm them
is the very essence of war
courage is the very requirement for war
all those who bully are committing an act of war
which requires all good people to retaliate

Jubilees
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

See also: Jubilee (Biblical)
This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because
help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (November 2009)
The Book of Jubilees, sometimes called Lesser Genesis
(Leptogenesis), is an ancient Jewish religious work of 50 chapters,
considered one of the pseudepigrapha by Protestant, Roman Catholic, and
Eastern Orthodox Churches.[1] Jubilees is considered canonical by the
Ethiopian Orthodox Church as well as Bete Israel (Ethiopian Jews), where
it is known as the Book of Division (Ge'ez: Mets'hafe Kufale).

It was well known to Early Christians, as evidenced by the writings of

Epiphanius, Justin Martyr, Origen, Diodorus of Tarsus, Isidore of
Alexandria, Isidore of Seville, Eutychius of Alexandria, John Malalas,
George Syncellus, and George Kedrenos. It was so thoroughly suppressed
in the 4th century that no complete Hebrew, Greek or Latin version has
survived. There is conjecture among western biblical scholars that Jubilees
may be a rework of material found in the canonical books of Genesis and
Exodus.[citation needed]
The Book of Jubilees claims to present "the history of the division of the
days of the Law, of the events of the years, the year-weeks, and the
jubilees of the world" as revealed to Moses (in addition to the Torah or
"Instruction") by Angels while he was on Mount Sinai for forty days and
forty nights.[2] The chronology given in Jubilees is based on multiples of
seven; the jubilees are periods of 49 years, seven 'year-weeks', into which
all of time has been divided. According to the author of Jubilees, all proper
customs that mankind should follow are determined by God's decree.
[

citation needed]

Contents [hide]
%

1 Manuscripts of Jubilees

2 Origins

3 Subsequent use

4 Content

5 Sources

6 See also

7 Notes

8 References

9 External links

Manuscripts of Jubilees[edit]
Until extensive fragments were discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls
(DSS), the only surviving manuscripts of Jubilees were four complete
Ge'ez texts dating to the 15th and 16th centuries, and several quotations
by the Church fathers such as Epiphanius, Justin Martyr, Origen, Diodorus

of Tarsus, Isidore of Alexandria, Isidore of Seville, Eutychius of Alexandria,

John Malalas, George Syncellus, and George Kedrenos. There is also a
preserved fragment of a Latin translation of the Greek that contains about
a quarter of the whole work.[3] The Ethiopic texts, now numbering twentyseven, are the primary basis for translations into English. Passages in the
texts of Jubilees that are directly parallel to verses in Genesis do not
directly reproduce either of the two surviving manuscript traditions.[4]
Consequently, even before the Qumran discoveries, Charles had deduced
that the Hebrew original had used an otherwise unrecorded text for
Genesis and the early chapters of Exodus, one that was independent of
either the Masoretic text or the Hebrew text that was the basis for the
Septuagint. As the variation among parallel manuscript traditions that are
exhibited by the Septuagint compared with the Masoretic text, and which
are embodied in the further variants among the Dead Sea Scrolls, have
demonstrated, even canonical Hebrew texts did not possess any single
'authorized' manuscript tradition in the first centuries BC.[5]
A further fragment in Syriac in the British Museum, titled Names of the
wives of the patriarchs according to the Hebrew books called Jubilees
suggests that there once existed a Syriac translation. How much is missing
can be guessed from the Stichometry of Nicephorus, where 4300 stichoi or
lines are attributed to The Book of Jubilees.[citation needed]
Between 1947 and 1956, approximately 15 Jubilees scrolls were found in
five caves at Qumran, all written in Hebrew. The large quantity of
manuscripts (more than for any biblical books except for Psalms,
Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Exodus, and Genesis, in descending order) indicates
that Jubilees was widely used at Qumran. A comparison of the Qumran
texts with the Ethiopic version, performed by James VanderKam, found
that the Ethiopic was in most respects an accurate and literalistic
translation.[citation needed]

Origins[edit]
The first biblical scholar to propose an origin for Jubilees was Robert Henry
Charles (18551931). Charles proposed the author of Jubilees may have

been a Pharisee and that Jubilees was the product of the midrash which
had already been at work in the Old Testament Chronicles.[3] However,
with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) at Qumran in 1947,
Charles' Pharisaic hypothesis of the origin of Jubilees has been almost
completely abandoned.
The dating of Jubilees has been somewhat problematic for biblical
scholars. While the oldest extant copies of Jubilees can be assigned on the
basis of the handwriting to about 100 BC, there is much evidence to
suggest Jubilees was written prior to this date.[6] For example, the author
of Jubilees seems to be aware of 1 Enoch's "Book of Dreams"; of which,
the oldest extant copy (DSS-13 4Q208) has been carbon dated to ca. 200
BC.[7]
And yet, many scholars continue to subscribe to Robert Henry Charles's
view that Jubilees could not have been written before the events of 1
Maccabees, due to perceived cryptic references within the text. As a result,
general reference works such as the Oxford Annotated Bible and the
Mercer Bible Dictionary conclude the work can be dated to 160150 BC.[8]

Subsequent use[edit]
Jubilees was immediately adopted by the Hasmoneans, and became a
source for the Aramaic Levi Document.[9] Jubilees remained a point of
reference for priestly circles (although they disputed its calendric proposal),
and the Temple Scroll and "Epistle of Enoch" (1 Enoch 91:110, 92:3
93:10, 91:1192:2, 93:11105:3) are based on Jubilees.[10] It is the source
for certain of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, for instance that of
Reuben.[11]
There is no official record of it in Pharisaic or Rabbinic sources, and it was
among several books that were left out of the canon established by the
Sanhedrin (possibly at the so-called Council of Jamnia, c 80 AD, though
this theory has been largely discredited, see Development of the Hebrew
Bible canon for details). Sub rosa, many of the traditions which Jubilees
includes for the first time are echoed in later Jewish sources, including

some 12th-century midrashim which may have had access to a Hebrew

copy. The sole exception within Judaism are the Beta Israel Jews formerly
of Ethiopia, who regard the Ge'ez text as canonical.[12]
The book of Jubilees was evidently held in high regard, and sometimes
quoted at length, by some Early Church Fathers. Ethiopian Orthodox
Christians and Beta Israel Jews have continued to consider Jubilees an
important book of the Bible, dictated to Moses, and older than Genesis.
[

citation needed]

Content[edit]
Jubilees covers much of the same ground as Genesis, but often with
additional detail, and addressing Moses in the second person as the entire
history of creation, and of Israel up to that point, is recounted in divisions of
49 years each, or "Jubilees". The elapsed time from the creation, up to
Moses receiving the scriptures upon Sinai during the Exodus, is calculated
as fifty Jubilees, less the 40 years still to be spent wandering in the desert
before entering Canaan or 2,410 years.
Four classes of angels are mentioned: angels of the presence, angels of
sanctifications, guardian angels over individuals, and angels presiding over
the phenomena of nature. Enoch was the first man initiated by the angels
in the art of writing, and wrote down, accordingly, all the secrets of
astronomy, of chronology, and of the world's epochs. As regards
demonology, the writer's position is largely that of the deuterocanonical
writings from both New and Old Testament times.
The Book of Jubilees narrates the genesis of angels on the first day of
Creation and the story of how a group of fallen angels mated with mortal
females, giving rise to a race of giants known as the Nephilim, and then to
their descendants, the Elioud. The Ethiopian version states that the
"angels" were in fact the disobedient offspring of Seth (Deqiqa Set), while
the "mortal females" were daughters of Cain.[13] This is also the view held
by Simeon bar Yochai, Clementine literature, Sextus Julius Africanus,
Ephrem the Syrian, Augustine of Hippo, and John Chrysostom among

many other early authorities. Their hybrid children, the Nephilim in

existence during the time of Noah, were wiped out by the great flood.
However, Jubilees also states that God granted ten percent of the
disembodied spirits of the Nephilim to try to lead mankind astray after the
flood.
Jubilees makes an incestuous reference regarding the son of Adam and
Eve, Cain and his wife. In chapter iv (1-12) (Cain and Abel), it mentions
that Cain took his sister Awan to be his wife and Enoch was their child.
Also, it mentions that Seth (another son of Adam and Eve) married his
sister Azura.[14]
According to this book, Hebrew is the language of Heaven, and was
originally spoken by all creatures in the Garden, animals and man, however
the animals lost their power of speech when Adam and Eve were expelled.
Some time following the Deluge, the earth is apportioned into three
divisions for the three sons of Noah, and his sixteen grandsons. After the
destruction of the tower of Babel, their families were scattered to their
respective allotments, and Hebrew was forgotten, until Abraham was
taught it by the angels.
Jubilees also contains a few scattered allusions to the Messianic kingdom.
RH Charles in 1913 wrote: "This kingdom was to be ruled over by a
Messiah sprung, not from Levi that is, from the Maccabean family as
some of his contemporaries expected but from Judah. This kingdom
would be gradually realized on earth, and the transformation of physical
nature would go hand in hand with the ethical transformation of man until
there was a new heaven and a new earth. Thus, finally, all sin and pain
would disappear and men would live to the age of 1,000 years in
happiness and peace, and after death enjoy a blessed immortality in the
spirit world."[3]
Jubilees 7:2029 is possibly an early reference to the Noahide laws.[15]

Sources[edit]
Jubilees bases its take on Enoch on the "Book of Watchers", 1 Enoch 1

36.[16]
Its sequence of events leading to the Flood match those of the "Dream
Visions", 1 Enoch 8390. However the direction of dependence is
controversial.[17]

See also[edit]
Wives aboard the Ark
Jubilees

Seven Laws of Noah

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The rainbow is the unofficial symbol of the Noahide Movement, recalling the rainbow that
appeared after the Great Flood of the Bible.

In Judaism, the Seven Laws of Noah (Hebrew: Sheva

mitzvot B'nei Noach), or the Noahide Laws, are a set of moral imperatives
that, according to the Talmud, were given by God[1] as a binding set of
laws for the "children of Noah" that is, all of humankind.[2][3]
According to Judaism, any non-Jew who adheres to these laws is regarded
as a righteous gentile, and is assured of a place in the World to Come
(Hebrew: Olam Haba), the final reward of the righteous.[4][5]
Adherents are often called "B'nei Noach" (Children of Noah) or "Noahides,"
and may sometimes network in Jewish synagogues.[citation needed]
The seven laws listed by the Tosefta and the Talmud are:[6]
%

The prohibition of Idolatry.

The prohibition of Murder.

The prohibition of Theft.

The prohibition of Sexual immorality.

The prohibition of Blasphemy.

The prohibition of eating flesh taken from an animal while it is still

alive.

The requirement of maintaining courts to provide legal recourse.

The Noahide laws comprise the six commandments which were given to
Adam in the Garden of Eden, according to the Talmud's interpretation of
Gen 2:16,[7] and a seventh precept, which was added after the Flood of
Noah. According to Judaism, the 613 commandments given in the written
Torah, as well as their explanations and applications discussed in the oral
Torah, are applicable to the Jews only, and non-Jews are bound only to
observe the seven Noahide laws.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Biblical origins
1

1.1 Hebrew Bible

1.2 Second Temple period texts

1.2.1 2nd Century BCE, Book of Jubilees

1.2.2 1st century AD, Acts 15

1.3 Talmud

2 Subdividing the Seven Laws

3 Ger toshav (Resident alien)

4 Punishment

5 Modern Times
1

5.1 Modern views

5.2 Chabad views: A Shulchan Aruch for Gentiles

6 Public endorsement of Noahide Laws

1

6.1 United States Congress

6.2 Israeli Druze

7 Christianity and the Noahide Laws

8 See also

9 References

10 Further reading

11 External links

Biblical origins[edit]
Part of a series on

Judaism
Movements
[show]

Philosophy
[show]

Texts
[show]

Law
[show]

Holy Cities
[show]

Places
[show]

Important figures
[show]

Rabbinic Sages
[show]

Religious roles
[show]

Culture
[show]

Education
[show]

Ritual objects
[show]

Prayers
[show]

Relations with other religions

[show]

Related topics
[show]

Category Portal WikiProject

vte

Hebrew Bible[edit]
According to the Biblical narrative, the Deluge covered the whole world,
killing every surface-dwelling creature except Noah, his wife, his sons and
their wives, and the animals taken aboard Noah's Ark. According to this all
humans are descendants of Noah, thus the name Noahide Laws in
reference to laws that apply to all of humanity. After the flood, God sealed a
covenant with Noah with the following admonitions (Genesis 9):
%

Flesh of a living animal: "However, flesh with its life-blood [in it], you
shall not eat." (9:4)

Murder and courts: "Furthermore, I will demand your blood, for [the
taking of] your lives, I shall demand it [even] from any wild animal.
From man too, I will demand of each person's brother the blood of
man. He who spills the blood of man, by man his blood shall be spilt;
for in the image of God He made man." (9:56)

Second Temple period texts[edit]

Although other texts from the Second Temple period are not considered
authoritative in Judaism, they do show reference to the concept of Noahide
laws before the Talmud.

2nd Century BCE, Book of Jubilees[edit]

An early reference to Noachide Law may appear in the Book of Jubilees
7:2028, which is generally dated to the 2nd century BCE:
"And in the twenty-eighth jubilee [13241372 A.M.] Noah began to enjoin
upon his sons' sons the ordinances and commandments, and all the
judgments that he knew, and he exhorted his sons to observe
righteousness, and to cover the shame of their flesh, and to bless their
Creator, and honour father and mother, and love their neighbour, and
guard their souls from fornication and uncleanness and all iniquity. For
owing to these three things came the flood upon the earth ... For whoso
sheddeth man's blood, and whoso eateth the blood of any flesh, shall all be

destroyed from the earth."[8][9]

1st century AD, Acts 15[edit]

Main article: Council of Jerusalem
The Jewish Encyclopedia article on Saul of Tarsus states:
According to Acts, Paul began working along the traditional Jewish line of
proselytizing in the various synagogues where the proselytes of the gate
[e.g., Exodus 20:9] and the Jews met; and only because he failed to win
the Jews to his views, encountering strong opposition and persecution from
them, did he turn to the Gentile world after he had agreed at a convention
with the apostles at Jerusalem to admit the Gentiles into the Church only
as proselytes of the gate, that is, after their acceptance of the Noachian
laws (Acts 15:131).
Jewish Encyclopedia: New Testament Spirit of Jewish Proselytism in
Christianity states:
For great as was the success of Barnabas and Paul in the heathen world,
the authorities in Jerusalem insisted upon circumcision as the condition of
admission of members into the church, until, on the initiative of Peter, and
of James, the head of the Jerusalem church, it was agreed that
acceptance of the Noachian Laws namely, regarding avoidance of
idolatry, fornication, and the eating of flesh cut from a living animal
should be demanded of the heathen desirous of entering the Church.
Acts 15:19-21, the Apostolic Decree of the Council of Jerusalem, resolved
this early Christian dispute by commending righteous Gentiles to
understand Noahide law, rather than to live under the same dictates as
Torah-observant Jews and be circumcised (cf. Acts 15:5, Acts 15:24). As
Christianity began as a sect of first-century Judaism, so modern Judaism
has continued to observe Gentiles and proselytes as not being under the
scrutiny of the ordinances as Jews. Jewish scholar Maimonides (13th
century) held Gentiles may have a part in salvation and in the world to
come just by observing Noahide law. Some modern Jewish and Christian
scholars, however, dispute the connection between Acts 15 and Noahide
law,[10] the content of Noahide law, the historical reliability of the Acts of the
Apostles, and the nature of Biblical law in Christianity.

Talmud[edit]
According to Judaism, as expressed in the Talmud, the Noachide Laws
apply to all humanity through humankind's descent from one paternal
ancestor, the head of the only family to survive The Flood, who in Hebrew
tradition is called Noah. In Judaism, B'nei Noah (Hebrew,
"Descendants of Noah", "Children of Noah") refers to all of humankind.[11]
The Talmud also states: "Righteous people of all nations have a share in
the world to come" (Sanhedrin 105a). Any non-Jew who lives according to
these laws is regarded as one of "the righteous among the gentiles".
Maimonides writes that this refers to those who have acquired knowledge
of God and act in accordance with the Noachide laws out of obedience to
God. According to what scholars consider to be the most accurate texts of
the Mishneh Torah,[12] Maimonides goes on to say that anyone who
upholds the Noachide laws only because they appear logical is not one of
the "righteous among the nations," but rather he is one of the wise among
them. The more prolific versions of the Mishneh Torah say of such a
person: "..nor is he one of the wise among them."[13]
The Talmud states that the instruction not to eat "flesh with the life" was
given to Noah, and that Adam and Eve had already received six other
commandments. Adam and Eve were not enjoined from eating from a
living animal; they were forbidden to eat any animal. The remaining six are
exegetically derived from the sentence "And the Lord God commanded the
man saying, of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat." in Gen
2:16.[14]
Historically, some rabbinic opinions consider non-Jews not only not
obligated to adhere to all the remaining laws of the Torah, but actually
forbidden to observe them.[15] The Noachide Laws are regarded as the
way through which non-Jews can have a direct and meaningful relationship
with God, or at least comply with the minimal requisites of civilization and
of divine law.[citation needed]
Noachide law differs radically from Roman law for gentiles (Jus Gentium), if
only because the latter was enforceable judicial policy. Rabbinic Judaism

has never adjudicated any cases under Noachide law (per Novak,
1983:28ff.), although scholars disagree about whether Noachide law is a
functional part of Halakha ("Jewish law") (cf. Bleich).
In recent years, the term "Noahide" has come to refer to non-Jews who
strive to live in accord with the seven Noachide Laws; the terms "observant
Noahide" or "Torah-centered Noahides" would be more precise but are
infrequently used. Support for the use of Noahide in this sense can be
found with the Ritva, who uses the term Son of Noah to refer to a Gentile
who keeps the seven laws, but is not a Ger Toshav.[16] The rainbow,
referring to the Noachide or First Covenant (Genesis 9), is the symbol of
many organized Noahide groups, following Genesis 9:12-17. A non-Jew of
any ethnicity or religion is referred to as a bat ("daughter") or ben ("son") of
Noah, but most organizations that call themselves ( b'nei noach) are
composed of gentiles who are keeping the Noachide Laws.[citation needed]

Subdividing the Seven Laws[edit]

Various rabbinic sources have different positions on the way the seven
laws are to be subdivided in categories. Maimonides[17] lists other
additional Noahide commandments, including the coupling of different
kinds of animals and the grafting of different species (as defined by Jewish
law) of trees. Rabbi David ben Solomon ibn Abi Zimra (Radbaz), a
contemporary commentator on Maimonides, expressed surprise that he left
out castration and sorcery which were listed in the Talmud.[18]
The 10th-century Rabbi Saadia Gaon added tithes and levirate marriage.
The 11th-century Rav Nissim Gaon included "listening to God's Voice",
"knowing God" and "serving God" besides going on to say that all religious
acts which can be understood through human reasoning are obligatory
upon Jew and Gentile alike. The 14th-century Rabbi Nissim ben Reuben
Gerondi added the commandment of charity.
The 16th-century work Asarah Maamarot by Rabbi Menahem Azariah of
Fano (Rema mi-Fano) enumerates thirty commandments, listing the latter
twenty-three as extensions of the original seven, which includes

prohibitions on various forms of sorcery, as well as incest and bestiality.

Another commentator, Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Chajes (Kol Hidushei Maharitz
Chayess I, end Ch. 10) suggests these are not related to the first seven,
nor based on Scripture, but were passed down by oral tradition. The
number thirty derives from the statement of the Talmudic sage Ulla in
tractate Hullin 92a, though he lists only three other rules in addition to the
original seven, consisting of details of the prohibitions against
homosexuality and cannibalism, as well as the imperative to honor the
Torah.
Talmud commentator Rashi remarks on this that he does not know the
other Commandments that are referred to. Though the authorities seem to
take it for granted that Ulla's thirty commandments included the original
seven, an additional thirty laws is also possible from the reading[citation
needed].
The 10th century Shmuel ben Hophni Gaon lists thirty Noahide
Commandments based on Ulla's Talmudic statement, though the text is
problematic.[19] He includes the prohibitions against suicide and false
oaths, as well as the imperatives related to prayer, sacrifices and honoring
one's parents.
The contemporary Rabbi Aaron Lichtenstein counts 66 instructions[citation
needed] but Rabbi Harvey Falk has suggested that much work remains to be
done in order to properly identify all of the Noahide Commandments, their
divisions and subdivisions.[citation needed]
Theft, robbery and stealing covers the appropriate understanding of other
persons, their property and their rights. The establishment of courts of
justice promotes the value of the responsibility of a corporate society of
people to enforce these laws and define these terms. The refusal to
engage in unnecessary lust or cruelty demonstrates respect for the
creation itself as renewed after the Flood. The prohibition against
committing murder includes a prohibition against human sacrifice.[citation
needed]

Maimonides, in his Mishnah Torah, interpreted the prohibition against

homicide as including a prohibition against abortion.[20]

Ger toshav (Resident alien)[edit]

Main article: Ger toshav
In earlier times, a Gentile living in the Land of Israel who accepted the
Seven laws in front of a rabbinical court was known as a Ger toshav
(literally Stranger/Resident) or "Resident Alien". Jewish law recognizes a
Biblical obligation to help a Ger toshav in time of need (as opposed to the
rabbinic obligation help all Gentiles who live among Jews). The regulations
regarding Jewish-Gentile relations are modified in the case of a Ger
toshav.[21]
Jewish law only allows the official acceptance of a Ger Toshav as a
resident in the Land of Israel during a time when the Year of Jubilee (yovel)
is in effect. There is discussion in the sources as to whether some of the
laws that apply to a Ger Toshav may be applied to some modern Gentiles,
particularly Muslims.[21]
A Ger Toshav should not be confused with a Ger Tzedek, who is a person
who prefers to proceed to total conversion to Judaism, a procedure that is
traditionally only allowed to take place after much thought and deliberation
over converting.

Punishment[edit]
The Talmud laid down the statutory punishment for transgressing any one
of the Seven Laws of Noah (but not other parts of the Noahide code) as
capital punishment [22] by decapitation, which is considered one of the
lightest[23] of the four modes of execution of criminals. According to some
opinions, punishment is the same whether the individual transgresses with
knowledge of the law or is ignorant of the law.[24]

Modern Times[edit]
Modern views[edit]

Some modern views hold that penalties are a detail of the Noahide Laws
and that Noahides themselves must determine the details of their own laws
for themselves. According to this school of thought see N. Rakover, Law
and the Noahides (1998); M. Dallen, The Rainbow Covenant (2003) the
Noahide Laws offer mankind a set of absolute values and a framework for
righteousness and justice, while the detailed laws that are currently on the
books of the world's states and nations are presumptively valid.

Chabad views: A Shulchan Aruch for Gentiles[edit]

After the Rebbe of Chabad Lubavitch, Rabbi Menachem Mendel
Schneerson, started his Noahide Campaign in the 1980s, the number of
Gentiles willing to keep the Seven Laws of Noah as described in the Torah
increased.[citation needed] A codification of the exact obligations of the
Gentiles in the spirit of the classical Shulchan Aruch was needed. In 2005
the scholar Rabbi Moshe Weiner of Jerusalem accepted to produce an indepth codification of the Noahide precepts.[25] The work is called Sefer
Sheva Mitzvot HaShem, (The Book of Seven Divine Commandments)
published 2008/2009. As it is approved by both Chief Rabbis of Israel,
Rabbi Shlomo Moshe Amar and Rabbi Yonah Metzger, as well as other
Hasidic- and non-Hasidic halachic authorities like Rabbi Zalman Nechemia
Goldberg, Rabbi Gedalia Dov Schwartz and Rabbi Jacob Immanuel
Schochet, it can claim an authoritative character and is referred as a
"Shulchan Aruch"[26] for Gentiles at many places.

Public endorsement of Noahide Laws[edit]

United States Congress[edit]
The Seven Laws of Noah were recognized by the United States Congress
in the preamble to the 1991 bill that established Education Day in honor of
the birthday of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the leader of the
Chabad movement:
Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and
principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great
Nation was founded; Whereas these ethical values and principles have

been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were
known as the Seven Noahide Laws.[27]

Israeli Druze[edit]
In January 2004, the spiritual leader of the Druze community in Israel,
Sheikh Mowafak Tarif, signed a declaration calling on all non-Jews in Israel
to observe the Noahide Laws as laid down in the Talmud and expounded
upon in Jewish tradition. The mayor of the Galilean city of Shefa-'Amr
(Shfaram), where Muslim, Christian and Druze communities live side by
side, also signed the document. The declaration includes the commitment
to make a better, more humane world based on the Seven Noahide
Commandments and the values they represent commanded by the Creator
to all mankind through Moses on Mount Sinai.
Support for the spread of the Seven Noahide Commandments by the
Druze leaders reflects the Biblical narrative itself. The Druze community
reveres the non-Jewish father-in-law of Moses, Jethro, whom Arabs call
Shoaib. According to the Biblical narrative, Jethro joined and assisted the
Jewish people in the desert during the Exodus, accepted monotheism, but
ultimately rejoined his own people. In fact, the tomb of Jethro in Tiberias is
the most important religious site for the Druze community.[28]

Christianity and the Noahide Laws[edit]

Christian views on the old covenant vary. Most Christian denominations
incorporate the Ten Commandments, the Great Commandment, and The
Golden Rule, however some believe in the complete Abrogation of Old
Covenant laws. The only Noahide law that is not part of the standard moral
teaching of mainstream Christianity is the prohibition against eating the
flesh of an animal while it is still alive (number 6 above). Many interpret
Acts and the Pauline Epistles as making void the dietary laws found in the
Torah and known of Noah (Genesis 7:2-3 and Genesis 8:20). This claim is
disputed by many Christians, including the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Church, the Seventh Day Adventist Church, the Church of God (Seventh
Day). The Apostolic Decree which is still observed by the Orthodox

includes some food restrictions.[29]

The 18th-century Rabbi Jacob Emden proposed that Jesus, and Paul after
him, intended to convert the Gentiles to the Noahide laws while allowing
the Jews to follow full Mosaic Law.[30]

See also[edit]
%

Code of Hammurabi

Conversion to Judaism

List of ancient legal codes

Natural law

Noahidism
Seven Laws of Noah

Wives aboard Noah's Ark

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wives aboard the Ark)

Jump to: navigation, search

The Construction of Noah's Ark by Jacopo Bassano depicts all the eight people said to
be on the ark, including the four wives.

Although the Book of Genesis in the Bible does not give any further
information about the four[1] women it says were aboard Noah's Ark during
the Flood, there exist substantial extra-Biblical traditions regarding these
women and their names.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Book of Jubilees

2 Sibylline oracles

3 Christian writers

4 Jewish Rabbinic literature

5 Islamic traditions

6 Irish and Anglo-Saxon traditions

7 Mandaeism

8 Gnostic literature

9 Kpes Krnika

10 Pseudo-Berossus

11 Comte de Gabalis

12 Miautso traditions

13 The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

14 Other

15 Modern popular fiction

16 See also

17 References

Book of Jubilees[edit source]

In the Book of Jubilees, known to have been in use from the late 2nd
century BC, the names of the wives of Noah, Shem, Ham and Japheth are
as follows:
%

Wife of Noah - Emzara, daughter of Rake'el, son of Methuselah

Wife of Shem - Sedeqetelebab

Wife of Ham - Ne'elatama'uk or Na'eltama'uk

Wife of Japheth - 'Adataneses

It adds that the three sons after some years struck out in different
directions from the original camp near Mount Ararat and founded three
villages bearing the names of these three mothers of the human race.

Sibylline oracles[edit source]

According to the Sibylline Oracles the wives of Shem, Ham and Japheth
enjoyed fantastically long lifespans, living for centuries, while speaking
prophecy to each generation they saw come and go.[2] According to the
preface of the Oracles, the Sibyl author was a daughter-in-law of Noah: the
"Babylonian Sibyl", Sambethe who, 900 years after the Deluge,
allegedly moved to Greece and began writing the Oracles. The writings

attributed to her (at the end of Book III) also hint at possible names of her
family who would have lived before the Flood father Gnostos, mother
Circe; elsewhere (in book V) she calls Isis her sister. Other early sources
similarly name one of the Sibyls as Sabba (see Sibyl in Jewish
Encyclopedia).

Christian writers[edit source]

The early Christian writer St. Hippolytus (d. 235 AD) recounted a tradition
of their names according to the Syriac Targum that is similar to Jubilees,
although apparently switching the names of Shem's and Ham's wives. He
wrote: The names of the wives of the sons of Noah are these: the name of
the wife of Sem, Nahalath Mahnuk; and the name of the wife of Cham,
Zedkat Nabu; and the name of the wife of Japheth, Arathka. He also
recounts a quaint legend concerning the wife of Ham: God having
instructed Noah to destroy the first person who announced that the deluge
was beginning, Ham's wife at that moment was baking bread, when water
suddenly rushed forth from the oven, destroying the bread. When she
exclaimed then that the deluge was commencing, God suddenly cancels
his former command lest Noah destroy his own daughter-in-law who was to
be saved.[3][4]
An early Arabic work known as Kitab al-Magall or the Book of Rolls (part of
Clementine literature), the Syriac Book of the Cave of Treasures (c. 350),
and Patriarch Eutychius of Alexandria (c. 930) all agree in naming Noah's
wife as "Haykl, the daughter of Nams (or Namousa), the daughter of
Enoch, the brother of Methuselah"; the first of these sources elsewhere
calls Haikal "the daughter of Mashamos, son of Enoch", while stating that
Shem's wife is called "Leah, daughter of Nasih".
Furthermore, the Panarion of Epiphanius (c. 375) names Noah's wife as
Barthenos, while the c. 5th-century Ge'ez work Conflict of Adam and Eve
with Satan calls Noah's wife "Haikal, the daughter of Abaraz, of the
daughters of the sons of Enos" whom some authors have connected
with Epiphanius' Barthenos (i.e., Bath-Enos, daughter of Enos).[5]
However, Jubilees makes "Betenos" the name of Noah's mother. The word

haykal is Syriac for "temple" or "church"; in the Georgian copy of Cave of

Treasures, we find instead the name T'ajar, which is the Georgian word for
the same.[6]
Armenian tradition give the name of Noah's wife as Nemzar, Noyemzar or
Noyanzar.
Patriarch Eutychius of Alexandria, writing in Arabic, also states that Shem's
wife was Salit, Ham's Nahlat and Japheth's Arisisah, all daughters of
Methuselah. The theologian John Gill (16971771) wrote in his Exposition
of the Bible of this tradition "that the name of Shem's wife was Zalbeth, or,
as other copies, Zalith or Salit; that the name of Ham's Nahalath; and of
Japheth's Aresisia."
A manuscript of the 8th-century Latin work Inventiones Nominum, copies of
which have been found at the Abbey of St. Gall in Switzerland, and in a
library at Albi, SW France, lists as Noah's wife Set, as Shem's wife Nora,
as Ham's wife Sare, and as Japeth's wife Serac.[7]

Jewish Rabbinic literature[edit source]

The Genesis Rabba midrash lists Naamah, the daughter of Lamech and
sister of Tubal-Cain, as the wife of Noah, as does the 11th-century Jewish
commentator Rashi in his commentary on Sefer Bereishis 4:22.
In the medieval midrash Book of Jasher (trans. Moses Samuel c. 1840, ed.
J. H. Parry 1887) Chapter 5:15, the name of Noah's wife is said to be
Naamah, daughter of Enoch.[8]

Islamic traditions[edit source]

The Persian historian Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (c. 915) recounts that
Japheth's wife was Arbasisah, daughter of Marazil, son of al-Darmasil,
son of Mehujael, son of Enoch, son of Cain; that Ham's wife was Nalab,
daughter of Marib, another son of al-Darmasil; and that Shem's wife was
alib, daughter of Batawil, another son of Mehujael. He says Noah's wife
was Amzurah, daughter of Barakil, another son of Mehujael.

(According to George Sale's Commentary on the Quran (1734), some

Muslim commentators asserted that Noah had had an infidel wife named
Waila, who perished in the deluge, and was thus not aboard the Ark.)

Irish and Anglo-Saxon traditions[edit source]

Irish folklore is rich in traditions and legends regarding the three sons and
their wives. Here the wives are usually named Olla, Olliva, and Ollivani
(or variations thereof), names possibly derived from the Anglo-Saxon
Codex Junius (c. 700 AD), a Bible paraphrase written in the fashion of
Germanic sagas, and often attributed to the poet Caedmon. The wife of
Noah is given as Percoba in Codex Junius.
The Anglo-Saxon "Solomon and Saturn" dialogue gives for Noah's wife
Dalila, for Ham's, Jaitarecta, and for Japheth's Catafluvia, while giving
Olla, Ollina and Ollibana as alternatives. The name of Shem's wife is
missing. Some versions of the Gaelic Lebor Gabala also name Shem's,
Ham's and Japheth's wives as Cata Rechta, Cata Flauia and Cata
Chasta respectively. Similar traditions seem to have endured for several
centuries in some form, for in Petrus Comestor, we read that the wives of
Noah, Shem, Ham and Japheth are Phuarpara, Pharphia, Cataflua and
Fliva respectively, and in a 15th-century Middle English catechism, we find
written "What hicht Noes wyf?" "Dalida; and the wif of Sem, Cateslinna;
and the wif of Cam, Laterecta; and the wif of Japheth, Aurca. And other 3
names, Ollia, Olina, and Olybana."
lfric of Eynsham's Anglo-Saxon translation of the Heptateuch (c. 1000)
included illustrations with the wives' names recorded in the captions. One
such illustration (fol. 17) names Noah's wife as Phiapphara, Shem's as
Parsia, Ham's as Cataphua, and Japheth's as Fura.[9] Another (fol. 14)
includes one wife, presumably Noah's, named Sphiarphara.[10] A Middle
English illustrated version of Genesis dating to the 13th century also gives
Puarphara as Noah's wife.

Mandaeism[edit source]

Mandaean literature, of uncertain antiquity, refers to Noah's wife by the

name Nuraita (or Nhuraitha, Anhuraita, various other spellings).

Gnostic literature[edit source]

Gnostic literature of the first few centuries AD calls Noah's wife Norea,
including texts ascribed to her, as reported by Epiphanius, and confirmed in
modern times with the discovery of these texts at Nag Hammadi.

Kpes Krnika[edit source]

Hungarian folklore has several tales about Japheth and his wife called
Eneh, attributing this information to the Chronicles of Sigilbert, Bishop of
Antioch in the 14th-century Kpes Krnika.

Pseudo-Berossus[edit source]
According to the 15th-century monk Annio da Viterbo, the Hellenistic
Babylonian writer Berossus had stated that the sons' wives were Pandora,
Noela, and Noegla, and that Noah's wife was Tytea. However, Annio's
manuscript is widely regarded today as having been a forgery.[11]
Nonetheless, later writers made use of this "information", sometimes even
combining it with other traditions. The Portuguese friar Gaspar Rodriguez
de S. Bernardino wrote in Itinerario da India por terra ate a ilha de Chypre
in 1842 that the wives of Noah, Shem, Ham and Japheth were named
Tytea or Phuarphara, Pandora or Parphia, Noela or Cataflua, and
Noegla, Eliua or Arca. In Robert Southey's Common-place Book from
around the same time, similar names are given, with the information
attributed to the "Comte de Mora Toledo": Titea Magna; Pandora; Noala or
Cataflua; and Noegla, Funda or Afia, respectively.

Comte de Gabalis[edit source]

A cabalistic work that appeared in 1670, known as Comte de Gabalis,
considered sacred in Rosicrucianism, maintains that the name of Noah's
wife was Vesta.

This name for Noah's wife had earlier been found in Pedro Sarmiento de
Gamboa's History of the Incas (c. 1550), where the names Prusia or
Persia, Cataflua and Funda are also given for Shem, Ham, and Japheth's
wives respectively.

Miautso traditions[edit source]

The Miautso people of China preserved in their traditions the name of
Noah's wife as Gaw Bo-lu-en.[12]

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints[edit

source]
The LDS Book of Abraham, first published in 1842, mentions the name of
Egyptus (Abraham 1:23) as being Ham's wife; his daughter apparently has
the same name (v. 25).

Other[edit source]
The Holy Tablets, first appearing in 1996 as the sacred text of the
Nuwaubian Nation (which has fewer than 500 adherents) names Noah's
wives as Naama, Waala, and Mubiyna, of whom only Naama survives the
flood in the Ark. The corresponding wives of Shem, Ham and Japheth are
named as Faatin, Haliyma and Ifat, respectively.

Modern popular fiction[edit source]

In his opera Il diluvio universale ("The Great Flood", 1830), Italian
composer Gaetano Donizetti named Japhet's wife Tesbite, Shem's wife
Asfene, and Cham's wife Abra. These are of course fictional names.
Amlie Louise Rives wrote a short story in 1887 called "The Story of
Arnon" told in the first person by "Arnon, the fourth son of Noah", who hid
his beloved, Asenath daughter of Kemuel, aboard the Ark.[13]
In Andre Obey's 1930 play Noah, Noah's wife is given no proper name, but
is called simply "Mamma" by all, even Noah. Shem's intended bride is
Sella, Ham's is Naomi (or, in one English translation, "Norma"), and

Japheth's is Ada.
In Clifford Odets' 1954 play The Flowering Peach, Noah's wife is Esther,
Shem's wife is Leah, and Ham's wife is Rachel (These traditional Jewish
names are taken from other figures in the Old Testament). In the course of
the play, Ham divorces Rachel and she marries Japheth, who has always
loved her from afar. Ham takes Goldie, whom Noah had intended as
Japheth's wife, as his new bride, and all ends happily. (Goldie is an
outsider from another tribe, hence her unusual name.) These names are
also used in the Broadway musical adaptation, Two by Two (1970).
In Madeleine L'Engle's novel Many Waters (1986), the wife of Shem is said
to be Elisheba, that of Ham to be Anah, sister of Tiglah, and that of
Japheth Oholibamah. Noah's wife is called Matred. These names were all
taken from characters mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament.
In Stephen Schwartz's 1991 musical Children of Eden, Noah's wife is given
no name, but is called Mama Noah in the script or simply Mama by the
characters. Ham's wife is called Aphra and is pregnant with their child at
the time of the flood. The child is born after the flood and they name her
Eve after the Eve in the first act. Shem's wife is called Aysha. Japheth, at
the time of the flood, is in love with the family's servant, a young girl named
Yonah who is a descendant of Cain. Since God has forbidden all
concourse with those of the race of Cain, Noah forbids Japheth to take
Yonah on the Ark. However, Japheth hides Yonah inside a covered hold on
the Ark. She escapes the flood, to be later reconciled with both the family
and God when Shem discovers her after Yonah releases the dove to find
dry land. (In the Schwartz musical, with script by John Caird, it is
significant that after the flood, two of the wives' names become the names
of the continent to which that couple migrates: Ham and his wife set out for
the land later known as Africa - Aphra = Africa; while Shem and his wife
set out for the land later known as Asia - Aysha = Asia. Japheth and his
wife Jonah merely say their descendants will cover the world in their search
for a return to the lost Eden.)

See also[edit source]

Religion
portal

Hebrew Sibyl

List of names for the Biblical nameless

Seven Laws of Noah

Wives aboard Noah
Cloisonne and garnet, decoration style of shovay
the Chauvez (sho-vay) tricyclops tribe

Cloisonn
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Garnet cloisonn)

Jump to: navigation, search

Ming Dynasty cloisonn enamel bowl, using nine colors of enamel.

Chinese cloisonn enamel incense burner, 17th-18th centuries

Cloisonn is an ancient technique for decorating metalwork objects, in

recent centuries using vitreous enamel, and in older periods also inlays of
cut gemstones, glass, and other materials. The resulting objects can also
be called cloisonn. The decoration is formed by first adding
compartments (cloisons in French[1]) to the metal object by soldering or
adhering silver or gold wires or thin strips placed on their edges. These
remain visible in the finished piece, separating the different compartments
of the enamel or inlays, which are often of several colors. Cloisonn
enamel objects are worked on with enamel powder made into a paste,
which then needs to be fired in a kiln.

The technique was in ancient times mostly used for jewellery and small
fittings for clothes, weapons or similar small objects decorated with
geometric or schematic designs, with thick cloison walls. In the Byzantine
Empire techniques using thinner wires were developed to allow more
pictorial images to be produced, mostly used for religious images and
jewellery, and by then always using enamel. By the 14th century this
enamel technique had spread to China, where it was soon used for much
larger vessels such as bowls and vases; the technique remains common in
China to the present day, and cloisonn enamel objects using Chinesederived styles were produced in the West from the 18th century.
Contents [hide]
%

1 History
1

1.1 Early techniques

1.2 Enamel

2 Modern process

3 Examples
1

3.1 Enamel

3.2 Gems and glass

4 Gallery

5 Notes

6 References

7 External links

History[edit]
8th (?) century Anglo-Saxon sword hilt fitting, gold with garnet cloisonn inlay. From the
Staffordshire Hoard, found in 2009, and not fully cleaned.

Byzantine cloisonn enamel plaque of St. Demetrios, c. 1100, using the new thin-wire
technique. The lettering uses champlev technique.

Early techniques[edit]
Cloisonn first developed in the jewellery of the ancient Near East, typically

in very small pieces such as rings, with thin wire forming the cloisons. In
the jewellery of Ancient Egypt, including the pectoral jewels of the
Pharaohs, thicker strips form the cloisons, which remain small.[2] In Egypt
gemstones and enamel-like materials sometimes called "glass-paste" were
both used.[3] Cloisonn spread to surrounding cultures and a particular
type, often known as garnet cloisonn is widely found in the Migration
Period art of the "barbarian" peoples of Europe, who used gemstones,
especially red garnets, as well as glass and enamel, with small thick-walled
cloisons. Red garnets and gold made an attractive contrast of colours, and
for Christians the garnet was a symbol of Christ. This type is now thought
to have originated in the Late Antique Eastern Roman Empire and to have
initially reached the Migration peoples as diplomatic gifts of objects
probably made in Constantinople, then copied by their own goldsmiths.[4]
Glass-paste cloisonn was made in the same periods with similar results compare the gold Anglo-Saxon fitting with garnets (right) and the Visigothic
brooch with glass-paste in the gallery.[5] Thick ribbons of gold were
soldered to the base of the sunken area to be decorated to make the
compartments, before adding the stones or paste.[6][7] Sometimes
compartments filled with the different materials of cut stones or glass and
enamel are mixed to ornament the same object, as in the purse-lid from
Sutton Hoo.[8] In the Byzantine world the technique was developed into the
thin-wire style suitable only for enamel described below, which was
imitated in Europe from about Carolingian period onwards.

Enamel[edit]
The earliest surviving cloisonn pieces are rings in graves from 12th
century BC Cyprus, using very thin wire.[9] Subsequently, enamel was just
one of the fillings used for the small, thick-walled cloisons of the Late
Antique and Migration Period style described above. From about the 8th
century, Byzantine art began again to use much thinner wire more freely to
allow much more complex designs to be used, with larger and less
geometric compartments, which was only possible using enamel.[10] These
were still on relatively small objects, although numbers of plaques could be
set into larger objects, such as the Pala d'Oro, the altarpiece in Saint

Mark's Cathedral, Venice. Some objects combined thick and thin cloisons
for varied effect.[11] The designs often (as at right) contained a generous
background of plain gold, as in contemporary Byzantine mosaics. The area
to be enamelled was stamped to create the main depression, pricked to
help the enamel adhere, and the cloisons added.[12]
From Byzantium or the Islamic world the technique reached China in the
13-14th centuries; the first written reference is in a book of 1388, where it is
called "Dashi ('Muslim') ware". No Chinese pieces clearly from the 14th
century are known, the earliest datable pieces being from the reign of the
Xuande Emperor (142535), which however show a full use of Chinese
styles suggesting considerable experience in the technique.[13] It was
initially regarded with suspicion by Chinese connoisseurs, firstly as being
foreign, and secondly as appealing to feminine taste. However by the
beginning of the 18th century the Kangxi Emperor had a cloisonn
workshop among the many Imperial factories. The most elaborate and
highly-valued Chinese pieces are from the early Ming Dynasty, especially
the reigns of the Xuande Emperor and Jingtai Emperor (145057),
although 19th century or modern pieces are far more common. The
Chinese industry seems to have benefited from a number of skilled
Byzantine refugees fleeing the Fall of Constantinople in 1453, although
based on the name alone, it is far more likely China obtained knowledge of
the technique from the middle east. In much Chinese cloisonn blue is
usually the predominant colour, and the Chinese name for the technique,
jingtailan ("Jingtai blue ware"), refers to this, and the Jingtai Emperor.
Quality began to decline in the 19th century. Initially heavy bronze or brass
bodies were used, and the wires soldered, but later much lighter copper
vessels were used, and the wire glued on before firing.[14][15] The enamels
compositions and the pigments change with time.
In Byzantine pieces, and even more in Chinese work, the wire by no
means always encloses a separate color of enamel. Sometime a wire is
used just for decorative effect, stopping in the middle of a field of enamel,
and sometimes the boundary between two enamel colors is not marked by
a wire. In the Byzantine plaque at right the first feature may be seen in the

top wire on the saint's black sleeve, and the second in the white of his eyes
and collar. Both are also seen in the Chinese bowl illustrated at top right.
Chinese cloisonn is the best known enamel cloisonn, though the
Japanese produced large quantities from the mid-19th century, of very high
technical quality.[16] In Japan cloisonn enamels are known as 'Shippo'.
Russian cloisonn from the Tsarist era is also highly prized by collectors,
especially from the House of Faberg or Khlebnikov, and the French and
other nations have produced small quantities. Chinese cloisonn is
sometimes confused with Canton enamel, a similar type of enamel work
that is painted on freehand and does not utilize partitions to hold the colors
separate.
In medieval Western Europe cloisonn enamel technique was gradually
overtaken by the rise of champlev enamel, where the spaces for the
enamel to fill are created by making recesses (using various methods) into
the base object, rather than building up compartments from it, as in
cloisonn. Later techniques were evolved that allowed the enamel to be
painted onto a flat background without running. Plique--jour is a related
enameling technique which uses clear enamels and no metal backplate,
producing an object that has the appearance of a miniature stained glass
object - in effect cloisonn with no backing. Plique-a'-jour is usually created
on a base of mica or thin copper which is subsequently peeled off (mica) or
etched away with acid (copper).
Other ways of using the technique have been developed, but are of minor
importance. In 19th century Japan it was used on pottery vessels with
ceramic glazes, and it has been used with lacquer and modern acrylic
fillings for the cloisons.[17] A version of cloisonn technique is often used
for lapel badges, logo badges for many objects such as cars, including
BMW models, and other applications, though in these the metal base is
normally cast with the compartments in place, so the use of the term
cloisonne', though common, is questionable. That technique is correctly
referred by goldsmiths, metalsmiths and enamellists as champlev.
A large collection of 150 Chinese cloisonn pieces is at the G.W. Vincent

Smith Art Museum in Springfield, Massachusetts.

Modern process[edit]
Adding cloisons according to the pattern previously transferred to the workpiece

Adding frit with dropper after sintering cloisons. Upon completion the piece will be fired,
then ground (repeating as necessary) then polished and electroplated

First the object to be decorated is made or obtained; this will normally be

made by different craftspeople. The metal usually used for making the
body is copper, since it is cheap, light and easily hammered and stretched,
but gold, silver or other metals may be used. Cloisonn wire is made from
fine silver or fine gold and is usually about .010 x .040 inches in cross
section. It is bent into shapes that define the colored areas. The bends are
all done at right angles, so that the wire does not curve up. This is done
with small pliers, tweezers, and custom-made jigs. The cloisonn wire
pattern may consist of several intricately constructed wire patterns that fit
together into a larger design. Solder can be used to join the wires, but this
causes the enamel to discolor and form bubbles later on. Most existing
Byzantine enamels have soldered cloisons, however the use of solder to
adhere the cloison wires has fallen out of favor due to its difficulty, with the
exception of some "purist contemporary enamellists" who create fine watch
faces and high quality very expensive jewelry. Instead of soldering the
cloisons to the base metal, the base metal is fired with a thin layer of clear
enamel. The cloisonn wire is glued to the enamel surface with gum
tragacanth. When the gum has dried, the piece is fired again to fuse the
cloisonn wire to the clear enamel. The gum burns off, leaving no residue.
Vitreous enamels in the different colors are ground to fine powders in an
agate or porcelain mortar and pestle, then washed to remove the impurities
that would discolor the fired enamel. Each color of enamel is prepared this
way before it is used and then mixed with a very dilute solution of gum
tragacanth. The vitreous compound consists of silica nitre and lead oxide

to which metallic oxide is added for coloring. Using fine spatulas, brushes
or droppers, the enameler places the fine colored powder into each
cloison. The piece is left to dry completely before firing, which is done by
putting the article, with its enamel fillings, in a kiln. The enamel in the
cloisons will sink down a lot after firing, due to melting and shrinkage of the
granular nature of the glass powder, much as sugar melting in an oven.
This process is repeated until all cloisons are filled to the top of the wire
edge.
Three styles of cloisonn are most often seen: concave, convex, and flat.
The finishing method determines this final appearance.[18] With concave
cloisonn the cloisons are not completely filled. Capillary action causes the
enamel surface to curve up against the cloisonn wire when the enamel is
molten, producing a concave appearance. Convex cloisson is produced
by overfilling each cloison, at the last firing. This gives each color area the
appearance of slightly rounded mounds. Flat cloisonn is the most
common. After all the cloisons are filled the enamel is ground down to a
smooth surface with lapidary equipment, using the same techniques as are
used for polishing cabochon stones. The top of the cloisonn wire is
polished so it is flush with the enamel and has a bright lustre. Some
cloisonn wire is electroplated with a thin film of gold, which will not tarnish
as silver does.

Examples[edit]
Enamel[edit]
%

The 8th-century Irish Ardagh Chalice

The Alfred Jewel, a 9th-century Anglo-Saxon ornament

The Holy Crown of Hungary with Byzantine plaques, mostly 11th

century.

The Imperial Crown of the Holy Roman Empire with Byzantine

plaques

The Khakhuli triptych, a large gold altarpiece with over 100 Georgian
and Byzantine plaques, dating from the 8th to 12th centuries, said to

be the largest enamelled work of art in the world.

%

the eyes of the 10th century Golden Madonna of Essen

The 12th century Mosan Stavelot Triptych, combining cloisonn and

champlev work.

Gems and glass[edit]

%

The Pectoral of Tutankhamun, (image), and several others.

The 5th century grave goods of Childeric I, last pagan king of the
Franks, died c. 481

The 5th-century Germanic Treasure of Pouan

The 6th-century Merovingian Treasure of Gourdon

Gallery[edit]
%
%

Pectoral of Senusret II, from his daughter's grave. Cloisonn inlays on gold
of carnelian, feldspar, garnet, turquoise, lapis lazuli.

Visigothic 6th-century eagle-fibula, from Spain with glass-paste inlay.

%
%

Qing Dynasty cloisonn dish

Chinese enameled and gilt candlestick from the 18th or 19th century, Qing
Dynasty

St George slaying the dragon, 15th century cloisonn enamel on gold.

(National Art Museum of Georgia).

Detail showing pattern and partially completed cloisons

%
%

Modern cloisonn enamel beads

Ando Cloisonn Company, (c. 1910). The Walters Art Museum.

Harley-Davidson "100th Anniversary" fuel tank cloisonn on a 2003 Dyna Low

Rider

Cloisonne

Garnet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Garnet (disambiguation).

Garnet
General
Category

Nesosilicate

Formula

The general formula X3Y2(SiO4)3

(repeating unit)

Identification
Color

virtually all colors

Crystal habit Rhombic dodecahedron or cubic

Crystal
system

Cubic rhombic dodecahedron,

icositetrahedron

Cleavage

Indistinct

Fracture

conchoidal to uneven

Mohs scale
hardness

6.57.5

Luster

vitreous to resinous

Streak

White

Specific
gravity

3.14.3

Polish luster vitreous to subadamantine[1]

Optical
properties

Single refractive, often

anomalous double refractive[1]

Refractive
index

1.721.94

Birefringenc None
e
Pleochroism None
Major varieties
Pyrope

Mg3Al2Si3O12

Almandine

Fe3Al2Si3O12

Spessartine Mn3Al2Si3O12
Andradite

Ca3Fe2Si3O12

Grossular

Ca3Al2Si3O12

Uvarovite

Ca3Cr2Si3O12

Garnets /rnt/ are a group of silicate minerals that have been used
since the Bronze Age as gemstones and abrasives.[note 1]
Garnets possess similar physical properties and crystal forms but different
chemical compositions. The different species are pyrope, almandine,
spessartine, grossular (varieties of which are hessonite or cinnamon-stone
and tsavorite), uvarovite and andradite. The garnets make up two solid
solution series: pyrope-almandine-spessarite and uvarovite-grossularandradite.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Physical properties
1

1.1 Properties

1.2 Crystal structure

1.3 Hardness

1.4 Magnetics used in garnet series identification

2 Garnet group endmember species

1

2.1 Pyralspite garnets aluminium in Y site

1

2.1.1 Almandine

2.1.2 Pyrope

2.1.3 Spessartine

2.2 Ugrandite group calcium in X site

1

2.2.1 Andradite

2.2.2 Grossular

2.2.3 Uvarovite

2.3 Less common species

1

2.3.1 Knorringite

3 Garnet structural group

4 Synthetic garnets

5 Geological importance of garnet

6 Uses of garnets

6.1 Gemstones

6.2 Industrial uses

7 See also

8 Notes

9 References

10 Further reading

11 External links

Physical properties[edit]
Properties[edit]
Garnet species are found in many colors including red, orange, yellow,
green, blue, purple, brown, black, pink and colorless. The rarest of these is
the blue garnet, discovered in the late 1990s in Bekily, Madagascar. It is
also found in parts of the United States, Russia, Kenya, Tanzania, and
Turkey. It changes color from blue-green in the daylight to purple in
incandescent light, as a result of the relatively high amounts of vanadium
(about 1 wt.% V2O3). Other varieties of color-changing garnets exist. In
daylight, their color ranges from shades of green, beige, brown, gray, and
blue, but in incandescent light, they appear a reddish or purplish/pink color.
Because of their color-changing quality, this kind of garnet is often
mistaken for Alexandrite.

A sample showing the deep red color garnet can exhibit.

Garnet species' light transmission properties can range from the

gemstone-quality transparent specimens to the opaque varieties used for
industrial purposes as abrasives. The mineral's luster is categorized as
vitreous (glass-like) or resinous (amber-like).

Crystal structure[edit]
Crystal structure model of garnet/

Garnets are nesosilicates having the general formula X3Y2(Si O4)3. The X

site is usually occupied by divalent cations (Ca2+, Mg2+, Fe2+) and the Y site
by trivalent cations (Al3+, Fe3+, Cr3+) in an octahedral/tetrahedral framework
with [SiO4]4 occupying the tetrahedra.[4] Garnets are most often found in
the dodecahedral crystal habit, but are also commonly found in the
trapezohedron habit. (Note: the word "trapezohedron" as used here and in
most mineral texts refers to the shape called a Deltoidal icositetrahedron in
solid geometry.) They crystallize in the cubic system, having three axes
that are all of equal length and perpendicular to each other. Garnets do not
show cleavage, so when they fracture under stress, sharp irregular pieces
are formed.

Hardness[edit]
Because the chemical composition of garnet varies, the atomic bonds in
some species are stronger than in others. As a result, this mineral group
shows a range of hardness on the Mohs scale of about 6.5 to 7.5. The
harder species like almandine are often used for abrasive purposes.

Magnetics used in garnet series identification[edit]

For gem identification purposes, a pick-up response to a strong
neodymium magnet separates garnet from all other natural transparent
gemstones commonly used in the jewelry trade. Magnetic susceptibility
measurements in conjunction with refractive index can be used to
distinguish garnet species and varieties, and determine the composition of
garnets in terms of percentages of end-member species within an
individual gem.[5] See http://gemstonemagnetism.com.

Garnet group endmember species[edit]

Pyralspite garnets aluminium in Y site[edit]
%

Almandine: Fe3Al2(SiO4)3

Pyrope: Mg3Al2(SiO4)3

Spessartine: Mn3Al2(SiO4)3

Almandine[edit]

Almandine in metamorphic rock

Almandine, sometimes incorrectly called almandite, is the modern gem

known as carbuncle (though originally almost any red gemstone was
known by this name). The term "carbuncle" is derived from the Latin
meaning "live coal" or burning charcoal. The name Almandine is a
corruption of Alabanda, a region in Asia Minor where these stones were cut
in ancient times. Chemically, almandine is an iron-aluminium garnet with
the formula Fe3Al2(SiO4)3; the deep red transparent stones are often called
precious garnet and are used as gemstones (being the most common of
the gem garnets). Almandine occurs in metamorphic rocks like mica
schists, associated with minerals such as staurolite, kyanite, andalusite,
and others. Almandine has nicknames of Oriental garnet, almandine ruby,
and carbuncle.

Pyrope[edit]
Pyrope (from the Greek pyrps meaning "fire-eyed") is red in color and
chemically a magnesium aluminium silicate with the formula Mg3Al2(SiO4)3,
though the magnesium can be replaced in part by calcium and ferrous iron.
The color of pyrope varies from deep red to black. Pyrope and spessartine
gemstones have been recovered from the Sloan diamondiferous
kimberlites in Colorado, from the Bishop Conglomerate and in a Tertiary
age lamprophyre at Cedar Mountain in Wyoming.[6]
A variety of pyrope from Macon County, North Carolina is a violet-red
shade and has been called rhodolite, Greek for "rose". In chemical
composition it may be considered as essentially an isomorphous mixture of
pyrope and almandine, in the proportion of two parts pyrope to one part
almandine. Pyrope has tradenames some of which are misnomers; Cape
ruby, Arizona ruby, California ruby, Rocky Mountain ruby, and Bohemian
garnet from the Czech Republic. Another intriguing find is the blue colorchanging garnets from Madagascar, a pyrope-spessartine mix. The color of
these blue garnets is not like sapphire blue in subdued daylight but more
reminiscent of the grayish blues and greenish blues sometimes seen in
spinel. However, in white LED light, the color is equal to the best cornflower

blue sapphire, or D block tanzanite; this is due to the blue garnet's ability to
absorb the yellow component of the emitted light.[citation needed]
Pyrope is an indicator mineral for high-pressure rocks. The garnets from
mantle-derived rocks, peridotites, and eclogites commonly contain a
pyrope variety.

Spessartine[edit]
Spessartine (the reddish mineral)

Spessartine or spessartite is manganese aluminium garnet, Mn3Al2(SiO4)3.

Its name is derived from Spessart in Bavaria. It occurs most often in
granite pegmatite and allied rock types and in certain low grade
metamorphic phyllites. Spessartine of an orange-yellow is found in
Madagascar. Violet-red spessartines are found in rhyolites in Colorado and
Maine.

Ugrandite group calcium in X site[edit]

%

Andradite: Ca3Fe2(SiO4)3

Grossular: Ca3Al2(SiO4)3

Uvarovite: Ca3Cr2(SiO4)3

Andradite[edit]
Andradite is a calcium-iron garnet, Ca3Fe2(SiO4)3, is of variable composition
and may be red, yellow, brown, green or black. The recognized varieties
are topazolite (yellow or green), demantoid (green) and melanite (black).
Andradite is found both in deep-seated igneous rocks like syenite as well
as serpentines, schists, and crystalline limestone. Demantoid has been
called the "emerald of the Urals" from its occurrence there, and is one of
the most prized of garnet varieties. Topazolite is a golden-yellow variety
and melanite is a black variety.

Grossular[edit]
Grossular on display at the U.S. National Museum of Natural History. The green gem at

right is a type of grossular known as tsavorite.

Grossular is a calcium-aluminium garnet with the formula Ca3Al2(SiO4)3,

though the calcium may in part be replaced by ferrous iron and the
aluminium by ferric iron. The name grossular is derived from the botanical
name for the gooseberry, grossularia, in reference to the green garnet of
this composition that is found in Siberia. Other shades include cinnamon
brown (cinnamon stone variety), red, and yellow. Because of its inferior
hardness to zircon, which the yellow crystals resemble, they have also
been called hessonite from the Greek meaning inferior. Grossular is found
in contact metamorphosed limestones with vesuvianite, diopside,
wollastonite and wernerite.
Grossular garnet from Kenya and Tanzania has been called tsavorite.
Tsavorite was first described in the 1960s in the Tsavo area of Kenya, from
which the gem takes its name.[7]

Uvarovite[edit]
Uvarovite is a calcium chromium garnet with the formula Ca3Cr2(SiO4)3. This
is a rather rare garnet, bright green in color, usually found as small crystals
associated with chromite in peridotite, serpentinite, and kimberlites. It is
found in crystalline marbles and schists in the Ural mountains of Russia
and Outokumpu, Finland.

Less common species[edit]

%

Calcium in X site
1 Goldmanite: Ca3V2(SiO4)3
2 Kimzeyite: Ca3(Zr,Ti)2[(Si,Al,Fe3+)O4]3
3 Morimotoite: Ca3Ti4+Fe2+(SiO4)3
4 Schorlomite: Ca3(Ti4+,Fe3+)2[(Si,Ti)O4]3

Hydroxide bearing calcium in X site

1 Hydrogrossular: Ca3Al2(SiO4)3-x(OH)4x
1 Hibschite: Ca3Al2(SiO4)3-x(OH)4x (where x is between 0.2
and 1.5)
2 Katoite: Ca3Al2(SiO4)3-x(OH)4x (where x is greater than
1.5)

Magnesium or manganese in X site

1 Knorringite: Mg3Cr2(SiO4)3
2 Majorite: Mg3(Fe2+Si)(SiO4)3
3 Calderite: Mn3Fe3+2(SiO4)3

Knorringite[edit]
Knorringite is a magnesium-chromium garnet species with the formula
Mg3Cr2(SiO4)3. Pure endmember knorringite never occurs in nature. Pyrope
rich in the knorringite component is only formed under high pressure and is
often found in kimberlites. It is used as an indicator mineral in the search
for diamonds.

Garnet structural group[edit]

%

Formula: X3Z2(TO4)3 (X = Ca, Fe, etc., Z = Al, Cr, etc., T = Si, As, V,
Fe, Al)
1 All are cubic or strongly pseudocubic.

IMA/CNMNC
NickelStrunz
Mineral name
Mineral
class

Formula

Crystal
system

Point
group

Space
group

04 Oxide

Bitikleite(SnAl)

Ca3SnSb(AlO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

04 Oxide

Bitikleite(SnFe)

Ca3(SnSb5+)(Fe3+O)3 isometric

m3m

Ia3d

04 Oxide

Bitikleite(ZrFe)

Ca3SbZr(Fe3+O4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

04 Tellurate

Yafsoanite

Ca3Zn3(Te6+O6)2

isometric

m3m
or 432

Ia3d
or I4132

08 Arsenate Berzeliite

NaCa2Mg2(AsO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

08 Vanadate Palenzonaite

NaCa2Mn2+2(VO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

08 Vanadate Schferite
%

NaCa2Mg2(VO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

IMA/CNMNC Nickel-Strunz Mineral subclass: 09.A Nesosilicate

%

Nickel-Strunz classification: 09.AD.25

Mineral
name

Formula

Crystal
system

Point
group

Space
group

Almandine

Fe2+3Al2(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Andradite

Ca3Fe3+2(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Calderite

Mn+23Fe+32(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Goldmanite

Ca3V3+2(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Grossular

Ca3Al2(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Henritermierit
Ca3Mn3+2(SiO4)2(OH)4
e

tetragonal

4/mmm

I41/acd

Hibschite

Ca3Al2(SiO4)(3-x)(OH)4x (x= 0.21.5)

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Katoite

Ca3Al2(SiO4)(3-x)(OH)4x (x= 1.5-3)

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Kerimasite

Ca3Zr2(Fe+3O4)2(SiO4)

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Kimzeyite

Ca3Zr2(Al+3O4)2(SiO4)

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Knorringite

Mg3Cr2(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Majorite

Mg3(Fe2+Si)(SiO4)3

tetragonal

4/m
or 4/mmm

I41/a
or I41/acd

Menzerite(Y)

Y2CaMg2(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Momoiite

Mn2+3V3+2(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Morimotoite

Ca3(Fe2+Ti4+)(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Pyrope

Mg3Al2(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Schorlomite

Ca3Ti4+2(Fe3+O4)2(SiO4)

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Spessartine

Mn2+3Al2(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Toturite

Ca3Sn2(Fe3+O4)2(SiO4)

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

Uvarovite

Ca3Cr2(SiO4)3

isometric

m3m

Ia3d

References: Mindat.org; mineral name, chemical formula and space

group (American Mineralogist Crystal Structure Database) of the
IMA Database of Mineral Properties/ RRUFF Project, Univ. of
Arizona, was preferred most of the time. Minor components in
formulae have been left out to highlight the dominant chemical
endmember that defines each species.

Synthetic garnets[edit]
The crystallographic structure of garnets has been expanded from the
prototype to include chemicals with the general formula A3B2(C O4)3.
Besides silicon, a large number of elements have been put on the C site,
including Ge, Ga, Al, V and Fe.[8]
Yttrium aluminium garnet (YAG), Y3Al2(AlO4)3, is used for synthetic
gemstones. Due to its fairly high refractive index, YAG was used as a
diamond simulant in the 1970s until the methods of producing the more
advanced simulant cubic zirconia in commercial quantities were developed.
When doped with neodymium (Nd3+), these YAl-garnets may be used as
the lasing medium in lasers.
Interesting magnetic properties arise when the appropriate elements are
used. In yttrium iron garnet (YIG), Y3Fe2(FeO4)3, the five iron(III) ions
occupy two octahedral and three tetrahedral sites, with the yttrium(III) ions
coordinated by eight oxygen ions in an irregular cube. The iron ions in the
two coordination sites exhibit different spins, resulting in magnetic
behaviour. YIG is a ferrimagnetic material having a Curie temperature of
550 K.
Another example is gadolinium gallium garnet, Gd3Ga2(GaO4)3 which is
synthesized for use as a substrate for liquid-phase epitaxy of magnetic
garnet films for bubble memory and magneto-optical applications.

Geological importance of garnet[edit]

This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this s
sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2012)

Garnet var. Spessartine, Putian City, Putian Prefecture, Fujian Province, China

The Garnet group is a key mineral in interpreting the genesis of many

igneous and metamorphic rocks via geothermobarometry. Diffusion of
elements is relatively slow in garnet compared to rates in many other
minerals, and garnets are also relatively resistant to alteration. Hence,
individual garnets commonly preserve compositional zonations that are
used to interpret the temperature-time histories of the rocks in which they
grew. Garnet grains that lack compositional zonation commonly are
interpreted as having been homogenized by diffusion, and the inferred
homogenization also has implications for the temperature-time history of
the host rock.
Garnets are also useful in defining metamorphic facies of rocks. For
instance, eclogite can be defined as a rock of basalt composition, but
mainly consisting of garnet and omphacite. Pyrope-rich garnet is restricted
to relatively high-pressure metamorphic rocks, such as those in the lower
crust and in the Earth's mantle. Peridotite may contain plagioclase, or
aluminium-rich spinel, or pyrope-rich garnet, and the presence of each of
the three minerals defines a pressure-temperature range in which the
mineral could equilibrate with olivine plus pyroxene: the three are listed in
order of increasing pressure for stability of the peridotite mineral
assemblage[vague]. Hence, garnet peridotite must have been formed at
great depth in the earth. Xenoliths of garnet peridotite have been carried up
from depths of 100 km and greater by kimberlite, and garnets from such
disaggegated xenoliths are used as a kimberlite indicator minerals in
diamond prospecting. At depths of about 300 to 400 km and greater, a
pyroxene component is dissolved in garnet, by the substitution of (Mg,Fe)
plus Si for 2Al in the octahedral (Y) site in the garnet structure, creating
unusually silica-rich garnets that have solid solution towards majorite. Such
silica-rich garnets have been identified as inclusions within diamonds.

Uses of garnets[edit]
c. 8th century AD, Anglo-Saxon sword hilt fitting gold with gemstone inlay of garnet
cloisonn. From the Staffordshire Hoard, found in 2009, and not fully cleaned.

Pendant in uvarovite, a rare bright-green garnet.

Gemstones[edit]

Red garnets were the most commonly used gemstones in the Late Antique
Roman world, and the Migration Period art of the "barbarian" peoples who
took over the territory of the Western Roman Empire. They were especially
used inlaid in gold cells in the cloisonn technique, a style often just called
garnet cloisonn, found from Anglo-Saxon England, as at Sutton Hoo, to
the Black Sea.
Pure crystals of garnet are still used as gemstones. The gemstone
varieties occur in shades of green, red, yellow, and orange.[9] In the USA it
is known as the birthstone for January.[1] It is the state mineral of
Connecticut,[10] New York's gemstone,[11] and star garnet (garnet with
rutile asterisms) is the state gemstone of Idaho.[12]

Industrial uses[edit]
Garnet sand is a good abrasive, and a common replacement for silica sand
in sand blasting. Alluvial garnet grains which are rounder are more suitable
for such blasting treatments. Mixed with very high pressure water, garnet is
used to cut steel and other materials in water jets. For water jet cutting,
garnet extracted from hard rock is suitable since it is more angular in form,
therefore more efficient in cutting.
Garnet paper is favored by cabinetmakers for finishing bare wood.[13]
Garnet sand is also used for water filtration media.
As an abrasive garnet can be broadly divided in two categories; blasting
grade and water jet grade. The garnet, as it is mined and collected, is

crushed to finer grains; all pieces which are larger than 60 mesh
(250 micrometers) are normally used for sand blasting. The pieces
between 60 mesh (250 micrometers) and 200 mesh (74 micrometers) are
normally used for water jet cutting. The remaining garnet pieces that are
finer than 200 mesh (74 micrometers) are used for glass polishing and
lapping. Regardless of the application, the larger grain sizes are used for
faster work and the smaller ones are used for finer finishes.
There are different kinds of abrasive garnets which can be divided based
on their origin. The largest source of abrasive garnet today is garnet-rich
beach sand which is quite abundant on Indian and Australian coasts and
the main producers today are Australia and India.[14]
This material is particularly popular due to its consistent supplies, huge
quantities and clean material. The common problems with this material are
the presence of ilmenite and chloride compounds. Since the material has
been naturally crushed and ground on the beaches for past centuries, the
material is normally available in fine sizes only. Most of the garnet at the
Tuticorin beach in south India is 80 mesh, and ranges from 56 mesh to
100 mesh size.[citation needed]
River garnet is particularly abundant in Australia. The river sand garnet
occurs as a placer deposit.[citation needed]
Rock garnet is perhaps the garnet type used for the longest period of time.
This type of garnet is produced in America, China and western India.
These crystals are crushed in mills and then purified by wind blowing,
magnetic separation, sieving and, if required, washing. Being freshly
crushed, this garnet has the sharpest edges and therefore performs far
better than other kinds of garnet. Both the river and the beach garnet suffer
from the tumbling effect of hundreds of thousands of years which rounds
off the edges.
Garnet has been mined in western Rajasthan in northwestern India for the
past 200 years, but mainly for the gemstone grade stones. Abrasive garnet
was mainly mined as a secondary product while mining for gem garnets
and was used as lapping and polishing media for the glass industries. The

host rock of the garnet here is garnetiferous mica schist and the total
percentage of garnet is not more than 7% to 10%,[citation needed] which
makes the material extremely costly and non-economical to extract for nongemstone applications.

See also[edit]
%

Tsavorite

Geology

Mineral collecting

Mineral

Gemstone

Abrasive blasting

Garnet
'artists are brave; it is their bravery that stuns us'

make believe is MAKING BELIEVING, is CREATING EXPANDED KNOWING

gray, peter - free to learn - how school should be
free to learn peter gray

Freedom to Learn
The roles of play and curiosity as foundations for learning.
by Peter Gray

Beyond Attachment to Parents: Children

Need Community
For good biological reasons, children want & need to move beyond their

parents.
Published on July 20, 2013 by Peter Gray in Freedom to Learn

Im all for natural parenting. The basic premise of such parenting, at

least as I view it, is that you trust your childrens instincts and
judgments. For example, you recognize that a baby who is crying is a
baby who needs something, and you try to figure out what that need
is and satisfy it. You dont let a baby cry it out. You recognize that
throughout our evolutionary history babies and young children always
slept with their mothers or other adults or older siblings, never alone,
and that sleeping alone is terrifying for many young children (see post
here). You recognize that babies and children, like all of us really,
crave physical contact, and you provide it. You dont push it when its
not wanted, but you provide it and welcome it when it is wanted.
Related Articles
%

Raising Baby: What You Need to Know

Our young people need parents, not drill instructors

Thousands Need Teens to lead Them Back to School

Six things you need to do for your baby

Dealing With Rejection (Re-Evaluating The Priority of Needs)

Find a Therapist
Search for a mental health professional near you.

Find Local:
%

Acupuncturists

Chiropractors

Massage Therapists

Dentists

and more!

The key concept here is sensitivity. To understand what a child wants

and needs, and especially to understand what a non-verbal baby
wants and needs, you have to be in tune with that person. You have
to be able to see the world from the childs point of view. That
requires empathy. This isnt really any different from the
requirements for any other close relationship. To have a good
marriage, you must be able to empathize with your spouse. To be a
good friend, you must be able to empathize with your friend. Your
spouse, your friend, and your child are not you; they have different
needs and wishes than you do, but to have a good relationship with
them you must be sensitive to their needs and wishes.
Natural parenting is often equated with attachment parenting, and
that is fine as long as we are careful about what we mean by
attachment. Children are not designed, by nature, to attach just to
the mother, or just to the mother and father. They are, for good
biological reasons, designed to form multiple attachments, to many of
the people in a community. It is important to recognize here that the
private nuclear family, living in a house apart from others in the
community, is, from an evolutionary perspective, an unnatural
environment.
Throughout most of human history, prior to the development of
agriculture, people lived not in houses but in what are best described
as camps. The basic social unit was the band, which consisted
typically of about 20 to 50 people who cooperated with one another
and who moved from campsite to campsite as needed to follow the
available game and edible vegetation. At each campsite they built

small, temporary huts to sleep in, all clustered together. Except when
they were asleep, people spent their time outdoors with all of the
other band members. Marriages existed, and children had special
relationships with their parents, but parents did not own their
children in the way that people in our culture think of parents as
owning their children. In many ways, the children were children of the
entire band. Everyone took part in every childs care. Everyone
developed some kind of relationship with every child; and children,
even babies, were active partners in forming those relationships.
From an evolutionary perspective, it makes perfect sense that
children would want to form close relationships with many different
people, not just their parents. For starters, during most of human
history, parents often died before their children were grown. Losing a
parent is always a very sad event; but it is not a fatal event for a child
who has close relationships with others who are already involved in
the child's care. Perhaps even more important, the goal of childhood,
in our culture as well as in hunter-gatherer cultures, is to become an
independent being who can form relationships with lots of different
peoplerelationships that are essential for survival and
reproduction. You dont learn to do that by paying attention just to
your mother and father. You learn it by paying attention to lots of
different people, who have different personalities and needs and
different things to offer. Another goal of childhood is to educate
yourself, that is, to acquire the ideas, lore, knowledge, skills, and
values of the culture in which you are growing. If you were to try to
do this by attending just to your parents, you would learn only a
narrow slice of all that is out there and you would not prepare yourself
well for the world.
A too-exclusive attachment of child and parent is not only unfair to the
child but can also be burdensome to the mother (it usually is the
mother, not the father). There is nothing natural about the idea that a

woman should stop other activities and devote herself exclusively to

children and domestic chores when she becomes a mother. Huntergatherer mothers continue their foraging activities, and continue to
socialize fully with the other adults of the band and with neighboring
bands. Motherhood does not isolate them; if anything, it ties them
even more closely to everyone in the band, as they all enjoy
relationships with the child.
I recently had the pleasure of reviewing a chapter written by my
Boston College colleague Gilda Morelli and her research colleagues
Paula Ivey Henry and Steffen Foster. The chapter is based on a new
analysis of data that they had collected some years ago during
months of research among the Efe, who are hunter-gatherers living in
the Ituri Forest in the Congo Basin in Africa.[1] Their research
focused on the social relationships of infants and toddlers in the
bands that they observed. Here are a few of the findings:
When an Efe baby is born, the first to hold it are the women and
children who are in the mothers hut assisting with the birth and
providing emotional support to the mother. Then the baby is passed
outside the hut and held by all of the other band members who have
crowded around to greet this new arrival. The mother is the last to
hold her baby.
Efe babies are nursed not just by their mothers but also by other
lactating women in the band, most of whom are not genetic relatives
of the mother.
Timed, systematic observations, revealed that 4- to 6-month-old Efe
infants are in close physical and/or social contact with an average of
9 different partners every two hours, and 18- to 21-month-olds are in
contact with an average of 14 different partners every two hours!
These partners include men as well as women and children as well

as adults. On average, the researchers found, infants are in contact

with a single person for only 3 minutes before moving on to another
person, throughout the day.
As infants grow older they play increasingly active roles in initiating
contacts with others, by reaching toward them, smiling, laughing, and
in other ways inviting the interaction. Once they can toddle, they
move on their own from person to person and begin to join other
children in age-mixed play groups.
Efe infants and toddlers of all ages are remarkably cheerful and
non-fussy, perhaps because of all the attention they receive from so
many different people. The researchers reported them to be in good
moodssmiling, laughing, bright-eyed, and attentiveon average
about 90% of the time that they were awake.
Not all hunter-gatherers engage in communal nursing of infants, as
the Efe do, but all such cultures are apparently far more communal
than we are in their care of children. Child abuse is nearly impossible
in hunter-gatherer bands. If a mother or father gets irritable and acts
harshly toward a child, others in the band will immediately step in and
calm the parent while also gently taking the child. Because childcare
is public, every person, including young children, can witness all of
the childcare in the band. Nobody becomes a parent without having
had lots of experience holding and caring for others children and
witnessing many others doing so. No adult is left alone to care for a
child unassisted.
How different this all is from our society!
-----What can we do, in the context of our social world today, to provide
the kind of caring community that children need for healthy

development and that parents also need? Thats an honest question;

I dont know the answer. Im really interested in your opinion. What
have you done to provide a community for your child and yourself,
and how well has it worked out? This blog is a forum for discussion,
and your stories, thoughts, and questions are valued and treated with
respect by me and other readers. As always, I prefer if you post your
comments and questions here rather than send them to me by private
email. By putting them here, you share with other readers, not just
with me. I read all comments and try to respond to all serious
questions, if I feel I have something useful to say. Of course, if you
have something to say that truly applies only to you and me, then
send me an email.
-----[For the authors recent book documenting the effectiveness of selfdirected learning and the value of play, and the conditions in which
children learn best, see Free to Learn.]
------Note
[1] Morelli, G., Ivey Henry, P., & Foerster, S. Relationships and
Resource Uncertainty: Cooperative Development of Efe HunterGatherer Infants and Toddlers." In D. Narvaez, K. Valentino, A.
Fuentes, J. McKenna, & P. Gray (Eds.), Ancestral Landscapes in
Human Evolution. New York: Oxford University Press. To be
publshed in 2014.

Education Revolution: Help Us Reach the

Tipping Point
You can help build a directory of resources for self-directed learners.

Published on June 21, 2013 by Peter Gray in Freedom to Learn

The time for revolution is here. It will be a peaceful one, conducted

by people brave enough to walk away from our coercive schools,
smart enough to resist the propaganda saying that such schooling is
essential to success in our culture, and independent enough to thumb
their noses at the education-industrial complex that pushes coercive
schooling and makes it ever more burdensome.
Our schools fail because they are based on the false premise that
education is something that is done to young people by professionals,
not something that young people do for themselves. Over the past
few decades, the education-industrial complex has attempted to
remedy the obvious failures of coercive schooling by adding ever
more coercion, to the point where many children are literally being
driven crazy (for more on that, see here and here). It is time to stop
this madness. It is time to stop accepting diagnoses of mental
disorders for those of our children who cant or wont sit still through
tedious, irrelevant, timewasting, anxiety-producing, depressioninducing assignments and tests. It is time to stop praising children
who are willing to sit through all this, because all we foster with such
praise is conformity, passivity, mindless obedience, and false pride
for meaningless accomplishments. Its time to just say no.
Related Articles
%

What About America's Secular Heritage?

What Makes Life Worth Living? Michigan Theme Semester Update

Why I Love the SAT

The Perils of Swiss Timing

U.S. students lag badly behind Chinese; KY Governor funds creationist

park

Find a Therapist
Search for a mental health professional near you.

Find Local:
%

Acupuncturists

Chiropractors

Massage Therapists

Dentists

and more!

More and more people are saying no. More and more students, with
their parents support, are walking away from coercive schools and
choosing self-directed education at home and in the community, or at
democratic schools where students are in charge of their own lives.
The revolution has begun and is accelerating. It will continue to
accelerate, not by confronting the education-industrial complex and
trying to change it, but by empowering people to walk away from it so
it will become increasingly irrelevant.
Every year in recent times the percentage who opt out of coercive
schools has increased. At some point, before long, we will reach a
tipping point. We will reach the point at which everyone knows
several families who have left coercive schooling and chosen a path
of educational self-determination, so it will no longer seem like an odd
thing to do. When that happens, the floodgates will open. Schools
as we know them today will eventually empty out. When people see
that freedom works, that coercion isnt necessary, most people
choose freedom. The families who opt for freedom will become a
voting block that will stop approving funds for coercive schools and

start diverting those funds toward public educational opportunities

and resources--such as learning centers and democratic schools-that people can use or not use in their own chosen ways (more on
this here). All people, regardless of socioeconomic status, deserve
the right to control their own education. The right to selfdetermination in education should be one of our fundamental human,
democratic rights, and it will be.
The Tipping Point Project
I am part of a group who are committed to doing what we can to
hasten societys movement toward the tipping point, so the education
revolution will happen sooner rather than later. We have been
referring to our group informally as the Tipping Point Project. Our
primary means of facilitating social change is to help empower people
to leave coercive schooling. There are many, many families who
would gladly remove their children right now from coercive schools if
they knew it was possible and that doing so would make everyone in
the family happier and make their childrens futures brighter, not
dimmer.
As part of our Project we are developing a website that we hope will
become a central, easy-to-find, easy-to-use resource for families who
are unhappy with coercive schooling and are looking for a way out.
Our focus is on promoting self-directed education. Children come
into the world beautifully designed, by natural selection, to educate
themselves (for the whole story on this, see here), but they cant do
that when they are shut away in coercive schools, deprived of the
freedom and opportunities they need to play, explore, pursue their
own questions, find their passions, and develop true expertise in the
pursuits that interest them. The website will present the evidence
that self-directed education works for young people of all ages, and it
will provide a directory of resources to assist people who take that

route.
How You Can Help
I will tell you more about the Tipping Point Project, and name some of
the others who are most involved, in a future post, but right now my
purpose is to recruit your help in gathering information for the
website. Specifically:
1. Tell us about any democratic schools that you know of, for our
directory.
One section of the website will include a directory of democratic
schools, organized by region. Here is our working definition of a
democratic school:
A DEMOCRATIC SCHOOL is a school where students are trusted to
take responsibility for their own lives and learning and for the school
community. At such a school students choose their own activities.
They choose what, when, how, and with whom to learn. If courses are
offered, students are always free to take them or not. The adult staff
members at a democratic school are there to help, not direct. The
staff members teach, in the broad sense of the term, but so do
students. The staff members at a democratic school are usually not
called teachers, because there is recognition that students
commonly learn more from one anotheras they play, explore,
socialize, and work together in age-mixed groupsthan they do from
the adults. Democratic schools are administrated democratically,
usually through a school meeting at which each student and staff
member has one vote. The school meeting typically legislates all
rules of behavior at the school and works out procedures for
enforcing the rules, often involving a jury whose members change
regularly from week to week or month to month. In short, a

democratic school is a setting for self-directed education in which

students have the advantage of an age-mixed community of friends
and colleagues with whom and from whom to learn.
We know that this is a narrower definition than some others use for
democratic schools. Our focus is on finding schools where students
are truly in charge of their own learning and have a real voice in
governing the school. If you are associated with such a school or
know one well, please describe it briefly in the comments section to
this blog post and provide a link to the schools website. If you know
someone who is involved with such a school, please use the email
function, below, to link them to this post so he or she can respond.
We want to include all the democratic schools that are out there.
If you are not certain that your school fully meets our definition of
democratic, but believe it comes close--for example, the students
have control over their educational choices but responsibility for the
management of day-to-day operations lies with an adult staff, not with
the school community as a whole--describe it to us anyway, including
the ways that it may not fully meet the criteria. We realize there are
degrees of democracy and that our cutoff point will be somewhat
arbitrary. But, for this list, we are not seeking Montessori schools, or
Waldorf schools, or other schools in the progressive education
tradition where there is some student choice but still a top-down
curriculum and system of evaluation to accord with that curriculum.
Also, we are most interested in schools that accommodate students
all the way through high school age, not just younger children.
2. Tell us about learning centers, family cooperatives, and other
community resources designed to support self-directed learners.
In another section of the website we will have a directory of
community resources that are designed to help support self-

directed education. One category of such resources are often

referred to as resource centers. These differ from schools in that they
typically do not involve full-time attendance, nor do the students
usually have equal participation in day-to-day operations. Resource
centers are most often designed to help young people who are
officially registered as homeschoolers. Such centers provide
opportunities for self-directed learners to get to know one another and
learn from one another. They may also provide tools and equipment
for various sorts of activities, courses for those who choose them,
and adult guidance or mentoring for those who seek it.
If you are involved with such a resource or know about one, please
let us know about it. Describe it briefly in the comments section to
this blog post, and link to its website if there is one.
3. Share any insights you may have about what our website should
include.
In your view, what is the most useful kind of information that we can
provide, on our website, that will help empower people to take the
leap from coercive to self-directed education? If you have taken that
leap, what helped you to take it? We dont want to miss anything,
and we will be sure to take your thoughts on this into account.
---Finally, please post whatever information and thoughts you have in
any of these three categories here, in the comments section to the
blog, rather than send them to me by private email. I automatically
receive an email, anyway, every time a comment is posted, and I
read all comments. My colleagues in the Tipping Point Project will
read them too. And, by posting them here, you are sharing with all
other readers, some of whom may expand on your posting. By
posting here you are also helping to create, right here, a resource

that others may find valuable, even before the Tipping Point website
goes up.

Be Glad for Our Failure to Catch Up with

China in Education
Our schools are better than Chinas because ours dont work as well as
theirs.
Published on May 28, 2013 by Peter Gray in Freedom to Learn

For more than 20 years weve had national educational goals aimed
at emulating the Chinese (and Japanese and Korean) educational
system. Weve been working toward more centralization of control,
more standardization of curricula and methods, and more student
time in the classroom and at homework, all in an effort to produce
higher scores on standardized tests. This was embodied in Clintons
Goals 2000 in the 1990s, Bushs No Child Left Behind in the next
decade, and now Obamas Race to the Top. Were embarrassed
every time international tests show our schoolchildren scoring low
compared to those in other countries. When Shanghais 15-year-olds
topped the charts in reading, math, and science on the 2010 PISA
(Program for International Student Assessment) exam and we were
far behind, our educational leaders once again affirmed the
commitment to emulate the Chinese. Education Secretary Arne
Duncan called it a wakeup call.[1, p 120]
Related Articles
%

Learning How to Learn

Are College Final Exams Disappearing?

Is America "on the Wrong Side of History"?

The Real Slumdog Millionaire

This Is A Test---And Only A Test

Find a Therapist
Search for a mental health professional near you.

Find Local:
%

Acupuncturists

Chiropractors

Massage Therapists

Dentists

and more!

You might think the Chinese educational leaders would be happy that
their kids are scoring so high on these international competitions. But
theyre not. More and more they realize that their system is failing
terribly. At the same time that we are continuing to try to be more like
them, they are tryingthough without much success so farto be
more like us, or like we were before we began trying so hard to be
like them. They see that their system is quashing creativity and
initiative, with the result that it produces decent bureaucrats and
number crunchers, but very few inventors and entrepreneurs. In
response to the same PISA report that led Duncan to his wakeup
call, Jiang Xuaqin, director of the International Division of Peking
University High School, wrote this in the Wall Street Journal: The
failings of a rote-memorization system are well-known: Lack of social
and practical skills, absence of self-discipline and imagination, loss of
curiosity and passion for learning. One way we will know when
were succeeding in changing our schools is when those PISA scores
come down. (Italics added) [2]

Lets look a little closer at the Chinese educational system.

According to a study conducted by the Hangzhou Education Science
Publishing House, Chinese students spend nearly 10 hours per day
studying in the primary grades, 11 hours per day in middle school,
and 12.5 hours per day in high school.[3] Kieth Bradsher reported
recently on the life of a typical Chinese high school student: She
woke up at 5:30 every morning to study, had breakfast at 7:30, then
attended classes from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30; 1:30-5:30 in the afternoon;
and 7:30-10:30 in the evening. She studied part of the day on
Saturdays and Sundays.[4] David Jiang, an American born Chinese
who went to China for his high-school years, wrote in his blog: What
I saw around me [in high school] was a mass of zombies. It is here
that I realized how shallow grades were.[5]
Chinese students do all this study for one and only one reasonto
get a high score on the gaokao, the national examination that is the
sole criterion for admitting students to college. Every parent, every
teacher, is in competition with other parents and teachers to wring the
highest scores they possibly can out of their children. Many parents
punish their children physically for failure in school, and any
performance not at or near the top is considered failure.
A recent large-scale survey of children in Chinese primary schools,
conducted by Chinese and British researchers, revealed massive
psychological suffering. The authors summarized the results as
follows: Eighty-one per cent worry 'a lot' about exams, 63% are
afraid of the punishment of teachers, 44% had been physically bullied
at least sometimes, with boys more often victims of bullying, and 73%
of children are physically punished by parents. Over one-third of
children reported psychosomatic symptoms at least once per week,
37% headache and 36% abdominal pain. All individual stressors were
highly significantly associated with psychosomatic symptoms.

Children identified as highly stressed (in the highest quartile of the

stress score) were four times as likely to have psychosomatic
symptoms. [6]
The highest scorers on the gaokao each year are celebrated in the
Chinese press; they and their parents become temporarily famous.
But follow-up studies reveal that test scores dont predict future
success. The high scorers do not achieve beyond their lower-scoring
peers once they leave school; in fact, the results of one study
suggested that the highest scorers achieved less, on average, than
those who scored lower.[7, p 82] Indeed, according to Yong Zhao, an
expert on Chinese education, a common term used in China now to
refer to the general results of their educational system is gaofen
dineng, which means, literally, high scores but low ability. Because
students spend nearly all of their time studying, they have little
chance to do anything else. They have little opportunity to be
creative, take initiative, or develop physical and social skills.
Yong Zhao grew up in China, so he experienced the Chinese
educational system first hand. He is now a professor of education at
the University of Oregon, has two children in American schools, and
has focused much of his research on the similarities and differences
between Chinese and American schooling and their economic
consequences. In two recent books-- Catching up or Leading the
Way (2009) and World Class Learners (2012)he describes the
harm of Chinas educational system and documents their interest in
reforming it.
In addressing the question of why the US system has produced better
real-world results than the Chinese system, Zhao writes, The short
answer is that American education has not been as good as the
Chinese at killing creativity and the entrepreneurial spirit. In the most
fundamental ways, American education operates under the same

paradigm as the Chinese. In a nutshell, both American education

and Chinese education are designed to turn a group of children into
products with similar specifications indicated by how much they have
mastered the curriculum, that is, what the adult decides they should
know and be able to do, regardless of their backgrounds, interests,
and differences. [1, p 134-135]
Zhao goes on to explain that the advantage of the American system
is that it fails to do very well what it wants to do; it fails to bring
American kids into line. His analogy is that the American system is
like a sausage machine that isnt very good at making sausages, so
sometimes it spits out things quite unlike sausages.
Leaders in China want to emulate the American educational system,
and leaders in America want to emulate the Chinese system. Maybe
in a few years, if the leaders get their way, the Chinese will be doing
all the inventing and well be keeping our pediatricians and child
psychiatrists even busier than they already are with stress-induced
childhood illnesses.
I say, lets do away entirely with our system of top-down, forced
education. Lets scrap the sausage machine and, instead, provide
the conditions that will allow all children to educate themselves freely,
in their own chosen ways, without having to fight the school system to
do it. For more on that, see Free to Learn.

The Most Basic Freedom Is Freedom to

Quit
Schools will become moral institutions only when children are free to quit.
Published on April 29, 2013 by Peter Gray in Freedom to Learn

We like to think of human rights in affirmative terms, so we speak

most often of our rights to move toward what we want: our rights to
vote, assemble freely, speak freely, and choose our own paths to
happiness. My contention here, however, is that the most basic right
the right that makes all other rights possibleis the right to quit.
Quitting often has negative connotations in our minds. We grow up
hearing things like, Quitters never win, winners never quit. Were
supposed to stick things out, no matter how tough the going. I rather
like this variation, which I heard somewhere: Quitters never win,
winners never quit, but those who never win and never quit are
idiots.
If we move our minds out of the quagmire of competition (indeed, we
cant win tennis matches by quitting) and think of lifes broader goals
the goals of surviving, avoiding injury, finding happiness, and living
in accordance with our personal values among people whom we
respect and who respect usthen we see that freedom to quit is
essential to all of these goals. I am talking here about the freedom to
walk away from people and situations that are harmful to our
wellbeing.
Related Articles
%

Gun Control: It's Really About Guns As Symbols, Not Weapons

International No Diet Day--May 6, 2011

7 Misunderstood Truths About Workplace Trust

Raising Quitters

If I'd 'a Known You Were Coming, I'd 'a Baked a Cake!

Find a Therapist
Search for a mental health professional near you.

Find Local:
%

Acupuncturists

Chiropractors

Massage Therapists

Dentists

and more!

Freedom to quit is a foundation for peace, equality, and

democracy in hunter-gatherer bands.
I first began thinking about the crucial value of the freedom to quit a
few years ago, when I began studying hunter-gatherer band
societies. These societies, which lack police, prisons, or any formal
means of forcing people to follow rules, nevertheless live in
remarkably ordered, peaceful, ways. Their principal values are those
of equality (no person is regarded as inherently better or more worthy
than another and there are no chiefs or other bosses), sharing (food
and material goods are shared equally among the band members),
and autonomy (people of all ages are free to make their own
decisions, from day to day and moment to moment). [For
documentation of all of this, see this article,] Why dont the stronger
people selfishly exploit or enslave those who are weaker? What
prompts people to care for one another, even when they arent
related?
There are many reasonable answers to these questions, depending
on the level of explanation we are seeking; but the ultimate answer, I
think, lies in freedom to quit. As anthropologists have repeatedly
pointed out, band hunter-gatherers are highly mobile. Not only does
the whole band move regularly from place to place, to follow he
available game and edible vegetation, but individuals and families

also move from band to band. Because hunter-gatherers dont own

land and dont own more personal property than they can easily carry,
and because they all have friends and relatives in other bands, they
are always free to move. People who feel oppressed in their current
band, and who find no intra-band route to overcome that oppression,
can, at a moments notice, pick up their things and move out, either to
join another band or to start their own band with a group of friends.
Hunter-gatherers, like all people everywhere, depend on one another
for survival. Nobody can survive alone, at least not for long. But, in a
world where people can easily move away, you must treat others well
or they will leave you. You cant force them to work for you, because
if you try to do that theyll just walk away. You cant cheat them, or
bully them, or denigrate themat least not for long--because if you
do theyll quit. If you want a cohesive band, which everyone does
want because thats the best route to survival, you have to see things
from the perspective of the other band members and strive to please
them; you must compromise with them when you disagree, and you
must share your food with them on days when you are lucky in
hunting and they are not.
Hunter-gatherers are famous for making decisions by consensus.
They must talk things out and reach general agreement before
embarking on actions that affect the whole band. What does
consensus mean in this case? It means simply that everyone is
willing to go along with the decision; they may not fully agree, but
they wont walk away from the band because of it. So, for a huntergatherer band, democratic decision-making doesnt arise from some
high moral philosophy; it arises from necessity. To survive and thrive,
you need a cohesive band; and to achieve that, you need to make
decisions that dont offend people so much that they will quit.
Freedom to quit is a foundation for democracy and human rights

in modern nations.
It is much harder for us non-hunter-gatherers to move, but we still can
move and with sufficient oppression will, even from one nation to
another. Nations in which leaders routinely oppress their own people
can get away with it through laws that make it impossible for people
to leave.
Within two months after the Russian revolution of 1917, the new
government enacted laws against emigration. That was the beginning
of the end of any chance for democracy within the communist
regime. The same thing happened in the other communist block
countries, and we see it today, for example, in North Korea.
Governments can brutalize people who cant leave. When people
can leave, governments have to figure out how to make people want
to stay; or else there will be nobody left to govern. The first to leave
are often those who are most competent and valuable.
Freedom to quit is a foundation for marital harmony.
The quitting principle applies not only at the level of whole
communities and nations, but also at the level of the family. Lots of
research reveals strong negative correlations between domestic
violence and freedom of divorce. Wife beating is much more rare in
hunter-gatherer bands than in the neighboring agricultural
communities. The main reason, again, is freedom to quit. A huntergatherer woman can and will leave a husband who bullies her.
Divorce is easy and rather frequent in hunter-gatherer bands. A
woman can return to the band of her parents, or move to another
band where she has friends and relatives, and that automatically
terminates the marriage. If she has kids and they want to go with her,
they will. Because everyone in the band shares food, and because
women forage as well as men, a woman is not economically

dependent on her husband, any more than he is upon her.

So, if you are a man in a hunter-gatherer band and dont want to lose
your wife, you have to treat her well. That is not so true in primitive
farming societies, because in those societies the men own the land,
so women who leave have no means to support themselves. To
survive, women in those societies often have to put up as best as
they can with brutal husbands.
It is no secret that, in modern societies, the legal and economic
freedom to divorce is the primary force against domestic violence.
When divorce was illegal, wife beating was common. When divorce
became legal but was still not financially feasible for most women,
wife beating continued. Wife beating declines only when women are
both legally and financially free to leave their husbands. A recent
example (here) of this effect has been documented in Spain. In
2005, a change in Spanish law made divorce easier than it had been
before, and the rate of domestic violence against women dropped
significantly. It didnt drop just because of actual divorces; it also
dropped because men who didnt want to lose their wives started
treating them more kindly.
There was a time when stories and songs glorified the woman who
stuck with her man, no matter how bad he was. The man eventually
came around through the sheer power of her love and devotion. But,
truth be told, men become better when their wives might leave them
than they are in conditions where wives will stay no matter what.
Freedom to quit distinguishes employment from slavery
The same principle also applies in the workplace. If you cant quit
your job because you are owned by or legally bound to your
employer, or because economic necessity prevents you from quitting,

then your employer can brutalize and exploit you and get away with
it. If you can walk away, then your employer must treat you well if he
or she wants to retain your services. The legal and economic capacity
to quit is the force that tends to equalize the relationship between
employer and employee. There is no mystery here.
In school, children are not free to quit, so what are the
consequences?
In general, children are the most brutalized of people, not because
they are small and weak, but because they dont have the same
freedoms to quit that adults have. Anthropologists tell me that this is
not so true in hunter-gatherer cultures, because children there, to a
considerable degree, can quit, much as adults can. Children who are
treated unkindly by their parents can move into a different hut, with
different adults, who will treat them kindly. They can even move to a
different band. Hunter-gatherers dont hold to the notion that parents
own their children. Nearly everyone enjoys children, and the whole
band shares in the care of every child; so children are not a burden.
Even very young children who are mistreated by a parent or another
caregiver can move away from that caregiver, or be taken away, and
find safety in others arms. That is not true in our society, and
domestic violence against children is a serious and continuing
problem.
But now I want to turn to the violence we do to our children by forcing
them into schools. When schooling is compulsory, schools are, by
definition, prisons. A prison is a place where one is forced to be and
within which people are not free to choose their own activities,
spaces, or associates. Children cannot walk away from school, and
within the school children cannot walk away from mean teachers,
oppressive and pointless assignments, or cruel classmates. For
some children, the only outthe only real way to quitis suicide. As

writer Helen Smith put it in her book, The Scarred Heart, in describing
the suicide of a 13-year-old girl who had been regularly bullied in
school: After missing fifty-three out of the required one hundred and
eighty days of school, she was told that she would have to return to
school or appear before a truancy board which could then send her
to a juvenile detention center. She decided the better alternative was
to go into her bedroom and hang herself with a belt. ... In times past,
she could have just dropped out of school, but now kids like her are
trapped by compulsory education."
Lots of words have been spent on the problem of school bullying and
related problems such as students general unhappiness, boredom,
and cynicism in school. Nobody has found a way to solve these
problems, and nobody ever will until we grant children the freedom to
quit. The only way to solve these problems, ultimately, is to do away
with the coercion.
When children are truly free to walk away from school, then schools
will have to become child-friendly places in order to survive. Children
love to learn, but, like all of us, they hate to be coerced,
micromanaged, and continuously judged. They love to learn in their
own ways, not in ways that others force on them. Schools, like all
institutions, will become moral institutions only when the people they
serve are no longer inmates. When students are free to quit, schools
will have to grant them other basic human rights, such as the right to
have a voice in decisions that affect them, the right to free speech,
the right to free assembly, and the right to choose their own paths to
happiness. Such schools would look nothing at all like the dreary
institutions we call school today. (For more, see Free to Learn.)
I feel a bit like the child in Hans Christian Andersons The Emperors
New Clothes, who cried out, But he isnt wearing anything at all! I
imagine that some of you readers feel the same way.
All the world seems to believe that our coercive system of schooling

is essential to childrens becoming educated. They believe it not

because their own two eyes and common sense tell them its true, but
because everyone says its true and therefore it must be. Many
people dont even think much about it; they just accept it as true.
They may hate school themselves, but nevertheless assume school
is necessary, like bad-tasting medicine. Never mind that bad-tasting
medicine takes a second to swallow while forced schooling takes 11
to 13 years.
Nearly all political leaders espouse more forced schooling as the
route to a better future. Philanthropists are working feverishly at
making kids start school at ever-younger ages and making them
spend more hours per day, days per year, and years of their lifetime
there. The United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child--with
no acknowledgement of irony--proclaims that every child has the
right to a compulsory education. (If you dont believe it, look at Item 7
here.) What a tortuous distortion of the concept of a human right;
you have the right, which you cant refuse, to be compelled to spend
years in a setting where you must do just what you are told to do.
Orwellian doublespeak in spades, but few people recognize it as
such. We are so stuck on the idea that children must be forced to
learn that we cant even imagine that a child might be better off
learning without being forced. (In its defense, I note that the UN
Declaration also speaks of the child's right to play.)
Related Articles
%

KindergartenReady or Not? Should You Redshirt Next Year?

Creating Generation Anxiety

Hope for Dyslexics

Ladies First

How to Get Straight A's in Life

Find a Therapist

Search for a mental health professional near you.

Find Local:
%

Acupuncturists

Chiropractors

Massage Therapists

Dentists

and more!

But like the great majority who praised the Emperors fine new
clothes, those who proclaim their belief in the value of forced
schooling are uneasy, I think, in that belief. They believe it because
everyone else claims to believe it, because it would seem stupid not
to believe it, because there is some profit to be made for believing it,
or because to stand against the crowd would be uncomfortable. But,
at the same time, they find it hard to completely deny their own two
eyes and common sense, and they find it hard to rationalize their
beliefs about freedom and dignity with the belief that children should
be denied these as they are in school. When I talk with advocates of
coercive schooling in a way that allows them to set aside their
defenses, I often find that just below the surface lies a bed of doubt.
That gives me hope.
Since the publication of my new book, Free to Learn, many people
have asked me why I wrote it and what I hope it will accomplish. I
have qualms about writing here about my own book. I debated for a
long time with myself about whether or not I should even mention it
here, but I do so want the message to spread that I am overcoming
those qualms. Of course, I am far from the first to cry out that the
Emperor is naked on the issue of schooling. Indeed, many regular

readers of this blog have been saying this longer than I, and in
previous posts I have referenced such pioneering thinkers as A.S.
Neill, John Holt, John Taylor Gatto, Sandra Dodd, and Daniel
Greenberg. We need all such voices, and we need them to be heard.
So, here goes
At a local level, I hope that Free to Learn will give to those parents
who can see that forced schooling is harming their children and
disrupting their family life the courage to act on what they see. I hope,
too, that families who are already taking a non-standard route in
education will find the book useful as a tool to help convince their
skeptical friends and relatives that what they are doing is not crazy.
But my broadest hope is that the book will reach people who haven't
previously given much thought to this whole question. I hope that the
book will lead many people to think deeply about childhood,
education, and schooling (and about the difference between
education and schooling) and that this will help promote societal
change in our ways of treating children.
The books central thesis is that children come into the world
exquisitely designed, and strongly motivated, to educate themselves.
They dont need to be forced to learn; in fact, coercion undermines
their natural desire to learn. What they do need is opportunity. My
argument to society at large is that we need to stop thinking about
educating children and start thinking about how to provide the
conditions that maximize each childs ability to educate himself or
herself. That is what children are biologically designed to do, but to
do it well they need conditions that are very, very different from the
coercive, deprived conditions of our standard schools.
The book is not founded on abstract theory, philosophical
speculation, or romantic idealism. It is founded on large bodies of
empirical evidence. Some of the evidence comes from

anthropologists observations of how children in pre-agricultural

societies educated themselves. Some of it comes from research in
our culture showing that children who are allowed to educate
themselves and are provided the resources to do so learn very well
what they need to know to become happy, productive, moral adult
citizens. Some of it comes from the laboratories of research
psychologists, who have studied childrens strong and effective drives
to explore and understand the physical and social world around them.
Some of it comes from research showing how the playful frame of
mind is best for acquiring new ideas and skills and thinking creatively,
and how play is the natural vehicle through which children practice
the skills and values of their culture and learn how to get along with
others, solve their own problems, regulate their emotions and
impulses, and generally take control of their own lives. The book also
documents the history of our coercive system of schooling; it shows
how that system arose quite explicitly for purposes of indoctrination
and obedience training, not for education as most of us think of it
today. And further, the book documents the psychological damage
that we are currently inflicting on children by depriving them of the
freedom and play they need for healthy development.
The book brings all of these sources of evidence together to make
the case that we can and should change our way of treating children,
to a way that trusts them and takes their real needs and abilities into
account. It also describes the environmental conditions that enable
children to educate themselves well. These conditions include
unlimited freedom to play and explore, access to the tools of the
culture, access to adult experts, free age mixing among children and
adolescents, and immersion in a stable, moral, caring local
community. All of these can be provided at far less expense than
what we spend on our prisonlike schools, if we put our minds to it.

I have seen many wonderful improvements in human rights in my

years so far on earth. We have made great strides in recognizing the
competence and rights of people regardless of race, gender, and
sexual orientation. I hope now to see, in my remaining years, real
progress in recognizing the competence and rights of children, for
only when children grow up free can we hope for a society in which
adults know fully how to handle freedom and the responsibilities that
come with it. Thats why I wrote the book and why I will continue, as
long as I am able, to promote these ideas.

The Educative Value of Teasing

What exactly is teasing, and what are its purposes?
Published on January 13, 2013 by Peter Gray in Freedom to Learn

Teasing gets a bad rap, especially in educational circles, because of

its association with bullying. But not all teasing is bullying. In fact, in
most settings (maybe not in our typical schools), teasing serves
positive ends far more often than negative ones. This essay is mostly
about the positive uses of teasing.
Definition of teasing
What is teasing? I like the definition given by Dacher Keltner, a
psychologist at UC Berkeley who is perhaps the worlds leading
researcher on the topic. According to Keltner, a tease is an
intentional provocation accompanied by playful off-record markers
that together comment on something relevant to the target.[1] Let me
break that down.
A tease, as the term is used by Keltner and his colleagues, has these
three characteristics: (1) It is a verbal statement or nonverbal action
that is designed deliberately to provoke another person (the target of

the tease). (2) The statement or action is accompanied by or followed

by one or more markers indicating that it is playful or at least is not
fully serious. For example, it might be marked by laughter or smiling,
a singsong voice, unusual phrasing, obvious exaggeration, or irony
(saying the opposite of what is meant). (3) It draws attention to, or
comments on, something relevant to the target. For example, it may
comment on some aspect of the targets personality, or physical
being, or current emotional or motivational state.
Related Articles
%

The Sting of Shyness

"No Name-Calling Week" Weakens Children

A New Mental Health Curriculum

Teaching About Social Meanness In Middle School

Sex Therapy: Clearing Up Some Confusions

Find a Therapist
Search for a mental health professional near you.

Find Local:
%

Acupuncturists

Chiropractors

Massage Therapists

Dentists

and more!

A tease can be purely nonverbal. For example, a parent might tease

a young child by pretending to offer him a piece of candy and then
laughing and taking it away; the comment here is on the childs strong

desire for candy. (To most of us, this example seems mean; but in
some cultures teasing of this sort is used to deliberately train children
in self-control.) In an analogous manner, a woman might tease a
man by acting as if she is sexually available and then making it clear
she is not. Even a poke in the ribs, or an eye blink, appropriately
timed to follow a faux pas on the part of the target, can be a tease.
But the teases Im concerned with here are primarily verbal.
Teasing as an expression of acceptance
My family members and closest friends, especially my wife, are well
aware of my many flaws and dont hesitate to tease me about them.
They know, for example, that I cant carry a tune, am often absentminded, am uncomfortable at parties, am ignorant of much of popular
culture, get too serious when playing games that should be just for
fun (an obvious flaw in someone who writes about the noncompetitive nature of play), and am far more frugal than necessity
demands. By teasing me about these things they show me that these
elements of my character are out in the open; I dont have to try to
hide them. The people I care most about already know these things
about me, find them amusing, and accept me despite the flaws. To
know someone well is to know their weaknesses as well as strengths,
and teasing can be a playful way of expressing that knowledge and
thereby reinforcing the friendship. The flaws, to the real friend, can
even be endearing, as long as theyre not too egregious.
Teasing as a means of promoting humility
But teasing also serves purposes beyond acceptance. One of its
primary functions is that of deflating egos.
Its human nature to be repelled by arrogance. Arrogant people are
threats to all of us because they think they are better than us, think

they have a right to impose their will on us, and may even think that
our purpose on earth is to serve them. Arrogance is a flaw that is not
endearing, and if we want to be true friends with a person who tends
even slightly toward arrogance, we must do what we can to punch
holes in that persons ego. We all, at times, have the potential of
becoming a bit too arrogant, and teasing by others can help us
overcome that tendency.
When my friends and loved ones tease me about my flaws, they are
not only expressing acceptance of those flaws, but are also reminding
me of them. In doing so, they are keeping me humble. When either
my wife or I concede that the other was right, on something about
which we had disagreed, we often do so with a playful, Oh, youre
such a smarty-pants. Its a tease, common to children, which
means, OK, youre right; but dont get all arrogant just because you
knew something that I didnt know.
The worlds superstars at the use of teasing to promote humility are
hunter-gatherers.[2] As I have explained in previous essays
(here and here), the hunting-and-gathering way of life requires
continuous cooperation, sharing, and an egalitarian spirit. Huntergatherers do not have big men or chiefs, but make all group
decisions democratically, through discussions aimed at achieving
consensus. They recognize that the human tendency toward
arrogance is a threat to their means of existence, and they are
constantly on guard to nip it in the bud. They are particularly vigilant
about arrogance in young men.
For example, hunter-gatherers everywhere engage in a practice that
anthropologists refer to as insulting the meat. When a hunter brings
a fat antelope or other prize kill back to the band, for everyone to
share, he must act humbly about it. He must say that the animal is
skinny, hardly worth bothering with. He must say that he killed it

through sheer luck, or because of the fine arrow that someone else
had made and lent him, or because it was sickly and an easy mark,
or all of these things. If he acts even the slightest bit arrogant about
his hunting, others will mock both him and the meat he has brought
them. The men and women alike, especially the grandmothers, will
complain that the antelope is nothing but a bag of bones and hardly
worth cooking. They might make up a song about the mans flaws
and about how he thinks he is such a great hunter but is really a
puny weakling. They might mockingly call him chief or big man.
In a culture that doesnt have chiefs or big men and values equality,
this is one of the greatest insults that can be hurled.
The man who is insulted in this way knows what is happening, but the
insults nevertheless work. He knows that he has crossed a line that
hunter-gatherers must not cross, and he must immediately make
amends by expressing great humility about the meat and himself. He
must join the others now in taunting himself. If he doesnt, he knows
that the taunting will escalate and might even lead to ostracism or
banishment from the band. Such taunting is a form of teasing. It has
all the elements of teasing, including humor. But it is teasing with a
very serious purpose.
When anthropologist Richard Lee asked a wise healer in the huntergatherer group he was studying to explain this practice of insulting
the meat, the healer replied: "When a young man kills much meat, he
comes to think of himself as a big man, and he thinks of the rest of us
as his inferiors. We can't accept this. We refuse one who boasts, for
someday his pride will make him kill somebody. So we always speak
of his meat as worthless. In this way we cool his heart and make him
gentle."[3]
Research in our culture shows that over the past two or three
decades in North America there has been a continuous rise in

narcissism, which might be defined as a pathological form of

arrogance.[4] I cant help but wonder: Might the rise of narcissism be
partly caused by a decline in teasing, especially teasing of children by
parents and other adults? The self-esteem movement of the past two
or three decades has been accompanied by the view that all sorts of
put-downs of children are harmful, because they damage selfesteem. Well, maybe thats what the put-downs were designed to do
damage the sort of self-esteem that manifests itself as arrogance
or narcissism. Pacific Islanders and Asians generally value humility
more than do Westerners, and they are also more likely than
Westerners to tease their children, often in ways that strike
Westerners as mean or insensitive.[5]
Teasing as a means of correction and social control
Teasing can be a gentle, not so gentle, or even harsh way of
encouraging others to change their behavior. Teasing to counteract
arrogance is an example of this, but there are many other examples.
Children, especially teenagers, tease one another regularly in their
play as a means of social control. For example, in a friendly pick-up
game of baseball, a pitcher who throws the ball too hard for a little kid
to hit it might be told by a teammate, Hey, way to go; its always
good to strike out the little ones, in a teasing voice that lets the
pitcher know that the real meaning is the opposite. This is a way of
offering criticism that does not destroy the spirit of play, does not
have to be acknowledged as criticism, but yet is criticism and lets the
target know that he has crossed a line he shouldnt have crossed. It
gives the criticized person a way of saving face. For example, he
might respond by saying something like, Yeah, youre right, Im really
going to be tough on the little ones, thereby pretending that his hard
pitching was itself a teasing form of play; but then he can change his
ways and start pitching more softly.

According to anthropologists reports, hunter-gatherers use such

teasing regularly as a means of maintaining peace and harmony in
the band. Hunter-gatherers refrain from criticizing others directly,
because they believe that people should make their own decisions
and not be told what to do or not do. Instead, they criticize indirectly,
often through teasing. For example, Elizabeth Marshall Thomas
described a case in which two women in the Ju/hoan band that she
was observing argued regularly and loudly with one another,
disturbing the whole band, until others in the band made up a song
about them and began to sing it whenever they started arguing. The
song made them feel ashamed, and they stopped arguing. Shame is
not always a bad emotion!
Teasing of this sort is not only more acceptable than direct criticism,
given hunter-gatherer mores, but may also be more effective, even
for us Westerners. Direct criticism tends to provoke argument and
defensiveness. In contrast, teasing acts at an emotional level that
bypasses our verbal defensiveness, and it gives us a choice of how
to respond. We can laugh along with the teasers, thereby
acknowledging that the implied criticism is justified. We can feel and
express shame, likewise indicating our intent to change. We can
stew for a while in resentment, but then eventually come around. Or
we can leave, quietly or noisily, and henceforth avoid, when possible,
this group of people who dont like the way we behave.
As Keltner and his colleagues point out, the comment in teasing is
most often about some non-normative characteristic or behavior of
the target. When that non-normative thing is something that the
person cant change or shouldnt feel compelled to change and the
teasing is harsh, then it is proper to think of the teasing as bullying.
But if the teasing is about something that the person can change and
should changefor his own good or for the good of othersthen it
may serve a very useful purpose. Teasing a young man about the

odor of his cigarette breath or about how he thinks he looks so cool

when hes smoking may be harsh, but it may be more effective than
either direct command or reasoned argument in changing his
behavior and prolonging his life. This is especially true if the teaser
happens to be a potential girlfriend.
Teasing as a test of social relationship
Teasing can be a sign of affection, a constructive form of criticism, or
a cruel put-down. It can also be a semi-competitive verbal game, in
which the players are testing one anothers abilities to keep cool in
response to provocation and provide clever responses, as in the
classic case of inner city kids teasing one another about how fat or
how sexually promiscuous (or both) the others momma is. (Yo
mommas so fat only mountain climbers can have sex with her.)
Sometimes the intent of a tease is ambiguous even in the mind of the
teaser, but is shaped by the way the target and/or audience respond.
In an article on teasing in a working-class community in South
Baltimore, Peggy Miller gives a nice example.[6] A high-school girl
was taunted, in singsong fashion, by other kids in the lunchroom
about the fact that she was on the free lunch program (a sign of
poverty). The taunt might have been an instance of cruel bullying and
ostracism, as happens altogether too often in our schools (see post
here), or it might have been a verbal challenge, a test of the girls
cool. It was probably, in the minds of the teasers (if they thought
about it at all), a bit of both. The girl chose to treat it as a challenge.
She retorted with something like this (I dont have the exact words in
front of me): Hey, you all just jealous cause I get something free and
you dont. Hmmm, this is sooo good. Just look at this jello! I hope
you all are enjoying the stale boloney your mommas packed for you.
Even the lunch ladies laughed. Through her response, she turned
the tormenters intended put-down into a game in which she won and
thereby elevated, rather than reduced, her status.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freedom-learn

you've got a choice

are you going to die because you're an angel
or as demon vermin?
really it's a question of if you're afraid of death
angel or demon vermin
art is created by someone in a fight with spiritual death provoked by
material death
art is created by someone in a fight with spiritual death provoked by
material death, we include a place for artists, since we are all one at
some time
we're all naked underneath our clothes
but the question is, why are we wearing the (specific clothes when
others would do) clothes we are?

Philosophy is important
Philosophy is important for many reasons including the following:
%

It offers a degree of knowledge involving lifes biggest

questions: Reasoning, logic, morality, and reality itself.
Knowledge seems to be worth pursuing for its own sake. It
can be enjoyable just to attain some knowledgeespecially
about lifes biggest questions.

It can transform you into a better human being. You will

learn to think for yourself, refute poor reasoning, use better
reasoning, consider various worldviews, and learn how to
make the world a better place.

You will learn to be open minded without being gullible,

and skeptical without being close-minded.

By learning to be reasonable, you will avoid being fanatical

or reckless. You will be less likely to become a criminal or
horrible person.

By learning about morality (ethics), you will learn

something about what it means to live a meaningful life and
make the world a better place. This can be used. If we want
the world to become a better place, we need people to
think about what goals are worth having and how to
accomplish them. Philosophy is the best way to do that.

Philosophy has lead to real world achievements, such as

logic, the best higher education imaginable, computers, and
natural science.

Philosophy can offer you the best sort of enlightenment

that I know about. Philosophy can help you see the world in
new ways that can transform you into a better person and
transcend the limited worldview you have attained from
your culture. You can learn to better seize the day. You
can better see how life is marginalized through
consumerism, how your time is wasted with trivial
distractions, how peoples behavior is often thoughtless or
irrational (often due to a faulty worldview), and so on.

Philosophy can teach you the history that is often taken out
of history booksthe history of worldviews and thought
itself. You cant know how we have progressed and
attained the wonders of science and technology without
knowing the history of philosophy.

You will learn of many of the greatest achievements and

conversations that existed throughout historythe books

and thoughts written by people who devoted their lives to

learning about the world and how to live a good life.
%

You will learn how to think more creatively, not less.

Learning about the answers people have thought of to lifes
greatest questions opens possibilities that you would have a
very difficult time to realize on your own. Philosophers often
contribute to the world by thinking in entirely new ways and
offering entirely new answersand you can learn to do so
as well through example. You might think you are creative
now, but odds are that many of your ideas are the same as
someone elses. Would you rather know what ideas are
already thought of so you can make sure your own ideas
are unique or do you want to end up coming to the same
ideas that many others come up with?

Conclusion

What you get out of philosophy is partially up to your teacher,

but its mostly up to you. If you want to get by doing the minimal
work with as little effort as possible, then you might not get
much out of philosophy at all. To get something out of
philosophy, you should spend some time arguing and thinking
about your life and what it means to be rational or moral. In fact,
you dont need to take a single philosophy class to learn about
philosophy. You could try to learn it on your own.
Whatever you want to do in life philosophy can help. Being
rational, thinking clearly, and being moral is important for all
human beings just for being human beings. Everyone should not
only take a philosophy class of their own free will, but people
should be required to learn philosophy in high school. It could
probably be taught as part of our English classes. Learning to

read and write is an important part of learning to think. You cant

read or write anything important if you cant read or write
philosophy. (In fact, I think philosophy should have a greater
influence over all of our education in general. Education should
be less about obedience, following directions, and memorization;
and more about understanding the world using good reasoning.)
Should you major in philosophy? If you want an education to get
a job like everyone else, then it might not be the best choice.
However, if you want to make yourself or the world better, then
you should consider it.
eon thinks about philosophy, thinking is sign of dying
christianity is emotional magic
a flowering freedom until death
a wonder of a story
world title salesmanship
each one of us is God, when God means Alone - Chavez ///Quartez
cannot be egocentric
must be god centric
for success
god is the boundary between success and failure
cannot be egocentric, sacrifice is to get you to let go
everything not geared at eating
altar food wasting
is geared at reminding

altar food wasting reminds priest

he is dead to the world

greed is a carrot
america, like the jungle, runs on wickedness, proved by the inclusion of
evil in the socioeconomic wheel
and greed is its carrot

we are the jungle again, hypercalculated and artificial causality in lieu

of nature and its pitfalls. tigers and parasites and marshes and forest
fires and an lucre level that sets up a class of artificial gods where once
there was an imaginary one.
book of terror
lie named god
lie named devil
i focus on the way to be considered
this is to think of my death
this is like the samurai, the way of the dead
but samurais were psychologically trained to die on purpose?
don't i want to live?
therefore, i should focus on the way of living, which is the way of
acquisition...
the way of kings, the divine right, the right of lying, the way of
entitlement
for one knows that some lies go unpunished, lies under protection
and deception goes unpunished, it provides and vanishes,
demands constant recreation of a new ambush
there is no rest for the wicked
they will survive, but must constantly be running

survival is based on reproduction,

inheritance of body,
and inheritance of eternal ideas
like, guerilla warfare wins over castle warfare, because of siege...
at the tipping point!
because total guerilla warfare loses to castle warfare
if the guerilla's must turn into farmers to survive
what wins is the correct construction of organization to win over the
enemy
and the way to defeat an enemy is to turn them into a friend...
therefore, include them in the empire, under your rule
rulership is as chemically oriented as the body's creation
conclusions of the spiral, spiritual warrior the sword from whence
springs the light of life

Forsaking All Self-centeredness

There is a saying: Wholesome deeds performed with selfish aims
are just like poisoned food. Poisoned food might look delicious
and even taste good, but it quickly leads to certain death.
Thinking of an enemy as someone to be hated, thinking of a
friend as someone to be loved, being jealous of others happiness
and good fortune: all this is rooted in ego clinging. And
wholesome actions, infiltrated by a clinging to the I conceived as
something real and solid, turn to poison. We should try to forsake
all self-centeredness.

Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche

estimations require extra effort

extra effort falls to labor

compare real miles and air miles
for example
the difference falls to labor to make up

intentions are good for kids, but results are necessary for adults
it is what it is.
submit.
condensed bible
intelligent kindness
instead of intelligent design
steve's way

if you're good enough at what you're doing all the time

it won't matter if you're being
watched
you won't have to calculate that
if everyone read the bible one time and took one trip into space and
saw that peas in a jar float around like a swarm of bees, religion would
be exposed and abolished
its not just that everything in life has its price.
life itself has a price.
you are more like what you practice
we are just sex machines, clocks winding down as timers, but denying
it makes it impossible to get along, to move forward, to find love, to
discover dignity, and insist that Land of Love rises up under our feet

and Horizons of Dignity travel with us, for us and our children and
everyone, knowing that we purchase that reality with vigilant, goodly
behaviour throughout every day and night, never bending even at the
inevitable instant of Eternal Death, unlimited death, real true death. I
am happy everyday, and will be happy when I die.
this knowledge should make a person brave
create the opportunity to live as an immortal
open that doorway
create a society of braves
all the colors of freedom
there is no money (money does not exist), there is only love, confusion
(peace), and hate

there is no money, there is only emotion.

there is nothing, there are only people.
there should be help like I ching
but no laws
and understanding that nothing is eternal
the air was full of I Ching coins and potential futures ;paradise

this is my simple religion. there is no need for temples;

no need for complicated philosophy. our own brain, our own
heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness

**types of government, types of social structure**

So far, we have created ORGANIZATION through LIMITATION
we need to reconstruct ORGANIZATION so that it exists through
GUIDANCE instead, else WRONG will always be done in the NAME OF
THE LAW, for no STATIC RULE (LAW) can keep pace with the financial

and civic damage done due to the constancy of financial and familial
need over time, the time/finance production being broken by the
interruption of time by the time consumed by address from the law
holistic data sets, interpretation, future prediction, then judgment must
be used.
types of government ideas of utopia

The essence of man is not an abstraction inherent in each

particular individual [i.e. a soul]. His real nature is the
ensemble of social relations. This is to say, man is not just a
social animal - as Aristotle had stated; he is nothing more
than a part of a vast web of social relations. He has no
existence apart from other men. And what of other men?
They have no existence apart from him. Society is like a
house of cards, all leaning against one another. But if men
have no free will, if they are no more than twigs floating on a
stream, then what is the stream? Marxs answer - which
certainly had the merit of originality - was: economic forces.
Throughout history, men have imagined they are driven by
ideals of truth and justice and religion; in fact, the
philosophy of Plato was merely an expression of the
economic forces in the Mediterranean in 500 B.C.;
Christianity was an expression of the economic forces in the
Roman Empire in 100 A.D.; Luthers revolt was an
expression of the economic forces of 1500 A.D. - the proof
being that Luther was enraged by the Churchs financial
skulduggery, and that the peasants used Lutheranism as an
excuse to revolt against the landowners... Marxs new friend
Friedrich Engels, son of a wealthy textile manufacturer, later
admitted wryly that Marx had gone too far in his emphasis
on economic factors, but by that time it was too late.
refer to book 'sofies world' too

marx humanity matter and force-humanist capitalism

lying and cheating, deception and secrets are natural and logical and
of low intelligence.
these are the first forms of power of children, of people who cannot
produce for themselves, who are liabilities to the group as they are
existing at that moment
no rest from the wicked
we can see through the eyes of people like us
cyclops
corporate structure filled with like people
all goblins
now i know why keep the bad employees
we can see through the eyes of people like us, family easy example
you must go after your wish. as soon as you start to pursue a dream,
your life wakes up and everything has meaning
you must go after your wish, and live the way you want the world to
be, too
women are born to serve at the pleasure
sex
sexual power
pleasure power
permanently gone
american parents chasing desire

nothing new
under the sun
-solomon
dedicate yourself to god
to Good
don't dedicate your life to work

let people grow

don't think you know what's best for them
that has always helped you yourself
life is a continuous mistake
no perfection
just chasing the idea of perfection
pyramids represented civilization
passages represented rights of secrecy of hierarchy
pharoah buried inside represents heart of civilization
must be warrior philospher
workers were criminals
being taught civilization
joseph in bible , egypt, represents even
most unlikely
has ability to fit in, adhere
and in time, be promoted
joseph in bible, fitting in, and many colored robes, many talents,
normal person, multiple interests

Cassandra (metaphor)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Painting of Cassandra by Evelyn De Morgan.

The Cassandra metaphor (variously labelled the Cassandra 'syndrome',

'complex', 'phenomenon', 'predicament', 'dilemma', or 'curse'), is a term
applied in situations in which valid warnings or concerns are dismissed or
disbelieved.
The term originates in Greek mythology. Cassandra was a daughter of
Priam, the King of Troy. Struck by her beauty, Apollo provided her with the
gift of prophecy, but when Cassandra refused Apollo's romantic advances,
he placed a curse ensuring that nobody would believe her warnings.
Cassandra was left with the knowledge of future events, but could neither
alter these events nor convince others of the validity of her predictions.
The metaphor has been applied in a variety of contexts such as
psychology, environmentalism, politics, science, cinema, the corporate
world, and in philosophy, and has been in circulation since at least 1949
when French philosopher Gaston Bachelard coined the term 'Cassandra
Complex' to refer to a belief that things could be known in advance.[1]
Contents [hide]
%

1 Usage
1

1.1
Psychology
1
1.1.1
Melanie Klein
2
1.1.2
Laurie Layton
Schapira
3
1.1.3 Jean

Shinoda Bolen
2

1.2
Corporate world

1.3
Environmental
movement

1.4 Other
examples

2 See also

3 References

[edit]

Usage
[edit]

Psychology
The Cassandra metaphor is applied by some psychologists to individuals
who experience physical and emotional suffering as a result of distressing
personal perceptions, and who are disbelieved when they attempt to share
the cause of their suffering with others.
[edit]

Melanie Klein
In 1963, psychologist Melanie Klein provided an interpretation of
Cassandra as representing the human moral conscience whose main task
is to issue warnings. Cassandra as moral conscience, "predicts ill to come
and warns that punishment will follow and grief arise."[2] Cassandra's need
to point out moral infringements and subsequent social consequences is
driven by what Klein calls "the destructive influences of the cruel superego," which is represented in the Greek myth by the god Apollo,
Cassandra's overlord and persecutor.[3] Klein's use of the metaphor
centers on the moral nature of certain predictions, which tends to evoke in
others "a refusal to believe what at the same time they know to be true,
and expresses the universal tendency toward denial, [with] denial being a

potent defence against persecutory anxiety and guilt."[2]

[edit]

Laurie Layton Schapira

In a 1988 study Jungian analyst Laurie Layton Schapira explored what she
called the "Cassandra Complex" in the lives of two of her analysands.[4]
Based on clinical experience, she delineates three factors which constitute
the Cassandra complex:
%

dysfunctional relationships with the Apollo archetype

emotional or physical suffering, including hysteria or womens

problems,

and being disbelieved when attempting to relate the facticity of these

experiences to others.[4]

Layton Schapira views the Cassandra complex as resulting from a

dysfunctional relationship with what she calls the "Apollo archetype", which
refers to any individual's or culture's pattern that is dedicated to, yet bound
by, order, reason, intellect, truth and clarity that disavows itself of anything
occult or irrational.[5] The intellectual specialization of this archetype
creates emotional distance and can predispose relationships to a lack of
emotional reciprocity and consequent dysfunctions.[4] She further states
that a 'Cassandra woman' is very prone to hysteria because she "feels
attacked not only from the outside world but also from within, especially
from the body in the form of somatic, often gynaecological, complaints."[6]
Addressing the metaphorical application of the Greek Cassandra myth,
Layton Schapira states that:
What the Cassandra woman sees is something dark and painful that may
not be apparent on the surface of things or that objective facts do not
corroborate. She may envision a negative or unexpected outcome; or
something which would be difficult to deal with; or a truth which others,
especially authority figures, would not accept. In her frightened, ego-less
state, the Cassandra woman may blurt out what she sees, perhaps with
the unconscious hope that others might be able to make some sense of it.
But to them her words sound meaningless, disconnected and blown out of

all proportion.[6]
[edit]

Jean Shinoda Bolen

In 1989, Jean Shinoda Bolen, Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the
University of California, published an essay on the god Apollo[7] in which
she detailed a psychological profile of the Cassandra woman whom she
suggested referred to someone suffering as happened in the
mythological relationship between Cassandra and Apollo a
dysfunctional relationship with an Apollo man. Bolen added that the
Cassandra woman may exhibit hysterical overtones, and may be
disbelieved when attempting to share what she knows.[8]
According to Bolen, the archetypes of Cassandra and Apollo are not
gender-specific. She states that "women often find that a particular [male]
god exists in them as well, just as I found that when I spoke about
goddesses men could identify a part of themselves with a specific
goddess. Gods and goddesses represent different qualities in the human
psyche. The pantheon of Greek deities together, male and female, exist as
archetypes in us all There are gods and goddesses in every person."[9]
"As an archetype, Apollo personifies the aspect of the personality that
wants clear definitions, is drawn to master a skill, values order and
harmony, and prefers to look at the surface rather than at what underlies
appearances. The Apollo archetype favors thinking over feeling, distance
over closeness, objective assessment over subjective intuition."[10]
Of what she describes as the negative Apollonic influence, Dr. Bolen
writes:
Individuals who resemble Apollo have difficulties that are related to
emotional distance, such as communication problems, and the inability to
be intimate Rapport with another person is hard for the Apollo man. He
prefers to access (or judge) the situation or the person from a distance, not
knowing that he must "get close up" - be vulnerable and empathic - in
order to truly know someone else. But if the woman wants a deeper,
more personal relationship, then there are difficulties she may become

increasingly irrational or hysterical.[8]

Bolen suggests that a Cassandra woman (or man) may become
increasingly hysterical and irrational when in a dysfunctional relationship
with a negative Apollo, and may experience others' disbelief when
describing her experiences.[8]
[edit]

Corporate world
Foreseeing potential future directions for a corporation or company is
sometimes called visioning.[11] Yet achieving a clear, shared vision in an
organization is often difficult due to a lack of commitment to the new vision
by some individuals in the organization, because it does not match reality
as they see it. Those who support the new vision are termed Cassandras
able to see what is going to happen, but not believed.[11] Sometimes the
name Cassandra is applied to those who can predict rises, falls, and
particularly crashes on the global stock market, as happened with Warren
Buffett, who repeatedly warned that the 1990s stock market surge was a
bubble, attracting to him the title of 'Wall Street Cassandra'.[12]
[edit]

Environmental movement
Many environmentalists have predicted looming environmental
catastrophes including climate change, rise in sea levels, irreversible
pollution, and an impending collapse of ecosystems, including those of
rainforests and ocean reefs.[13] Such individuals sometimes acquire the
label of 'Cassandras', whose warnings of impending environmental disaster
are disbelieved or mocked.[13] Environmentalist Alan Atkisson states that to
understand that humanity is on a collision course with the laws of nature is
to be stuck in what he calls the 'Cassandra dilemma' in which one can see
the most likely outcome of current trends and can warn people about what
is happening, but the vast majority can not, or will not respond, and later if
catastrophe occurs, they may even blame you, as if your prediction set the
disaster in motion.[14] Occasionally there may be a "successful" alert,
though the succession of books, campaigns, organizations, and

personalities that we think of as the environmental movement has more

generally fallen toward the opposite side of this dilemma: a failure to "get
through" to the people and avert disaster. In the words of Atkisson: "too
often we watch helplessly, as Cassandra did, while the soldiers emerge
from the Trojan horse just as foreseen and wreak their predicted havoc.
Worse, Cassandra's dilemma has seemed to grow more inescapable even
as the chorus of Cassandras has grown larger."[15]
[edit]

Other examples
There are examples of the Cassandra metaphor being applied in the
contexts of medical science,[16][17] the media,[18] to feminist perspectives
on 'reality',[19][20] in relation to Aspergers Disorder (a 'Cassandra
Syndrome' is sometimes said to arise when partners or family members of
the Asperger individual seek help but are disbelieved,[21][22][23]) and in
politics.[24] There are also examples of the metaphor being used in popular
music lyrics, such as the 1982 ABBA song "Cassandra." [25][26] The fivepart The Mars Volta song "Cassandra Gemini" may reference this
syndrome,[27] as well as the film 12 Monkeys.
[edit]

See also
%

Martha Mitchell effect ("The Cassandra of Watergate")

Cassandra - Modern usage

Cassandra
cassandra-quartez's wife

First Council of Nicaea

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

First Council of Nicaea

Date
Accepted
by

325 AD
%

Anglicans

Assyrian Church of the

East

Eastern Orthodox

Oriental Orthodox

Protestants

Roman Catholics

Previous
council

Council of Jerusalem (though not

considered ecumenical)

Next
council

First Council of Constantinople

Convoked Emperor Constantine I

by
Presided
by

St. Alexander of Alexandria (and

also Emperor Constantine)[1]

Attendanc 250318 (only five

e
from Western Church)
Topics of Arianism, celebration of Passover
discussio (Easter), ordination of eunuchs,
n
prohibition of kneeling on
Sundays and from Easter to
Pentecost, validity of baptism by
heretics, lapsed Christians,
sundry other matters.[2]
Document Original Nicene Creed,[3] 20
s and
canons,[4] and an epistle[2]
statement
s
Chronological list of Ecumenical councils

The First Council of Nicaea (nasi:; Greek: ) was a council of

Christian bishops convened in Nicaea in Bithynia (present-day znik in
Turkey) by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325. This first
ecumenical council was the first effort to attain consensus in the church

through an assembly representing all of Christendom.[5][6]

Its main accomplishments were settlement of the Trinitarian issue of the
nature of The Son and his relationship to God the Father,[3] the
construction of the first part of the Creed of Nicaea, settling the calculation
of the date of Easter,[2] and promulgation of early canon law.[4][7][8]
Contents [hide]
%

1 Overview

2 Character and purpose

3 Attendees

4 Agenda and procedure

5 Arian controversy
1

5.1 Position of Arius

(Arianism)

5.2 Position of St. Alexander

5.3 Result of the debate

%
%

6 The Nicene Creed

7 Separation of Easter computation
from Jewish calendar

8 Meletian schism

9 Promulgation of canon law

10 Effects of the Council

11 Misconceptions
1

11.1 The biblical canon

11.2 The Trinity

11.3 The role of Constantine

11.4 The role of the Bishop of

Rome

12 See also

13 Bibliography
1

13.1 Primary sources

13.2 Literature

14 References

15 External links

[edit]

Overview
Eastern Orthodox icon depicting the First Council of Nicea

The First Council of Nicaea was the first ecumenical council of the Catholic
Church. Most significantly, it resulted in the first, extra-biblical, uniform
Christian doctrine, called the Creed of Nicaea. With the creation of the
creed, a precedent was established for subsequent local and regional
councils of Bishops (Synods) to create statements of belief and canons of
doctrinal orthodoxy the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the
whole of Christendom.
The council settled, to some degree, the debate within the Early Christian
communities regarding the divinity of Christ. This idea of the divinity of
Christ, along with the idea of Christ as a messenger from God (The
Father), had long existed in various parts of the Roman empire. The
divinity of Christ had also been widely endorsed by the Christian
community in the otherwise pagan city of Rome.[9] The council affirmed
and defined what it believed to be the teachings of the Apostles regarding
who Christ is: that Christ is the one true God in deity with the Father.
Derived from Greek oikoumenikos (Greek: ), "ecumenical"
means "worldwide" but generally is assumed to be limited to the Roman
Empire in this context as in Augustus' claim to be ruler of the
oikoumene/world; the earliest extant uses of the term for a council are
Eusebius' Life of Constantine 3.6[10] around 338, which states "
" (he convoked an Ecumenical Council);
Athanasius' Ad Afros Epistola Synodica in 369;[11] and the Letter in 382 to
Pope Damasus I and the Latin bishops from the First Council of
Constantinople.[12]
One purpose of the council was to resolve disagreements arising from
within the Church of Alexandria over the nature of the Son in his
relationship to the Father; in particular, whether the Son had been

'begotten' by the Father from his own being, or created as the other
creatures out of nothing.[13] St. Alexander of Alexandria and Athanasius
claimed to take the first position; the popular presbyter Arius, from whom
the term Arianism comes, is said to have taken the second. The council
decided against the Arians overwhelmingly (of the estimated 250
318 attendees, all but two agreed to sign the creed and these two, along
with Arius, were banished to Illyria[14]). The emperor's threat of banishment
is claimed to have influenced many to sign, but this is highly debated by
both sides.
Another result of the council was an agreement on when to celebrate
Easter, the most important feast of the ecclesiastical calendar, decreed in
an epistle to the Church of Alexandria in which is simply stated
We also send you the good news of the settlement concerning the holy
pasch, namely that in answer to your prayers this question also has been
resolved. All the brethren in the East who have hitherto followed the Jewish
practice will henceforth observe the custom of the Romans and of
yourselves and of all of us who from ancient times have kept Easter
together with you.[15]
Historically significant as the first effort to attain consensus in the church
through an assembly representing all of Christendom,[5] the Council was
the first occasion where the technical aspects of Christology were
discussed.[5] Through it a precedent was set for subsequent general
councils to adopt creeds and canons. This council is generally considered
the beginning of the period of the First seven Ecumenical Councils in the
History of Christianity.
[edit]

Character and purpose

Constantine the Great summoned the bishops of the Christian Church to Nicea to
address divisions in the Church (mosaic in Hagia Sophia, Constantinople (Istanbul), ca.
1000).

The First Council of Nicea was convened by Constantine the Great upon
the recommendations of a synod led by Hosius of Crdoba in the
Eastertide of 325. This synod had been charged with investigation of the
trouble brought about by the Arian controversy in the Greek-speaking east.
[16] To most bishops, the teachings of Arius were heretical and dangerous
to the salvation of souls. In the summer of 325, the bishops of all provinces
were summoned to Nicea (now known as znik, in modern-day Turkey), a
place easily accessible to the majority of delegates, particularly those of
Asia Minor, Georgia, Armenia, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Greece, and
Thrace.
This was the first general council in the history of the Church since the
Apostolic Council of Jerusalem, the Apostolic council having established
the conditions upon which Gentiles could join the Church.[17] In the Council
of Nicea, "the Church had taken her first great step to define doctrine more
precisely in response to a challenge from a heretical theology."[18]
[edit]

Attendees
Constantine had invited all 1800 bishops of the Christian church (about
1000 in the east and 800 in the west), but a smaller and unknown number
attended. Eusebius of Caesarea counted 220,[19] Athanasius of Alexandria
counted 318,[20] and Eustathius of Antioch counted 270[21] (all three were
present at the council). Later, Socrates Scholasticus recorded more than
300,[22] and Evagrius,[23] Hilary of Poitiers,[24] Jerome[25] and Rufinus
recorded 318. Delegates came from every region of the Roman Empire
except Britain.
The participating bishops were given free travel to and from their episcopal
sees to the council, as well as lodging. These bishops did not travel alone;
each one had permission to bring with him two priests and three deacons;
so the total number of attendees could have been above 1800. Eusebius
speaks of an almost innumerable host of accompanying priests, deacons
and acolytes.

A special prominence was also attached to this council because the

persecution of Christians had just ended with the Edict of Milan, issued in
February of AD 313 by Emperors Constantine and Licinius.
The Eastern bishops formed the great majority. Of these, the first rank was
held by the three patriarchs: Alexander of Alexandria, Eustathius of
Antioch, and Macarius of Jerusalem. Many of the assembled fathersfor
instance, Paphnutius of Thebes, Potamon of Heraclea and Paul of
Neocaesareahad stood forth as confessors of the faith and came to the
council with the marks of persecution on their faces. Historically, the
influence of these marred confessors has been seen as substantial, but
recent scholarship has called this into question.[26]
Other remarkable attendees were Eusebius of Nicomedia; Eusebius of
Caesarea, the purported first church historian; legends attest and
circumstances suggest that Nicholas of Myra attended (his life was the
seed of the Santa Claus legends) but none of the ancient rolls include him;
Aristakes of Armenia (son of Saint Gregory the Illuminator); Leontius of
Caesarea; Jacob of Nisibis, a former hermit; Hypatius of Gangra;
Protogenes of Sardica; Melitius of Sebastopolis; Achilleus of Larissa
(considered the Athanasius of Thessaly)[27] and Spyridion of Trimythous,
who even while a bishop made his living as a shepherd.[28][29] From
foreign places came a Persian bishop John, a Gothic bishop Theophilus
and Stratophilus, bishop of Pitiunt of Georgia.
The Latin-speaking provinces sent at least five representatives: Marcus of
Calabria from Italia, Cecilian of Carthage from Africa, Hosius of Crdoba
from Hispania, Nicasius of Dijon from Gaul,[27] and Domnus of Stridon
from the province of the Danube.
Athanasius of Alexandria, a young deacon and companion of Bishop
Alexander of Alexandria, was among the assistants. Athanasius eventually
spent most of his life battling against Arianism. Alexander of
Constantinople, then a presbyter, was also present as representative of his
aged bishop.[27]
The supporters of Arius included Secundus of Ptolemais, Theonus of

Marmarica, Zphyrius, and Dathes, all of whom hailed from the Libyan
Pentapolis. Other supporters included Eusebius of Nicomedia,[30]
Eusebius of Caesarea, Paulinus of Tyrus, Actius of Lydda, Menophantus of
Ephesus, and Theognus of Nicea.[27][31]
"Resplendent in purple and gold, Constantine made a ceremonial entrance
at the opening of the council, probably in early June, but respectfully
seated the bishops ahead of himself."[17] As Eusebius described,
Constantine "himself proceeded through the midst of the assembly, like
some heavenly messenger of God, clothed in raiment which glittered as it
were with rays of light, reflecting the glowing radiance of a purple robe, and
adorned with the brilliant splendor of gold and precious stones."[32] He was
present as an observer, and did not vote. Constantine organized the
Council along the lines of the Roman Senate. Hosius of Cordoba may have
presided over its deliberations; he was probably one of the Papal legates.
[17] Eusebius of Nicomedia probably gave the welcoming address.[17][33]
[edit]

Agenda and procedure

Fresco depicting the First Council of Nicea.

The agenda of the synod included:

%

The Arian question regarding the relationship between God the

Father and Jesus; i.e. are the Father and Son one in divine purpose
only or also one in being

The date of celebration of the Paschal/Easter observation

The Meletian schism

The validity of baptism by heretics

The status of the lapsed in the persecution under Licinius[citation

needed]

The council was formally opened May 20, in the central structure of the
imperial palace at Nicea, with preliminary discussions of the Arian
question. In these discussions, some dominant figures were Arius, with

several adherents. "Some 22 of the bishops at the council, led by Eusebius

of Nicomedia, came as supporters of Arius. But when some of the more
shocking passages from his writings were read, they were almost
universally seen as blasphemous."[17] Bishops Theognis of Nicea and
Maris of Chalcedon were among the initial supporters of Arius.
Eusebius of Caesarea called to mind the baptismal creed of his own
diocese at Caesarea at Palestine, as a form of reconciliation. The majority
of the bishops agreed. For some time, scholars thought that the original
Nicene Creed was based on this statement of Eusebius. Today, most
scholars think that the Creed is derived from the baptismal creed of
Jerusalem, as Hans Lietzmann proposed.
The orthodox bishops won approval of every one of their proposals
regarding the Creed. After being in session for an entire month, the council
promulgated on June 19 the original Nicene Creed. This profession of faith
was adopted by all the bishops "but two from Libya who had been closely
associated with Arius from the beginning."[18] No historical record of their
dissent actually exists; the signatures of these bishops are simply absent
from the Creed.
[edit]

Arian controversy
Main articles: Arius, Arianism, and Arian controversy
The synod of Nicea, Constantine and the condemnation and burning of Arian books,
illustration from a northern Italian compendium of canon law, ca. 825

The Arian controversy was a Trinitarian dispute that began in Alexandria

between the followers of Arius (the Arians) and the followers of St.
Alexander of Alexandria (now known as Homoousians). Alexander and his
followers believed that the Son was co-eternal with the Father, and divine in
just the same sense that the Father is. The Arians believed that the Son
shared neither the eternity nor the true divinity of the Father, but was
merely the most perfect of the creatures.[34]

For about two months, the two sides argued and debated,[35] with each
appealing to Scripture to justify their respective positions. According to
many accounts, debate became so heated that at one point, Arius was
slapped in the face by Nicholas of Myra, who would later be canonized.[36]
Much of the debate hinged on the difference between being "born" or
"created" and being "begotten". Arians saw these as essentially the same;
followers of Alexander did not. The exact meaning of many of the words
used in the debates at Nicea were still unclear to speakers of other
languages. Greek words like "essence" (ousia), "substance" (hypostasis),
"nature" (physis), "person" (prosopon) bore a variety of meanings drawn
from pre-Christian philosophers, which could not but entail
misunderstandings until they were cleared up. The word homoousia, in
particular, was initially disliked by many bishops because of its associations
with Gnostic heretics (who used it in their theology), and because it had
been condemned at the 264268 Synods of Antioch.
[edit]

Position of Arius (Arianism)

Arius maintained that the Son of God was a Creature, made from nothing;
and that he was God's First Production, before all ages. And he argued
that everything else was created through the Son. Thus, said the Arians,
only the Son was directly created and begotten of God; and therefore there
was a time that He had no existence. Arius believed the Son Jesus was
capable of His own free will of right and wrong, and that "were He in the
truest sense a son, He must have come after the Father, therefore the time
obviously was when He was not, and hence He was a finite being,"[37] and
was under God the Father. The Arians appealed to Scripture, quoting
verses such as John 14:28: "the Father is greater than I", and also
Colossians 1:15: "Firstborn of all creation."
[edit]

Position of St. Alexander

Alexander and the Nicene fathers countered the Arians' argument, saying
that the Father's fatherhood, like all of his attributes, is eternal. Thus, the

Father was always a father, and that the Son, therefore, always existed with
him. The Nicene fathers believed that to follow the Arian view destroyed
the unity of the Godhead, and made the Son unequal to the Father, in
contravention of the Scriptures ("I and the Father are one"; John 10:30).
Further on it says "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and
I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that
thou hast sent me"; John 17:21.
[edit]

Result of the debate

The Council declared that the Son was true God, co-eternal with the Father
and begotten from His same substance, arguing that such a doctrine best
codified the Scriptural presentation of the Son as well as traditional
Christian belief about him handed down from the Apostles. Under
Constantine's influence,[38] this belief was expressed by the bishops in the
Nicene Statement, which would form the basis of what has since been
known as the Nicene Creed.
[edit]

The Nicene Creed

Main article: Nicene Creed
Icon depicting the Emperor Constantine and the bishops of the First Council of Nicea
(325) holding the NicenoConstantinopolitan Creed of 381.

One of the projects undertaken by the Council was the creation of a Creed,
a declaration and summary of the Christian faith. Several creeds were
already in existence; many creeds were acceptable to the members of the
council, including Arius. From earliest times, various creeds served as a
means of identification for Christians, as a means of inclusion and
recognition, especially at baptism.
In Rome, for example, the Apostles' Creed was popular, especially for use
in Lent and the Easter season. In the Council of Nicea, one specific creed
was used to define the Church's faith clearly, to include those who

professed it, and to exclude those who did not.

Some distinctive elements in the Nicene Creed, perhaps from the hand of
Hosius of Cordova, were added. Some elements were added specifically to
counter the Arian point of view.[39] [40]
%

Jesus Christ is described as "God from God, Light from Light, true
God from true God," proclaiming his divinity.

Jesus Christ is said to be "begotten, not made", asserting that he

was not a mere creature, brought in to being out of nothing, but the
true Son of God, brought in to being 'from the substance of the
Father'.

He is said to be "one in being with The Father". Eusebius of

Caesarea ascribes the term homoousios, or consubstantial, i.e., "of
the same substance" (of the Father), to Constantine who, on this
particular point, may have chosen to exercise his authority. The
significance of this clause, however, is extremely ambiguous, and the
issues it raised would be seriously controverted in future.

At the end of the creed came a list of anathemas, designed to repudiate

explicitly the Arians' stated claims.
%

The view that 'there was once that when he was not' was rejected to
maintain the co-eternity of the Son with the Father.

The view that he was 'mutable or subject to change' was rejected to

maintain that the Son just like the Father was beyond any form of
weakness or corruptibility, and most importantly that he could not fall
away from absolute moral perfection.

Thus, instead of a baptismal creed acceptable to both the Arians and their
opponents the council promulgated one which was clearly opposed to
Arianism and incompatible with the distinctive core of their beliefs. The text
of this profession of faith is preserved in a letter of Eusebius to his
congregation, in Athanasius, and elsewhere. Although the most vocal of
anti-Arians, the Homoousians (from the Koine Greek word translated as "of
same substance" which was condemned at the Council of Antioch in 264
268), were in the minority, the Creed was accepted by the council as an

expression of the bishops' common faith and the ancient faith of the whole
Church.
Bishop Hosius of Cordova, one of the firm Homoousians, may well have
helped bring the council to consensus. At the time of the council, he was
the confidant of the emperor in all Church matters. Hosius stands at the
head of the lists of bishops, and Athanasius ascribes to him the actual
formulation of the creed. Great leaders such as Eustathius of Antioch,
Alexander of Alexandria, Athanasius, and Marcellus of Ancyra all adhered
to the Homoousian position.
In spite of his sympathy for Arius, Eusebius of Caesarea adhered to the
decisions of the council, accepting the entire creed. The initial number of
bishops supporting Arius was small. After a month of discussion, on June
19, there were only two left: Theonas of Marmarica in Libya, and Secundus
of Ptolemais. Maris of Chalcedon, who initially supported Arianism, agreed
to the whole creed. Similarly, Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nice
also agreed, except for the certain statements.
The Emperor carried out his earlier statement: everybody who refused to
endorse the Creed would be exiled. Arius, Theonas, and Secundus refused
to adhere to the creed, and were thus exiled to Illyria, in addition to being
excommunicated. The works of Arius were ordered to be confiscated and
consigned to the flames while all persons found possessing them were to
be executed.[14] Nevertheless, the controversy continued in various parts
of the empire.
The Creed was amended to a new version by the First Council of
Constantinople in 381.
[edit]

Separation of Easter computation from Jewish

calendar
The feast of Easter is linked to the Jewish Passover and Feast of
Unleavened Bread, as Christians believe that the crucifixion and
resurrection of Jesus occurred at the time of those observances.

As early as Pope Sixtus I, some Christians had set Easter to a Sunday in

the lunar month of Nisan. To determine which lunar month was to be
designated as Nisan, Christians relied on the Jewish community. By the
later 3rd century some Christians began to express dissatisfaction with
what they took to be the disorderly state of the Jewish calendar. They
argued that contemporary Jews were identifying the wrong lunar month as
the month of Nisan, choosing a month whose 14th day fell before the
spring equinox.[41]
Christians, these thinkers argued, should abandon the custom of relying on
Jewish informants and instead do their own computations to determine
which month should be styled Nisan, setting Easter within this
independently computed, Christian Nisan, which would always locate the
festival after the equinox. They justified this break with tradition by arguing
that it was in fact the contemporary Jewish calendar that had broken with
tradition by ignoring the equinox, and that in former times the 14th of Nisan
had never preceded the equinox.[42] Others felt that the customary practice
of reliance on the Jewish calendar should continue, even if the Jewish
computations were in error from a Christian point of view.[43]
The controversy between those who argued for independent computations
and those who argued for continued reliance on the Jewish calendar was
formally resolved by the Council, which endorsed the independent
procedure that had been in use for some time at Rome and Alexandria.
Easter was henceforward to be a Sunday in a lunar month chosen
according to Christian criteriain effect, a Christian Nisannot in the
month of Nisan as defined by Jews. Those who argued for continued
reliance on the Jewish calendar (called "protopaschites" by later historians)
were urged to come around to the majority position. That they did not all
immediately do so is revealed by the existence of sermons,[44] canons,[45]
and tracts[46] written against the protopaschite practice in the later 4th
century.
These two rules, independence of the Jewish calendar and worldwide
uniformity, were the only rules for Easter explicitly laid down by the Council.
No details for the computation were specified; these were worked out in

practice, a process that took centuries and generated a number of

controversies. (See also Computus and Reform of the date of Easter.) In
particular, the Council did not decree that Easter must fall on Sunday. This
was already the practice almost everywhere.[47]
Nor did the Council decree that Easter must never coincide with Nisan 15
(the first Day of Unleavened Bread, now commonly called "Passover") in
the Hebrew calendar. By endorsing the move to independent
computations, the Council had separated the Easter computation from all
dependence, positive or negative, on the Jewish calendar. The "Zonaras
proviso", the claim that Easter must always follow Nisan 15 in the Hebrew
calendar, was not formulated until after some centuries. By that time, the
accumulation of errors in the Julian solar and lunar calendars had made it
the de-facto state of affairs that Julian Easter always followed Hebrew
Nisan 15.[48]
"At the council we also considered the issue of our holiest day, Easter, and it was
determined by common consent that everyone, everywhere should celebrate it on
one and the same day. For what can be more appropriate, or what more solemn,
than that this feast from which we have received the hope of immortality, should
be kept by all without variation, using the same order and a clear arrangement?
And in the first place, it seemed very unworthy for us to keep this most sacred
feast following the custom of the Jews, a people who have soiled their hands in a
most terrible outrage, and have thus polluted their souls, and are now deservedly
blind. Since we have cast aside their way of calculating the date of the festival,
we can ensure that future generations can celebrate this observance at the more
accurate time which we have kept from the first day of the passion until the
present time...."
Emperor Constantine, following the Council of Nicaea [49]

[edit]

Meletian schism
Main article: Meletius of Lycopolis
The suppression of the Meletian schism, an early breakaway sect, was
another important matter that came before the Council of Nicea. Meletius,

it was decided, should remain in his own city of Lycopolis in Egypt, but
without exercising authority or the power to ordain new clergy; he was
forbidden to go into the environs of the town or to enter another diocese for
the purpose of ordaining its subjects. Melitius retained his episcopal title,
but the ecclesiastics ordained by him were to receive again the Laying on
of hands, the ordinations performed by Meletius being therefore regarded
as invalid. Clergy ordained by Meletius were ordered to yield precedence to
those ordained by Alexander, and they were not to do anything without the
consent of Bishop Alexander.[50]
In the event of the death of a non-Meletian bishop or ecclesiastic, the
vacant see might be given to a Meletian, provided he was worthy and the
popular election were ratified by Alexander. As to Meletius himself,
episcopal rights and prerogatives were taken from him. These mild
measures, however, were in vain; the Meletians joined the Arians and
caused more dissension than ever, being among the worst enemies of
Athanasius. The Meletians ultimately died out around the middle of the fifth
century.
[edit]

Promulgation of canon law

The council promulgated twenty new church laws, called canons, (though
the exact number is subject to debate[51]), that is, unchanging rules of
discipline. The twenty as listed in the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers are
as follows:[52]
1. prohibition of self-castration
2. establishment of a minimum term for catechumen (persons studying for
baptism)
3. prohibition of the presence in the house of a cleric of a younger woman
who might bring him under suspicion (the so called virgines
subintroductae)
4. ordination of a bishop in the presence of at least three provincial bishops
and confirmation by the Metropolitan bishop
5. provision for two provincial synods to be held annually

6. exceptional authority acknowledged for the patriarchs of Alexandria,

Antioch, and Rome (the Pope), for their respective regions
7. recognition of the honorary rights of the see of Jerusalem
8. provision for agreement with the Novatianists, an early sect
914. provision for mild procedure against the lapsed during the
persecution under Licinius
1516. prohibition of the removal of priests
17. prohibition of usury among the clergy
18. precedence of bishops and presbyters before deacons in receiving the
Eucharist (Holy Communion)
19. declaration of the invalidity of baptism by Paulian heretics
20. prohibition of kneeling on Sundays and during the Pentecost (the fifty
days commencing on Easter). Standing was the normative posture for
prayer at this time, as it still is among the Eastern Christians.[53]
On July 25, 325, in conclusion, the fathers of the council celebrated the
Emperor's twentieth anniversary. In his farewell address, Constantine
informed the audience how averse he was to dogmatic controversy; he
wanted the Church to live in harmony and peace. In a circular letter, he
announced the accomplished unity of practice by the whole Church in the
date of the celebration of Christian Passover (Easter).
[edit]

Effects of the Council

The long-term effects of the Council of Nicea were significant. For the first
time, representatives of many of the bishops of the Church convened to
agree on a doctrinal statement. Also for the first time, the Emperor played a
role, by calling together the bishops under his authority, and using the
power of the state to give the Council's orders effect.
In the short-term, however, the council did not completely solve the
problems it was convened to discuss and a period of conflict and upheaval
continued for some time. Constantine himself was succeeded by two Arian
Emperors in the Eastern Empire: his son, Constantius II and Valens.
Valens could not resolve the outstanding ecclesiastical issues, and

unsuccessfully confronted St. Basil over the Nicene Creed.[54]

Pagan powers within the Empire sought to maintain and at times reestablish paganism into the seat of the Emperor (see Arbogast and Julian
the Apostate). Arians and Meletians soon regained nearly all of the rights
they had lost, and consequently, Arianism continued to spread and to
cause division in the Church during the remainder of the fourth century.
Almost immediately, Eusebius of Nicomedia, an Arian bishop and cousin to
Constantine I, used his influence at court to sway Constantine's favor from
the orthodox Nicene bishops to the Arians.[55]
Eustathius of Antioch was deposed and exiled in 330. Athanasius, who had
succeeded Alexander as Bishop of Alexandria, was deposed by the First
Synod of Tyre in 335 and Marcellus of Ancyra followed him in 336. Arius
himself returned to Constantinople to be readmitted into the Church, but
died shortly before he could be received. Constantine died the next year,
after finally receiving baptism from Arian Bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia,
and "with his passing the first round in the battle after the Council of Nicea
was ended."[56]
[edit]

Misconceptions

This section's references may not meet Wikipedia's guidelines for reliable sourc
references meet the criteria for reliable sources. (February 2012)
[edit]

The biblical canon

Main article: Development of the Christian biblical canon
A number of erroneous views have been stated regarding the council's role
in establishing the biblical canon. In fact, there is no record of any
discussion of the biblical canon at the council at all.[57][58] The
development of the biblical canon took centuries, and was nearly complete
(with exceptions known as the Antilegomena, written texts whose
authenticity or value is disputed) by the time the Muratorian fragment was

written.[59]
In 331 Constantine commissioned fifty Bibles for the Church of
Constantinople, but little else is known, though it has been speculated that
this may have provided motivation for canon lists. In Jerome's Prologue to
Judith[60][61][62] he claims that the Book of Judith was "found by the Nicene
Council to have been counted among the number of the Sacred
Scriptures".
[edit]

The Trinity
The council of Nicea dealt primarily with the issue of the deity of Christ.
Over a century earlier the use of the term "Trinity" (in Greek; trinitas
in Latin) could be found in the writings of Origen (185-254) and Tertullian
(160-220), and a general notion of a "divine three", in some sense, was
expressed in the second century writings of Polycarp, Ignatius, and Justin
Martyr.[citation needed] But the doctrine in a more full-fledged form was not
formulated until the Council of Constantinople in 360 AD.[63]
[edit]

The role of Constantine

Main article: Constantine I and Christianity
While Constantine wanted a unified church after the council for political
reasons, he did not force the Homoousian view of Christ's nature on the
council, nor commission a Bible at the council that omitted books he did
not approve of, although he did later commission Bibles. In fact,
Constantine had little theological understanding of the issues at stake, and
did not particularly care which view of Christ's nature prevailed so long as it
resulted in a unified church.[64] This can be seen in his initial acceptance of
the Homoousian view of Christ's nature, only to abandon the belief several
years later for political reasons; under the influence of Eusebius of
Nicomedia and others.[64]
[edit]

The role of the Bishop of Rome

See also: Primacy of the Roman pontif and East-West Schism

Roman Catholics assert that idea of Christ's deity was ultimately confirmed
by the Bishop of Rome, and that it was this confirmation that gave the
council its influence and authority. In support of this they cite the position of
early fathers and their expression of the need for all churches to agree with
Rome (see Ireneaus, Adversus Haereses III:3:2).
However, Protestants and Eastern Orthodox do not believe the Council
viewed the Bishop of Rome as the jurisdictional head of Christendom or
someone having authority over other bishops attending the Council. In
support of this they cite Canon 6, where the Roman Bishop could be seen
as simply one of several influential leaders, but not one who had
jurisdiction over other bishops in other regions.
"Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis prevail: that the
Bishop of Alexandria have jurisdiction in all these, since the like is
customary for the Bishop of Rome also. Likewise in Antioch and the other
provinces, let the Churches retain their privileges..."[65]
According to Protestant theologian Philip Schaff, "The Nicene fathers
passed this canon not as introducing anything new, but merely as
confirming an existing relation on the basis of church tradition; and that,
with special reference to Alexandria, on account of the troubles existing
there. Rome was named only for illustration; and Antioch and all the other
eparchies or provinces were secured their admitted rights. The bishoprics
of Alexandria, Rome, and Antioch were placed substantially on equal
footing"[66]
There is however, an alternate Roman Catholic interpretation of the above
6th canon proposed by Fr. James F. Loughlin in contradistinction to the
above interpretation; an interpretation which is in line with the above
reference from Ireneaus. It involves 5 different arguments "drawn
respectively from the grammatical structure of the sentence, from the
logical sequence of ideas, from Catholic analogy, from comparison with the
process of formation of the Byzantine Patriarchate, and from the authority
of the ancients"[67] in favor of an alternative understanding of the canon.
The understanding of the canon according to Fr. Loughlin can be

summarized as follows:
"Let the Bishop of Alexandria continue to govern these provinces, because
this is also the Roman Pontiff's custom; that is, because the Roman Pontiff,
prior to any synodical enactment, has repeatedly recognized the
Alexandrian Bishop's authority over this tract of country".[67]
According to this interpretation, the canon shows the role the Bishop of
Rome had when he, by his authority, confirmed the jurisdiction of the other
patriarchs- an interpretation which is in line with the Roman Catholic
understanding of the Pope.
[edit]

See also
First seven Ecumenical Councils
First Council of Nicaea

Homoousian
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Homoousian (/hmoasi/ hom-oh-ow-see-; Ancient Greek:
, from theAncient Greek: ,homs, "same" and Ancient
Greek: , ousa, "essence, being") is a technical theological term
used in discussion of the Christian understanding of God as Trinity. The
Nicene Creed describes Jesus as being homoosios with God the Father
that is, they are of the "same substance" and are equally God. This
term, adopted by the First Council of Nicaea, was intended to add clarity to
the relationship between Christ and God the Father within the Godhead.
The term is rendered "consubstantialis" in Latin and in related terms in
other Latin-derived languages. It is one of the cornerstones of theology in
all Churches that adhere to the Nicene Creed.

Contents [hide]
%

1 Pre-Nicene use of
the term

2 Adoption of the term

in the Nicene Creed

3 See also

4 Notes

5 References

[edit]

Pre-Nicene use of the term

The term had been used before its adoption by the Nicene
theology. The Gnostics were the first theologians to use the word
"homoousios", while before the Gnostics there is no trace at all of its
existence.[1] The early church theologians were probably made aware of
this concept, and thus of the doctrine of emanation, by the Gnostics.[2] In
Gnostic texts the word "homoousios" is used with these meanings: (1)
identity of substance between generating and generated; (2) identity of
substance between things generated of the same substance; (3) identity of
substance between the partners of a syzygy. For example, Basilides, the
first known Gnostic thinker to use "homoousios" in the first half of the 2nd
century, speaks of a threefold sonship consubstantial with the god who is
not.[3] The Valentinian Gnostic Ptolemy claims in his letter to Flora that it is
the nature of the good God to beget and bring forth only beings similar to,
and consubstantial with himself.[4] "Homoousios" was already in current
use by the 2nd-century Gnostics, and through their works it became known
to the orthodox heresiologists, though this Gnostic use of the term had no
reference to the specific relationship between Father and Son, as is the
case in the Nicene Creed.
[edit]

Adoption of the term in the Nicene Creed

The Nicaean Creed is the official doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church,

Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodox, Anglican Church, and most

mainline Protestant churches with regard to the ontological status of the
three persons of the Trinity: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Origen seems to have been the first ecclesiastical writer to use the word
"homoousios" in a Trinitarian context,[5] but it is evident in his writings that
he considered the Son's divinity lesser than the Father's, since he even
calls the Son a creature.[6] It was by Athanasius and the Nicene Synod that
the Son was taken to have exactly the same nature or essence with the
Father, and at the Nicene Creed the Son was declared to be as immutable
as his Father is.[7] Some theologians preferred the use of the term
(homoiosios, from , hmoios, "similar" rather than
,homs, "same") in order to emphasize distinctions among the three
persons in the Godhead, but the term homoousios became a consistent
mark of Nicene orthodoxy in both East and West. According to this
doctrine, Jesus Christ is the physical manifestation of Logos (or the divine
word) and consequently possesses all of the inherent, ineffable perfections
which religion and philosophy attribute to the Supreme Being. Three
distinct and infinite minds or substances, three co-equal and eternal
realities, participate in (or share) the same, single Divine Essence (ousia).
This doctrine was formulated in the 4th century during the extraordinary
Trinitarian or Arian controversy. The several distinct branches of Arianism
which sometimes conflicted with each other as well as with the pro-Nicene
homoousian creed can be roughly broken down into the following
classification:
%

Homoiousianism (from , hmoios, "similar" - as opposed to

homs, "same") which maintained that the Son was "like in
substance" but not necessarily to be identified with the essence of
the Father.

Homoeanism (also from hmoios) which declared that the Son was
similar to God the father, without reference to substance or essence.
Some supporters of Homoian formulae also supported one of the
other descriptions. Other Homoians declared that God the father was
so incomparable and ineffably transcendent that even the ideas of

likeness, similarity or identity in substance or essence with the

subordinate Son and the Holy Spirit were heretical and not justified
by the Gospels. They held that the Father was like the Son in some
sense but that even to speak of ousia was impertinent speculation.
%

Heteroousianism (including Anomoeanism) which held that God the

father and the son were different in substance and/or attributes.

All of these positions and the almost innumerable variations on them which
developed in the 4th century AD were strongly and tenaciously opposed by
Athanasius and other pro-Nicenes who insisted on the doctrine of the
homoousian (or as it is called in modern terms consubstantiality),
eventually prevailing in the struggle to define the dogma of the Orthodox
Church for the next two millennia when its use was confirmed by the First
Council of Constantinople in 381 or 383.
It has also been noted that this Greek term "homoousian", which
Athanasius of Alexandria favored, and was ratified in the Nicene Council
and Creed, was actually a term reported to also be used and favored by
the Sabellians in their Christology. And it was a term that many followers of
Athanasius were actually uneasy about. And the "Semi-Arians", in
particular, objected to the word "homoousian". Their objection to this term
was that it was considered to be un-Scriptural, suspicious, and "of a
Sabellian tendency."[8] This was because Sabellius also considered the
Father and the Son to be "one substance." Meaning that, to Sabellius, the
Father and Son were "one essential Person." This notion, however, was
also rejected at the Council of Nicaea, in favor of the Athanasian
formulation and creed, of the Father and Son being distinct yet also coequal, co-eternal, and con-substantial Persons.
[edit]

See also
%

Nicene Creed

First Council of Nicaea

Athanasius

Arius

Sabellius

Homoiousian
Homoousian
council at nicea (nicaea
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9uoyRYoJ4c&feature=related
dr. ray hagin
argument of apologetics (argument where you
have to prove your point=go get the evidence)

ecumenical councils

look at ray's background!!! it's my material for the story!!!

put into office by alexander the great (alexander the greek)
ptolemy the first meryamun(beloved warrior) setepenre(chosen by
god), 'soter', c.a.(=circa=approximate) 367-283 bce
(first european pharoah)
soter=savior
his image was serapis
osirus + apis=osirapis=serapis

egyptian c.a. 350 bce

serapis christus greco-roman
c.a. 135 bce
NICEAN COUNCIL LASTED TWO MONTHS AND TWELVE DAYS
318 bishops present
which day easter was celebrated was decided
pope sylvester

the nicean creed

which became the statement of the christian
faith, was written, decreed and canonized by
318 roman catholic bishops at the council of
nicea in 325 a.d.- 'We believe in one god, the
father, all powerful maker of all things both seen
and unseen. And in one lord, jesus christ, the son
of god, the only begotten, begotten from the father,
that is from the substance of the father, god from
god, light from light, true god from true god, begotten
not made, consubstantial with the father, through whom
all things came to be, both those in heaven and
those in earth; for us humans and for our salvation he
came down and became incarnate, became human,
suffered and rose up on the third day, went up into
the heavens, is coming to judge the living and the
dead. and in the holy spirit.
And those who say, 'there once was when he was
not,' and, 'before he was begotten he was not,' and that
he came to be from things that were not, or from
another hypostasis or substance, affirming that the
son of god is subject to change or alteration these
the catholic and apostolic church anathematises.
this creed is a control mechanism (mechanism is
a word used about thoughts as well as machines)
created a creed based on what erius said that
catholics have to recite
constantine commands the bishops agree to the creed
constantine burns all the books
two followers of erius stuck by him
constantine exiled them
serapis christus (christ the saviour) became
jesus christ by edict of emperor constantine in 325 a. d.

council at nicea

council of nicea-christ type impressed into doctrine of religious

dominance-religious peaceful easier to convert into vehicle for rulerall organization is a vehicle for survival

Gbekli Tepe
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Gbekli Tepe
Location

near anlurfa

Region

Southeastern Anatolia Region, Turkey

Coordinates

37.2233N 38.9224E
Coordinates: 37.2233N 38.9224E

Type

Temple
History

Periods

pre-pottery Neolithic AB
Site notes

Condition

well preserved

Website

references:[1] Megalithic Portal

Gbekli Tepe Turkish: [bee kli tee p][2] ("Potbelly Hill"[3]) is a Neolithic
hilltop sanctuary erected at the top of a mountain ridge in the Southeastern
Anatolia Region of Turkey, some 15 kilometers (9 mi) northeast of the town
of anlurfa (formerly Urfa / Edessa). It is the oldest known human-made
religious structure.[1][4] The site was most likely erected in the 10th
millennium BCE and has been under excavation since 1994 by German
and Turkish archaeologists.[5] Together with Neval ori, it has
revolutionized understanding of Eurasian Neolithic history.[6]
Contents [hide]
%

1
Discovery

2 The

complex
%

3 Dating

4
Architecture

5
Economy

6
Chronological context

7
Interpretation and
importance

8
Conservation

9 See also

10 Notes

11
References

12
External links

[edit]

Discovery
Gbekli Tepe, anlurfa, 2011

Gbekli Tepe is located in southeastern Turkey. It was first noted in a

survey conducted by Istanbul University and the University of Chicago in
1964, which recognized that the hill could not entirely be a natural feature
and postulated that a Byzantine cemetery lay beneath. The survey noted a
large number of flints and the presence of limestone slabs thought to be
Byzantine grave markers. This work was first mentioned in print in Peter
Benedict's article "Survey Work in Southeastern Anatolia" (1980). In 1994,
archaeologist Klaus Schmidt of the German Archaeological Institute of
Istanbul noted Benedict's article and visited the site, recognizing that it was

in fact a much older Neolithic site. Since 1995[7] excavations have been
conducted by the German Archaeological Institute of Istanbul and the
anlurfa Museum, under the direction of Schmidt (University of Heidelberg
19952000, German Archaeological Institute 2001present). The hill had
been under agricultural cultivation before being excavated. Generations of
local inhabitants had frequently moved rocks and placed them in clearance
piles and much archaeological evidence may have been destroyed in the
process. Scholars from the Hochschule Karlsruhe began documenting the
architectural remains and soon discovered T-shaped pillars facing southeast. Some of these pillars had apparently undergone attempts at
destruction, probably by farmers who mistook them for ordinary large
rocks.[8]
[edit]

The complex
View of site and excavation

Gbekli Tepe is the world's oldest known religious structure.[4] The site,
located on a hilltop, contains 20 round structures which had been buried,
four of which have been excavated. Each round structure has a diameter of
between 10 and 30 meters (30 and 100 ft) and all are decorated with
massive, mostly T-shaped, limestone pillars that are the most striking
feature of the site. The limestone slabs were carried from bedrock pits
located around 100 meters (330 ft) from the hilltop, with neolithic workers
using flint points to carve the bedrock.[9] The majority of flint tools found at
the site are Byblos and Nemrik points.
Two pillars are at the centre of each circle, possibly intended to help
support a roof, and up to eight pillars are evenly positioned around the
walls of the room. The spaces between the pillars are lined with unworked
stone and there are stone benches between each set of pillars around the
edges of the wall.[10]
Many of the pillars are decorated with carved reliefs of animals and of

abstract enigmatic pictograms. The pictograms may represent commonly

understood sacred symbols, as known from Neolithic cave paintings
elsewhere. The reliefs depict lions, bulls, boars, foxes, gazelles, donkeys,
snakes and other reptiles, insects, arachnids, and birds, particularly
vultures. (At the time the shrine was constructed, the surrounding country
was much lusher and capable of sustaining this variety of wildlife, before
millennia of settlement and cultivation resulted in the nearDust Bowl
conditions prevailing today.)[8] Vultures also feature prominently in the
iconography of the Neolithic sites of atalhyk and Jericho; it is believed
that in the early Neolithic culture of Anatolia and the Near East the
deceased were deliberately exposed in order to be excarnated by vultures
and other carrion birds. (The head of the deceased was sometimes
removed and preservedpossibly a sign of ancestor worship.)[11] This,
then, would represent an early form of sky burial, as practiced today by
Tibetan Buddhists and by Zoroastrians in India.[12]
Few humanoid figures have surfaced at Gbekli Tepe, but they include the
engraving of a naked woman posed frontally in a crouched position that
Schmidt likens to the Venus accueillante figures found in Neolithic north
Africa, and a decapitated corpse surrounded by vultures in bas-relief.
Some of the T-shaped pillars picture human arms, which indicate that they
represent the bodies of stylized humans (or anthropomorphic gods). The
wider stone member atop the T-shaped pillars is thought to symbolize the
head; thus the pillars as a whole have an anthropomorphic identity.[13] One
example is decorated with human hands in what could be interpreted as a
prayer gesture, with a simple stole or surplice engraved above; this may be
intended to signify a temple priest.[14]
Until excavations began, a complex on this scale was not thought possible
for a community so ancient, and with such primitive quarrying tools. The
massive sequence of stratification layers suggests several millennia of
activity, perhaps reaching back to the Mesolithic. The oldest occupation
layer (Layer III) contains monolithic pillars linked by coarsely built walls to
form circular or oval structures. Four such buildings have been uncovered,
with diameters between 1030 meters (3398 ft). Geophysical surveys

indicate the existence of 16 additional structures.

Layer II, dated to Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) (75006000 BCE), has
revealed several adjacent rectangular rooms with floors of polished lime,
reminiscent of Roman terrazzo floors. The most recent layer consists of
sediment deposited as the result of agricultural activity.
[edit]

Dating
The PPN A settlement has been dated to c. 9000 BCE. There are remains
of smaller houses from the PPN B and a few epipalaeolithic finds as well.
There are a number of radiocarbon dates (presented with one standard
deviation errors and calibrations to BCE):
LabNumber

Date BP Cal BCE

Context

Ua-19561

8430 8 7560
0
7370

enclosure
C

Ua-19562

8960 8 8280
5
7970

enclosure
B

Hd-20025

9452 7 9110
3
8620

Layer III

Hd-20036

9559 5 9130
3
8800

Layer III

The Hd samples are from charcoal in the lowest levels of the site and
would date the active phase of occupation. The Ua samples come from
pedogenic carbonate coatings on pillars and only indicate a time after the
site was abandonedthe terminus ante quem.[15]
[edit]

Architecture
The structures are round megalithic buildings. The walls are made of

unworked dry stone and include numerous T-shaped monolithic pillars of

limestone that are up to 3 meters (10 ft) high. Another, bigger pair of pillars
is placed in the centre of the structures. There is evidence that the
structures were roofed; the central pair of pillars may have supported the
roof. Some of the floors are made of terrazzo (burnt lime), others are
bedrock from which pedestals for the large pair of central pillars were
carefully carved in high relief.[16]
The reliefs on the pillars include foxes, lions, cattle, hyenas, wild boar, wild
asses, cranes, ducks, scorpions, ants, spiders, many snakes, and a small
number of anthropomorphic figures. Some of the reliefs have been
deliberately erased, maybe in preparation for new designs. There are
freestanding sculptures as well that may represent wild boars or foxes. As
they are heavily encrusted with lime, it is sometimes difficult to tell.
Comparable statues have been discovered at Neval ori and Nahal
Hemar.

Monolith with bull, fox, and crane in low relief

The quarries for the statues are located on the plateau itself; some
unfinished pillars have been found there in situ. The biggest unfinished
pillar is still 6.9 meters (22.6 ft) long; a length of 9 meters (30 ft) has been
reconstructed. This is much larger than any of the finished pillars found so
far. The stone was quarried with stone picks.[citation needed] Bowl-like
depressions in the limestone rocks may already have served as mortars or
fire-starting bowls in the epipalaeolithic. There are some phalloi and
geometric patterns cut into the rock as well; their dating is uncertain.
Creation of the circular enclosures in layer III later gave way to the
construction of small rectangular rooms in layer II. But the T-shaped pillars,
the main feature of the older enclosures, survived, indicating that the
buildings of Layer II likewise served as sanctuaries.[17] Schmidt believes
this "cathedral on a hill" was a pilgrimage destination attracting worshipers
up to a 100 miles (160 km) distant. Butchered bones found in large
numbers from local game such as deer, gazelle, pigs, and geese have

been identified as refuse derived from hunting and food prepared for the
congregants.[18]
The site was deliberately backfilled sometime after 8000 BCE: the
buildings are covered with debris, mostly flint gravel, stone tools and
animal bones that must have been brought from elsewhere.[19] The lithic
inventory is characterised by Byblos points and numerous Nemrik-points.
There are Helwan-points and Aswad-points as well.
[edit]

Economy
While the site formally belongs to the earliest Neolithic (PPNA), up to now
no traces of domesticated plants or animals have been found. The
inhabitants are assumed to have been hunters and gatherers who
nevertheless lived in villages for at least part of the year.[20] Schmidt
speculates that the site played a key function in the transition to agriculture;
he assumes that the necessary social organization needed for the creation
of these structures went hand-in-hand with the organized domestication of
wild crops. Wild cereals may have been used for sustenance more
intensively than before and were perhaps deliberately cultivated. Recent
DNA analysis of modern domesticated wheat compared with wild wheat
has shown that its DNA is closest in sequence to wild wheat found on
Mount Karaca Da 20 miles (32 km) away from the site, suggesting that
this is where modern wheat was first domesticated.[21]
Schmidt considers Gbekli Tepe a central location for a cult of the dead.
He suggests that the carved animals are there to protect the dead. Though
no tombs or graves have been found so far, Schmidt believes they remain
to be discovered in niches located behind the sacred circles' walls.[8]
Schmidt also interprets it in connection with the initial stages of an incipient
Neolithic. It is one of several neolithic sites in the vicinity of Karaca Da, an
area which geneticists suspect may have been the origin of at least some
of our cultivated grains (see Einkorn). Such scholars suggest that the
Neolithic revolution, i.e., the beginnings of grain cultivation, took place
here. Schmidt and others believe that mobile groups in the area were

forced to cooperate with each other to protect early concentrations of wild

cereals from wild animals (herds of gazelles and wild donkeys). This would
have led to an early social organization of various groups in the area of
Gbekli Tepe. Thus, according to Schmidt, the Neolithic did not begin on a
small scale in the form of individual instances of garden cultivation, but
started immediately as a large-scale social organization ("a full-scale
revolution.")[22]
[edit]

Chronological context
All statements about the site must be considered preliminary, as only about
5% of the site's total area has yet been excavated. Schmidt believes that
the dig could well continue for another fifty years, "and barely scratch the
surface."[8] Floor levels have been reached in three of the Layer III
enclosures; enclosure B contains a terrazzo-like floor; in enclosures C and
D the floors were found to be natural bedrock, carefully smoothed. So far,
excavations have revealed very little evidence for residential use. Through
the radiocarbon method, the end of Layer III can be fixed at c. 9000 BCE
(see above); its beginnings are estimated to 11,000 BCE or earlier. Layer II
dates to about 8000 BCE.
Thus, the structures not only predate pottery, metallurgy, and the invention
of writing or the wheel; they were built before the so-called Neolithic
Revolution, i.e., the beginning of agriculture and animal husbandry around
9000 BCE. But the construction of Gbekli Tepe implies organization of an
order of complexity not hitherto associated with Paleolithic, PPNA, or
PPNB societies. The archaeologists estimate that up to 500 persons were
required to extract the heavy pillars from local quarries and move them
100500 meters (3301,640 ft) to the site.[23] The pillars weigh 1020
metric tons (1020 long tons; 1122 short tons); with one found still in its
quarry weighing 50 tons.[24] It is generally believed that an elite class of
religious leaders supervised the work and later controlled whatever
ceremonies took place here. If so, this would be the oldest known evidence
for a priestly castemuch earlier than such social distinctions developed

elsewhere in the Near East.[8]

Around the beginning of the 8th millennium BCE "Potbelly Hill" lost its
importance. The advent of agriculture and animal husbandry brought new
realities to human life in the area, and the "stone-age zoo" (as Schmidt
calls it) depicted on the pillars apparently lost whatever significance it had
had for the region's older, foraging, communities. But the complex was not
simply abandoned and forgotten to be gradually destroyed by the
elements. Instead, each enclosure was deliberately buried under as much
as 300 to 500 cubic meters (390 to 650 cu yd) of debris consisting mainly
of small limestone fragments, stone vessels, and stone tools; many animal,
even human, bones are also found in the burial refuse.[25] Why the
enclosures were backfilled is unknown, but it preserved them for posterity.
[edit]

Interpretation and importance

Monolith with animals in high and low relief.

Gbekli Tepe is regarded as an archaeological discovery of the greatest

importance since it could profoundly change our understanding of a crucial
stage in the development of human societies. "Gbekli Tepe changes
everything," says Ian Hodder of Stanford University. David Lewis-Williams,
professor of archaeology at Witwatersrand University in Johannesburg,
says that "Gbekli Tepe is the most important archaeological site in the
world." It seems that the erection of monumental complexes was within the
capacities of hunter-gatherers and not only of sedentary farming
communities as had been previously thought. In other words, as excavator
Klaus Schmidt puts it: "First came the temple, then the city."[26]
Not only its large dimensions, but the side-by-side existence of multiple
pillar shrines makes the location unique. There are no comparable
monumental complexes from its time. Neval ori, a well-known Neolithic
settlement also excavated by the German Archaeological Institute and
submerged by the Atatrk Dam since 1992, is 500 years later, its T-shaped

pillars are considerably smaller, and its shrine was located inside a village;
the roughly contemporary architecture at Jericho is devoid of artistic merit
or large-scale sculpture; and atalhyk, perhaps the most famous of all
Anatolian Neolithic villages, is 2,000 years younger.
Schmidt has engaged in some speculation regarding the belief systems of
the groups that created Gbekli Tepe, based on comparisons with other
shrines and settlements. He assumes shamanic practices and suggests
that the T-shaped pillars may represent mythical creatures, perhaps
ancestors, whereas he sees a fully articulated belief in gods only
developing later in Mesopotamia, associated with extensive temples and
palaces. This corresponds well with an ancient Sumerian belief that
agriculture, animal husbandry, and weaving had been brought to mankind
from the sacred mountain Du-Ku, which was inhabited by Annunadeities,
very ancient gods without individual names. Klaus Schmidt identifies this
story as an oriental primeval myth that preserves a partial memory of the
emerging Neolithic.[27] It is also apparent that the animal and other images
give no indication of organized violence, i.e., there are no depictions of
hunting raids or wounded animals, and the pillar carvings ignore game on
which the society mainly subsisted, like deer, in favor of formidable
creatures such as lions, snakes, spiders, and scorpions.[8][28][29]
At present, Gbekli Tepe raises more questions for archaeology and
prehistory than it answers. We do not know how a force large enough to
construct, augment, and maintain such a substantial complex was
mobilized and rewarded or fed in the conditions of pre-Neolithic society. We
cannot "read" the pictograms, and do not know for certain what meaning
the animal reliefs had for visitors to the site; the variety of fauna depicted,
from lions and boars to birds and insects, makes any single explanation
problematic. As there seems to be little or no evidence of habitation, and
the animals depicted on the stones are mainly predators, the stones may
have been intended to stave off evils through some form of magic
representation; it is also possible that they served as totems.[30] The
assumption that the site was strictly cultic in purpose and not inhabited has
also been challenged by the suggestion that the structures served as large

communal houses, "similar in some ways to the large plank houses of the
Northwest Coast of North America with their impressive house posts and
totem poles."[31] It is not known why every few decades the existing pillars
were buried to be replaced by new stones as part of a smaller, concentric
ring inside the older one.[32] Human burial may or may not have occurred
at the site. The reason the complex was eventually backfilled remains
unexplained. Until more evidence is gathered, it is difficult to deduce
anything certain about the originating culture or the site's significance.
[edit]

Conservation
In 2010, Global Heritage Fund (GHF) announced it will undertake a multiyear conservation program to preserve Gbekli Tepe. The first
conservation program in the site's history, the partners include Klaus
Schmidt and the German Archaeological Institute, German Research
Foundation, anlurfa Municipal Government, and the Turkish Ministry of
Tourism and Culture.[33] The stated goals of the GHF Gbekli Tepe project
are to support the preparation of a Site Management and Conservation
Plan, construction of a shelter over the exposed archaeological features,
training local community members in guiding and conservation, and
helping Turkish authorities secure UNESCO World Heritage Site
nomination.[1]
[edit]

See also
%

Tell Aswad a c.9000 BCE site in Syria.

List of megalithic sites

Gobekli Tepe
espre de core

Esprit de corps (pronounced espree deh core) translates from French as

group spirit. It is a synonym for words like morale, comradeship, and

purpose.Normally,espritdecorpstranslatesonlyaspositivegroupspirit.In
itsstrictestsense,itappliedonlytomilitarygroups,whotogetherforma
sense of purpose and comradeship. Yetit isoften also used incommon
language to refer to any group that appears united and protective of its
members.
Manydifferentgroups,likekidsinaclassroom,ascouttroop,aparents
club,apoliticalorganization,orthousandsofotherscansaidtobeunifiedby
espritdecorps.Whereitdoesnotexist,disorganizationcanprevail.
Oneexampleofespritdecorpscanbefoundregularlyontelevisionshows
likeExtremeMakeover:HomeEdition.Thehostandhisteamrally
communitiesintoassistingworthyfamilieswhoneedhomes.Mostofthe
showsfeaturemanycommunitymemberswhoarepleasedtoshowtheir
senseoftrulybelongingtoacommunitybyhelpingothers.Suchsenseof
purposecanmakequiteadifferenceintheworld.
espre de core

Morale
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this a
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2011)
Not to be confused with Moral or Morality.
For the Italian athlete, see Salvatore Morale.
"Esprit de corps" redirects here. For other uses, see Esprit de corps
(disambiguation).
Morale, also known as esprit de corps when discussing the morale of a
group, is a term used to describe the capacity of people to maintain belief
in an institution or a goal, or even in oneself and others. The second term
applies particularly to military personnel and to members of sports teams,
but is also applicable in business and in any other organizational context,

particularly in times of stress or controversy. While the term is often used

by authority figures as a generic value judgment of the willpower,
obedience and self-discipline of a group tasked with performing duties
assigned by a superior, more accurately it refers to the level of individual
faith in the collective benefit gained by such performance.
According to Alexander H. Leighton, "morale is the capacity of a group of
people to pull together persistently and consistently in pursuit of a common
purpose".[1]
Contents [hide]
%
1
Military
%
2 In
the
workplace
%
3
See also
%
4
Reference
s
%
5
External
links

[edit]

Military
In military science, there are two meanings to morale. Primarily it means
unit cohesion, the cohesion of a unit, task force, or other military group. An
army with good supply lines, sound air cover and a clear objective can be

said to possess, as a whole, "good morale" or "high morale." Historically,

elite military units such as special operations forces have "high morale"
due to both their training and pride in their unit. When a unit's morale is
said to be "depleted", it means it is close to "crack and surrender", as was
the case with Italian units in North Africa during World War II. It is well
worth noting that generally speaking, most commanders do not look at the
morale of specific individuals but rather the "fighting spirit" of squadrons,
divisions, battalions, ships, etc.
[edit]

In the workplace
Workplace events play a large part in changing employee morale, such as
heavy layoffs, the cancelation of overtime, canceling benefits programs,
and the lack of union representation. Other events can also influence
workplace morale, such as sick building syndrome, low wages, and
employees being mistreated.
[edit]

See also
%

Information warfare

Motivation

Psychological warfare

Collective identity

Battle trance

Atheism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Atheist" redirects here. For other uses, see Atheist (disambiguation).

Part of a series on

Atheism
Concepts
%

Antitheism Atheism and religion

Criticism of atheism Implicit and
explicit atheism Negative and positive
atheism Christian atheism Jewish
atheism Hindu atheism
History

History of atheism New Atheism State

atheism
Arguments for atheism

Arguments against God's existence

Argument from free will Argument from
inconsistent revelations Argument from
nonbelief Hitchens' razor Argument
from poor design Atheist's Wager Fate
of the unlearned God of the gaps
Incompatible-properties argument
Omnipotence paradox Problem of evil
Problem of Hell Russell's teapot
Theological noncognitivism Ultimate
Boeing 747 gambit
People
%

Demographics Discrimination /
persecution of atheists Notable
atheists
Related concepts
Agnosticism
[show]

Irreligion
[show]

Naturalism
[show]

Secularism

[show]

%
%

Atheism portal
WikiProject

% vte
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of
deities.[1][2] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that
there are no deities.[3][4][5] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence
of belief that any deities exist.[4][5][6][7] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[8]
[9] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.
[9][10]

The term atheism originated from the Greek (atheos), meaning

"without god(s)", used as a pejorative term applied to those thought to
reject the gods worshipped by the larger society. With the spread of
freethought, skeptical inquiry, and subsequent increase in criticism of
religion, application of the term narrowed in scope. The first individuals to
identify themselves using the word "atheist" lived in the 18th century.[11]
Arguments for atheism range from the philosophical to social and historical
approaches. Rationales for not believing in any supernatural deity include
the lack of empirical evidence,[12][13] the problem of evil, the argument
from inconsistent revelations, and the argument from nonbelief.[12][14]
Although some atheists have adopted secular philosophies,[15][16] there is
no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere.[17] Many
atheists hold that atheism is a more parsimonious worldview than theism,
and therefore the burden of proof lies not on the atheist to disprove the
existence of God, but on the theist to provide a rationale for theism.[18]
Atheism is accepted within some religious and spiritual belief systems,
including Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Raelism, Neopagan
movements[19] such as Wicca,[20] and nontheistic religions. Jainism and
some forms of Buddhism do not advocate belief in gods,[21] whereas
Hinduism holds atheism to be valid, but some schools view the path of an
atheist to be difficult to follow in matters of spirituality.[22]
Since conceptions of atheism vary, determining how many atheists exist in

the world today is difficult.[23] According to one estimate, atheists make up

about 2.3% of the world's population, while a further 11.9% are
nonreligious.[24] According to another, rates of self-reported atheism are
among the highest in Western nations, again to varying degrees: United
States (4%), Italy (7%), Spain (11%), Great Britain (17%), Germany (20%),
and France (32%).[25] According to a 2012 report by the Pew Research
Center, people describing themselves as "atheist" were 2% of the total
population in the US, and within the religiously unaffiliated (or "no religion")
demographic, atheists made up 12%.[26] According to a 2012 global poll
conducted by WIN/GIA, 13% of the participants say they are atheists.[27]
Contents [hide]
%

1 Definitions and distinctions

1

1.1 Range

1.2 Implicit vs. explicit

1.3 Positive vs. negative

1.4 Definition as impossible or impermanent

2 Concepts
1

2.1 Practical atheism

2.2 Theoretical atheism

2.2.1 Ontological arguments

2.2.2 Epistemological arguments

2.2.3 Metaphysical arguments

2.2.4 Logical arguments

2.3 Reductionary accounts of religion

3 Atheist philosophies

4 Atheism, religion, and morality

1

4.1 Association with world views and social behaviors

4.2 Atheism and irreligion

4.3 Divine command vs. ethics

4.4 Dangers of religions

5 Etymology

6 History
1

6.1 Early Indic religion

6.2 Classical antiquity

6.3 Early Middle Ages to the Renaissance

6.4 Early modern period

6.5 Since 1900

1

6.5.1 New Atheism

7 Demographics

8 See also

9 Notes

10 References

11 Further reading

12 External links

Definitions and distinctions

A diagram showing the relationship between the definitions of weak/strong and
implicit/explicit atheism. Explicit strong/positive/hard atheists (in purple on the right)
assert that "at least one deity exists" is a false statement. Explicit weak/negative/soft
atheists (in blue on the right) reject or eschew belief that any deities exist without
actually asserting that "at least one deity exists" is a false statement. Implicit
weak/negative atheists (in blue on the left) would include people (such as young
children and some agnostics) who do not believe in a deity, but have not explicitly
rejected such belief. (Sizes in the diagram are not meant to indicate relative sizes within
a population.)

Writers disagree how best to define and classify atheism,[28] contesting

what supernatural entities it applies to, whether it is an assertion in its own
right or merely the absence of one, and whether it requires a conscious,
explicit rejection. Atheism has been regarded as compatible with
agnosticism,[29][30][31][32][33][34][35] and has also been contrasted with it.
[36][37][38] A variety of categories have been used to distinguish the
different forms of atheism.

Range
Some of the ambiguity and controversy involved in defining atheism arises
from difficulty in reaching a consensus for the definitions of words like deity
and god. The plurality of wildly different conceptions of god and deities

leads to differing ideas regarding atheism's applicability. The ancient

Romans accused Christians of being atheists for not worshiping the pagan
deities. Gradually, this view fell into disfavor as theism came to be
understood as encompassing belief in any divinity.[39]
With respect to the range of phenomena being rejected, atheism may
counter anything from the existence of a deity, to the existence of any
spiritual, supernatural, or transcendental concepts, such as those of
Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism and Taoism.[40]

Implicit vs. explicit

Main article: Implicit and explicit atheism
Definitions of atheism also vary in the degree of consideration a person
must put to the idea of gods to be considered an atheist. Atheism has
sometimes been defined to include the simple absence of belief that any
deities exist. This broad definition would include newborns and other
people who have not been exposed to theistic ideas. As far back as 1772,
Baron d'Holbach said that "All children are born Atheists; they have no idea
of God."[41] Similarly, George H. Smith (1979) suggested that: "The man
who is unacquainted with theism is an atheist because he does not believe
in a god. This category would also include the child with the conceptual
capacity to grasp the issues involved, but who is still unaware of those
issues. The fact that this child does not believe in god qualifies him as an
atheist."[42] Smith coined the term implicit atheism to refer to "the absence
of theistic belief without a conscious rejection of it" and explicit atheism to
refer to the more common definition of conscious disbelief. Ernest Nagel
contradicts Smith's definition of atheism as merely "absence of theism",
acknowledging only explicit atheism as true "atheism".[43]

Positive vs. negative

Main article: Negative and positive atheism
Philosophers such as Antony Flew[44] and Michael Martin[39] have
contrasted positive (strong/hard) atheism with negative (weak/soft)
atheism. Positive atheism is the explicit affirmation that gods do not exist.
Negative atheism includes all other forms of non-theism. According to this

categorization, anyone who is not a theist is either a negative or a positive

atheist. The terms weak and strong are relatively recent, while the terms
negative and positive atheism are of older origin, having been used (in
slightly different ways) in the philosophical literature[44] and in Catholic
apologetics.[45] Under this demarcation of atheism, most agnostics qualify
as negative atheists.
While Martin, for example, asserts that agnosticism entails negative
atheism,[32] most agnostics see their view as distinct from atheism,[citation
needed] which they may consider no more justified than theism or requiring
an equal conviction.[46] The assertion of unattainability of knowledge for or
against the existence of gods is sometimes seen as indication that atheism
requires a leap of faith.[47][unreliable source?] Common atheist responses to
this argument include that unproven religious propositions deserve as
much disbelief as all other unproven propositions,[48] and that the
unprovability of a god's existence does not imply equal probability of either
possibility.[49] Scottish philosopher J. J. C. Smart even argues that
"sometimes a person who is really an atheist may describe herself, even
passionately, as an agnostic because of unreasonable generalised
philosophical skepticism which would preclude us from saying that we
know anything whatever, except perhaps the truths of mathematics and
formal logic."[50] Consequently, some atheist authors such as Richard
Dawkins prefer distinguishing theist, agnostic and atheist positions along a
spectrum of theistic probabilitythe likelihood that each assigns to the
statement "God exists".[51]

Definition as impossible or impermanent

Before the 18th century, the existence of God was so universally accepted
in the western world that even the possibility of true atheism was
questioned. This is called theistic innatismthe notion that all people
believe in God from birth; within this view was the connotation that atheists
are simply in denial.[52]
There is also a position claiming that atheists are quick to believe in God in
times of crisis, that atheists make deathbed conversions, or that "there are

no atheists in foxholes."[53] There have however been examples to the

contrary, among them examples of literal "atheists in foxholes."[54]
Some atheists have doubted the very need for the term "atheism". In his
book Letter to a Christian Nation, Sam Harris wrote:
In fact, "atheism" is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to
identify himself as a "non-astrologer" or a "non-alchemist." We do not have
words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have
traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is
nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of
unjustified religious beliefs.[55]

Concepts
Paul Henri Thiry, Baron d'Holbach, an 18th-century advocate of atheism.
The source of man's unhappiness is his ignorance of Nature. The pertinacity with which
he clings to blind opinions imbibed in his infancy, which interweave themselves with his
existence, the consequent prejudice that warps his mind, that prevents its expansion,
that renders him the slave of fiction, appears to doom him to continual error.
d'Holbach, The System of Nature[56]

The broadest demarcation of atheistic rationale is between practical and

theoretical atheism.

Practical atheism
Main article: Apatheism
In practical or pragmatic atheism, also known as apatheism, individuals live
as if there are no gods and explain natural phenomena without resorting to
the divine. The existence of gods is not rejected, but may be designated
unnecessary or useless; gods neither provide purpose to life, nor influence
everyday life, according to this view.[57] A form of practical atheism with
implications for the scientific community is methodological naturalismthe
"tacit adoption or assumption of philosophical naturalism within scientific
method with or without fully accepting or believing it."[58]
Practical atheism can take various forms:

Absence of religious motivationbelief in gods does not motivate

moral action, religious action, or any other form of action;

Active exclusion of the problem of gods and religion from intellectual

pursuit and practical action;

Indifferencethe absence of any interest in the problems of gods

and religion; or

Unawareness of the concept of a deity.[59]

Theoretical atheism
Ontological arguments
Further information: Agnostic atheism and Theological noncognitivism
Theoretical (or theoric) atheism explicitly posits arguments against the
existence of gods, responding to common theistic arguments such as the
argument from design or Pascal's Wager. Theoretical atheism is mainly an
ontology, precisely a physical ontology.

Epistemological arguments
Further information: Agnostic atheism and Theological noncognitivism
Epistemological atheism argues that people cannot know a God or
determine the existence of a God. The foundation of epistemological
atheism is agnosticism, which takes a variety of forms. In the philosophy of
immanence, divinity is inseparable from the world itself, including a
person's mind, and each person's consciousness is locked in the subject.
According to this form of agnosticism, this limitation in perspective prevents
any objective inference from belief in a god to assertions of its existence.
The rationalistic agnosticism of Kant and the Enlightenment only accepts
knowledge deduced with human rationality; this form of atheism holds that
gods are not discernible as a matter of principle, and therefore cannot be
known to exist. Skepticism, based on the ideas of Hume, asserts that
certainty about anything is impossible, so one can never know for sure
whether or not a god exists. Hume, however, held that such unobservable
metaphysical concepts should be rejected as "sophistry and illusion".[60]
The allocation of agnosticism to atheism is disputed; it can also be
regarded as an independent, basic worldview.[57]

Other arguments for atheism that can be classified as epistemological or

ontological, including logical positivism and ignosticism, assert the
meaninglessness or unintelligibility of basic terms such as "God" and
statements such as "God is all-powerful." Theological noncognitivism holds
that the statement "God exists" does not express a proposition, but is
nonsensical or cognitively meaningless. It has been argued both ways as
to whether such individuals can be classified into some form of atheism or
agnosticism. Philosophers A. J. Ayer and Theodore M. Drange reject both
categories, stating that both camps accept "God exists" as a proposition;
they instead place noncognitivism in its own category.[61][62]

Metaphysical arguments
Further information: Monism and Physicalism
One author writes:
"Metaphysical atheism includes all doctrines that hold to metaphysical
monism (the homogeneity of reality). Metaphysical atheism may be either:
a) absolute an explicit denial of God's existence associated with
materialistic monism (all materialistic trends, both in ancient and modern
times); b) relative the implicit denial of God in all philosophies that, while
they accept the existence of an absolute, conceive of the absolute as not
possessing any of the attributes proper to God: transcendence, a personal
character or unity. Relative atheism is associated with idealistic monism
(pantheism, panentheism, deism)."[63]
Epicurus is credited with first expounding the problem of evil. David Hume in his
Dialogues concerning Natural Religion (1779) cited Epicurus in stating the argument as a
series of questions:[64] "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then
whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

Logical arguments
Further information: Deductive arguments against the existence of God,
Problem of evil, Divine hiddenness
Logical atheism holds that the various conceptions of gods, such as the

personal god of Christianity, are ascribed logically inconsistent qualities.

Such atheists present deductive arguments against the existence of God,
which assert the incompatibility between certain traits, such as perfection,
creator-status, immutability, omniscience, omnipresence, omnipotence,
omnibenevolence, transcendence, personhood (a personal being),
nonphysicality, justice, and mercy.[12]
Theodicean atheists believe that the world as they experience it cannot be
reconciled with the qualities commonly ascribed to God and gods by
theologians. They argue that an omniscient, omnipotent, and
omnibenevolent God is not compatible with a world where there is evil and
suffering, and where divine love is hidden from many people.[14] A similar
argument is attributed to Siddhartha Gautama, the founder of Buddhism.
[65]

Reductionary accounts of religion

Further information: Evolutionary origin of religions, Evolutionary
psychology of religion, and Psychology of religion
Philosophers such as Ludwig Feuerbach[66] and Sigmund Freud argued
that God and other religious beliefs are human inventions, created to fulfill
various psychological and emotional wants or needs. This is also a view of
many Buddhists.[67] Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, influenced by the work
of Feuerbach, argued that belief in God and religion are social functions,
used by those in power to oppress the working class. According to Mikhail
Bakunin, "the idea of God implies the abdication of human reason and
justice; it is the most decisive negation of human liberty, and necessarily
ends in the enslavement of mankind, in theory and practice." He reversed
Voltaire's famous aphorism that if God did not exist, it would be necessary
to invent him, writing instead that "if God really existed, it would be
necessary to abolish him."[68]

Atheist philosophies
Further information: Atheist existentialism and Humanism
Axiological, or constructive, atheism rejects the existence of gods in favor

of a "higher absolute", such as humanity. This form of atheism favors

humanity as the absolute source of ethics and values, and permits
individuals to resolve moral problems without resorting to God. Marx and
Freud used this argument to convey messages of liberation, fulldevelopment, and unfettered happiness.[57] One of the most common
criticisms of atheism has been to the contrarythat denying the existence
of a god leads to moral relativism, leaving one with no moral or ethical
foundation,[69] or renders life meaningless and miserable.[70] Blaise Pascal
argued this view in his Penses.[71]
French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre identified himself as a representative
of an "atheist existentialism"[72] concerned less with denying the existence
of God than with establishing that "man needs to find himself again and
to understand that nothing can save him from himself, not even a valid
proof of the existence of God."[73] Sartre said a corollary of his atheism
was that "if God does not exist, there is at least one being in whom
existence precedes essence, a being who exists before he can be defined
by any concept, and this being is man."[72] The practical consequence
of this atheism was described by Sartre as meaning that there are no a
priori rules or absolute values that can be invoked to govern human
conduct, and that humans are "condemned" to invent these for themselves,
making "man" absolutely "responsible for everything he does".[74]

Atheism, religion, and morality

See also: Atheism and religion, Criticism of atheism, Secular ethics, and
Secular morality

Association with world views and social behaviors

Sociologist Phil Zuckerman analyzed previous social science research on
secularity and non-belief, and concluded that societal well-being is
positively correlated with irreligion. His findings relating specifically to
atheism in the US include:[75][76]
%

Compared to religious people in the US, "atheists and secular

people" are less nationalistic, prejudiced, antisemitic, racist,

dogmatic, ethnocentric, closed-minded, and authoritarian.

%

In US states with the highest percentages of atheists, the murder

rate is lower than average. In the most religious states, the murder
rate is higher than average.

Atheism and irreligion

Because of its absence of a creator god, Buddhism is commonly described as
nontheistic.

People who self-identify as atheists are often assumed to be irreligious, but

some sects within major religions reject the existence of a personal, creator
deity.[77] In recent years, certain religious denominations have
accumulated a number of openly atheistic followers, such as atheistic or
humanistic Judaism[78][79] and Christian atheists.[80][81][82]
The strictest sense of positive atheism does not entail any specific beliefs
outside of disbelief in any deity; as such, atheists can hold any number of
spiritual beliefs. For the same reason, atheists can hold a wide variety of
ethical beliefs, ranging from the moral universalism of humanism, which
holds that a moral code should be applied consistently to all humans, to
moral nihilism, which holds that morality is meaningless.[83]
Philosophers such as Georges Bataille, Slavoj iek,[84] Alain de Botton,
[85] and Alexander Bard and Jan Sderqvist,[86] have all argued that
atheists should reclaim religion as an act of defiance against theism,
precisely not to leave religion as an unwarranted monopoly to theists.

Divine command vs. ethics

Although it is a philosophical truism, encapsulated in Plato's Euthyphro
dilemma, that the role of the gods in determining right from wrong is either
unnecessary or arbitrary, the argument that morality must be derived from
God and cannot exist without a wise creator has been a persistent feature
of political if not so much philosophical debate.[87][88][89] Moral precepts
such as "murder is wrong" are seen as divine laws, requiring a divine
lawmaker and judge. However, many atheists argue that treating morality

legalistically involves a false analogy, and that morality does not depend on
a lawmaker in the same way that laws do.[90] Friedrich Nietzsche believed
in a morality independent of theistic belief, and stated that morality based
upon God "has truth only if God is truthit stands or falls with faith in
God."[91][92][93]
There exist normative ethical systems that do not require principles and
rules to be given by a deity. Some include virtue ethics, social contract,
Kantian ethics, utilitarianism, and Objectivism. Sam Harris has proposed
that moral prescription (ethical rule making) is not just an issue to be
explored by philosophy, but that we can meaningfully practice a science of
morality. Any such scientific system must, nevertheless, respond to the
criticism embodied in the naturalistic fallacy.[94]
Philosophers Susan Neiman[95] and Julian Baggini[96] (among others)
assert that behaving ethically only because of divine mandate is not true
ethical behavior but merely blind obedience. Baggini argues that atheism is
a superior basis for ethics, claiming that a moral basis external to religious
imperatives is necessary to evaluate the morality of the imperatives
themselvesto be able to discern, for example, that "thou shalt steal" is
immoral even if one's religion instructs itand that atheists, therefore, have
the advantage of being more inclined to make such evaluations.[97] The
contemporary British political philosopher Martin Cohen has offered the
more historically telling example of Biblical injunctions in favour of torture
and slavery as evidence of how religious injunctions follow political and
social customs, rather than vice versa, but also noted that the same
tendency seems to be true of supposedly dispassionate and objective
philosophers.[98] Cohen extends this argument in more detail in Political
Philosophy from Plato to Mao, where he argues that the Qur'an played a
role in perpetuating social codes from the early 7th century despite
changes in secular society.[99]

Dangers of religions
See also: Criticism of religion
Some prominent atheistssuch as Bertrand Russell, Christopher

Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Richard Dawkinshave

criticized religions, citing harmful aspects of religious practices and
doctrines.[100] Atheists have often engaged in debate with religious
advocates, and the debates sometimes address the issue of whether
religions provide a net benefit to individuals and society.
One argument that religions can be harmful, made by atheists such as
Sam Harris, is that Western religions' reliance on divine authority lends
itself to authoritarianism and dogmatism.[101] Atheists have also cited data
showing that there is a correlation between religious fundamentalism and
extrinsic religion (when religion is held because it serves ulterior interests)
[102] and authoritarianism, dogmatism, and prejudice.[103] These
argumentscombined with historical events that are argued to
demonstrate the dangers of religion, such as the Crusades, inquisitions,
witch trials, and terrorist attackshave been used in response to claims of
beneficial effects of belief in religion.[104] Believers counter-argue that
some regimes that espouse atheism, such as in Soviet Russia, have also
been guilty of mass murder.[105][106] In response to those claims, atheists
such as Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins have stated that Stalin's
atrocities were influenced not by atheism but by dogmatic Marxism, and
that while Stalin and Mao happened to be atheists, they did not do their
deeds in the name of atheism.[107][108]

Etymology
The Greek word (atheoi), as it appears in the Epistle to the Ephesians (2:12) on
the early 3rd-century Papyrus 46. It is usually translated into English as "[those who are]
without God".[109]

In early ancient Greek, the adjective atheos (, from the privative - +

"god") meant "godless". It was first used as a term of censure roughly
meaning "ungodly" or "impious". In the 5th century BCE, the word began to
indicate more deliberate and active godlessness in the sense of "severing
relations with the gods" or "denying the gods". The term (asebs)
then came to be applied against those who impiously denied or

disrespected the local gods, even if they believed in other gods. Modern
translations of classical texts sometimes render atheos as "atheistic". As
an abstract noun, there was also (atheots), "atheism". Cicero
transliterated the Greek word into the Latin atheos. The term found
frequent use in the debate between early Christians and Hellenists, with
each side attributing it, in the pejorative sense, to the other.[110]
The term atheist (from Fr. athe), in the sense of "one who denies or
disbelieves the existence of God",[111] predates atheism in English, being
first found as early as 1566,[112] and again in 1571.[113] Atheist as a label
of practical godlessness was used at least as early as 1577.[114] The term
atheism was derived from the French athisme, and appears in English
about 1587.[115] An earlier work, from about 1534, used the term
atheonism.[116][117] Related words emerged later: deist in 1621,[118] theist
in 1662,[119] deism in 1675,[120] and theism in 1678.[121] At that time
"deist" and "deism" already carried their modern meaning. The term theism
came to be contrasted with deism.
Karen Armstrong writes that "During the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries, the word 'atheist' was still reserved exclusively for polemic
The term 'atheist' was an insult. Nobody would have dreamed of calling
himself an atheist."[11]
Atheism was first used to describe a self-avowed belief in late 18th-century
Europe, specifically denoting disbelief in the monotheistic Abrahamic god.
[122][123] In the 20th century, globalization contributed to the expansion of
the term to refer to disbelief in all deities, though it remains common in
Western society to describe atheism as simply "disbelief in God".[39]

History
Main article: History of atheism
Although the term atheism originated in 16th-century France,[115][original
research?] ideas that would be recognized today as atheistic are
documented from the Vedic period and the classical antiquity.

Early Indic religion

Main article: Atheism in Hinduism

Atheistic schools are found in early Indian thought and have existed from
the times of the historical Vedic religion.[124] Among the six orthodox
schools of Hindu philosophy, Samkhya, the oldest philosophical school of
thought, does not accept God, and the early Mimamsa also rejected the
notion of God.[125] The thoroughly materialistic and anti-theistic
philosophical Crvka (also called Nastika or Lokaiata) school that
originated in India around the 6th century BCE is probably the most
explicitly atheistic school of philosophy in India, similar to the Greek
Cyrenaic school. This branch of Indian philosophy is classified as
heterodox due to its rejection of the authority of Vedas and hence is not
considered part of the six orthodox schools of Hinduism, but it is
noteworthy as evidence of a materialistic movement within Hinduism.[126]
Chatterjee and Datta explain that our understanding of Crvka philosophy
is fragmentary, based largely on criticism of the ideas by other schools,
and that it is not a living tradition:
"Though materialism in some form or other has always been present in
India, and occasional references are found in the Vedas, the Buddhistic
literature, the Epics, as well as in the later philosophical works we do not
find any systematic work on materialism, nor any organized school of
followers as the other philosophical schools possess. But almost every
work of the other schools states, for refutation, the materialistic views. Our
knowledge of Indian materialism is chiefly based on these."[127]
Other Indian philosophies generally regarded as atheistic include Classical
Samkhya and Purva Mimamsa. The rejection of a personal creator God is
also seen in Jainism and Buddhism in India.[128]

Classical antiquity
In Plato's Apology, Socrates (pictured) was accused by Meletus of not believing in the
gods.

Western atheism has its roots in pre-Socratic Greek philosophy, but did not
emerge as a distinct world-view until the late Enlightenment.[129] The 5th-

century BCE Greek philosopher Diagoras is known as the "first atheist",

[130] and is cited as such by Cicero in his De Natura Deorum.[131] Atomists
such as Democritus attempted to explain the world in a purely materialistic
way, without reference to the spiritual or mystical. Critias viewed religion as
a human invention used to frighten people into following moral order[132]
and Prodicus also appears to have made clear atheistic statements in his
work. Philodemus reports that Prodicus believed that "the gods of popular
belief do not exist nor do they know, but primitive man, [out of admiration,
deified] the fruits of the earth and virtually everything that contributed to his
existence". Protagoras has sometimes been taken to be an atheist but
rather espoused agnostic views, commenting that "Concerning the gods I
am unable to discover whether they exist or not, or what they are like in
form; for there are many hindrances to knowledge, the obscurity of the
subject and the brevity of human life."[133] In the 3rd-century BCE the
Greek philosophers Theodorus Cyrenaicus[131][134] and Strato of
Lampsacus[135] did not believe gods exist.
Socrates (c. 471399 BCE) was associated in the Athenian public mind
with the trends in pre-Socratic philosophy towards naturalistic inquiry and
the rejection of divine explanations for phenomena. Although such an
interpretation misrepresents his thought he was portrayed in such a way in
Aristophanes' comic play Clouds and was later to be tried and executed for
impiety and corrupting the young. At his trial Socrates is reported as
vehemently denying that he was an atheist and contemporary scholarship
provides little reason to doubt this claim.[136][137]
Euhemerus (c. 330260 BCE) published his view that the gods were only
the deified rulers, conquerors and founders of the past, and that their cults
and religions were in essence the continuation of vanished kingdoms and
earlier political structures.[138] Although not strictly an atheist, Euhemerus
was later criticized for having "spread atheism over the whole inhabited
earth by obliterating the gods".[139]
Also important in the history of atheism was Epicurus (c. 300 BCE).
Drawing on the ideas of Democritus and the Atomists, he espoused a
materialistic philosophy according to which the universe was governed by

the laws of chance without the need for divine intervention. Although he
stated that deities existed, he believed that they were uninterested in
human existence. The aim of the Epicureans was to attain peace of mind
and one important way of doing this was by exposing fear of divine wrath
as irrational. The Epicureans also denied the existence of an afterlife and
the need to fear divine punishment after death.[140]
The Roman philosopher Sextus Empiricus held that one should suspend
judgment about virtually all beliefsa form of skepticism known as
Pyrrhonismthat nothing was inherently evil, and that ataraxia ("peace of
mind") is attainable by withholding one's judgment. His relatively large
volume of surviving works had a lasting influence on later philosophers.
[141]

The meaning of "atheist" changed over the course of classical antiquity.

The early Christians were labeled atheists by non-Christians because of
their disbelief in pagan gods.[142] During the Roman Empire, Christians
were executed for their rejection of the Roman gods in general and
Emperor-worship in particular. When Christianity became the state religion
of Rome under Theodosius I in 381, heresy became a punishable offense.
[143]

Early Middle Ages to the Renaissance

The espousal of atheistic views was rare in Europe during the Early Middle
Ages and Middle Ages (see Medieval Inquisition); metaphysics, religion
and theology were the dominant interests.[144] There were, however,
movements within this period that forwarded heterodox conceptions of the
Christian god, including differing views of the nature, transcendence, and
knowability of God. Individuals and groups such as Johannes Scotus
Eriugena, David of Dinant, Amalric of Bena, and the Brethren of the Free
Spirit maintained Christian viewpoints with pantheistic tendencies. Nicholas
of Cusa held to a form of fideism he called docta ignorantia ("learned
ignorance"), asserting that God is beyond human categorization, and our
knowledge of God is limited to conjecture. William of Ockham inspired antimetaphysical tendencies with his nominalistic limitation of human

knowledge to singular objects, and asserted that the divine essence could
not be intuitively or rationally apprehended by human intellect. Followers of
Ockham, such as John of Mirecourt and Nicholas of Autrecourt furthered
this view. The resulting division between faith and reason influenced later
theologians such as John Wycliffe, Jan Hus, and Martin Luther.[144]
The Renaissance did much to expand the scope of freethought and
skeptical inquiry. Individuals such as Leonardo da Vinci sought
experimentation as a means of explanation, and opposed arguments from
religious authority. Other critics of religion and the Church during this time
included Niccol Machiavelli, Bonaventure des Priers, and Franois
Rabelais.[141]

Early modern period

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2013)
The Renaissance and Reformation eras witnessed a resurgence in
religious fervor, as evidenced by the proliferation of new religious orders,
confraternities, and popular devotions in the Catholic world, and the
appearance of increasingly austere Protestant sects such as the Calvinists.
This era of interconfessional rivalry permitted an even wider scope of
theological and philosophical speculation, much of which would later be
used to advance a religiously skeptical world-view.
Criticism of Christianity became increasingly frequent in the 17th and 18th
centuries, especially in France and England, where there appears to have
been a religious malaise, according to contemporary sources. Some
Protestant thinkers, such as Thomas Hobbes, espoused a materialist
philosophy and skepticism toward supernatural occurrences, while the
Jewish-Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza rejected divine providence in
favour of a panentheistic naturalism. By the late 17th century, deism came
to be openly espoused by intellectuals such as John Toland who coined
the term "pantheist".
The first known explicit atheist was the German critic of religion Matthias

Knutzen in his three writings of 1674.[145] He was followed by two other

explicit atheist writers, the Polish ex-Jesuit philosopher Kazimierz
yszczyski and in the 1720s by the French priest Jean Meslier.[146] In the
course of the 18th century, other openly atheistic thinkers followed, such as
Baron d'Holbach, Jacques-Andr Naigeon, and other French materialists.
[147]

The philosopher David Hume developed a skeptical epistemology

grounded in empiricism, and Immanuel Kant's philosophy has strongly
questioned the very possibility of a metaphysical knowledge. Both
philosophers undermined the metaphysical basis of natural theology and
criticized classical arguments for the existence of God. However, they were
not atheists themselves.

Ludwig Feuerbach's The Essence of Christianity (1841) would greatly influence

philosophers such as Engels, Marx, David Strauss, Nietzsche, and Max Stirner. He
considered God to be a human invention and religious activities to be wish-fulfillment.
For this he is considered the founding father of modern anthropology of religion.

The French Revolution took atheism and anti-clerical deism outside the
salons and into the public sphere. Baron d'Holbach was a prominent figure
in the French Enlightenment who is best known for his atheism and for his
voluminous writings against religion, the most famous of them being The
System of Nature (1770) but also Christianity Unveiled. A major goal of the
French revolution was a restructuring and subordination of the clergy with
respect to the state through the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. Attempts to
enforce it led to anti-clerical violence and the expulsion of many clergy from
France. The chaotic political events in revolutionary Paris eventually
enabled the more radical Jacobins to seize power in 1793, ushering in the
Reign of Terror. The Jacobins were deists and introduced the Cult of the
Supreme Being as a new French state religion. Some atheists surrounding
Jacques Hbert instead sought to establish a Cult of Reason, a form of
atheistic pseudo-religion with a goddess personifying reason. Both
movements in part contributed to attempts to forcibly de-Christianize
France. The Cult of Reason ended after three years when its leadership,

including Jacques Hbert, was guillotined by the Jacobins. The anti-clerical

persecutions ended with the Thermidorian Reaction.
The Napoleonic era institutionalized the secularization of French society,
and exported the revolution to northern Italy, in the hopes of creating
pliable republics. In the 19th century, atheists contributed to political and
social revolution, facilitating the upheavals of 1848, the Risorgimento in
Italy, and the growth of an international socialist movement.
In the latter half of the 19th century, atheism rose to prominence under the
influence of rationalistic and freethinking philosophers. Many prominent
German philosophers of this era denied the existence of deities and were
critical of religion, including Ludwig Feuerbach, Arthur Schopenhauer, Max
Stirner, Karl Marx, and Friedrich Nietzsche.[148]

Since 1900
See also: State atheism
Atheism in the 20th century, particularly in the form of practical atheism,
advanced in many societies. Atheistic thought found recognition in a wide
variety of other, broader philosophies, such as existentialism, objectivism,
secular humanism, nihilism, anarchism, logical positivism, Marxism,
feminism,[149] and the general scientific and rationalist movement.
Logical positivism and scientism paved the way for neopositivism,
analytical philosophy, structuralism, and naturalism. Neopositivism and
analytical philosophy discarded classical rationalism and metaphysics in
favor of strict empiricism and epistemological nominalism. Proponents such
as Bertrand Russell emphatically rejected belief in God. In his early work,
Ludwig Wittgenstein attempted to separate metaphysical and supernatural
language from rational discourse. A. J. Ayer asserted the unverifiability and
meaninglessness of religious statements, citing his adherence to the
empirical sciences. Relatedly the applied structuralism of Lvi-Strauss
sourced religious language to the human subconscious in denying its
transcendental meaning. J. N. Findlay and J. J. C. Smart argued that the
existence of God is not logically necessary. Naturalists and materialistic
monists such as John Dewey considered the natural world to be the basis

of everything, denying the existence of God or immortality.[50][150]

The 20th century also saw the political advancement of atheism, spurred
on by interpretation of the works of Marx and Engels. After the Russian
Revolution of 1917, religious instruction was banned by the State. While
the Soviet Constitution of 1936 guaranteed freedom to hold religious
services, the Soviet state under Stalin's policy of state atheism did not
consider education a private matter; it outlawed religious instruction and
waged campaigns to persuade people, at times violently, to abandon
religion.[151][152][153][154][155] Several other communist states also
opposed religion and mandated state atheism,[156] including the former
governments of Albania,[157][158][159] and currently, China,[160][161] North
Korea,[161][162] and Cuba.[161][163]
Other leaders like E. V. Ramasami Naicker (Periyar), a prominent atheist
leader of India, fought against Hinduism and Brahmins for discriminating
and dividing people in the name of caste and religion.[164] This was
highlighted in 1956 when he arranged for the erection of a statue depicting
a Hindu god in a humble representation and made antitheistic statements.
[165]

In 1966, Time magazine asked "Is God Dead?"[166] in response to the

Death of God theological movement, citing the estimation that nearly half of
all people in the world lived under an anti-religious power, and millions
more in Africa, Asia, and South America seemed to lack knowledge of the
one God.[167]
In 1967, the Albanian government under Enver Hoxha announced the
closure of all religious institutions in the country, declaring Albania the
world's first officially atheist state,[168] although religious practice in Albania
was restored in 1991. These regimes enhanced the negative associations
of atheism, especially where anti-communist sentiment was strong in the
United States, despite the fact that prominent atheists were anticommunist.[169]
Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, the number of actively anti-religious
regimes has reduced considerably. In 2006, Timothy Shah of the Pew

Forum noted "a worldwide trend across all major religious groups, in which
God-based and faith-based movements in general are experiencing
increasing confidence and influence vis--vis secular movements and
ideologies."[170] However, Gregory S. Paul and Phil Zuckerman consider
this a myth and suggest that the actual situation is much more complex
and nuanced.[171]
The religiously motivated terrorist events of 9/11 and the partially
successful attempts of the Discovery Institute to change the American
science curriculum to include creationist ideas, together with support for
those ideas from George W. Bush in 2005, all triggered the noted atheist
authors Sam Harris, Daniel C. Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Victor J. Stenger
and Christopher Hitchens to publish books that were best sellers in
America and worldwide.[172]
A 2010 survey found that those identifying themselves as atheists or
agnostics are on average more knowledgeable about religion than
followers of major faiths. Nonbelievers scored better on questions about
tenets central to Protestant and Catholic faiths. Only Mormon and Jewish
faithful scored as well as atheists and agnostics.[173]

New Atheism
Main article: New Atheism
New Atheism is the name given to a movement among some early-21stcentury atheist writers who have advocated the view that "religion should
not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by
rational argument wherever its influence arises."[174] The movement is
commonly associated with Richard Dawkins, Daniel C. Dennett, Sam
Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and Victor J. Stenger.[175][176] Several bestselling books by these authors, published between 2004 and 2007, form
the basis for much of the discussion of New Atheism.[176]

Demographics
Main article: Demographics of atheism
Further information: Religiosity and education

Percentage of people in various European countries who said: "I don't believe there is
any sort of spirit, God or life force." (2005)[177]

It is difficult to quantify the number of atheists in the world. Respondents to

religious-belief polls may define "atheism" differently or draw different
distinctions between atheism, non-religious beliefs, and non-theistic
religious and spiritual beliefs.[178] A Hindu atheist would declare oneself as
a Hindu, although also being an atheist at the same time.[179] A 2010
survey published in Encyclopdia Britannica found that the non-religious
made up about 9.6% of the world's population, and atheists about 2.0%.
This figure did not include those who follow atheistic religions, such as
some Buddhists.[180] The average annual change for atheism from 2000 to
2010 was 0.17%.[181] A broad figure estimates the number of atheists
and agnostics on Earth at 1.1 billion.[182]
A NovemberDecember 2006 poll published in the Financial Times gives
rates for the United States and five European countries. The lowest rates of
atheism were in the United States at only 4%, while the rates of atheism in
the European countries surveyed were considerably higher: Italy (7%),
Spain (11%), Great Britain (17%), Germany (20%), and France (32%).[25]
The European figures are similar to those of an official European Union
survey, which reported that 18% of the EU population do not believe in a
god.[183] Other studies have placed the estimated percentage of atheists,
agnostics, and other nonbelievers in a personal god as low as single digits
in Poland, Romania, Cyprus, and some other European countries,[184] and
up to 85% in Sweden, 80% in Denmark, 72% in Norway, and 60% in
Finland.[23] According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, 22% of
Australians have "no religion", a category that includes atheists.[185]
Between 64% and 65%[23] of Japanese and up to 81%[186] of Vietnamese
are atheists, agnostics, or do not believe in a god. A 2012 Gallup survey
reported that 13% of people surveyed worldwide self-report to be atheists.
[187] In the United States, there was a 1% to 5% increase in self-reported
atheism from 2005 to 2012, and a larger drop in those who self-identified
as "religious", down by 13%, from 73% to 60%.[188]

Proportion of atheists and agnostics around the world.

A study noted positive correlations between levels of education and

secularity, including atheism, in America,[75] and an EU survey found a
positive correlation between leaving school early and believing in a God.
[183] According to evolutionary psychologist Nigel Barber, atheism
blossoms in places where most people feel economically secure,
particularly in the social democracies of Europe, as there is less
uncertainty about the future with extensive social safety nets and better
health care resulting in a greater quality of life and higher life expectancy.
By contrast, in underdeveloped countries, there are virtually no atheists.
[189] A letter published in Nature in 1998 reported a survey suggesting that
belief in a personal god or afterlife was at an all-time low among the
members of the U.S. National Academy of Science, 7.0% of whom
believed in a personal god as compared with more than 85% of the general
U.S. population,[190] although this study has been criticized by Rodney
Stark and Roger Finke for its definition of belief in God. The definition was
"I believe in a God to whom one may pray in the expectation of receiving
an answer".[191] An article published by The University of Chicago
Chronicle that discussed the above study, stated that 76% of physicians
believe in God, more than the 7% of scientists above, but still less than the
85% of the general population.[192] Another study assessing religiosity
among scientists who are members of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science found that "just over half of scientists (51%)
believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists
say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher
power."[193] Frank Sulloway of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
and Michael Shermer of California State University conducted a study
which found in their polling sample of "credentialed" U.S. adults (12% had
Ph.Ds and 62% were college graduates) 64% believed in God, and there
was a correlation indicating that religious conviction diminished with
education level.[194] In 1958, Professor Michael Argyle of the University of
Oxford analyzed seven research studies that had investigated correlation

between attitude to religion and measured intelligence among school and

college students from the U.S. Although a clear negative correlation was
found, the analysis did not identify causality but noted that factors such as
authoritarian family background and social class may also have played a
part.[195] Sociologist Philip Schwadel found that higher levels of education
are associated with increased religious participation and religious practice
in daily life, but also correlate with greater tolerance for atheists' public
opposition to religion and greater skepticism of "exclusivist religious
viewpoints and biblical literalism".[196]

See also
%

Book:
Atheism

Adevism

Apostasy

Atheist existentialism

Atheist feminism

Brights movement

Discrimination against atheists

Dysteleology

Empiricism

Irreligion by country

Jewish atheism

List of atheists

List of secularist organizations

Out Campaign

Secular religion

Tabula rasa

Wealth and religion

Atheism

Atheist existentialism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the
Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. (May 2011)

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this a
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2009)
Part of a series on

Atheism
Concepts
%

Antitheism Atheism and religion Criticism of atheism Implicit and explicit atheism Negative and posi
atheism
History
%

History of atheism New Atheism State atheism

Arguments for atheism

Arguments against God's existence Argument from free will Argument from inconsistent revelations
from poor design Atheist's Wager Fate of the unlearned God of the gaps Incompatible-properties arg
of Hell Russell's teapot Theological noncognitivism Ultimate Bo
People
%

Demographics Discrimination / persecution of atheists Nota

Related concepts
Agnosticism
[show]

Irreligion
[show]

Naturalism
[show]

Secularism
[show]

Atheism portal

WikiProject

Atheist existentialism or atheistic existentialism is a kind of

existentialism which strongly diverged from the Christian works of Sren
Kierkegaard and has developed within the context of an atheistic
worldview.[1]
The philosophy of Sren Kierkegaard provided existentialism's theoretical
foundation in the 19th century. Atheist existentialism began to be
recognized after the 1943 publication of Being and Nothingness by JeanPaul Sartre, and Sartre later explicitly alluded to it in Existentialism is a
Humanism in 1946. Sartre had previously written in the spirit of atheistic
existentialism, (e.g. the novel Nausea (1938) and the short stories in his
1939 collection The Wall). Simone de Beauvoir likewise wrote from an
atheist existentialist perspective.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Thought

2 Major works
1

2.1 Sartre

2.2 Camus

2.3 Despair, Optimism, and Rebellion

3 Notes

4 See also

5 External links

Thought[edit]
The term atheistic existentialism refers to the exclusion of any
transcendental, metaphysical, or religious beliefs from philosophical
existentialist thought. Atheistic existentialism can nevertheless share
elements (e.g. anguish or rebellion in light of human finitude and
limitations) with religious existentialism, or with metaphysical existentialism
(e.g. through phenomenology and Heidegger's works).
Atheistic existentialism confronts death anxiety without appealing to a hope

of somehow being saved by a God (and often without any appeal to

supernatural salvations like reincarnation). For some thinkers, existential
malaise is mostly theoretical (as it is with Jean-Paul Sartre) while others
are quite affected by an existentialistic anguish (an example being Albert
Camus and his discussion of the Absurd).
Sartre once said "existence precedes essence". What he meant was that,
first of all, man exists (e.g. appears on the scene) and only afterwards
defines himself. If man, as the existentialist conceives him, is indefinable, it
is because at first he is nothing. Only afterward will he be something, and
he himself will have made what he will be. Thus, there is no human nature,
since there is no God to conceive it. Not only is man what he conceives
himself to be, but he is also only what he wills himself to be after this thrust
toward existence.[citation needed]

Major works[edit]
Sartre[edit]
The novel Nausea is, in some ways, a manifesto of atheistic existentialism.
Sartre deals with a dejected researcher (Antoine Roquentin) in an
anonymous French town, where Roquentin becomes conscious of the fact
that nature, as well as every inanimate object, are indifferent towards him
and his tormented existence. Furthermore, they show themselves to be
totally extraneous to any human meaning, and no human can see anything
significant in them.[citation needed]

Camus[edit]
Camus writes of dualisms, between happiness and sadness, as well as life
and death. In Le Mythe de Sisyphe (The Myth of Sisyphus), such dualism
becomes paradoxical, because humans greatly value their existence while
at the same time being aware of their mortality. Camus believes it is human
nature to have difficulty reconciling these paradoxes, and indeed, he
believed humankind must accept what he called "the Absurd". On the other
hand, Camus is not strictly an existential atheist because the acceptance of
the Absurd implies neither the existence of a god nor the nonexistence of a

god.

Despair, Optimism, and Rebellion[edit]

In his essay Despair, Optimism, and Rebellion, Evan Fales submits three
atheist existential stances towards life (which are not mutually
incompatible). He argues that a certain dignity, and commitment to truth, is
captured by Bertrand Russell when he says that only on the firm
foundation of unyielding despair, can the souls habitation henceforth be
safely built. Fales believes that despair is only one possible reaction, or
else component, of the atheist existentialist attitude.[2]
Fales proposes that another attitude is the Optimism of Secular Humanists:
their moral systems are objective, man-made, and grounded to some
extent in naturalistic facts; they derive meaning in their lives by defending
those morals, and other aspects of a good life (beauty, pleasure, mastery,
etc.). Fales adds that atheist optimists must be careful to avoid fatalism
(not to be confused with determinism) when faced with the grimmer sides
of human nature, especially in the absence of divine retribution - a task he
says secular humanists realize by seeing their short life and great
challenges as serving to deepen their moral obligations to make at least a
small contribution. Fales also describes what he calls the optimists
negative thesis when he writes The infantilization of humankind in
relation to God is one of the most disturbing features of Christian religious
sensibility, especially in the context of moral judgment. The path of
optimism, to Fales, thus means affirming man-made morality, but also
challenging ideologies that say morality could be anything else.[2]
Since Rebellion is practiced against something, Fales warns that the
atheist is not rebelling against the God they reject, so much as an
indifferent universe. Fales continues: But, if there is a God, and that God
is the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus, then I affirm that there is
one stance that is legitimate and justified. It is rebellion.[2]

Notes[edit]
%

^ [1]

^ a b c Evan Fales' essay "Despair, Optimism, and Rebellion" (2007), at

Infidels.org

See also[edit]
%

Absurdism

Atheism

Existence

Existentialism

Faith

Laicism

Nihilism
Atheist existentialism

Absurdism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the philosophy. For an extremely unreasonable, silly, or
foolish thing, see Absurdity. For absurdist humour, see surreal humour. For
the literary genre, see Absurdist fiction.
In philosophy, "the Absurd" refers to the conflict between the human
tendency to seek inherent value and meaning in life and the human
inability to find any. In this context absurd does not mean "logically
impossible", but rather "humanly impossible".[1] The universe and the
human mind do not each separately cause the Absurd, but rather, the
Absurd arises by the contradictory nature of the two existing
simultaneously. Absurdism, therefore, is a philosophical school of thought
stating that the efforts of humanity to find inherent meaning will ultimately
fail (and hence are absurd) because the sheer amount of information as
well as the vast realm of the unknown make certainty impossible. And yet,
some absurdists state that one should embrace the absurd condition of

humankind while conversely continuing to explore and search for meaning.

[2] As a philosophy, absurdism thus also explores the fundamental nature
of the Absurd and how individuals, once becoming conscious of the
Absurd, should respond to it.
Absurdism is very closely related to existentialism and nihilism and has its
origins in the 19th century Danish philosopher Sren Kierkegaard, who
chose to confront the crisis humans faced with the Absurd by developing
existentialist philosophy.[3] Absurdism as a belief system was born of the
European existentialist movement that ensued, specifically when the
French Algerian philosopher and writer Albert Camus rejected certain
aspects from that philosophical line of thought[4] and published his essay
The Myth of Sisyphus. The aftermath of World War II provided the social
environment that stimulated absurdist views and allowed for their popular
development, especially in the devastated country of France.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Overview

2 Relationship with existentialism and nihilism

3 Related works by Sren Kierkegaard

4 Albert Camus

5 The meaning of life

1

5.1 Elusion

5.2 God

5.3 Personal meaning

5.4 Freedom

5.5 Hope

5.6 Integrity

6 See also

7 References

8 Further reading

9 External links

Overview[edit]
"... in spite of or in defiance of the whole of existence he wills to be himself with it, to take

it along, almost defying his torment. For to hope in the possibility of help, not to speak of
help by virtue of the absurd, that for God all things are possible no, that he will not do.
And as for seeking help from any other no, that he will not do for all the world; rather
than seek help he would prefer to be himself with all the tortures of hell, if so it must
be."
Sren Kierkegaard, The Sickness Unto Death[5]

In absurdist philosophy, the Absurd arises out of the fundamental

disharmony between the individual's search for meaning and the
meaninglessness of the universe. As beings looking for meaning in a
meaningless world, humans have three ways of resolving the dilemma.
Kierkegaard and Camus describe the solutions in their works, The
Sickness Unto Death (1849) and The Myth of Sisyphus (1942):
%

Suicide (or, "escaping existence"): a solution in which a person ends

one's own life. Both Kierkegaard and Camus dismiss the viability of
this option. Camus states that it does not counter the Absurd, but
only becomes more absurd, to end one's own existence.

Religious, spiritual, or abstract belief in a transcendent realm, being,

or idea: a solution in which one believes in the existence of a reality
that is beyond the Absurd, and, as such, has meaning. Kierkegaard
stated that a belief in anything beyond the Absurd requires a nonrational but perhaps necessary religious acceptance in such an
intangible and empirically unprovable thing (now commonly referred
to as a "leap of faith"). However, Camus regarded this solution, and
others, as "philosophical suicide".

Acceptance of the Absurd: a solution in which one accepts the Absurd and
continues to live in spite of it. Camus endorsed this solution, believing that
by accepting the Absurd, one can achieve absolute freedom, and that by
recognizing no religious or other moral constraints and by revolting against
the Absurd while simultaneously accepting it as unstoppable, one could
possibly be content from the personal meaning constructed in the process.
Kierkegaard, on the other hand, regarded this solution as "demoniac
madness": "He rages most of all at the thought that eternity might get it into
its head to take his misery from him!"[6]
Basic relationships between existentialism, absurdism and nihilism

Atheistic
existentialism
1. There is such a thing as
meaning or value:
2. There is inherent
meaning in the universe:

Monotheistic existentialism

Yes.

Yes.

Maybe

No.

Maybe, but the individual must

have faith in God to believe there Maybe
is.

No, meaning can

3. The pursuit of meaning
only be constructed, Yes.
may have meaning in itself:
not pursued.

Maybe

4. The individual's
construction of any type of
meaning is possible:

Yes, th
is no w
any in

Yes, thus the goal of

Yes, thus the goal of
existentialism, though this
existentialism.
meaning must incorporate God.

5. There is resolution to the

Yes, the creation of Yes, the creation of one's own
individual's desire to seek
one's own meaning. meaning involving God.
meaning:

Related works by Sren Kierkegaard[edit]

Main article: Philosophy of Sren Kierkegaard
Kierkegaard designed the relationship framework based (in part) on how a person reacts
to despair. Absurdist philosophy fits into the 'despair of defiance' rubric.[8]

A century before Camus, the 19th century Danish philosopher Sren

Kierkegaard wrote extensively on the absurdity of the world. In his journals,
Kierkegaard writes about the absurd:
What is the Absurd? It is, as may quite easily be seen, that I, a rational being,
must act in a case where my reason, my powers of reflection, tell me: you can
just as well do the one thing as the other, that is to say where my reason and
reflection say: you cannot act and yet here is where I have to act... The Absurd,
or to act by virtue of the absurd, is to act upon faith ... I must act, but reflection

Maybe
inhere

has closed the road so I take one of the possibilities and say: This is what I do, I
cannot do otherwise because I am brought to a standstill by my powers of
reflection.[9]
Kierkegaard, Sren, Journals, 1849

Here is another example of the absurd from his writings:

What, then, is the absurd? The absurd is that the eternal truth has come into
existence in time, that God has come into existence, has been born, has grown
up. etc., has come into existence exactly as an individual human being,
indistinguishable from any other human being, inasmuch as all immediate
recognizability is pre-Socratic paganism and from the Jewish point of view is
idolatry. Kierkegaard, Concluding Unscientific Postscript, 1846, Hong 1992, p.
210

How can this absurdity be held or believed? Kierkegaard says:

I gladly undertake, by way of brief repetition, to emphasize what other
pseudonyms have emphasized. The absurd is not the absurd or absurdities
without any distinction (wherefore Johannes de Silentio: "How many of our age
understand what the absurd is?"). The absurd is a category, and the most
developed thought is required to define the Christian absurd accurately and with
conceptual correctness. The absurd is a category, the negative criterion, of the
divine or of the relationship to the divine. When the believer has faith, the absurd
is not the absurd faith transforms it, but in every weak moment it is again more
or less absurd to him. The passion of faith is the only thing which masters the
absurd if not, then faith is not faith in the strictest sense, but a kind of
knowledge. The absurd terminates negatively before the sphere of faith, which is
a sphere by itself. To a third person the believer relates himself by virtue of the
absurd; so must a third person judge, for a third person does not have the
passion of faith. Johannes de Silentio has never claimed to be a believer; just the
opposite, he has explained that he is not a believerin order to illuminate faith
negatively. Journals of Soren Kierkegaard X6B 79[10]

Kierkegaard provides an example in one of his works, Fear and Trembling.

In the story of Abraham in the Book of Genesis, Abraham is told by God to
kill his son Isaac. Just as Abraham is about to kill Isaac, an angel stops
Abraham from doing so. Kierkegaard believes that through virtue of the

absurd, Abraham, defying all reason and ethical duties ("you cannot act"),
got back his son and reaffirmed his faith ("where I have to act").[11]
However, it should be noted that in this particular case, the work was
signed with the pseudonym Johannes de Silentio.
Another instance of absurdist themes in Kierkegaard's work appears in
The Sickness Unto Death, which Kierkegaard signed with pseudonym AntiClimacus. Exploring the forms of despair, Kierkegaard examines the type
of despair known as defiance.[12] In the opening quotation reproduced at
the beginning of the article, Kierkegaard describes how such a man would
endure such a defiance and identifies the three major traits of the Absurd
Man, later discussed by Albert Camus: a rejection of escaping existence
(suicide), a rejection of help from a higher power and acceptance of his
absurd (and despairing) condition.
According to Kierkegaard in his autobiography The Point of View of My
Work as an Author, most of his pseudonymous writings are not necessarily
reflective of his own opinions. Nevertheless, his work anticipated many
absurdist themes and provided its theoretical background.

Albert Camus[edit]
Though the notion of the 'absurd' pervades all Albert Camus's writing, The
Myth of Sisyphus is his chief work on the subject. In it, Camus considers
absurdity as a confrontation, an opposition, a conflict or a "divorce"
between two ideals. Specifically, he defines the human condition as
absurd, as the confrontation between man's desire for significance,
meaning and clarity on the one hand and the silent, cold universe on the
other. He continues that there are specific human experiences evoking
notions of absurdity. Such a realization or encounter with the absurd leaves
the individual with a choice: suicide, a leap of faith, or recognition. He
concludes that recognition is the only defensible option.[2]
For Camus, suicide is a "confession" that life is not worth living; it is a
choice that implicitly declares that life is "too much." Suicide offers the most
basic "way out" of absurdity: the immediate termination of the self and its

place in the universe.

The absurd encounter can also arouse a "leap of faith," a term derived
from one of Kierkegaard's early pseudonyms, Johannes de Silentio
(although the term was not used by Kierkegaard himself),[13] where one
believes that there is more than the rational life (aesthetic or ethical). To
take a "leap of faith," one must act with the "virtue of the absurd" (as
Johannes de Silentio put it), where a suspension of the ethical may need to
exist. This faith has no expectations, but is a flexible power initiated by a
recognition of the absurd. (Although at some point, one recognizes or
encounters the existence of the Absurd and, in response, actively ignores
it.) However, Camus states that because the leap of faith escapes
rationality and defers to abstraction over personal experience, the leap of
faith is not absurd. Camus considers the leap of faith as "philosophical
suicide," rejecting both this and physical suicide.[13][14]
Lastly, a person can choose to embrace their own absurd condition.
According to Camus, one's freedom and the opportunity to give life
meaning lies in the recognition of absurdity. If the absurd experience is
truly the realization that the universe is fundamentally devoid of absolutes,
then we as individuals are truly free. "To live without appeal,"[15] as he puts
it, is a philosophical move to define absolutes and universals subjectively,
rather than objectively. The freedom of humans is thus established in a
human's natural ability and opportunity to create his own meaning and
purpose; to decide (or think) for him- or herself. The individual becomes
the most precious unit of existence, representing a set of unique ideals that
can be characterized as an entire universe in its own right. In
acknowledging the absurdity of seeking any inherent meaning, but
continuing this search regardless, one can be happy, gradually developing
meaning from the search alone.
Camus states in The Myth of Sisyphus: "Thus I draw from the absurd three
consequences, which are my revolt, my freedom, and my passion. By the
mere activity of consciousness I transform into a rule of life what was an
invitation to death, and I refuse suicide."[16] "Revolt" here refers to the
refusal of suicide and search for meaning despite the revelation of the

Absurd; "Freedom" refers to the lack of imprisonment by religious devotion

or others' moral codes; "Passion" refers to the most wholehearted
experiencing of life, since hope has been rejected, and so he concludes
that every moment must be lived fully.

The meaning of life[edit]

According to absurdism, humans historically attempt to find meaning in
their lives. Traditionally, this search results in one of two conclusions: either
that life is meaningless, or life contains within it a purpose set forth by a
higher powera belief in God, or adherence to some religion or other
abstract concept.

Elusion[edit]
Camus perceives filling the void with some invented belief or meaning as a
mere "act of eluding"that is, avoiding or escaping rather than
acknowledging and embracing the Absurd. To Camus, elusion is a
fundamental flaw in religion, existentialism, and various other schools of
thought. If the individual eludes the Absurd, then he or she can never
confront it.

God[edit]
Even with a spiritual power as the answer to meaning, another question
arises: What is the purpose of God? Kierkegaard believed that there is no
human-comprehensible purpose of God, making faith in God absurd itself.
Camus on the other hand states that to believe in God is to "deny one of
the terms of the contradiction" between humanity and the universe (and
therefore not absurd), but is what he calls "philosophical suicide". Camus
(as well as Kierkegaard), though, suggests that while absurdity does not
lead to belief in God, neither does it lead to the denial of God. Camus
notes, "I did not say 'excludes God', which would still amount to asserting".
[17]

Personal meaning[edit]
For Camus, the beauty people encounter in life makes it worth living.

People may create meaning in their own lives, which may not be the
objective meaning of life (if there is one), but can still provide something to
strive for. However, he insisted that one must always maintain an ironic
distance between this invented meaning and the knowledge of the absurd,
lest the fictitious meaning take the place of the absurd.

Freedom[edit]
Freedom cannot be achieved beyond what the absurdity of existence
permits; however, the closest one can come to being absolutely free is
through acceptance of the Absurd. Camus introduced the idea of
"acceptance without resignation" as a way of dealing with the recognition of
absurdity, asking whether or not man can "live without appeal", while
defining a "conscious revolt" against the avoidance of absurdity of the
world. In a world devoid of higher meaning or judicial afterlife, the human
nature becomes as close to absolutely free as is humanly possible.

Hope[edit]
The rejection of hope, in absurdism, denotes the refusal to believe in
anything more than what this absurd life provides. Hope, Camus
emphasizes, however, has nothing to do with despair (meaning that the two
terms are not opposites). One can still live fully while rejecting hope, and,
in fact, can only do so without hope. Hope is perceived by the absurdist as
another fraudulent method of evading the Absurd, and by not having hope,
one is motivated to live every fleeting moment to the fullest.[citation needed]

Integrity[edit]
The absurdist is not guided by morality, but rather, by their own integrity.
The absurdist is, in fact, amoral (though not necessarily immoral). The
Absurdist's view of morality implies an unwavering sense of definite right
and wrong at all times, while integrity implies honesty with one's self and
consistency in the motivations of one's actions and decisions.

See also[edit]
Philosophy

portal

Absurdist fiction

Discordianism

Existential nihilism

Existentialism

Lottery of birth

Nihilism

Non sequitur (literary device)

Pataphysics

Peter Wessel Zapffe

The Stranger (novel)

Theatre of the Absurd

Absurdism

Nihilism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the philosophical doctrines. For other uses, see
Nihilism (disambiguation).

Certainty series
%
%

Approximation
Belief

%
%
%

Agnosticism

Certainty
Doubt
Determinism

%
%
%
%
%

Epistemology
Fallibilism
Fatalism
Hypothesis
Justification

%
%
%

%
%
%
%

Nihilism
Probability
Scientific
theory
Skepticism
Solipsism
Theory
Truth
Uncertainty

% vte
Nihilism (/na.lzm/ or /ni.lzm/; from the Latin nihil, nothing) is the
philosophical doctrine suggesting the negation of one or more putatively
meaningful aspects of life. Most commonly, nihilism is presented in the
form of existential nihilism, which argues that life is without objective
meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value.[1] Moral nihilists assert that morality
does not inherently exist, and that any established moral values are
abstractly contrived. Nihilism can also take epistemological or
ontological/metaphysical forms, meaning respectively that, in some aspect,
knowledge is not possible, or that reality does not actually exist.
The term was popularized by Ivan Turgenev in his novel Fathers and Sons,
whose hero, Bazarov, was a nihilist.[2]

The term is sometimes used in association with anomie to explain the

general mood of despair at a perceived pointlessness of existence that one
may develop upon realising there are no necessary norms, rules, or laws.
[3] Movements such as Futurism and deconstruction,[4] among others, have
been identified by commentators as "nihilistic" at various times in various
contexts.
Nihilism is also a characteristic that has been ascribed to time periods: for
example, Jean Baudrillard and others have called postmodernity a nihilistic
epoch,[5] and some Christian theologians and figures of religious authority
have asserted that postmodernity[6] and many aspects of modernity[4]
represent a rejection of theism, and that rejection of their theistic doctrine
entails nihilism.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Forms of nihilism
1

1.1 Metaphysical nihilism

1.2 Epistemological nihilism

1.3 Mereological nihilism

1.4 Existential nihilism

1.5 Moral nihilism

1.6 Political nihilism

2 History
1

2.1 19th century

2.2 Kierkegaard

2.3 Nietzsche

2.4 Heidegger's interpretation of Nietzsche

2.5 Postmodernism

3 Nihilism and culture

1

3.1 Television

3.2 Dada

3.3 Literature

3.4 Music

3.5 Film
4 See also

5 Notes

6 References

7 External links

Forms of nihilism[edit]
Nihilism has many definitions and is thus used to describe philosophical
positions which are arguably independent.

This article is written like a personal reflection or opinion essay rather than an
Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (October 2012)

Metaphysical nihilism[edit]
Metaphysical nihilism is the philosophical theory that there might be no
objects at all, i.e. that there is a possible world in which there are no
objects at all; or at least that there might be no concrete objects at all, so
even if every possible world contains some objects, there is at least one
that contains only abstract objects.
An extreme form of metaphysical nihilism is commonly defined as the belief
that nothing exists as a correspondent component of the self efficient
world."[7] One way of interpreting such a statement would be: It is
impossible to distinguish 'existence' from 'non-existence' as there are no
objective qualities, and thus a reality, that one state could possess in order
to discern between the two. If one cannot discern existence from its
negation, then the concept of existence has no meaning; or in other words,
does not 'exist' in any meaningful way. 'Meaning' in this sense is used to
argue that as existence has no higher state of reality, which is arguably its
necessary and defining quality, existence itself means nothing. It could be
argued that this belief, once combined with epistemological nihilism, leaves
one with an all-encompassing nihilism in which nothing can be said to be
real or true as such values do not exist. A similar position can be found in
solipsism; however, in this viewpoint the solipsist affirms whereas the
nihilist would deny the self. Both these positions are forms of anti-realism.
[

citation needed]

Epistemological nihilism[edit]
Nihilism of an epistemological form can be seen as an extreme form of
skepticism in which all knowledge is denied.[8]

Mereological nihilism[edit]
Mereological nihilism (also called compositional nihilism) is the position
that objects with proper parts do not exist (not only objects in space, but
also objects existing in time do not have any temporal parts), and only
basic building blocks without parts exist, and thus the world we see and
experience full of objects with parts is a product of human misperception
(i.e., if we could see clearly, we would not perceive compositive objects).
This interpretation of existence must be based on resolution. The
resolution with which humans can see and perceive the "improper parts" of
the world is not an objective fact of reality, but is rather an implicit trait that
can only be qualitatively explored and expressed. Therefore there is no
arguable way to surmise or measure the validity of mereological nihilism.
Example: An ant can get lost on a large cylindrical object because the
circumference of the cable is so large with respect to the ant that the ant
effectively feels as though the cable has no curvature. Thus, the resolution
with which the ant views the world it exists "within" is a very important
determining factor in how the ant experiences this "within the world"
feeling. We humans once believed the world was likely flat and planar.

Existential nihilism[edit]
Main article: Existential nihilism
Existential nihilism is the belief that life has no intrinsic meaning or value.
With respect to the universe, existential nihilism posits that a single human
or even the entire human species is insignificant, without purpose and
unlikely to change in the totality of existence. The meaninglessness of life
is largely explored in the philosophical school of existentialism.

Moral nihilism[edit]
Moral nihilism, also known as ethical nihilism, is the meta-ethical view

that morality does not exist as something inherent to objective reality;

therefore no action is necessarily preferable to any other. For example, a
moral nihilist would say that killing someone, for whatever reason, is not
inherently right or wrong. Otherwise in simple terms, a lack of a moral
system. Other nihilists may argue not that there is no morality at all, but
that if it does exist, it is a human construction and thus artificial, wherein
any and all meaning is relative for different possible outcomes. As an
example, if someone kills someone else, such a nihilist might argue that
killing is not inherently a bad thing, or bad independently from our moral
beliefs, because of the way morality is constructed as some rudimentary
dichotomy. What is said to be a bad thing is given a higher negative
weighting than what is called good: as a result, killing the individual was
bad because it did not let the individual live, which was arbitrarily given a
positive weighting. In this way a moral nihilist believes that all moral claims
are false. An alternative scholarly perspective is that moral nihilism is a
morality in itself. Cooper writes, "In the widest sense of the word 'morality',
moral nihilism is a morality."[9]

Political nihilism[edit]
Political nihilism, a branch of nihilism, follows the characteristic nihilist's
rejection of non-rationalized or non-proven assertions; in this case the
necessity of the most fundamental social and political structures, such as
government, family, and law. The Nihilist movement in 19th century Russia
espoused a similar doctrine. Political nihilism is rather different from other
forms of nihilism, and is generally considered to be more like a form of
utilitarianism. An influential analysis of political nihilism is presented by Leo
Strauss.[10]

History[edit]
19th century[edit]
The term nihilism was first used by Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (17431819).
Jacobi used the term to characterize rationalism[11] and in particular
Immanuel Kant's "critical" philosophy in order to carry out a reductio ad

absurdum according to which all rationalism (philosophy as criticism)

reduces to nihilism, and thus it should be avoided and replaced with a
return to some type of faith and revelation. Bret W. Davis writes, for
example, "The first philosophical development of the idea of nihilism is
generally ascribed to Friedrich Jacobi, who in a famous letter criticized
Fichte's idealism as falling into nihilism. According to Jacobi, Fichtes
absolutization of the ego (the 'absolute I' that posits the 'not-I') is an
inflation of subjectivity that denies the absolute transcendence of God."[12]
A related but oppositional concept is fideism, which sees reason as hostile
and inferior to faith.
With the popularizing of the word nihilism by Ivan Turgenev, a new Russian
political movement called the Nihilism movement adopted the term. They
supposedly called themselves nihilists because nothing "that then existed
found favor in their eyes."[13]

Kierkegaard[edit]
Main article: Philosophy of Sren Kierkegaard
Sren Kierkegaard (18131855) posited an early form of nihilism, to which
he referred as levelling.[14] He saw levelling as the process of suppressing
individuality to a point where the individual's uniqueness becomes nonexistent and nothing meaningful in his existence can be affirmed:
Levelling at its maximum is like the stillness of death, where one can hear
one's own heartbeat, a stillness like death, into which nothing can
penetrate, in which everything sinks, powerless. One person can head a
rebellion, but one person cannot head this levelling process, for that would
make him a leader and he would avoid being levelled. Each individual can
in his little circle participate in this levelling, but it is an abstract process,
and levelling is abstraction conquering individuality.
Sren Kierkegaard, The Present Age, translated by Alexander Dru with Foreword
by Walter Kaufmann, p. 51-53

Kierkegaard, an advocate of a philosophy of life, generally argued against

levelling and its nihilist consequence, although he believed it would be
"genuinely educative to live in the age of levelling [because] people will be

forced to face the judgement of [levelling] alone."[15] George Cotkin asserts

Kierkegaard was against "the standardization and levelling of belief, both
spiritual and political, in the nineteenth century [and he] opposed
tendencies in mass culture to reduce the individual to a cipher of
conformity and deference to the dominant opinion."[16] In his day, tabloids
(like the Danish magazine Corsaren) and apostate Christianity were
instruments of levelling and contributed to the "reflective apathetic age" of
19th century Europe.[17] Kierkegaard argues that individuals who can
overcome the levelling process are stronger for it and that it represents a
step in the right direction towards "becoming a true self."[15][18] As we must
overcome levelling,[19] Hubert Dreyfus and Jane Rubin argue that
Kierkegaard's interest, "in an increasingly nihilistic age, is in how we can
recover the sense that our lives are meaningful".[20]
Note however that Kierkegaard's meaning of "nihilism" differs from the
modern definition in the sense that, for Kierkegaard, levelling led to a life
lacking meaning, purpose or value,[17] whereas the modern interpretation
of nihilism posits that there was never any meaning, purpose or value to
begin with.

Nietzsche[edit]
Main article: Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche
Nihilism is often associated with the German philosopher Friedrich
Nietzsche, who provided a detailed diagnosis of nihilism as a widespread
phenomenon of Western culture. Though the notion appears frequently
throughout Nietzsche's work, he uses the term in a variety of ways, with
different meanings and connotations, all negative. Karen Carr describes
Nietzsche's characterization of nihilism "as a condition of tension, as a
disproportion between what we want to value (or need) and how the world
appears to operate."[21] When we find out that the world does not possess
the objective value or meaning that we want it to have or have long since
believed it to have, we find ourselves in a crisis.[22] Nietzsche asserts that
with the decline of Christianity and the rise of physiological decadence,
nihilism is in fact characteristic of the modern age,[23] though he implies

that the rise of nihilism is still incomplete and that it has yet to be
overcome.[24] Though the problem of nihilism becomes especially explicit
in Nietzsche's notebooks (published posthumously), it is mentioned
repeatedly in his published works and is closely connected to many of the
problems mentioned there.
Nietzsche characterized nihilism as emptying the world and especially
human existence of meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential
value. This observation stems in part from Nietzsche's perspectivism, or
his notion that "knowledge" is always by someone of some thing: it is
always bound by perspective, and it is never mere fact.[25] Rather, there
are interpretations through which we understand the world and give it
meaning. Interpreting is something we can not go without; in fact, it is
something we need. One way of interpreting the world is through morality,
as one of the fundamental ways in which people make sense of the world,
especially in regard to their own thoughts and actions. Nietzsche
distinguishes a morality that is strong or healthy, meaning that the person
in question is aware that he constructs it himself, from weak morality,
where the interpretation is projected on to something external. Regardless
of its strength, morality presents us with meaning, whether this is created
or 'implanted,' which helps us get through life.[26]
Nietzsche discusses Christianity, one of the major topics in his work, at
length in the context of the problem of nihilism in his notebooks, in a
chapter entitled 'European Nihilism'.[27] Here he states that the Christian
moral doctrine provides people with intrinsic value, belief in God (which
justifies the evil in the world) and a basis for objective knowledge. In this
sense, in constructing a world where objective knowledge is possible,
Christianity is an antidote against a primal form of nihilism, against the
despair of meaninglessness. However, it is exactly the element of
truthfulness in Christian doctrine that is its undoing: in its drive towards
truth, Christianity eventually finds itself to be a construct, which leads to its
own dissolution. It is therefore that Nietzsche states that we have outgrown
Christianity "not because we lived too far from it, rather because we lived
too close."[28] As such, the self-dissolution of Christianity constitutes yet

another form of nihilism. Because Christianity was an interpretation that

posited itself as the interpretation, Nietzsche states that this dissolution
leads beyond skepticism to a distrust of all meaning.[29][30]
Stanley Rosen identifies Nietzsche's concept of nihilism with a situation of
meaninglessness, in which "everything is permitted." According to him, the
loss of higher metaphysical values which existed in contrast to the base
reality of the world or merely human ideas give rise to the idea that all
human ideas are therefore valueless. Rejection of idealism thus results in
nihilism, because only similarly transcendent ideals would live up to the
previous standards that the nihilist still implicitly holds.[31] The inability for
Christianity to serve as a source of valuating the world is reflected in
Nietzsche's famous aphorism of the madman in The Gay Science.[32] The
death of God, in particular the statement that "we killed him", is similar to
the self-dissolution of Christian doctrine: due to the advances of the
sciences, which for Nietzsche show that man is the product of evolution,
that earth has no special place among the stars and that history is not
progressive, the Christian notion of God can no longer serve as a basis for
a morality.
One such reaction to the loss of meaning is what Nietzsche calls 'passive
nihilism', which he recognises in the pessimistic philosophy of
Schopenhauer. Schopenhauer's doctrine, which Nietzsche also refers to as
Western Buddhism, advocates a separating oneself of will and desires in
order to reduce suffering. Nietzsche characterises this ascetic attitude as a
"will to nothingness," whereby life turns away from itself, as there is nothing
of value to be found in the world. This mowing away of all value in the
world is characteristic of the nihilist, although in this, the nihilist appears to
be inconsistent:[33]
A nihilist is a man who judges of the world as it is that it ought not to be,
and of the world as it ought to be that it does not exist. According to this
view, our existence (action, suffering, willing, feeling) has no meaning: the
pathos of 'in vain' is the nihilists' pathos at the same time, as pathos, an
inconsistency on the part of the nihilists.
Friedrich Nietzsche, KSA 12:9 [60], taken from The Will to Power, section 585,

translated by Walter Kaufmann

Nietzsche's relation to the problem of nihilism is a complex one. He

approaches the problem of nihilism as deeply personal, stating that this
predicament of the modern world is a problem that has "become
conscious" in him.[34] Furthermore, he emphasises both the danger of
nihilism and the possibilities it offers, as seen in his statement that "I
praise, I do not reproach, [nihilism's] arrival. I believe it is one of the
greatest crises, a moment of the deepest self-reflection of humanity.
Whether man recovers from it, whether he becomes master of this crisis, is
a question of his strength!"[35] According to Nietzsche, it is only when
nihilism is overcome that a culture can have a true foundation upon which
to thrive. He wished to hasten its coming only so that he could also hasten
its ultimate departure.[23]
He states that there is at least the possibility of another type of nihilist in
the wake of Christianity's self-dissolution, one that does not stop after the
destruction of all value and meaning and succumb to the following
nothingness. This alternate, 'active' nihilism on the other hand destroys to
level the field for constructing something new. This form of nihilism is
characterized by Nietzsche as "a sign of strength,"[36] a wilful destruction of
the old values to wipe the slate clean and lay down one's own beliefs and
interpretations, contrary to the passive nihilism that resigns itself with the
decomposition of the old values. This wilful destruction of values and the
overcoming of the condition of nihilism by the constructing of new meaning,
this active nihilism, could be related to what Nietzsche elsewhere calls a
'free spirit'[37] or the bermensch from Thus Spoke Zarathustra and the
Antichrist, the model of the strong individual who posits his own values and
lives his life as if it were his own work of art. It may be questioned, though,
whether active nihilism is indeed the correct term for this stance, and
whether Nietzsche takes the problems nihilism poses seriously enough.[38]

Heidegger's interpretation of Nietzsche[edit]

Many postmodern thinkers who investigated the problem of nihilism, as put
forward by Nietzsche, were influenced by Martin Heideggers interpretation
of Nietzsche. It is only recently that Heideggers influence on nihilism

research by Nietzsche has faded.[39] As early as the 1930s, Heidegger

was giving lectures on Nietzsches thought.[40] Given the importance of
Nietzsches contribution to the topic of nihilism, Heidegger's influential
interpretation of Nietzsche is important for the historical development of the
term nihilism.
Heidegger's method of researching and teaching Nietzsche is explicitly his
own. He does not specifically try to present Nietzsche as Nietzsche. He
rather tries to incorporate Nietzsche's thoughts into his own philosophical
system of Being, Time and Dasein.[41] In his Nihilism as Determined by the
History of Being (194446),[42] Heidegger tries to understand Nietzsches
nihilism as trying to achieve a victory through the devaluation of the, until
then, highest values. The principle of this devaluation is, according to
Heidegger, the Will to Power. The Will to Power is also the principle of
every earlier valuation of values.[43] How does this devaluation occur and
why is this nihilistic? One of Heideggers main critiques on philosophy is
that philosophy, and more specifically metaphysics, has forgotten to
discriminate between investigating the notion of a Being (Seiende) and
Being (Sein). According to Heidegger, the history of Western thought can
be seen as the history of metaphysics. And because metaphysics has
forgotten to ask about the notion of Being (what Heidegger calls
Seinsvergessenheit), it is a history about the destruction of Being. That is
why Heidegger calls metaphysics nihilistic.[44] This makes Nietzsches
metaphysics not a victory over nihilism, but a perfection of it.[45]
Heidegger, in his interpretation of Nietzsche, has been inspired by Ernst
Jnger. Many references to Jnger can be found in Heideggers lectures
on Nietzsche. For example, in a letter to the rector of Freiburg University of
November 4, 1945, Heidegger, inspired by Jnger, tries to explain the
notion of God is dead as the reality of the Will to Power. Heidegger also
praises Jnger for defending Nietzsche against a too biological or
anthropological reading during the Third Reich.[46]
A number of important postmodernist thinkers were influenced by
Heidegger's interpretation of Nietzsche. Gianni Vattimo points at a back
and forth movement in European thought, between Nietzsche and

Heidegger. During the 1960s, a Nietzschean 'renaissance' began,

culminating in the work of Mazzino Montinari and Giorgio Colli. They began
work on a new and complete edition of Nietzsche's collected works,
making Nietzsche more accessible for scholarly research. Vattimo explains
that with this new edition of Colli and Montinari, a critical reception of
Heidegger's interpretation of Nietzsche began to take shape. Like other
contemporary French and Italian philosophers, Vattimo does not want, or
only partially wants, to rely on Heidegger for understanding Nietzsche. On
the other hand, Vattimo judges Heidegger's intentions authentic enough to
keep pursuing them.[47] Philosophers who Vattimo exemplifies as a part of
this back and forth movement are French philosophers Deleuze, Foucault
and Derrida. Italian philosophers of this same movement are Cacciari,
Severino and himself.[48] Habermas, Lyotard and Rorty are also
philosophers who are influenced by Heideggers interpretation of
Nietzsche.[49]

Postmodernism[edit]
Postmodern and poststructuralist thought question the very grounds on
which Western cultures have based their 'truths': absolute knowledge and
meaning, a 'decentralization' of authorship, the accumulation of positive
knowledge, historical progress, and certain ideals and practices of
humanism and the Enlightenment.
Jacques Derrida, whose deconstruction is perhaps most commonly labeled
nihilistic, did not himself make the nihilistic move that others have claimed.
Derridean deconstructionists argue that this approach rather frees texts,
individuals or organizations from a restrictive truth, and that deconstruction
opens up the possibility of other ways of being.[50] Gayatri Chakravorty
Spivak, for example, uses deconstruction to create an ethics of opening up
Western scholarship to the voice of the subaltern and to philosophies
outside of the canon of western texts.[51] Derrida himself built a philosophy
based upon a 'responsibility to the other'.[52] Deconstruction can thus be
seen not as a denial of truth, but as a denial of our ability to know truth (it
makes an epistemological claim compared to nihilism's ontological claim).

Lyotard argues that, rather than relying on an objective truth or method to

prove their claims, philosophers legitimize their truths by reference to a
story about the world which is inseparable from the age and system the
stories belong to, referred to by Lyotard as meta-narratives. He then goes
on to define the postmodern condition as one characterized by a rejection
both of these meta-narratives and of the process of legitimation by metanarratives. "In lieu of meta-narratives we have created new languagegames in order to legitimize our claims which rely on changing
relationships and mutable truths, none of which is privileged over the other
to speak to ultimate truth."[citation needed] This concept of the instability of
truth and meaning leads in the direction of nihilism, though Lyotard stops
short of embracing the latter.
Postmodern theorist Jean Baudrillard wrote briefly of nihilism from the
postmodern viewpoint in Simulacra and Simulation. He stuck mainly to
topics of interpretations of the real world over the simulations of which the
real world is composed. The uses of meaning was an important subject in
Baudrillard's discussion of nihilism:
The apocalypse is finished, today it is the precession of the neutral, of
forms of the neutral and of indifferenceall that remains, is the fascination
for desertlike and indifferent forms, for the very operation of the system that
annihilates us. Now, fascination (in contrast to seduction, which was
attached to appearances, and to dialectical reason, which was attached to
meaning) is a nihilistic passion par excellence, it is the passion proper to
the mode of disappearance. We are fascinated by all forms of
disappearance, of our disappearance. Melancholic and fascinated, such is
our general situation in an era of involuntary transparency.
Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, "On Nihilism", trans.
1995[page needed]

Nihilism and culture[edit]

Television[edit]

Thomas Hibbs suggested that the show Seinfeld is a manifestation of

nihilism in television. The very basis of the sitcom is that it is a "show about
nothing." The majority of the episodes focused on minutiae. The view
presented in Seinfeld is arguably consistent with the philosophy of nihilism,
the idea that life is pointless, and from which arises a feeling of the absurd
that characterizes the show's ironic humor.[53]

Dada[edit]
The term Dada was first used by Tristan Tzara in 1916.[54] The movement,
which lasted from approximately 1916 to 1922, arose during World War I,
an event that influenced the artists.[55] The Dada Movement began in
Zrich, Switzerland known as the "Niederdorf" or "Niederdrfli" in the
Caf Voltaire.[56] The Dadaists claimed that Dada was not an art
movement, but an anti-art movement, sometimes using found objects in a
manner similar to found poetry. The "anti-art" drive is thought to have
stemmed from a post-war emptiness. This tendency toward devaluation of
art has led many to claim that Dada was an essentially nihilistic movement.
Given that Dada created its own means for interpreting its products, it is
difficult to classify alongside most other contemporary art expressions.
Hence, due to its ambiguity, it is sometimes classified as a nihilistic modus
vivendi.[55]

Literature[edit]
Anton Chekhov portrayed nihilism when writing Three Sisters. The phrase
"what does it matter" or such variants is often spoken by several characters
in response to events; the significance of some of these events suggests a
subscription to nihilism by said characters as a type of coping strategy.
In the graphic novel Watchmen, the character The Comedian/Edward
Blake is characterized as being a nihilist, both moral and political, to the
extent of openly committing murder in order to demonstrate the lack of
human concern or nerve (stating that Dr. Manhattan could have stopped
him at any moment, but chose not to). Dr. Manhattan is also portrayed as a
nihilist on the cosmic scale by stating if the Earth was destroyed and all life
on it eradicated, the universe would not notice.

The comic book supervillain The Joker has been portrayed as both an
anarchist and a nihilist, typically by condemning life as a meaningless,
harsh joke. Living through such a life to him is "crazy", while the insane
ones are truly the normal people. In Batman #663 (The Clown At Midnight)
the Joker says "The real joke is your stubborn, bone deep conviction that
somehow, somewhere, all of this makes sense! That's what cracks me up
each time!" and during The Killing Joke he goes as far to call everyone's
ideals and struggles in life a "monstrous, demented gag".
In the manga-graphic novel series Bleach The Espada Ullquiorra Cifer's
aspect of death is Nihilism.
In the novel Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand condemns nihilism quite
aggressively. The philosophical ideas of the French author, the Marquis De
Sade, are often noted as early examples of nihilistic principles.

Music[edit]
In Act III of Shostakovich's opera "Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District", a
nihilist is tormented by the Russian Police.
A 2007 article in The Guardian noted that "...in the summer of
1977, ...punk's nihilistic swagger was the most thrilling thing in
England."[57] The Sex Pistols' God Save The Queen, with its chant-like
refrain of "no future", became a slogan for unemployed and disaffected
youth during the late 1970s.[58]
Black metal and death metal music often emphasize nihilistic themes.[59]
[60][61]

The Nine Inch Nails album The Downward Spiral has several nihilistic
themes and concepts throughout the overall storyline, with the narrator
rejecting the world and the concept of God and attempting to forge his own
versions (with lines such as "God is dead/ And no one cares/ If there is a
Hell/ I'll see you there"), although other lines such as "you get me Closer to
God," suggest the narrator finds meaning and faith once more through his
sexuality.
"Nihilism" is also the name of a song released by the band Rancid in their

1994 album Let's Go.

Film[edit]
The character John Morlar from Peter Van Greenaway's 1973 novel The
Medusa Touch and the 1978 film version holds nihilistic beliefs[citation
needed] as does the character Animal Mother from Stanley Kubrick's 1987
film Full Metal Jacket and the ruthless thug O-Dog from the 1993 film
Menace II Society by the Hughes Brothers.
Three of the antagonists in the 1998 movie The Big Lebowski are explicitly
described as "nihilists," but are not shown exhibiting any explicitly nihilistic
traits during the film. The 1999 film The Matrix portrays the character
Thomas A. Anderson with a hollowed out copy of Baudrillard's treatise,
Simulacra and Simulation, in which he stores contraband data files under
the chapter "On Nihilism." The 1999 film Fight Club also features concepts
relating to Nihilism by exploring the contrasts between the artificial values
imposed by consumerism in relation to the more meaningful pursuit of
spiritual happiness.

See also[edit]
%

Absurdism

Acosmism

Anatta

Anti-art and Anti-anti-art

Cynicism (philosophy)

Dysteleology

Eliminative materialism

Existentialism

Nihilist movement

Nirvana

Paradox of nihilism

Solipsism

Suicide

Therapeutic nihilism
Nihilism

Lacit
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Laicism)

Jump to: navigation, search

"Laicism" redirects here. For laicization of priests, see defrocking.
Motto of the French republic on the tympanum of a church, in Aups (Var dpartement)
which was installed after the 1905 law on the Separation of the State and the Church.
Such inscriptions on a church are very rare; this one was restored during the 1989
bicentenary of the French Revolution.

See also: Separation of church and state

French secularity, in French, lacit (pronounced [la.isite]) is a concept
denoting the absence of religious involvement in government affairs as well
as absence of government involvement in religious affairs.[1][2] French
secularism has a long history but the current regime is based on the 1905
French law on the Separation of the Churches and the State.[3] During the
twentieth century, it evolved to mean equal treatment of all religions,
although a more restrictive interpretation of the term has developed since
2004.[4] Certain different implementations have evolved since World War II,
some have seen the evolution of a "positive" lacit which manages
competing pluralities rather than serving as secular alternative to religion.[5]
Dictionaries ordinarily translate lacit as secularity or secularism (the latter
being the political system),[6] although it is sometimes rendered in English
as laicity or laicism. While the term was coined in 1871 in the dispute over
the removal of religious teachers and instruction from elementary schools,
the term lacit dates to 1842.[7]
In its strict and official acceptance, it is the principle of separation of church
(or religion) and state.[8] Etymologically, lacit is a noun formed by adding

the suffix -it (English -ity, Latin -its) to the Latin adjective licus, loanword
from the Greek lks
(
"of the people", "layman"), the adjective
from ls
( "people").[9]
Contents [hide]
%

1 Controversy

2 Contemporary French political secularism

3 State secularism in other countries

1

3.1 Belgium

3.2 Turkey

3.3 Contrast with the United States

3.4 Proposal in Mexico

3.5 Quebec (Canada)

4 See also

5 Notes

6 External links

Controversy[edit]

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this a
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2013)
The word lacit has been used, from the end of the 19th century on, to
mean the freedom of public institutions, especially primary schools, from
the influence of the Catholic Church[10] in countries where it had retained
its influence, in the context of a secularization process. Today, the concept
covers other religious movements as well.
Proponents assert the French state secularism is based on respect for
freedom of thought and freedom of religion. Thus the absence of a state
religion, and the subsequent separation of the state and Church, is
considered by proponents to be a prerequisite for such freedom of thought.
Proponents maintain that lacit is thus distinct from anti-clericalism, which
actively opposes the influence of religion and the clergy. Lacit relies on
the division between private life, where adherents believe religion belongs,
and the public sphere, in which each individual, adherents believe, should

appear as a simple citizen equal to all other citizens, devoid of ethnic,

religious or other particularities. According to this concept, the government
must refrain from taking positions on religious doctrine and only consider
religious subjects for their practical consequences on inhabitants' lives.
Supporters argue that Lacit by itself does not necessarily imply any
hostility of the government with respect to religion. It is best described as a
belief that government and political issues should be kept separate from
religious organizations and religious issues (as long as the latter do not
have notable social consequences). This is meant to protect both the
government from any possible interference from religious organizations,
and to protect the religious organization from political quarrels and
controversies.
Critics of lacit argue that it is a disguised form of anti-clericalism[citation
needed] and infringement on individual right to religious expression, and
that, instead of promoting freedom of thought and freedom of religion, it
prevents the believer from observing his or her religion.
Another critique is that, in countries historically dominated by one religious
tradition, officially avoiding taking any positions on religious matters favors
the dominant religious tradition of the relevant country. They point out that
even in the current French Fifth Republic (1958), school holidays mostly
follow the Christian liturgical year, even though Easter holidays have been
replaced by Spring holidays, which may or may not include Easter,
depending on the years. However, the Minister of Education has responded
to this criticism by giving leave to students for important holidays of their
specific religions, and food menus served in secondary schools pay
particular attention to ensuring that each religious observer may respect
his religion's specific restrictions concerning diets. To counter the traditional
influence of Christian festivals educationalists in line with market forces
have often promoted references to Santa Claus, Valentines and Halloween,
particularly at primary school level.
Other countries, following in the French model, have forms of Lacit
examples include Mexico and Turkey.[11]

Contemporary French political secularism[edit]

The principle of lacit in France is implemented through a number of
policies. The French government is legally prohibited from recognizing any
religion (except for legacy statutes like those of military chaplains and the
local law of Alsace-Moselle). Instead, it recognizes religious organizations,
according to formal legal criteria that do not address religious doctrine:
%

whether the sole purpose of the organization is to organize religious

activities (so that, for instance, the pretense of being a religious
organization is not used for tax evasion)

whether the organization disrupts public order.

French political leaders, though not prohibited from making religious

remarks, mostly refrain from it. Religious considerations are generally
considered incompatible with reasoned political debate. Of course, political
leaders may openly practice their religion (for instance, former president
Nicolas Sarkozy is a Catholic), but they are expected to differentiate their
beliefs from their actions. Christine Boutin, who openly argued on religious
grounds against a legal domestic partnership available regardless of the
sex of the partners, was quickly marginalized.
The term was originally the French equivalent of the term laity, that is,
everyone who is not clergy. After the French Revolution this meaning
changed and it came to mean keeping religion separate from the executive,
judicial, and legislative branches of government. This includes prohibitions
on having a state religion, as well as for the government to endorse any
religious position, be it a religion or atheism.
Although the term was current throughout the nineteenth century, France
did not fully separate church and state until the passage of its 1905 law on
the separation of the Churches and the State, prohibiting the state from
recognizing or funding any religion. All religious buildings in France (mostly
Catholic churches, Protestant temples and Jewish synagogues) became
the property of the City councils. Those now have the duty to maintain the
(often historical) buildings but can't subsidize the religious organizations
using them. In areas that were part of Germany at that time, and which did

not return to France until 1918, some arrangements for the cooperation of
church and state are still in effect today (see Alsace-Moselle).
Lacit is currently a core concept in the French constitution, Article 1 of
which formally states that France is a secular republic ("La France est une
Rpublique indivisible, laque, dmocratique et sociale.") This of course
does not prevent an active role on the part of the state (Presidence of the
Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of the Interior) in the
appointment of Catholic diocesan bishops see Briand-Ceretti Agreement.
Many see being discreet with one's religion as a necessary part of being
French. This has led to frequent divisions with some non-Christian
immigrants, especially with part of France's large Muslim population. A
debate took place over whether any religious apparel or displays by
individuals, such as the Islamic hijab, Sikh turban, (large) Christian crosses
and Jewish Stars of David, should be banned from public schools. Such a
ban came into effect in France in 2004; see French law on secularity and
conspicuous religious symbols in schools. In the spring of 2011 there was
a reinforcement of lacit in hospitals, advocated by the Minister of the
Interior, Claude Guant, and in public service generally, by the official nondiscrimination agency, la HALDE. The simultaneous broadcasting of the
traditional Protestant and Catholic Lent Sermons (operating since 1946)
has been interrupted. Earlier the broadcasting of the Russian Orthodox
Christmas night liturgy was similarly stopped on 6/7 January.
The strict separation of church and state which began with the 1905 law
has evolved into what some religious leaders see as a "form of political
correctness that made bringing religion into public affairs a major
taboo."[12] Former President Sarkozy initially criticised this approach as a
"negative lacit" and wanted to develop a "positive lacit" that recognizes
the contribution of faith to French culture, history and society, allows for
faith in the public discourse and for government subsidies for faith-based
groups.[12] Sarkozy saw France's main religions as positive contributions to
French society. He visited the Pope in December 2007 and publicly
acknowledged France's Christian roots, while highlighting the importance
of freedom of thought,[13] arguing that faith should come back into the

public sphere. In line with Sarkozy's views on the need for reform of lacit,
Pope Benedict XVI on September 12, 2008 said it was time to revisit the
debate over the relationship between church and state, advocating a
"healthy" form of lacit.[14] Meeting with Sarkozy, he stated: "In fact, it is
fundamental, on the one hand, to insist upon the distinction between the
political realm and that of religion in order to preserve both the religious
freedom of citizens and the responsibility of the state toward them." [14] He
went on: "On the other hand, [it is important] to become more aware of the
irreplaceable role of religion for the formation of consciences and the
contribution which it can bring to among other things the creation of a
basic ethical consensus within society.[14]
Sarkozy later changed footing on the place of religion in French society, by
publicly declaring the burqa "not welcome" in France in 2009 and favoring
legislation to outlaw it, following which, in February 2010, a post office
robbery took place by two burqa-clad robbers, ethnicity unknown, who after
entering the post office, removed their veils.[15] Following March 2011 local
elections strong disagreement appeared within the governing UMP over
the appropriateness of holding a debate on lacit as desired by the
President of the Republic. On 30 March a letter appeared in La Croix
signed by representatives of six religious bodies opposing the
appropriateness of such a debate.
A law was passed on April 11, 2011, with strong support from political
parties as well as from Sarkozy, which made it illegal to hide the face in
public spaces, affecting a few thousand women in France wearing the
niqab and the burqa.

State secularism in other countries[edit]

Belgium[edit]
Main article: Organized secularism
In Belgium, "lacit" has a double meaning. It refers either to the separation
between Church and State or the community of citizens that reject religion
and follow a secular way of life, such as free-thinkers. To distinguish

between the two concepts, this community is also called georganiseerde

vrijzinnigheid (Dutch) or lacit organise (French).
Under the Belgian constitution, ministers of religion are paid with
government funds. The constitution was amended in 1991 in order to give
the same right to persons fulfilling similar functions (mainly moral
assistance) for the nonreligious. Public schools must now offer pupils the
choice between religion courses and courses in non-religious morals.

Turkey[edit]
Main article: Secularism in Turkey
In Turkey, a strong stance of secularism has held sway since Mustafa
Kemal Atatrk's Turkish revolution in the early 20th century. On March 3,
1924 Turkey removed the caliphate system and all religious influence from
the state. Sunni Islam, the majority religion, is now controlled by the
Turkish government through the Department of Religious Affairs, and is
state-funded while other religions or sects have independence on religious
affairs. Islamic views which are deemed political are censored in
accordance with the principle of secularism.
This system of Turkish lacit permeates both the government and religious
sphere. The content of the weekly sermons in all state funded mosques
has to be approved by the state. Also, independent Sunni communities are
illegal. Minority religions, like Armenian or Greek Orthodoxy, are
guaranteed by the constitution as individual faiths and are mostly tolerated,
but this guarantee does not give any rights to any religious communities
including Muslim ones. Turkey's view is that the Treaty of Lausanne gives
certain religious rights to Jews, Greeks, and Armenians but not, for
example, to Syrian-Orthodox or Roman Catholics, because the latter ones
did not play any political roles during the treaty. However the Treaty of
Lausanne does not specify any nationality or ethnicity and simply identifies
non-Moslems in general.
Recently, the desire to reestablish the Greek Orthodox seminary on
Heybeli Island near Istanbul became a political issue in regard to Turkey's
accession to EU membership. The EU considers such prohibition to

amount to suppression of religious freedom. However, it is pointed out that

if Greek Orthodoxy is allowed to reopen a school it will become the only
religion in Turkey with the right to an independent religious school. Recent
attempts by the conservative government to outlaw adultery caused an
outcry in Turkey and was seen as an attempt to legislate Islamic values,
but others point out that the legislation was intended to combat polygamy
which is still common in rural areas, although not recognized legally. Also,
not like France, Muslims are not forbidden from wearing the hijab in
government institutions such as schools (whether as teachers or as
students), or the civil service.

Contrast with the United States[edit]

Main article: Separation of church and state in the United States
In the United States, the First Amendment to the Constitution contains a
similar concept, although the term "laicity" is not used either in the
Constitution or elsewhere, and is in fact used as a term to contrast
European secularism with American secularism. That amendment includes
clauses prohibiting both governmental interference with the "free exercise"
of religion, and governmental "establishment" of religion. These clauses
have been held by the courts to apply to both the federal and state
governments. Together, the "free exercise clause" and "establishment
clause" are considered to accomplish a "separation of church and state."
However, separation is not extended to bar religious conduct in public
places or by public servants. Public servants, up to and including the
President of the United States, often make proclamations of religious faith.
Sessions of both houses of the United States Congress and most state
legislatures typically open with a prayer by a minister of some faith or other,
and many if not most politicians and senior public servants in Washington,
DC attend the annual Roman Catholic Red Mass at the Cathedral of St.
Matthew the Apostle regardless of their personal religious convictions. In
contrast to France, the wearing of religious insignia in public schools is
largely noncontroversial as a matter of law and culture in the U.S.; the main
cases where there have been controversies are when the practice in

question is potentially dangerous (for instance, the wearing of the Sikh

kirpan knife in public places), and even then the issue is usually settled in
favor of allowing the practice. In addition, the U.S. government regards
religious institutions as tax-exempt 501(c)(3) non-profits provided that they
do not overtly interfere with politics, which some observers interpret as an
implicit act of establishment.[citation needed] Moreover, the military includes
government-paid religious chaplains to provide for the spiritual needs of
soldiers. In contrast to Europe, however, the government cannot display
religious symbols (such as the cross) in public schools, courts and other
government offices, although some exceptions are made (e.g. recognition
of a cultural group's religious holiday). In addition, the United States
Supreme Court has banned any activity in public schools and other
government-run areas that can be viewed as a government endorsement
of religion.
The French philosopher and Universal Declaration of Human Rights codrafter Jacques Maritain, a devout Catholic convert and critic of French
lacit, noted the distinction between the models found in France and in the
mid-twentieth century United States.[16] He considered the US model of
that time to be more amicable because it had both "sharp distinction and
actual cooperation" between church and state, what he called "an historical
treasure" and admonished the United States, "Please to God that you keep
it carefully, and do not let your concept of separation veer round to the
European one."[16]

Proposal in Mexico[edit]
In March 2010, the lower house of the Mexican legislature introduced
legislation to amend the Constitution to make the Mexican government
formally "laico" meaning "lay" or "secular".[17] Critics of the move say the
"context surrounding the amendment suggests that it might be a step
backwards for religious liberty and true separation of church and state".[17]
Coming on the heels of the Church's vocal objection to legalization of
abortion as well as same sex unions and adoptions in Mexico City,
"together with some statements of its supporters, suggests that it might be

an attempt to suppress the Catholic Church's ability to engage in public

policy debates".[17] Mexico has had a history of religious suppression and
persecution. Critics of the amendment reject the idea that "Utilitarians,
Nihilists, Capitalists, and Socialists can all bring their philosophy to bear on
public life, but Catholics (or other religious minorities) must check their
religion at the door" in a sort of "second-class citizenship" which they
consider nothing more than religious discrimination.[17]

Quebec (Canada)[edit]
Public discourse in Quebec, the only predominantly French-speaking
province in Canada, had been greatly influenced by the lacit of France
since the 1960s. Prior to this time Quebec was seen as a very observant
Catholic society, where Catholicism was a de facto state religion. Quebec
then underwent a period of rapid secularization called the Quiet
Revolution. Quebec politicians have tended to adopt a stricter
understanding of secularism than is practised elsewhere in Canada. This
came to the fore during the debate on what constitutes the "reasonable
accommodation" of religious minorities.[18]

See also[edit]
%

1825 Anti-Sacrilege Act

Politics of Turkey

Secular state

Civil religion

Secularism

Laicite
what does it mean that you're an atheist?
it means that i was never convinced there was a god
noone was ever able to convince me there was a god
and there was no god to convince me himself

noone could ever sell me the idea

atheism - no gods
bible apocrypha- works in greek the jews excised

Buddhist Monk Wearing Yellow Hat

Tibetan Buddhist Monk of the ''Gelug sect'' in Kathmandu, Nepal, wearing a
yellow traditional Buddhist Lama's hat (the ''Vinaya hat'') from TibetImage
Ref. no: Np07II064 -

Tibetan Buddhism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[show]
Part of a series on

Tibetan Buddhism

Mahyna
Buddhism
Lands
India China Japan
Vietnam Korea
Singapore Taiwan
Tibet Bhutan Nepal
Mongolia

Doctrine
Bodhisattva la
Samdhi Praj
unyat Trikya

Mahyna Stras
Prajpramit Stras
Lotus Stra
Nirva Stra
Sadhinirmocana Stra
Avatasaka Stra
ragama Stra

Mahyna Schools
Mdhyamaka
Yogcra
Esoteric Buddhism
Pure Land Zen
Tiantai Nichiren
view talk edit

Tibetan Buddhism[1] is the body of Buddhist religious doctrine and

institutions characteristic of Tibet and certain regions of the Himalayas,
including northern Nepal, Bhutan, and India (particularly in Arunachal
Pradesh, Ladakh, Dharamsala, Lahaul and Spiti in Himachal Pradesh, and
Sikkim). It is the state religion of Bhutan.[2] It is also practiced in Mongolia
and parts of Russia (Kalmykia, Buryatia, and Tuva) and Northeast China.
Texts recognized as scripture and commentary are contained in the
Tibetan Buddhist canon, such that Tibetan is a spiritual language of these
areas.

A Tibetan diaspora has spread Tibetan Buddhism to many Western

countries, where the tradition has gained popularity.[3] Among its prominent
exponents is the 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet. The number of its adherents is
estimated to be between ten and twenty million.[4]
Contents [hide]
%

1 Buddhahood

2 General methods of practice

1

2.1 Transmission and realisation

2.2 Analytic meditation and fixation meditation

2.3 Devotion to a Guru

1

2.3.1 Skepticism

2.4 Preliminary practices and approach to

Vajrayna

2.5 Esotericism

3 Native Tibetan developments

4 Study of tenet systems

5 History
1
2

5.1 Early history

5.2 The Chinese princess Jincheng (Kon-co) and
the Khotanese monks

5.3 Transmission of Chan to the Nyingmapa

5.4 Later history

6 Schools

7 Monasticism
1

7.1 Nyingma

7.2 Kagyu

7.3 Sakya

7.4 Gelug

8 Tibetan Buddhism in the contemporary world

9 Glossary of terms used

10 See also

11 Notes

12 References

13 Further reading

14 External links

[edit]

Buddhahood
Bodhnath Stpa, Kathmandu, Nepal. A stpa symbolizes the mind of a Buddha.

Tibetan Buddhism comprises the teachings of the three vehicles of

Buddhism: the Foundational Vehicle, Mahyna, and Vajrayna. The
Mahyna goal of spiritual development is to achieve the enlightenment of
Buddhahood in order to most efficiently help all other sentient beings attain
this state.[5] The motivation in it is the bodhicitta mind of enlightenment
an altruistic intention to become enlightened for the sake of all sentient
beings.[6] Bodhisattvas are revered beings who have conceived the will
and vow to dedicate their lives with bodhicitta for the sake of all beings.
Tibetan Buddhism teaches methods for achieving Buddhahood more
quickly by including the Vajrayna path in Mahyna.[7]
Buddhahood is defined as a state free of the obstructions to liberation as
well as those to omniscience.[8] When, in Buddhahood, one is freed from
all mental obscurations,[9] one is said to attain a state of continuous bliss
mixed with a simultaneous cognition of emptiness,[10] the true nature of
reality.[11] In this state, all limitations on one's ability to help other living
beings are removed.[12]
It is said that there are countless beings who have attained Buddhahood.
[13] Buddhas spontaneously, naturally and continuously perform activities
to benefit all sentient beings.[14] However it is believed that sentient beings'
karmas limit the ability of the Buddhas to help them. Thus, although
Buddhas possess no limitation from their side on their ability to help others,
sentient beings continue to experience suffering as a result of the
limitations of their own former negative actions.[15]
[edit]

General methods of practice

Buddhist monk Geshe Konchog Wangdu reads Mahayana sutras from an old woodblock
copy of the Tibetan Kanjur.

[edit]

Transmission and realisation

There is a long history of oral transmission of teachings in Tibetan
Buddhism. Oral transmissions by lineage holders traditionally can take
place in small groups or mass gatherings of listeners and may last for
seconds (in the case of a mantra, for example) or months (as in the case of
a section of the canon). A transmission can even occur without actually
hearing, as in Asaga's visions of Maitreya.[citation needed]
An emphasis on oral transmission as more important than the printed word
derives from the earliest period of Indian Buddhism, when it allowed
teachings to be kept from those who should not hear them.[16] Hearing a
teaching (transmission) readies the hearer for realisation based on it. The
person from whom one hears the teaching should have heard it as one link
in a succession of listeners going back to the original speaker: the Buddha
in the case of a sutra or the author in the case of a book. Then the hearing
constitutes an authentic lineage of transmission. Authenticity of the oral
lineage is a prerequisite for realisation, hence the importance of lineages.
[edit]

Analytic meditation and fixation meditation

Spontaneous realisation on the basis of transmission is possible but rare.
Normally an intermediate step is needed in the form of analytic meditation,
i.e., thinking about what one has heard. As part of this process,
entertaining doubts and engaging in internal debate over them is
encouraged in some traditions.[17]
Analytic meditation is just one of two general methods of meditation. When
it achieves the quality of realisation, one is encouraged to switch to

"focused" or "fixation" meditation. In this the mind is stabilised on that

realisation for periods long enough to gradually habituate it to it.
A person's capacity for analytic meditation can be trained with logic. The
capacity for successful focused meditation can be trained through calm
abiding. A meditation routine may involve alternating sessions of analytic
meditation to achieve deeper levels of realization, and focused meditation
to consolidate them.[11] The deepest level of realization is Buddhahood
itself.
[edit]

Devotion to a Guru
As in other Buddhist traditions, an attitude of reverence for the teacher, or
guru, is also highly prized.[18] At the beginning of a public teaching, a lama
will do prostrations to the throne on which he will teach due to its
symbolism, or to an image of the Buddha behind that throne, then students
will do prostrations to the lama after he is seated. Merit accrues when
one's interactions with the teacher are imbued with such reverence in the
form of guru devotion, a code of practices governing them that derives from
Indian sources.[19] By such things as avoiding disturbance to the peace of
mind of one's teacher, and wholeheartedly following his prescriptions,
much merit accrues and this can significantly help improve one's practice.
There is a general sense in which any Tibetan Buddhist teacher is called a
lama. A student may have taken teachings from many authorities and
revere them all as lamas in this general sense. However, he will typically
have one held in special esteem as his own root guru and is encouraged to
view the other teachers who are less dear to him, however more exalted
their status, as embodied in and subsumed by the root guru.[20] Often the
teacher the student sees as root guru is simply the one who first introduced
him to Buddhism, but a student may also change his personal view of
which particular teacher is his root guru any number of times.
[edit]

Skepticism

Skepticism is an important aspect of Tibetan Buddhism, an attitude of

critical skepticism is encouraged to promote abilities in analytic meditation.
In favour of skepticism towards Buddhist doctrines in general, Tibetans are
fond of quoting sutra to the effect that one should test the Buddha's words
as one would the quality of gold.[21]
The opposing principles of skepticism and guru devotion are reconciled
with the Tibetan injunction to scrutinise a prospective guru thoroughly
before finally adopting him as such without reservation. A Buddhist may
study with a lama for decades before finally accepting him as his own guru.
[edit]

Preliminary practices and approach to Vajrayna

The Vajrayna deity, Vajrasattva

Vajrayna is said to be the fastest method for attaining Buddhahood but for
unqualified practitioners it can be dangerous. To engage in it one must
receive an appropriate initiation (also known as an "empowerment") from a
lama who is fully qualified to give it. From the time one has resolved to
accept such an initiation, the utmost sustained effort in guru devotion is
essential.
The aim of preliminary practices (ngndro) is to start the student on the
correct path for such higher teachings.[22] Just as Sutrayna preceded
Vajrayna historically in India, so sutra practices constitute those that are
preliminary to tantric ones. Preliminary practices include all Sutrayna
activities that yield merit like hearing teachings, prostrations, offerings,
prayers and acts of kindness and compassion, but chief among the
preliminary practices are realizations through meditation on the three
principle stages of the path: renunciation, the altruistic bodhicitta wish to
attain enlightenment and the wisdom realizing emptiness. For a person
without the basis of these three in particular to practice Vajrayna can be
like a small child trying to ride an unbroken horse.[23]
While the practices of Vajrayna are not known in Sutrayna, all Sutrayna

practices are common to Vajrayna. Without training in the preliminary

practices, the ubiquity of allusions to them in Vajrayna is meaningless and
even successful Vajrayna initiation becomes impossible.
The merit acquired in the preliminary practices facilitates progress in
Vajrayna. While many Buddhists may spend a lifetime exclusively on sutra
practices, however, an amalgam of the two to some degree is common. For
example, in order to train in calm abiding, one might use a tantric
visualisation as the meditation object.
[edit]

Esotericism
A sand mandala

In Vajrayna particularly, Tibetan Buddhists subscribe to a voluntary code

of self-censorship, whereby the uninitiated do not seek and are not
provided with information about it. This self-censorship may be applied
more or less strictly depending on circumstances such as the material
involved. A depiction of a mandala may be less public than that of a deity.
That of a higher tantric deity may be less public than that of a lower. The
degree to which information on Vajrayna is now public in western
languages is controversial among Tibetan Buddhists.
Buddhism has always had a taste for esotericism since its earliest period in
India.[24] Tibetans today maintain greater or lesser degrees of
confidentiality also with information on the vinaya and emptiness
specifically. In Buddhist teachings generally, too, there is caution about
revealing information to people who may be unready for it. Esoteric values
in Buddhism have made it at odds with the values of Christian missionary
activity, for example in contemporary Mongolia.
[edit]

Native Tibetan developments

Some commentators have emphasised Tibetan innovations such as the

system of incarnate lamas,[25] but such genuine innovations have been
few.[26] True to its roots in the Pla system of North India, however, Tibetan
Buddhism carried on a tradition of eclectic accumulation and
systematisation of diverse Buddhist elements, and pursued their synthesis.
Prominent among these achievements are the Stages of the Path and
motivational training.
[edit]

Study of tenet systems

Monks debating in Drepung Monastery

Tibetan Buddhists practice one or more understandings of the true nature

of reality, the emptiness of inherent existence of all things. Emptiness is
propounded according to four classical Indian schools of philosophical
tenets.
Two belong to the older path of the Foundation Vehicle:
%

Vaibhaika (Tib. bye-brag smra-ba)

Sautrntika (Tib. mdo-sde-pa)

The primary source for the former is the Abhidharma-koa by Vasubandhu

and its commentaries. The Abhidharmakoa is also an important source for
the Sautrntikas. Dignga and Dharmakrti are the most prominent
exponents.
The other two are Mahayana (Skt. Greater Vehicle) (Tib. theg-chen):
%

Yogcra, also called Cittamtra (Tib. sems-tsam-pa), Mind-Only

Madhyamaka (Tib. dbu-ma-pa)

Yogacrins base their views on texts from Maitreya, Asaga and

Vasubandhu, Madhyamakas on Ngrjuna and ryadeva. There is a
further classification of Madhyamaka into Svatantrika-Madhyamaka and
Prasagika-Madhyamaka. The former stems from Bhavaviveka,
ntarakita and Kamalala, and the latter from Buddhaplita and

Candrakrti.
The tenet system is used in the monasteries and colleges to teach
Buddhist philosophy in a systematic and progressive fashion, each
philosophical view being more subtle than its predecessor. Therefore the
four schools can be seen as a gradual path from a rather easy-to-grasp,
"realistic" philosophical point of view, to more and more complex and subtle
views on the ultimate nature of reality, that is on emptiness and dependent
arising, culminating in the philosophy of the Mdhyamikas, which is widely
believed to present the most sophisticated point of view.[27]
[edit]

History
[edit]

Early history
According to a Tibetan legendary tradition, the text of Kraavyhastra
arrived in a casket from the sky unto the roof of the palace of the 28th king
of Tibet, Lha Thothori Nyantsen who died in 650 C.E., in southern Tibet.[28]
While there is a level of doubt about the level of interest in Buddhism of
king Songtsn Gampo (who died in 650) it is known that he married a
Chinese Tang Dynasty Buddhist princess, Wencheng, who came to Tibet
with a statue of Shakyamuni Buddha. It is however clear from Tibetan
sources that some of his successors became ardent Buddhists. The
records show that Chinese Buddhists were actively involved in missionary
activity in Tibet, they did not have the same level of imperial support as
Indian Buddhists, with tantric lineages from Bihar and Bengal.[29]
According to a Tibetan legendary tradition, Songtsn Gampo also married
a Nepalese Buddhist princess, Bhrikuti. By the second half of the 8th
century he was already regarded as an embodiment of the bodhisattva
Avalokitevara.[30]
The successors of Songtsn Gampo were less enthusiastic about the
propagation of Buddhism but in the 8th century, King Trisong Detsen (755-

797) established it as the official religion of the state.[31] He invited Indian

Buddhist scholars to his court. In his age the famous tantric mystic
Padmasambhva arrived in Tibet according to the Tibetan tradition. In
addition to writing a number of important scriptures, some of which he hid
for future tertons to find, Padmasambhva, along with ntarakita,
established the Nyingma school.
The outlines of the history of Buddhism in Tibet from this time are wellknown.[32] At this early time also, from the south came the influence of
scholars under the Pla dynasty in the Indian state of Magadha. They had
achieved a blend of Mahyna and Vajrayna that has come to
characterize all forms of Tibetan Buddhism. Their teaching in sutra
centered on the Abhisamaylankra, a 4th century Yogcrin text, but
prominent among them were the Mdhyamika scholars ntarakita and
Kamalala.
A third influence was that of the Sarvstivdins from Kashmir in the south
west[33] and Khotan in the north west.[34] Although they did not succeed in
maintaining a presence in Tibet, their texts found their way into the Tibetan
Buddhist canon, providing the Tibetans with almost all of their primary
sources about the Foundation Vehicle. A subsect of this school,
Mlasarvstivda was the source of the Tibetan vinaya.[35]
[edit]

The Chinese princess Jincheng (Kon-co) and the

Khotanese monks
The Chinese princess Jincheng Gongzhu (?-739), Zongli, the "real
daughter" of the king of Yong, and an adoptive daughter of Emperor
Zhongzong of Tang (r. 705-710),[36] was sent to Tibet in 710 where,
according to most sources, she married Mes-ag-tshoms, who would have
been only six or seven years old at the time.[37] She was known in Tibet as
Gyim shang Ong co, or, simply, Kim-sheng or Kong-co, and was a devout
Buddhist.
Five Buddhist temples were built at: 'Ching bu nam ra, Kwa chu in Brag
dmar, 'Gran bzang, 'Khar brag and sMas gong.[38]

Buddhist monks from Khotan (Li), fleeing the persecutions of an antiBuddhist king, were given refuge by Kim-sheng about 737. The story of
these Khotanese monks is recorded the Li yul lung-btsan-pa or 'Prophecy
of the Li Country', a Buddhist history of Khotan which has been preserved
as part of the Tibetan Tanjur.
Kim-sheng died during an outbreak of smallpox sometime between 739
and 741. The rise of anti-Buddhist factions in Tibet following the death of
the Chinese princess began to blame the epidemic on the support of
Buddhism by the king and queen.[39] This forced the monks to flee once
again; first to Gandhara, and then to Kosambi in central India where the
monks, apparently ended up quarrelling and slaughtering each other.[40]
A fourth influence from China in the east came in the form of Chan
Buddhism.

Padmasambhva, founder of the Nyingmapa, the earliest school of Tibetan Buddhism.

Note the wide-open eyes, characteristic of a particular method of meditation.[41]

[edit]

Transmission of Chan to the Nyingmapa

According to A. W. Barber of the University of Calgary,[42] Chan Buddhism
was introduced to the Nyingmapa in three principal streams: the teachings
of Korean Master Kim, Kim Ho-shang, (Chin ho shang) transmitted
by Sang Shi[43] in ca. 750 CE; the lineage of Master Wu Chu () of
the Pao T'ang School was transmitted within Tibet by Ye-shes Wangpo;
and the teaching from Mo Ho Yen, (Tibetan: Hwa shang
Mahayana) that were a synthesis of the Northern School of Chan and the
Pao T'ang School.[44]
Tibetan king Khri srong lde btsan (742797) invited the Chan master Moho-yen (whose name consists of the same Chinese characters used to
transliterate Mahayana) to transmit the Dharma at Samye Monastery. Moho-yen had been disseminating Dharma in the Tun-huang locale, but,
according to Tibetan sources, lost an important philosophical debate on the

nature of emptiness with the Indian master Kamalala, and the king
declared Kamalala's philosophy should form the basis for Tibetan
Buddhism.[45] However, a Chinese source says their side won, and some
scholars conclude that the entire episode is fictitious.[46] Pioneering
Buddhologist Giuseppe Tucci speculated that Hwashang's ideas were
preserved by the Nyingmapas in the form of dzogchen teachings.[47] John
Myrdhin Reynolds holds a very different point of view stating "Except for a
brief flirtation with Ch'an in the early days of Buddhism in Tibet in the
eighth century, the Tibetans exhibited almost no interest at all in Chinese
Buddhism, except for translating a few Sutras from Chinese for which they
did not possess Indian originals." [48]
Whichever may be the case, Tibetan Buddhists today trace their spiritual
roots from Indian masters such as Padmasambhva, Atia, Tilopa, Naropa
and their later Tibetan students.
[edit]

Later history
Atia

From the outset Buddhism was opposed by the native shamanistic Bn

religion, which had the support of the aristocracy, but with royal patronage
it thrived to a peak under King Rlpachn (817-836). Terminology in
translation was standardised around 825, enabling a translation
methodology that was highly literal. Despite a reversal in Buddhist
influence which began under King Langdarma (836-842), the following
centuries saw a colossal effort in collecting available Indian sources, many
of which are now extant only in Tibetan translation.
Tibetan Buddhism exerted a strong influence from the 11th century CE
among the peoples of Inner Asia, especially the Mongols. It was adopted
as an official state religion by the Mongol Yuan dynasty and the Manchu
Qing dynasty that ruled China. Coinciding with the early discoveries of
"hidden treasures" (terma),[49] the 11th century saw a revival of Buddhist

influence originating in the far east and far west of Tibet.[50] In the west,
Rinchen Zangpo (958-1055) was active as a translator and founded
temples and monasteries. Prominent scholars and teachers were again
invited from India. In 1042 Atia arrived in Tibet at the invitation of a west
Tibetan king. This renowned exponent of the Pla form of Buddhism from
the Indian university of Vikramala later moved to central Tibet. There his
chief disciple, Dromtonpa founded the Kadampa school of Tibetan
Buddhism, under whose influence the New Translation schools of today
evolved.
[edit]

Schools
Sakya Pandita

Kalu Rinpoche (right) and Lama Denys at Karma Ling Institute in Savoy

Tibetan Buddhism has four main traditions:

%

Nyingma(pa),[51] the Ancient Ones. This is the oldest, the original

order founded by Padmasambhva and ntarakita.[52] Whereas
other schools categorize their teachings into the three vehicles: The
Foundation Vehicle, Mahyna and Vajrayna, the Nyingma tradition
classifies its into nine vehicles, among the highest of which is that
known as Atiyoga or Dzogchen (Great Perfection).[53] Hidden
treasures (terma) are of particular significance to this tradition.

Kagyu(pa), Lineage of the (Buddha's) Word. This is an oral

tradition which is very much concerned with the experiential
dimension of meditation. Its most famous exponent was Milarepa, an
11th century mystic. It contains one major and one minor subsect.
The first, the Dagpo Kagyu, encompasses those Kagyu schools that
trace back to the Indian master Naropa via Marpa, Milarepa and
Gampopa[52] and consists of four major sub-sects: the Karma
Kagyu, headed by a Karmapa, the Tsalpa Kagyu, the Barom Kagyu,

and Pagtru Kagyu. There are a further eight minor sub-sects, all of
which trace their root to Pagtru Kagyu and the most notable of which
are the Drikung Kagyu and the Drukpa Kagyu. The once-obscure
Shangpa Kagyu, which was famously represented by the 20th
century teacher Kalu Rinpoche, traces its history back to the Indian
master Naropa via Niguma, Sukhasiddhi and Kyungpo Neljor.[52]
%

Sakya(pa), Grey Earth. This school very much represents the

scholarly tradition. Headed by the Sakya Trizin, this tradition was
founded by Khon Konchog Gyalpo, a disciple of the great translator
Drokmi Lotsawa and traces its lineage to the Indian master Virupa.
[52] A renowned exponent, Sakya Pandita 11821251CE was the
great grandson of Khon Konchog Gyalpo.

Gelug(pa), Way of Virtue. Originally a reformist movement, this

tradition is particularly known for its emphasis on logic and debate.
Its spiritual head is the Ganden Tripa and its temporal one the Dalai
Lama. The Dalai Lama is regarded as the embodiment of the
Bodhisattva of Compassion.[54] Successive Dalai Lamas ruled Tibet
from the mid-17th to mid-20th centuries. The order was founded in
the 14th to 15th century by Je Tsongkhapa, renowned for both his
scholasticism and his virtue.

These major schools are sometimes said to constitute the Old Translation
and New Translation traditions, the latter following from the historical
Kadampa lineage of translations and tantric lineages. Another common
differentiation is into "Red Hat" and "Yellow Hat" schools. The
correspondences are as follows:
Nyingma

Kagyu

Sakya

Old Translation

New Translation

New Translation

Red Hat

Black Hat

Red Hat

The pre-Buddhist religion of Bn has also been recognized by Tenzin

Gyatso, the fourteenth Dalai Lama, as the fifth principal spiritual school of
Tibet.[55]
Besides these major schools, there is a minor one, the Jonang. The

Jonangpa were suppressed by the rival Gelugpa in the 17th century and
were once thought extinct, but are now known to survive in Eastern Tibet.
There is also an ecumenical movement known as Rim.[56]
[edit]

Monasticism
See also: List of Tibetan monasteries
This section needs additional citations for verification.

Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challeng

Lamayuru monastery.

Although there were many householder-yogis in Tibet, monasticism was

the foundation of Buddhism in Tibet. There were over 6,000 monasteries in
Tibet, however nearly all of these were ransacked and destroyed by Red
Guards during the Cultural Revolution.[57] Most of the major monasteries
have been at least partially re-established while, many other ones remain
in ruins.
In Mongolia during the 1920s, approximately one third of the male
population were monks, though many lived outside monasteries. By the
beginning of the 20th century about 750 monasteries were functioning in
Mongolia.[58] These monasteries were largely dismantled during
Communist rule, but many have been reestablished during the Buddhist
revival in Mongolia[citation needed] which followed the fall of Communism.
Monasteries generally adhere to one particular school. Some of the major
centers in each tradition are as follows:
[edit]

Nyingma
The Nyingma lineage is said to have "six mother monasteries," although
the composition of the six has changed over time:
%

Dorje Drak

Dzogchen Monastery

Katok Monastery

Mindrolling Monastery

Palyul

Shechen Monastery

Also of note is
%

Samye the first monastery in Tibet, established by

Padmasambhva and ntarakita

[edit]

Kagyu
Tibetan Buddhist monks at Rumtek Monastery in Sikkim

Many Kagyu monasteries are in Kham, eastern Tibet. Tsurphu, one of the
most important, is in central Tibet, as is Ralung and Drikung.
%

Palpung Monastery the seat of the Tai Situpa and Jamgon

Kongtrul

Ralung Monastery -- the seat of the Gyalwang Drukpa

Surmang Monastery the seat of the Trungpa tlkus

Tsurphu Monastery the seat of H.H. the Gyalwa Karmapa

[edit]

Sakya
%

Sakya Monastery the seat of H.H. the Sakya Trizin

[edit]

Gelug
The three most important centers of the Gelugpa lineage which are also
called 'great three' Gelukpa university monasteries of Tibet, are Ganden,
Sera and Drepung Monasteries, near Lhasa:
%

Ganden Monastery the seat of the Ganden Tripa

Drepung Monastery the home monastery of the Dalai Lama

Sera Monastery

Three other monasteries have particularly important regional influence:

%

Mahayana Monastery the seat of the H.H Kadhampa Dharmaraja

(The 25th Atisha Jiangqiu Tilei), Nepal

Tashilhunpo Monastery in Shigatse founded by the first Dalai

Lama, this monastery is now the seat of the Panchen Lama

Labrang Monastery in eastern Amdo

Kumbum Jampaling in central Amdo

Great spiritual and historical importance is also placed on:

%

The Jokhang Temple in Lhasa said to have been built by King

Songtsen Gampo in 647 AD, a major pilgrimage site

The statue of Buddha in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia

[edit]

Tibetan Buddhism in the contemporary world

Today, Tibetan Buddhism is adhered to widely in the Tibetan Plateau,
Nepal, Bhutan, Mongolia, Kalmykia (on the north-west shore of the
Caspian), Siberia and Russian Far East (Tuva and Buryatia). The Indian
regions of Sikkim and Ladakh, both formerly independent kingdoms, are
also home to significant Tibetan Buddhist populations. In the wake of the
Tibetan diaspora, Tibetan Buddhism has gained adherents in the West and
throughout the world. Celebrity practitioners include Brandon Boyd,
Richard Gere, Adam Yauch, Jet Li, Sharon Stone, Allen Ginsberg, Philip
Glass, Mike Barson and Steven Seagal (who has been proclaimed the
reincarnation of the tulku Chungdrag Dorje).[59]
In his classic work Buddhism in China (Princeton University Press, 1965),
Kenneth Chen proposed the idea that Buddhism adapts itself to its host
culture. Adaptations of Buddhism to contemporary Western culture include
Tricycle magazine, the modern notion of a dharma center, and Celtic
Buddhism.
[edit]

Glossary of terms used

English

spoken Tibetan

Wylie Tibetan

affliction

nynmong

nyon-mongs

analytic meditation

jegom

dpyad-sgom

calm abiding

shin

zhi-gnas

devotion to the guru

lama-la tenpa

bla-ma-la bsten-pa

fixation meditation

joggom

'jog-sgom

foundational vehicle

tek mn

theg sman

incarnate lama

tlku

sprul-sku

inherent existence

rangzhingi drubpa

rang-bzhin-gyi grub-p

mind of enlightenment

changchub sem

byang-chhub sems

motivational training

lojong

blo-sbyong

omniscience

tamc kyempa

thams-cad mkhyen-p

preliminary practices

ngndo

sngon-'gro

root guru

zaw lama

rtsa-ba'i bla-ma

stages of the path

lamrim

lam-rim

transmission and realisation

lungtok

lung-rtogs

[edit]

See also
Tibetan letter "A", the symbol of rainbow body

Buddhism

Dzogchen

Derge Parkhang

Mahamudra

Milarepa

Nagarjuna

Ngagpa

Padmasambhava

Pure Land Buddhism (Tibetan)

Samaya

Schools of Buddhism

Shambhala Buddhism

Tibetan art

Tibetan Buddhist teachers

Traditional Tibetan medicine

Tibetan Buddhism

This compilation is for anyone interested about Bhikkhus (monks) and

about how to relate to them. Some may think that this lineage follows an
overly traditionalist approach but then, it does happen to be the oldest
living tradition. A slight caution therefore to anyone completely new to the
ways of monasticism, which may appear quite radical for the modern day
and age. The best introduction, perhaps essential for a true understanding,
is meeting with a practising Bhikkhu who should manifest and reflect the
peaceful and joyous qualities of the Bhikkhu's way of life.
The Discipline of a Buddhist monk is refined and is intended to be
conducive to the arising of mindfulness and wisdom. This code of conduct
is called the Vinaya. While it is not an end in itself, it is an excellent tool,
which can be instrumental in leading to the end of suffering.
Apart from the direct training that the Vinaya provides, it also establishes a
relationship with lay people without whose co-operation it would be
impossible to live as a monk. A monk is able to live as a mendicant
because lay people respect the monastic conventions and are prepared to
help to support him. This gives rise to a relationship of respect and
gratitude in which both layperson and monk are called upon to practise
their particular life styles and responsibilities with sensitivity and sincerity.
Many of the rules of discipline were developed specifically to avoid
offending lay people or giving rise to misunderstanding or suspicion (for

example, the rules stipulating that another male be present when a monk
and a woman would otherwise be alone together). As no monk wishes to
offend by being fussy and difficult to look after, and no lay Buddhist would
wish to accidentally cause a monk to compromise the discipline, this
booklet is therefore intended to be a useful guide to the major aspects of
the Vinaya as it relates to lay people.

Providing the Means for Support

The Vinaya, as laid down by the Buddha, in its many practical rules defines
the status of a monk as being that of a mendicant. Having no personal
means of support is a very practical means of understanding the instinct to
seek security; furthermore, the need to seek alms gives a monk a source
of contemplation on what things are really necessary. The four requisites,
food, clothing, shelter and medicines, are what lay people can offer as a
practical way of expressing generosity and appreciation of their faith in
belonging to the Buddhist Community. Rather than giving requisites to
particular monks whom one likes and knows the practising Buddhist learns
to offer to the Sangha as an act of faith and respect for the Sangha as a
whole. Monks respond by sharing merit, spreading good will and the
teachings of the Buddha to all those who wish to hear, irrespective of
personal feelings.

Food
A monk is allowed to collect, receive and consume food between dawn and
midday (taken to be 12 noon). He is not allowed to consume food outside
of this time and he is not allowed to store food overnight. Plain water can
be taken at any time without having to be offered. Although a monk lives
on whatever is offered, vegetarianism is encouraged.
A monk must have all eatables and drinkables, except plain water, formally
offered into his hands or placed on something in direct contact with his
hands. In the Thai tradition, in order to prevent contact with a woman, he
will generally set down a cloth to receive things offered by women. He is
not allowed to cure or cook food except in particular circumstances.
In accordance with the discipline, a monk is prohibited from eating fruit or
vegetables containing fertile seeds. So, when offering such things, a
layperson can either remove the seeds or make the fruit allowable slightly
damaging it with a knife. This is done by piercing the fruit and saying at the
same time 'Kappiyam bhante' or 'I am making this allowable, Venerable Sir'
(the English translation). It is instructive to note that, rather than limiting

what can be offered, the Vinaya lays emphasis on the mode of offering.
Offering should be done in a respectful manner, making the act of offering
a mindful and reflective one, irrespective of what one is giving.

Clothing
Forest monks generally make their own robes from cloth that is given.
Plain white cotton is always useful (it can be dyed to the correct dull
ochre). The basic 'triple robe' of, the Buddha is supplemented with
sweaters, tee-shirts, socks, etc. and these, of an appropriate brown colour,
can also be offered.

Shelter
Solitary, silent and simple could be a fair description of the ideal lodging for
a monk. From the scriptures it seems that the general standard of lodging
was to neither cause discomfort nor impair health, yet not to be indulgently
luxurious. Modest furnishings of a simple and utilitarian nature were also
allowed, there being a rule against using 'high, luxurious beds or chairs',
that is, items that are opulent by current standards. So a simple bed is an
allowable thing to use, although most monks prefer the firmer surface
provided by a mat or thick blanket spread on the floor.
The monk's precepts do not allow him to sleep more than three nights in
the same room with an unordained male, and not even to lie down in the
same sleeping quarters as a woman. In providing a temporary room for a
night, a simple spare room that is private is adequate.

Medicine
A monk is allowed to use medicines if they are offered in the same way as
food. Once offered, neither food nor medicine should be handled again by
a layperson, as that renders it no longer allowable. Medicines can be
considered as those things that are specifically for illness; those things
having tonic or reviving quality (such as tea or sugar); and certain items
which have a nutritional value in times of debilitation, hunger or fatigue
(such as cheese or non-dairy chocolate).

Sundries
As circumstances changed, the Buddha allowed monks to make use of
other small requisites, such as needles, a razor, etc. In modern times, such
things might include a pen, a watch, a torch, etc. All of these were to be

plain and simple, costly or luxurious items being expressly forbidden.

Invitation
The principles of mendicancy forbid a monk from asking for anything,
unless he is ill, without having received an invitation. So when receiving
food, for example, a monk makes himself available in a situation, where
people wish to give food. At no time does the monk request food. This
principle should be borne in mind when offering food; rather than asking a
monk what he would like, it is better to ask if you can offer some food.
Considering that the meal will be the only meal of the day, one can offer
what seems right, recognising that the monk will take what he needs and
leave the rest. A good way to offer is to bring bowls of food to the monk
and let him choose what he needs from each bowl.
Tea and coffee can be offered at any time (if after noon, without milk).
Sugar or honey can be offered at the same time to go with it.
One can also make an invitation to cover any circumstances that may arise
which you may not be aware of by saying, for example, 'Bhante, if you
need any medicine or requisites, please let me know'. To avoid any
misunderstanding, it is better to be quite specific about what you are
offering. Unless specified, an invitation can only be accepted for up to four
months, after which time it lapses unless renewed.

Inappropriate Items Including Money

T.V.'s and videos for entertainment should not be used by a monk. Under
certain circumstances, a Dharma video or a documentary programme may
be watched. In general, luxurious items are inappropriate for a monk to
accept. This is because they are conducive to attachment in his own mind,
and excite envy, possibly even the intention to steal, in the mind of another
person. This is unwholesome Kamma. It also looks bad for an alms
mendicant, living on charity as a source of inspiration to others, to have
luxurious belongings. One who is content with little should be a light to a
world where consumer instincts and greed are whipped up in people's
minds.
Although the Vinaya specifies a prohibition on accepting and handling gold
and silver, the real spirit of it is to forbid use and control over funds,
whether these are bank notes or credit cards. The Vinaya even prohibits a
monk from having someone else receive money on his behalf. In practical
terms, monasteries are financially controlled by lay stewards, who then

make open invitation for the Sangha to ask for what they need, under the
direction of the Abbot. A junior monk even has to ask an appointed agent
(generally a senior monk or Abbot) if he may take up the stewards' offer to
pay for dental treatment or obtain medicines, for example. This means that
as far as is reasonably possible, the donations that are given to the
stewards to support the Sangha are not wasted on unnecessary whims.
If a layperson wishes to give something to a particular monk, but is
uncertain what he needs, he should make an invitation. Any financial
donations should not be to a monk but to the stewards of the monastery,
perhaps mentioning if it's for a particular item or for the needs of a certain
monk. For items such as travelling expenses, money can be given to an
accompanying anagarika (dressed in white) or accompanying layperson,
who can then buy tickets, drinks for a journey or anything else that the
monk may need at that time. It is quite a good exercise in mindfulness for a
layperson to actually consider what items are necessary and offer those
rather than money.

Relationships
Monks and nuns lead lives of total celibacy in which any kind of sexual
behaviour is forbidden. This includes even suggestive speech or physical
contact with lustful intent, both of which are very serious offences for
monks and nuns. As one's intent may not always be obvious (even to
oneself), and one's words not always guarded, it is a general principle for
monks and nuns to refrain from any physical contact with members of the
opposite sex. Monks should have a male present who can understand
what is being said when conversing with a lady, and a similar situation
holds true for nuns.
Much of this standard of behaviour is to prevent scandalous gossip or
misunderstanding occurring. In the stories that explain the origination of a
rule, there are examples of monks being accused of being a woman's
lover, of a woman's misunderstanding a monk's reason for being with her,
and even of a monk being thrashed by a jealous husband!
So, to prevent such misunderstanding, however groundless, a monk has to
be accompanied by a man whenever he is in the presence of a woman; on
a journey; or sitting alone in a secluded place (one would not call a
meditation hall or a bus station a secluded place). Generally, monks would
also refrain from carrying on correspondence with women, other than for
matters pertaining to the monastery, travel arrangements, providing basic
information, etc. When teaching Dharma, even in a letter, it is easy for

inspiration and compassion to turn into attachment.

Teaching Dharma
The monk as Dharma teacher must find the appropriate occasion to give
the profound and insightful teachings of the Buddha to those who wish to
hear it. It would not be appropriate to teach without invitation, nor in a
situation where the teachings cannot be reflected upon adequately. This is
a significant point, as the Buddha's teachings are meant to be a vehicle,
which one should contemplate silently and then apply. The value of
Dharma is greatly reduced if it is just received as chit-chat or speculations
for debate.
Accordingly, for a Dharma talk, it is good to set up a room where the
teachings can be listened to with respect being shown to the speaker. In
terms of etiquette, graceful convention rather than rule, this means
affording the speaker a seat which is higher than his audience, not pointing
one's feet at the speaker, not lying down on the floor during the talk, and
not interrupting the speaker. Questions are welcome at the end of the talk.
Also, as a sign of respect, when inviting a monk it is usual for the person
making the invitation to also make the travel arrangements, directly or
indirectly.

Minor Matters of Etiquette

Vinaya also extends into the realm of convention and custom. Such
observances, which it mentions, are not 'rules' but skillful means of
manifesting beautiful behaviour. In monasteries, there is some emphasis
on such matters as a means of establishing harmony, order and pleasant
relationships within a community. Lay people may be interested in applying
such conventions for their own development of sensitivity, but it should not
be considered as something that is necessarily expected of them.
Firstly, there is the custom of bowing to a shrine or teacher. This is done
when first entering their presence or when taking leave. Done gracefully, at
the appropriate time, this is a beautiful gesture, which honours the person
who does it; at an inappropriate time, done compulsively, it can appear
foolish to onlookers. Another common gesture of respect is to place the
hands so that the palms are touching, the fingers pointing upwards and the
hands held immediately in front of the chest. This is a pleasant means of
greeting, bidding farewell, saluting the end of a Dharma talk or concluding
an offering.

Body language is something that is well understood in Buddhist cultures.

Apart from the obvious reminder to sit up for a Dharma talk rather than loll
or recline on the floor one shows a manner of deference by ducking slightly
if having to walk between a monk and the person he is speaking to.
Similarly, one would not stand looming over a monk to talk to him or offer
him something, but rather approach him at the level at which he is sitting.
"Good is restraint in body,restraint in speech is good, good is restraint in
mind, everywhere restraint is good; the bhikkhu everywhere restrainedis
from all dukkha free."
Dharmapada no. 361

Dowsing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

For the English iconoclast, see William Dowsing.
A dowser, from an 18th century French book about superstitions

Otto Edler von Graeve in 1913

Dowsing is a type of divination employed in attempts to locate ground

water, buried metals or ores, gemstones, oil, gravesites,[1] and many other
objects and materials, as well as so-called currents of earth radiation (Ley
lines), without the use of scientific apparatus. Dowsing is also known as
divining (especially in reference to interpretation of results),[2]
doodlebugging[3] (particularly in the United States, in searching for
petroleum[4]) or (when searching specifically for water) water finding,
water witching or water dowsing.[5] There is no accepted scientific
rationale behind dowsing, and there is no scientific evidence that it is
effective.
A Y- or L-shaped twig or rod, called a dowsing rod, divining rod (Latin:

virgula divina or baculus divinatorius) or witching rod is sometimes

used during dowsing, although some dowsers use other equipment or no
equipment at all.
Dowsing appears to have arisen in the context of Renaissance magic in
Germany, and it remains popular among believers in Forteana or
radiesthesia.[6]
Contents [hide]
%

1 History

2 Dowsing rods

3 Other equipment used

for dowsing

4 Suggested explanations

5 Evidence

6 Commercial and "hightech" dowsing devices

7 List of well-known
dowsers

8 See also

9 References

10 Further reading

11 External links

[edit]

History
Dowsing as practiced today may have originated in Germany during the
15th century, when it was used to find metals. As early as 1518 Martin
Luther listed dowsing for metals as an act that broke the first
commandment (i.e., as occultism).[7] The 1550 edition of Sebastian
Mnster's Cosmographia contains a woodcut of a dowser with forked rod in
hand walking over a cutaway image of a mining operation. The rod is
labelled "Virgula Divina Glck rt" (Latin: divine rod; German
"Wnschelrute": fortune rod or stick), but there is no text accompanying the
woodcut. By 1556 Georgius Agricola's treatment of mining and smelting of

ore, De Re Metallica, included a detailed description of dowsing for metal

ore.[8]
In 1662 dowsing was declared to be "superstitious, or rather satanic" by a
Jesuit, Gaspar Schott, though he later noted that he wasn't sure that the
devil was always responsible for the movement of the rod.[9] In the South of
France in the 17th Century it was used in tracking criminals and heretics.
Its abuse led to a decree of the inquisition in 1701, forbidding its
employment for purposes of justice.[10]
An epigram by Samuel Sheppard, from Epigrams theological,
philosophical, and romantick (1651) runs thus:
Virgula divina.
"Some Sorcerers do boast they have a Rod,
Gather'd with Vowes and Sacrifice,
And (borne about) will strangely nod
To hidden Treasure where it lies;
Mankind is (sure) that Rod divine,
For to the Wealthiest (ever) they incline."
In the late 1960s during the Vietnam War, some United States Marines
used dowsing to attempt to locate weapons and tunnels.[11] As late as in
1986, when 31 soldiers were taken by an avalanche during an operation in
the NATO drill Anchor Express in Vassdalen, Norway, the Norwegian army
attempted to locate soldiers buried in the avalanche using dowsing as
search method.[12] 16 soldiers died.
[edit]

Dowsing rods
Traditionally, the most common dowsing rod is a forked (Y-shaped) branch
from a tree or bush. Some dowsers prefer branches from particular trees,
and some prefer the branches to be freshly cut. Hazel twigs in Europe and
witch-hazel in the United States are traditionally commonly chosen, as are
branches from willow or peach trees. The two ends on the forked side are
held one in each hand with the third (the stem of the "Y") pointing straight

ahead. Often the branches are grasped palms down. The dowser then
walks slowly over the places where he suspects the target (for example,
minerals or water) may be, and the dowsing rod supposedly dips, inclines
or twitches when a discovery is made. This method is sometimes known as
"Willow Witching."
The archaeologist Ivor Nol Hume introduced the practice of using "angle
rods" and bent coat hangers to locate buried remains in the study of
historical archaeology as a sub-surface surveying technique.[13]

Two L-shaped metal wire rods

Many dowsers today use a pair of simple L-shaped metal rods. One rod is
held in each hand, with the short arm of the L held upright, and the long
arm pointing forward. When something is found, the rods cross over one
another making an "X" over the found object. If the object is long and
straight, such as a water pipe, the rods will point in opposite directions,
showing its orientation. The rods are sometimes fashioned from wire coat
hangers, and glass or plastic rods have also been accepted. Straight rods
are also sometimes used for the same purposes, and were not uncommon
in early 19th century New England.
In all cases, the device is in a state of unstable equilibrium from which
slight movements may be amplified.[14]
[edit]

Other equipment used for dowsing

A pendulum of crystal, metal or other materials suspended on a chain is
sometimes used in divination and dowsing. In one approach the user first
determines which direction (left-right, up-down) will indicate "yes" and
which "no" before proceeding to ask the pendulum specific questions, or
else another person may pose questions to the person holding the
pendulum. The pendulum may also be used over a pad or cloth with "yes"
and "no" written on it and perhaps other words written in a circle. The
person holding the pendulum aims to hold it as steadily as possible over

the center and its movements are held to indicate answers to the
questions. In the practice of radiesthesia, a pendulum is used for medical
diagnosis.
[edit]

Suggested explanations
Early attempts at a scientific explanation of dowsing were based on the
notion that the divining rod was physically affected by emanations from
substances of interest. The following explanation is from William Pryce's
1778 Mineralogia Cornubiensis:
The corpuscles ... that rise from the Minerals, entering the rod, determine it
to bow down, in order to render it parallel to the vertical lines which the
effluvia describe in their rise. In effect the Mineral particles seem to be
emitted from the earth; now the Virgula [rod], being of a light porous wood,
gives an easy passage to these particles, which are also very fine and
subtle; the effluvia then driven forwards by those that follow them, and
pressed at the same time by the atmosphere incumbent on them, are
forced to enter the little interstices between the fibres of the wood, and by
that effort they oblige it to incline, or dip down perpendicularly, to become
parallel with the little columns which those vapours form in their rise.
Such explanations have no modern scientific basis.
A 1986 article in Nature included dowsing in a list of "effects which until
recently were claimed to be paranormal but which can now be explained
from within orthodox science."[15] Specifically, dowsing could be explained
in terms of sensory cues, expectancy effects and probability.[15]
Skeptics and some supporters believe that dowsing apparatus has no
power of its own but merely amplifies slight movements of the hands
caused by a phenomenon known as the ideomotor effect: people's
subconscious minds may influence their bodies without their consciously
deciding to take action. This would make the dowsing rods a conduit for the
diviner's subconscious knowledge or perception; but also susceptible to
confirmation bias.[16][17]

Soviet geologists have made claims for the abilities of dowsers,[18] which
are difficult to account for in terms of the reception of normal sensory cues.
Some authors suggest that these abilities may be explained by postulating
human sensitivity to small magnetic field gradient changes.[19][20][21]
[edit]

Evidence
Renowned skeptic James Randi at a lecture at Rockefeller University, on October 10,
2008, holding an $800 device advertised as a dowsing instrument

A 1948 study tested 58 dowsers' ability to detect water. None of them were
more reliable than chance.[22] A 1979 review examined many controlled
studies of dowsing for water, and found that none of them showed better
than chance results.[5]
In a study in Munich 19871988 by Hans-Dieter Betz and other scientists,
500 dowsers were initially tested for their "skill" and the experimenters
selected the best 43 among them for further tests. Water was pumped
through a pipe on the ground floor of a two-storey barn. Before each test
the pipe was moved in a direction perpendicular to the water flow. On the
upper floor each dowser was asked to determine the position of the pipe.
Over two years the dowsers performed 843 such tests. Of the 43 preselected and extensively tested candidates at least 37 showed no dowsing
ability. The results from the remaining 6 were said to be better than
chance, resulting in the experimenters' conclusion that some dowsers "in
particular tasks, showed an extraordinarily high rate of success, which can
scarcely if at all be explained as due to chance ... a real core of dowserphenomena can be regarded as empirically proven."[23]
Five years after the Munich study was published, Jim T. Enright, a
professor of physiology and a leading skeptic who emphasised correct data
analysis procedure, contended that the study's results are merely
consistent with statistical fluctuations and not significant. He believed the
experiments provided "the most convincing disproof imaginable that

dowsers can do what they claim,"[24] stating that the data analysis was
"special, unconventional and customized." Replacing it with "more ordinary
analyses,"[25] he noted that the best dowser was on average 4 millimeters
out of 10 meters closer to a mid-line guess, an advantage of 0.0004%, and
that the five other good dowsers were on average further than a mid-line
guess.[26] The study's authors responded, saying "on what grounds could
Enright come to entirely different conclusions? Apparently his data analysis
was too crude, even illegitimate."[27] The findings of the Munich study were
also confirmed in a paper by Dr. S. Ertel,[28] a German psychologist who
had previously intervened in the statistical controversy surrounding the
"Mars effect", but Enright remained unconvinced.[29]
More recently a study[30] was undertaken in Kassel, Germany, under the
direction of the Gesellschaft zur Wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung von
Parawissenschaften (GWUP) [Society for the Scientific Investigation of the
Parasciences]. The three-day test of some 30 dowsers involved plastic
pipes through which water flow could be controlled and directed. The pipes
were buried 50 centimeters under a level field, the position of each marked
on the surface with a colored strip. The dowsers had to tell whether water
was running through each pipe. All the dowsers signed a statement
agreeing this was a fair test of their abilities and that they expected a 100
percent success rate, however the results were no better than chance.
Some researchers have investigated possible physical or geophysical
explanations for alleged dowsing abilities. One study concluded that
dowsers "respond" to a 60 Hz electromagnetic field, but this response does
not occur if the kidney area or head are shielded.[31]
[edit]

Commercial and "high-tech" dowsing devices

A number of devices resembling "high tech" dowsing rods have been
marketed for modern police and military use: none has been shown to be
effective.[32] The more notable of this class of device are ADE 651, Sniffex,
and the GT200.[33][34] A US government study advised against buying
"bogus explosive detection equipment".[32]

Devices:
%

Sandia National Laboratories tested the MOLE Programmable

System manufactured by Global Technical Ltd. of Kent, UK and
found it ineffective.[33]

The ADE 651 is a device produced by ATSC (UK) and widely used
by Iraqi police to detect explosives.[34] Many[34][35] have denied its
effectiveness and contended that the ADE 651 failed to prevent
many bombings in Iraq. On 22 January 2010, the director of ATSC,
Jim McCormick was arrested on suspicion of fraud by
misrepresentation.[36] Earlier, the British Government had
announced a ban on the export of the ADE-651.[37]

SNIFFEX was the subject of a report by the United States Navy

Explosive Ordnance Disposal that concluded "The handheld
SNIFFEX explosives detector does not work."[38]

Global Technical GT200 is a dowsing type explosive detector which

contains no scientific mechanism.[39][40]

[edit]

List of well-known dowsers

Well-known dowsers include:
%

Otto Edler von Graeve[41]

Uri Geller

A. Frank Glahn

Thomas Charles Lethbridge[42]

Nils-Axel Mrner

Karl Spiesberger

Ludwig Straniak

Hellmut Wolff

[edit]

See also
%

Geopathic stress

Long range locator

Michel Moine

Pigeon Post

Professor Calculus

Rhabdomancy

TR Araa

[edit]
Dowsing

Humanism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Humanistic" redirects here. For the album, see Humanistic (album).
This article is about human-centered philosophy. For other uses, see
Humanism (disambiguation).
Part of a Philosophical series on

Humanism
Happy Human

International Humanistand
Ethical Union (IHEU)American
Humanist AssociationBritish
Humanist AssociationNational
Secular Society
Secular humanism
Council for Secular HumanismA
Secular Humanist Declaration
Amsterdam Declaration

Religious humanism
Christian humanismJewish
humanismBuddhist humanism
Related articles
Ethical CultureMarxist
humanismDeistic humanism
Cosmic humanismExistential
humanismIntegral humanism
TranshumanismPersonism
PosthumanismAntihumanism
Outline of humanismList of
humanists
History of humanism
Renaissance humanism
Humanism in Germany
Humanism in FranceHumanist
Manifesto
%

Philosophy Portal v t e

Humanism is a body of philosophies and ethical perspectives that

emphasize the value of human beings, individually and collectively, and
generally place more importance on rational thought than on strict faith or
adherence to principle. During the Renaissance period in Western Europe
humanist movements attempted to demonstrate the benefit of gaining
learning from classical, pre-Christian sources, which had previously been
frowned upon by the Roman Catholic Church. In modern times, many
humanist movements have become strongly aligned with atheism, with the
term Humanism often used as a byword for non-religious beliefs.
The term humanism can be ambiguously diverse, and there has been a
persistent confusion between the several, related uses of the term because
different intellectual movements have identified with it over time.[1]
In philosophy and social science, humanism refers to a perspective that
affirms some notion of a "human nature" (contrasted with anti-humanism).

The word "humanist" derives from the 15th-century Italian term umanista
describing a teacher or scholar of classical Greek and Latin literature and
the ethical philosophy behind it (including the approach to the humanities).
[2][3][2]

In 1856, still before the word was associated with secularism, German
historian and philologist Georg Voigt used humanism to describe
Renaissance humanism, the movement that flourished in the Italian
Renaissance to revive classical learning (this definition won wide
acceptance among historians in many nations).[4] During the French
Revolution, and soon after in Germany (by the Left Hegelians), humanism
began to refer to philosophies and morality centred on human kind, without
attention to any notions of the divine. Around when the Ethical movement
began using the word in the 1930s, the term "humanism" became
increasingly identified with secularism and finally became "Humanism", or
secular humanism[5] (a relatively recent movement born at the University
of Chicago).[6]
When the first letter is capitalized, "Humanism" describes the secular
ideology that espouses reason, ethics, and justice, while specifically
rejecting supernatural and religious ideas as a basis of morality and
decision-making.[7] Religious humanism developed as more liberal
religious organizations evolved in more humanistic directions. Religious
humanism is a unique integration of humanist ethical philosophy with the
rituals and beliefs of some religion, although religious humanism still
centers on human needs, interests, and abilities.[8]
Contents [hide]
%

1 History
1

1.1 Predecessors
1

1.1.1 Ancient Greece

1.1.2 Asia

1.1.3 Medieval Islam

1.2 Renaissance
1

1.2.1 Back to the sources

2
3
4
%

1.2.2 Consequences

1.3 From Renaissance to

modern humanism
1.4 19th and 20th centuries
2 Types of humanism

2.1 Renaissance humanism

2.2 Secular humanism

2.3 Religious humanism

3 Polemics

4 Inclusive humanism

5 See also

6 Notes

7 References

8 External links
1

8.1 From classical humanism to

the humanism of today

8.2 Introductions to humanism

8.3 Web articles

8.4 Web books

8.5 Primary Organizations

[edit]

History
The term "humanism" is ambiguous. Around 1806 Humanismus was used
to describe the classical curriculum offered by German schools, and by
1836 "humanism" was lent to English in this sense. In 1856, German
historian and philologist Georg Voigt used humanism to describe
Renaissance humanism, the movement that flourished in the Italian
Renaissance to revive classical learning, a use which won wide
acceptance among historians in many nations, especially Italy.[9] This
historical and literary use of the word "humanist" derives from the 15thcentury Italian term umanista, meaning a teacher or scholar of Classical
Greek and Latin literature and the ethical philosophy behind it.[2]

But in the mid-18th century, a different use of the term began to emerge. In
1765, the author of an anonymous article in a French Enlightenment
periodical spoke of "The general love of humanity ... a virtue hitherto quite
nameless among us, and which we will venture to call 'humanism', for the
time has come to create a word for such a beautiful and necessary thing".
[10] The latter part of the 18th and the early 19th centuries saw the creation
of numerous grass-roots "philanthropic" and benevolent societies
dedicated to human betterment and the spreading of knowledge (some
Christian, some not). After the French Revolution, the idea that human
virtue could be created by human reason alone independently from
traditional religious institutions, attributed by opponents of the Revolution to
Enlightenment philosophes such as Rousseau, was violently attacked by
influential religious and political conservatives, such as Edmund Burke and
Joseph de Maistre, as a deification or idolatry of man.[11] Humanism began
to acquire a negative sense. The Oxford English Dictionary records the use
of the word "humanism" by an English clergyman in 1812 to indicate those
who believe in the "mere humanity" (as opposed to the divine nature) of
Christ, i.e., Unitarians and Deists.[12] In this polarized atmosphere, in which
established ecclesiastical bodies tended to circle the wagons and
reflexively oppose political and social reforms like extending the franchise,
universal schooling, and the like, liberal reformers and radicals embraced
the idea of Humanism as an alternative religion of humanity. The anarchist
Proudhon (best known for declaring that "property is theft") used the word
"humanism" to describe a "culte, dification de lhumanit" ("cult, deification
of humanity") and Ernest Renan in Lavenir de la science: penses de
1848 ("The Future of Knowledge: Thoughts on 1848") (184849), states: "It
is my deep conviction that pure humanism will be the religion of the future,
that is, the cult of all that pertains to manall of life, sanctified and raised
to the level of a moral value".[13]
At about the same time, the word "humanism" as a philosophy centered
around humankind (as opposed to institutionalized religion) was also being
used in Germany by the so-called Left Hegelians, Arnold Ruge, and Karl
Marx, who were critical of the close involvement of the church in the

repressive German government. There has been a persistent confusion

between the several uses of the terms:[14] philosophical humanists look to
human-centered antecedents among the Greek philosophers and the great
figures of Renaissance history.
[edit]

Predecessors

This may contain previously unpublished synthesis of published material that

original sources. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. (September 20
[edit]

Ancient Greece
Main article: Ancient Greek philosophy
6th-century BCE pre-Socratic Greek philosophers Thales of Miletus and
Xenophanes of Colophon were the first to attempt to explain the world in
terms of human reason rather than myth and tradition, thus can be said to
be the first Greek humanists. Thales questioned the notion of
anthropomorphic gods and Xenophanes refused to recognize the gods of
his time and reserved the divine for the principle of unity in the universe.
These Ionian Greeks were the first thinkers to assert that nature is
available to be studied separately from the supernatural realm. Anaxagoras
brought philosophy and the spirit of rational inquiry from Ionia to Athens.
Pericles, the leader of Athens during the period of its greatest glory was an
admirer of Anaxagoras. Other influential pre-Socratics or rational
philosophers include Protagoras (like Anaxagoras a friend of Pericles),
known for his famous dictum "man is the measure of all things" and
Democritus, who proposed that matter was composed of atoms. Little of
the written work of these early philosophers survives and they are known
mainly from fragments and quotations in other writers, principally Plato and
Aristotle. The historian Thucydides, noted for his scientific and rational
approach to history, is also much admired by later humanists.[15] In the 3rd
century BCE, Epicurus became known for his concise phrasing of the
problem of evil, lack of belief in the afterlife, and human-centered
approaches to achieving eudaimonia. He was also the first Greek

philosopher to admit women to his school as a rule.

[edit]

Asia
Human-centered philosophy that rejected the supernatural can be found as
early as 1000 BCE in the Lokayata system of Indian philosophy.
In the 6th-century BCE, Gautama Buddha expressed, in Pali literature, a
skeptical attitude toward the supernatural:[16]
Since neither soul nor aught belonging to soul can really and truly exist, the
view which holds that this I who am 'world', who am 'soul', shall hereafter
live permanent, persisting, unchanging, yea abide eternally: is not this
utterly and entirely a foolish doctrine?
In China, Huangdi is regarded as the humanistic primogenitor. Sage kings
such as Yao and Shun are humanistic figures as recorded. King Wu of
Zhou has the famous saying: "Humanity is the Ling (efficacious essence)
of the world (among all)". Among them, Duke of Zhou, respected as an
initial founder of Rujia (Confucianism), is especially prominent and
pioneering in humanistic thought. His words were recorded in the Book of
History as follows (translated into English):
What the people desire, Heaven certainly complies?Heaven (or "God") is
not believable. Our Tao (special term referring to "the way of nature")
includes morality (derived from the philosophy of former sage kings and to
be continued forward).
In the 6th century BCE, Taoist teacher Laozi espoused a naturalistic &
humanistic philosophy which gave rise a loose-knit collection of
movements known as "Daoism" with some sects adopting forms of
Chinese "Yoga" & meditation, yet some other sects incorporating magical
rites.
Confucius also taught secular ethics. The silver rule of Confucianism from
Analects XV.24, is an example of ethical philosophy based on human
values rather than the supernatural. Humanistic thought is also contained
in other Confucian classics, e.g., as recorded in Zuo Zhuan, Ji Liang says:

"People is the zhu (master, lord, dominance, owner or origin) of gods. So,
to sage kings, people first, gods second"; Neishi Guo says: "Gods, clever,
righteous and wholehearted, comply with human.
[edit]

Medieval Islam
See also: Early Islamic philosophy
Many medieval Muslim thinkers pursued humanistic, rational and scientific
discourses in their search for knowledge, meaning and values. A wide
range of Islamic writings on love, poetry, history and philosophical theology
show that medieval Islamic thought was open to the humanistic ideas of
individualism, occasional secularism, skepticism and liberalism.[17]
According to Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad, another reason the Islamic world
flourished during the Middle Ages was an early emphasis on freedom of
speech, as summarized by al-Hashimi (a cousin of Caliph al-Ma'mun) in
the following letter to one of the religious opponents he was attempting to
convert through reason:[18]
"Bring forward all the arguments you wish and say whatever you please
and speak your mind freely. Now that you are safe and free to say
whatever you please appoint some arbitrator who will impartially judge
between us and lean only towards the truth and be free from the empery of
passion, and that arbitrator shall be Reason, whereby God makes us
responsible for our own rewards and punishments. Herein I have dealt
justly with you and have given you full security and am ready to accept
whatever decision Reason may give for me or against me. For "There is no
compulsion in religion" (Qur'an 2:256) and I have only invited you to accept
our faith willingly and of your own accord and have pointed out the
hideousness of your present belief. Peace be with you and the blessings of
God!"
According to George Makdisi, certain aspects of Renaissance humanism
has its roots in the medieval Islamic world, including the "art of dictation,
called in Latin, ars dictaminis", and "the humanist attitude toward classical
language".[19]

[edit]

Renaissance
Main article: Renaissance humanism
Portrait of Petrarch painted in 1376

Renaissance humanism was an intellectual movement in Europe of the

later Middle Ages and the Early Modern period. The 19th-century German
historian Georg Voigt (182791) identified Petrarch as the first
Renaissance humanist. Paul Johnson agrees that Petrarch was "the first to
put into words the notion that the centuries between the fall of Rome and
the present had been the age of Darkness". According to Petrarch, what
was needed to remedy this situation was the careful study and imitation of
the great classical authors. For Petrarch and Boccaccio, the greatest
master was Cicero, whose prose became the model for both learned
(Latin) and vernacular (Italian) prose.
Once the language was mastered grammatically it could be used to attain
the second stage, eloquence or rhetoric. This art of persuasion [Cicero had
held] was not art for its own sake, but the acquisition of the capacity to
persuade others all men and women to lead the good life. As Petrarch
put it, 'it is better to will the good than to know the truth'. Rhetoric thus led
to and embraced philosophy. Leonardo Bruni (c.13691444), the
outstanding scholar of the new generation, insisted that it was Petrarch
who "opened the way for us to show how to acquire learning", but it was in
Bruni's time that the word umanista first came into use, and its subjects of
study were listed as five: grammar, rhetoric, poetry, moral philosophy, and
history".[20]
The basic training of the humanist was to speak well and write (typically, in
the form of a letter). One of Petrarchs followers, Coluccio Salutati (1331
1406) was made chancellor of Florence, "whose interests he defended with
his literary skill. The Visconti of Milan claimed that Salutatis pen had done
more damage than 'thirty squadrons of Florentine cavalry'".[21] Contrary to
a still widely current interpretation that originated in Voigt's celebrated

contemporary, Jacob Burckhardt,[22] and which was adopted

wholeheartedly, especially by those moderns calling themselves
"humanists",[23] most specialists now do not characterize Renaissance
humanism as a philosophical movement, nor in any way as anti-Christian
or even anti-clerical. A modern historian has this to say:
Humanism was not an ideological programme but a body of literary
knowledge and linguistic skill based on the "revival of good letters", which
was a revival of a late-antique philology and grammar, This is how the word
"humanist" was understood by contemporaries, and if scholars would
agree to accept the word in this sense rather than in the sense in which it
was used in the nineteenth century we might be spared a good deal of
useless argument. That humanism had profound social and even political
consequences of the life of Italian courts is not to be doubted. But the idea
that as a movement it was in some way inimical to the Church, or to the
conservative social order in general is one that has been put forward for a
century and more without any substantial proof being offered.
The nineteenth-century historian Jacob Burckhardt, in his classic work,
The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, noted as a "curious fact" that
some men of the new culture were "men of the strictest piety, or even
ascetics". If he had meditated more deeply on the meaning of the careers
of such humanists as Abrogio Traversari (13861439), the General of the
Camaldolese Order, perhaps he would not have gone on to describe
humanism in unqualified terms as "pagan", and thus helped precipitate a
century of infertile debate about the possible existence of something called
"Christian humanism" which ought to be opposed to "pagan humanism".
--Peter Partner, Renaissance Rome, Portrait of a Society 15001559
(University of California Press 1979) pp. 1415.
The umanisti criticized what they considered the barbarous Latin of the
universities, but the revival of the humanities largely did not conflict with the
teaching of traditional university subjects, which went on as before.[24]
Nor did the humanists view themselves as in conflict with Christianity.
Some, like Salutati, were the Chancellors of Italian cities, but the majority

(including Petrarch) were ordained as priests, and many worked as senior

officials of the Papal court. Humanist Renaissance popes Nicholas V, Pius
II, Sixtus IV, and Leo X wrote books and amassed huge libraries.[25]
In the high Renaissance, in fact, there was a hope that more direct
knowledge of the wisdom of antiquity, including the writings of the Church
fathers, the earliest known Greek texts of the Christian Gospels, and in
some cases even the Jewish Kabbalah, would initiate an harmonious new
era of universal agreement.[26] With this end in view, Renaissance Church
authorities afforded humanists what in retrospect appears a remarkable
degree of freedom of thought.[27][28] One humanist, the Greek Orthodox
Platonist Gemistus Pletho (13551452), based in Mystras, Greece (but in
contact with humanists in Florence, Venice, and Rome) taught a
Christianized version of pagan polytheism.[29]
[edit]

Back to the sources

Portrait of Erasmus of Rotterdam

The humanists' close study of Latin literary texts soon enabled them to
discern historical differences in the writing styles of different periods. By
analogy with what they saw as decline of Latin, they applied the principle of
ad fontes, or back to the sources, across broad areas of learning, seeking
out manuscripts of Patristic literature as well as pagan authors. In 1439,
while employed in Naples at the court of Alfonso V of Aragon (at the time
engaged in a dispute with the Papal States) the humanist Lorenzo Valla
used stylistic textual analysis, now called philology, to prove that the
Donation of Constantine, which purported to confer temporal powers on
the Pope of Rome, was an 8th-century forgery.[30] For the next 70 years,
however, neither Valla nor any of his contemporaries thought to apply the
techniques of philology to other controversial manuscripts in this way.
Instead, after the fall of the Byzantine Empire to the Turks in 1453, which
brought a flood of Greek Orthodox refugees to Italy, humanist scholars
increasingly turned to the study of Neoplatonism and Hermeticism, hoping

to bridge the differences between the Greek and Roman Churches, and
even between Christianity itself and the non-Christian world.[31] The
refugees brought with them Greek manuscripts, not only of Plato and
Aristotle, but also of the Christian Gospels, previously unavailable in the
Latin West.
After 1517, when the new invention of printing made these texts widely
available, the Dutch humanist Erasmus, who had studied Greek at the
Venetian printing house of Aldus Manutius, began a philological analysis of
the Gospels in the spirit of Valla, comparing the Greek originals with their
Latin translations with a view to correcting errors and discrepancies in the
latter. Erasmus, along with the French humanist Jacques Lefvre
d'taples, began issuing new translations, laying the groundwork for the
Protestant Reformation. Henceforth Renaissance humanism, particularly in
the German North, became concerned with religion, while Italian and
French humanism concentrated increasingly on scholarship and philology
addressed to a narrow audience of specialists, studiously avoiding topics
that might offend despotic rulers or which might be seen as corrosive of
faith. After the Reformation, critical examination of the Bible did not resume
until the advent of the so-called Higher criticism of the 19th-century
German Tbingen school.
[edit]

Consequences
The ad fontes principle also had many applications. The re-discovery of
ancient manuscripts brought a more profound and accurate knowledge of
ancient philosophical schools such as Epicureanism, and Neoplatonism,
whose Pagan wisdom the humanists, like the Church fathers of old,
tended, at least initially, to consider as deriving from divine revelation and
thus adaptable to a life of Christian virtue.[32] The line from a drama of
Terence, Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto (or with nil for nihil),
meaning "I am a man, I think nothing human alien to me", known since
antiquity through the endorsement of Saint Augustine, gained renewed
currency as epitomizing the humanist attitude.[33]

Better acquaintance with Greek and Roman technical writings also

influenced the development of European science (see the history of
science in the Renaissance). This was despite what A. C. Crombie
(viewing the Renaissance in the 19th-century manner as a chapter in the
heroic March of Progress) calls "a backwards-looking admiration for
antiquity", in which Platonism stood in opposition to the Aristotelian
concentration on the observable properties of the physical world.[34] But
Renaissance humanists, who considered themselves as restoring the glory
and nobility of antiquity, had no interest in scientific innovation. However, by
the mid-to-late 16th century, even the universities, though still dominated
by Scholasticism, began to demand that Aristotle be read in accurate texts
edited according to the principles of Renaissance philology, thus setting the
stage for Galileo's quarrels with the outmoded habits of Scholasticism.
Just as artist and inventor Leonardo da Vinci partaking of the zeitgeist
though not himself a humanist advocated study of human anatomy,
nature, and weather to enrich Renaissance works of art, so Spanish-born
humanist Juan Luis Vives (c. 14931540) advocated observation, craft,
and practical techniques to improve the formal teaching of Aristotelian
philosophy at the universities, helping to free them from the grip of
Medieval Scholasticism.[35] Thus, the stage was set for the adoption of an
approach to natural philosophy, based on empirical observations and
experimentation of the physical universe, making possible the advent of the
age of scientific inquiry that followed the Renaissance.[36]
It was in education that the humanists' program had the most lasting
results, their curriculum and methods:
were followed everywhere, serving as models for the Protestant Reformers
as well as the Jesuits. The humanistic school, animated by the idea that
the study of classical languages and literature provided valuable
information and intellectual discipline as well as moral standards and a
civilized taste for future rulers, leaders, and professionals of its society,
flourished without interruption, through many significant changes, until our
own century, surviving many religious, political and social revolutions. It
has but recently been replaced, though not yet completely, by other more

practical and less demanding forms of education.[37]

[edit]

From Renaissance to modern humanism

The progression from the humanism of the renaissance to that of the 19th
and 20th centuries came about through two key figures: Galileo and
Erasmus. Cultural critic, Os Guinness explains that the word humanist
during the renaissance initially only defined a concern for humanity, and
many early humanists saw no dichotomy between this and their Christian
faith. See Christian Humanism
"Yet it was from the Renaissance that modern Secular Humanism grew,
with the development of an important split between reason and religion.
This occurred as the church's complacent authority was exposed in two
vital areas. In science, Galileo's support of the Copernican revolution upset
the church's adherence to the theories of Aristotle, exposing them as false.
In theology, the Dutch scholar Erasmus with his new Greek text showed
that the Roman Catholic adherence to Jerome's Vulgate was frequently in
error. A tiny wedge was thus forced between reason and authority, as both
of them were then understood".[38]
[edit]

19th and 20th centuries

The phrase the "religion of humanity" is sometimes attributed to American
Founding Father Thomas Paine, though as yet unattested in his surviving
writings. According to Tony Davies:
Paine called himself a theophilanthropist, a word combining the Greek for
"God", "love", and "man", and indicating that while he believed in the
existence of a creating intelligence in the universe, he entirely rejected the
claims made by and for all existing religious doctrines, especially their
miraculous, transcendental and salvationist pretensions. The Parisian
"Society of Theophilanthropy" which he sponsored, is described by his
biographer as "a forerunner of the ethical and humanist societies that
proliferated later" ... [Paine's book] the trenchantly witty Age of Reason

(1793) ... pours scorn on the supernatural pretensions of scripture,

combining Voltairean mockery with Paine's own style of taproom ridicule to
expose the absurdity of a theology built on a collection of incoherent
Levantine folktales.[39]
Davies identifies Paine's The Age of Reason as "the link between the two
major narratives of what Jean-Franois Lyotard[40] calls the narrative of
legitimation": the rationalism of the 18th-century Philosophes and the
radical, historically based German 19th-century Biblical criticism of the
Hegelians David Friedrich Strauss and Ludwig Feuerbach. "The first is
political, largely French in inspiration, and projects 'humanity as the hero of
liberty'. The second is philosophical, German, seeks the totality and
autonomy of knowledge, and stresses understanding rather than freedom
as the key to human fulfillment and emancipation. The two themes
converged and competed in complex ways in the 19th century and beyond,
and between them set the boundaries of its various humanisms.[41] Homo
homini deus est ("Man is a god to man" or "god is nothing [other than] man
to himself"), Feuerbach had written.[42]
Victorian novelist Mary Ann Evans, known to the world as George Eliot,
translated Strauss's Das Leben Jesu ("The Life of Jesus", 1846) and
Ludwig Feuerbach's Das Wesen Christianismus ("The Essence of
Christianity"). She wrote to a friend:
the fellowship between man and man which has been the principle of
development, social and moral, is not dependent on conceptions of what is
not man ... the idea of God, so far as it has been a high spiritual influence,
is the ideal of goodness entirely human (i.e., an exaltation of the human).
[43]

Eliot and her circle, who included her companion George Henry Lewes (the
biographer of Goethe) and the abolitionist and social theorist Harriet
Martineau, were much influenced by the positivism of Auguste Comte,
whom Martineau had translated. Comte had proposed an atheistic culte
founded on human principlesa secular Religion of Humanity (which
worshiped the dead, since most humans who have ever lived are dead),

complete with holidays and liturgy, modeled on the rituals of a what was
seen as a discredited and dilapidated Catholicism.[44] Although Comte's
English followers, like Eliot and Martineau, for the most part rejected the
full gloomy panoply of his system, they liked the idea of a religion of
humanity. Comte's austere vision of the universe, his injunction to "vivre
pour altrui" ("live for others", from which comes the word "altruism"),[45]
and his idealization of women inform the works of Victorian novelists and
poets from George Eliot and Matthew Arnold to Thomas Hardy.
The British Humanistic Religious Association was formed as one of the
earliest forerunners of contemporary chartered Humanist organizations in
1853 in London. This early group was democratically organized, with male
and female members participating in the election of the leadership, and
promoted knowledge of the sciences, philosophy, and the arts.[46]
In February 1877, the word was used pejoratively, apparently for the first
time in America, to describe Felix Adler. Adler, however, did not embrace
the term, and instead coined the name "Ethical Culture" for his new
movement a movement which still exists in the now Humanist-affiliated
New York Society for Ethical Culture.[47] In 2008, Ethical Culture Leaders
wrote: "Today, the historic identification, Ethical Culture, and the modern
description, Ethical Humanism, are used interchangeably".[48]
Active in the early 1920s, F.C.S. Schiller labeled his work "humanism" but
for Schiller the term referred to the pragmatist philosophy he shared with
William James. In 1929, Charles Francis Potter founded the First Humanist
Society of New York whose advisory board included Julian Huxley, John
Dewey, Albert Einstein and Thomas Mann. Potter was a minister from the
Unitarian tradition and in 1930 he and his wife, Clara Cook Potter,
published Humanism: A New Religion. Throughout the 1930s, Potter was
an advocate of such liberal causes as, womens rights, access to birth
control, "civil divorce laws", and an end to capital punishment.[49]
Raymond B. Bragg, the associate editor of The New Humanist, sought to
consolidate the input of Leon Milton Birkhead, Charles Francis Potter, and
several members of the Western Unitarian Conference. Bragg asked Roy

Wood Sellars to draft a document based on this information which resulted

in the publication of the Humanist Manifesto in 1933. Potter's book and the
Manifesto became the cornerstones of modern humanism, the latter
declaring a new religion by saying, "any religion that can hope to be a
synthesizing and dynamic force for today must be shaped for the needs of
this age. To establish such a religion is a major necessity of the present." It
then presented 15 theses of humanism as foundational principles for this
new religion.
In 1941, the American Humanist Association was organized. Noted
members of The AHA included Isaac Asimov, who was the president from
1985 until his death in 1992, and writer Kurt Vonnegut, who followed as
honorary president until his death in 2007. Gore Vidal became honorary
president in 2009. Robert Buckman was the head of the association in
Canada, and is now an honorary president.[citation needed]
After World War II, three prominent Humanists became the first directors of
major divisions of the United Nations: Julian Huxley of UNESCO, Brock
Chisholm of the World Health Organization, and John Boyd-Orr of the Food
and Agricultural Organization.[50]
In 2004, American Humanist Association, along with other groups
representing agnostics, atheists, and other freethinkers, joined to create
the Secular Coalition for America which advocates in Washington, D.C. for
separation of church and state and nationally for the greater acceptance of
nontheistic Americans. The Executive Director of Secular Coalition for
America is Sean Faircloth, a long-time state legislator from Maine.
[edit]

Types of humanism
[edit]

Renaissance humanism
Main article: Renaissance humanism
The term "humanism" was first used during the Renaissance. Renaissance
humanism was an activity of cultural and educational reform engaged by

scholars, writers, and civic leaders who are today known as Renaissance
humanists.[2] It developed during the fourteenth and the beginning of the
fifteenth centuries, and was a response to the challenge of scholastic
education, emphasizing practical, professional and scientific studies.
Scholasticism focused on preparing men to be doctors, lawyers or
professional theologians, and was taught from approved textbooks in logic,
natural philosophy, medicine, law and theology.[51] There were important
centers of humanism at Florence, Naples, Rome, Venice, Mantua, Ferrara,
and Urbino.
Humanists reacted against this utilitarian approach and the narrow
pedantry associated with it. They sought to create a citizenry (frequently
including women) able to speak and write with eloquence and clarity and
thus capable of engaging the civic life of their communities and persuading
others to virtuous and prudent actions. This was to be accomplished
through the study of the studia humanitatis, today known as the
humanities: grammar, rhetoric, history, poetry and moral philosophy.[52] As
a program to revive the culturaland particularly the literarylegacy and
moral philosophy of classical antiquity, Humanism was a pervasive cultural
mode and not the program of a few isolated geniuses like Giotto or Leon
Battista Alberti as is still sometimes popularly believed.
[edit]

Secular humanism
Main article: Secular humanism
The Humanist "happy human" logo.

Humanism (the capital 'H' often replaces the qualifying adjective "secular")
[53] is a comprehensive life stance or world view which embraces human
reason, metaphysical naturalism, altruistic morality and distributive justice,
and consciously rejects supernatural claims, theistic faith and religiosity,
pseudoscience, and perceived superstition.[54][55][56]
The International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) is the world union of
more than 100 Humanist, rationalist, irreligious, atheistic, Bright, secular,

Ethical Culture, and freethought organizations in more than 40 countries.

The "Happy Human" is the official symbol of the IHEU as well as being
regarded as a universally recognised symbol for those who call themselves
Humanists (as opposed to "humanists").
All member organisations of the IHEU are required by IHEU bylaw 5.1[57]
to accept the IHEU Minimum Statement on Humanism:
Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that
human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape
to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society
through an ethic based on human and other natural values in the spirit of
reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. It is not theistic, and it
does not accept supernatural views of reality.
[edit]

Religious humanism
Main article: Religious humanism
Religious humanism is an integration of humanist ethical philosophy with
religious rituals and beliefs that center on human needs, interests, and
abilities. Though practitioners of religious humanism did not officially
organize under the name of "humanism" until the late 19th and early 20th
centuries, non-theistic religions paired with human-centered ethical
philosophy have a long history. The Cult of Reason (French: Culte de la
Raison) was a religion based on deism devised during the French
Revolution by Jacques Hbert, Pierre Gaspard Chaumette and their
supporters.[58] In 1793 during the French Revolution, the cathedral Notre
Dame de Paris was turned into a "Temple to Reason" and for a time Lady
Liberty replaced the Virgin Mary on several altars. In the 1850s, Auguste
Comte, the Father of Sociology, founded Positivism, a "religion of
humanity".[59] One of the earliest forerunners of contemporary chartered
humanist organizations was the Humanistic Religious Association formed
in 1853 in London.[59] This early group was democratically organized, with
male and female members participating in the election of the leadership
and promoted knowledge of the sciences, philosophy, and the arts. The

Ethical Culture movement was founded in 1876. The movement's founder,

Felix Adler, a former member of the Free Religious Association, conceived
of Ethical Culture as a new religion that would retain the ethical message at
the heart of all religions. Ethical Culture was religious in the sense of
playing a defining role in people's lives and addressing issues of ultimate
concern.
[edit]

Polemics
Polemics about humanism have sometimes assumed paradoxical twists
and turns. Early 20th century critics such as Ezra Pound, T.E. Hulme, and
T.S. Eliot considered humanism to be sentimental "slop" (Hulme) or overly
feminine (Pound)[60] and wanted to go back to a more manly, authoritarian
society such as (they believed) existed in the Middle Ages. Postmodern
critics who are self-described anti-humanists, such as Jean-Franois
Lyotard and Michel Foucault, have asserted that humanism posits an
overarching and excessively abstract notion of humanity or universal
human nature, which can then be used as a pretext for imperialism and
domination of those deemed somehow less than human. Philosopher Kate
Soper[61] notes that by faulting humanism for falling short of its own
benevolent ideals, anti-humanism thus frequently "secretes a humanist
rhetoric".[62]
In his book, Humanism (1997), Tony Davies calls these critics "humanist
anti-humanists". Critics of antihumanism, most notably Jrgen Habermas,
counter that while antihumanists may highlight humanism's failure to fulfill
its emancipatory ideal, they do not offer an alternative emancipatory project
of their own.[63] Others, like the German philosopher Heidegger considered
themselves humanists on the model of the ancient Greeks, but thought
humanism applied only to the German "race" and specifically to the Nazis
and thus, in Davies' words, were anti-humanist humanists.[64] Such a
reading of Heidegger's thought is itself deeply controversial, Heidegger
includes his own views and critique of Humanism in Letter On Humanism.
Davies acknowledges that after the horrific experiences of the wars of the

20th century "it should no longer be possible to formulate phrases like 'the
destiny of man' or the 'triumph of human reason' without an instant
consciousness of the folly and brutality they drag behind them". For "it is
almost impossible to think of a crime that has not been committed in the
name of human reason". Yet, he continues, "it would be unwise to simply
abandon the ground occupied by the historical humanisms. For one thing
humanism remains on many occasions the only available alternative to
bigotry and persecution. The freedom to speak and write, to organize and
campaign in defense of individual or collective interests, to protest and
disobey: all these can only be articulated in humanist terms."[65]
Modern Humanists, such as Corliss Lamont or Carl Sagan, hold that
humanity must seek for truth through reason and the best observable
evidence and endorse scientific skepticism and the scientific method.
However, they stipulate that decisions about right and wrong must be
based on the individual and common good, with no consideration given to
metaphysical or supernatural beings. The idea is to engage with what is
human.[66]
Contemporary humanism entails a qualified optimism about the capacity of
people, but it does not involve believing that human nature is purely good
or that all people can live up to the Humanist ideals without help. If
anything, there is recognition that living up to one's potential is hard work
and requires the help of others. The ultimate goal is human flourishing;
making life better for all humans, and as the most conscious species, also
promoting concern for the welfare of other sentient beings and the planet
as a whole.[citation needed] The focus is on doing good and living well in the
here and now, and leaving the world a better place for those who come
after. In 1925, the English mathematician and philosopher Alfred North
Whitehead cautioned: "The prophecy of Francis Bacon has now been
fulfilled; and man, who at times dreamt of himself as a little lower than the
angels, has submitted to become the servant and the minister of nature. It
still remains to be seen whether the same actor can play both parts".[67]
[edit]

Inclusive humanism
Humanism increasingly designates an inclusive sensibility for our species,
planet, and lives. While retaining the definition of the IHEU with regard to
the life stance of the individual, inclusive Humanism enlarges its
constituency within homo sapiens to consider humans' broadening powers
and obligations.
This accepting viewpoint recalls Renaissance Humanism in that it
presumes an advocacy role for Humanists towards species governance,
and this proactive stance is charged with a commensurate responsibility
surpassing that of individual Humanism. It identifies pollution, militarism,
nationalism, sexism, poverty and corruption as being persistent and
addressable human character issues incompatible with the interests of our
species. It asserts that human governance must be unified and is
inclusionary in that it does not exclude any person by reason of their
collateral beliefs or personal religion alone. As such it can be said to be a
container for undeclared Humanism, instilling a species credo to
complement the personal tenets of individuals.
Dwight Gilbert Jones writes that Humanism may be the only philosophy
likely to be adopted by our species as a whole it is thus incumbent on
inclusive Humanists to not place unwarranted or self-interested conditions
on its prospective adherents, nor associate it with religious acrimony.[68]
[edit]

See also
%

Community organizing

Extropianism

John N. Gray

Materialism

Misanthropy

Natural rights

Objectivity (philosophy)

Post-theism

Social psychology

Ten Commandment Alternatives Secular and humanist alternatives

to the Ten Commandments

Unitarian Universalism
Humanism

Adler, Felix: An Ethical Philosophy of Life, "Chapter III:

Emerson"
Ethical Press, 1986 reprint. Original copyright 1918.
I find on looking backward that my development proceeded with
the help of a series of definitions fixing my attitude toward
teachers who made a special appeal to me, and toward great
historic tendencies past and present. I was helped both by what I
was able to appreciate in them, and, where I diverged, by what they
forced me to think out for myself. Here let me acknowledge a
passing debt to Emerson. As in the case of Kant, a strong attraction
drew me toward Emerson with temporary disregard of radical
differences, although the spell was never so potent or so
persistent in the latter instance as in the former. I made Emerson's
acquaintance in 1875. I came into touch with the Emerson circle
and read and re-read the Essays. The value of Emerson's teaching
to me at that time consisted in the exalted view he takes of the self.
Divinity as an object of extraneous worship for me had vanished.
Emerson taught that immediate experience of the divine power in
self may take the place of worship. His doctrine of self-reliance
also was bracing to a youth just setting out to challenge prevailing
opinions and to urge plans of transformation upon the community
in which he worked. But I soon discovered that Emerson
overstresses self-affirmation at the expense of service.

For a time indeed I reconciled in my own fashion the two contrary

tendencies. The divine power, I argued, flows through me as a
channel hence the grandeur which attaches to my spiritual
nature. But the divine power manifests itself in redressing the
wrongs that exist in the world, and in putting an end to such
violations of personality as the sexual and economic exploitations
which disgrace human society. So for a time I continued to walk on
air with Emerson, and had my head in the clouds, the clouds in
which Emerson enveloped me.
Out of this false sense of security, this quasi-pantheistic selfaffirmation, the experiences of the next few years effectually
roused me. I came to see that Emerson's pantheism in effect spoils
his ethics. Be thyself, he says, not a counterfeit or imitation of
someone else. Be different. But why! Because the One manifests
itself in endless variety. Penetrating below the surface, however,
one finds that in this kind of philosophy the value of difference, to
which I attach essential importance on ethical grounds, is nothing
more than that of a foil. According to Emerson life is a universal
masquerade' and the interest of the whole business of living
consists in the ever-renewed discovery that the face behind the
different masks is still the same. Difference is not cherished on its
own account. And here, as in the case of the uniformity principle of
Hebraism, I found myself dissenting.
Emerson is a kind of eagle, circling high up in the ether non soli
cedit.
Emerson with his oracular sayings might have served as a priest at
Dodona or led the mysteries at Eleusis. Yet, withal, he is genuinely
American, a rare blend of ancient mystic and modern Yankee,
a valued poet too, but as an ethical guide to be accepted only with
large reservations.

Adler

Felix Adler: An Ethical Philosophy of Life. Chapter V:

The Ideal of the Whole and the Ethical ManifoldOriginal
copyright 1918. Reprinted 1986, Ethica Press.
The ethical manifold, conceived of as unified, furnishes, or rather is, the ideal of
the whole. The ethical manifold is the true universe, not "Universe" in the sense in
which the word is too laxly used at present to designate those fragmentary and in
many respects unconnected lines of experience which might better by way of
discrimination be called World.
The ideal of the whole, as the terms imply, must fulfill two conditions: it must be a
whole, that is, include all manifoldness whatsoever; and it must be ideal, or
perfectly unified. In such an ideal whole the two reality-producing functions of the
human mind would find their complete fruition.
Point 1. -- The totality of manifoldness must be comprised.
Point 2. -- The connectedness must be without flaw,
From point one it follows that the ethical manifold cannot be spatial or temporal,
since juxtaposition and sequence lapse into indefiniteness, abounding without
ceasing, but never attaining or promising the attainment of totality. Our first
conclusion then is that the ethical manifold is non-temporal and non-spatial.
Furthermore it is necessary and decisive for the theoretical construction here
attempted to keep sharply In view, that the manifoldness may not be derived from
the unity, or conversely. The manifold remains forever manifold. This means that
in the ethical manifold each member(1) will differ uniquely from all the rest, and
preserve his irreducible singularity. The member of the ethical manifold was not
created by the One or any One. He is not derived as effect from any cause.
Causality does not apply to the ethical manifold, being a -category of spatial
sequence. The member of the ethical manifold, or the ethical unit, as we may now
call him (I say him metaphorically and provisionally) is unbegotten, induplicable,
unique. In the ethical manifold each infinitesimal member is indispensable,
inasmuch as he is one of the totality of intrinsically unlike differentiae. A duplicate
would be superfluous. Inclusion implies indispensableness; no member acquires a
place within the ethical universe save on the score of his title, as one of the
possible modes of being that are required to complete the totality of manifoldness.
But the reality-producing functions of the mind are two, and they act jointly. The
same manifold that is regarded as the scene of irreducible manifoldness, is also

regarded sub specie unitatis. The immense practical importance of holding fast to
diversity as indefeasible, and at the same time stressing the unity, will amply
appear in the course of the third Book. It is this insistence on the two aspects
jointly, that distinguishes the theory here worked out from preceding ethical
philosophies, and will be found to open new ethical applications to conduct. It is
this insistence on the joint action of the two reality-producing functions that will
enable us to see in the ideal of the whole a pattern traced, and to derive from this
pattern of relations a supreme rule of conduct. If the differences that exist among
the members of the manifold be slurred over, if the indefeasible singularity of each
member be overlooked, if the many be derived from the One, since the One is an
empty concept, we shall gain no light upon the conduct to be followed by each of
the many. It is true that our notion of the distinctive difference or the uniqueness of
each ethical unit is also empty as far as knowledge goes. The unique is
incognizable. Yet we are able to apprehend, and do apprehend, a determinate
relation as subsisting between the ethical units, and this relation supplies us with
an ideal plan of the ethical universe and a first principle and rule of ethics.' The
relation is that of reciprocal universal interdependence.
Consider that an infinite number of ethical entities is presented to our minds--each
of them radically different from the rest. In what then possibly can the unity of this
infinite assemblage consist? In this -- that the unique difference of each shall be
such as to render possible the correlated unique differences of all the rest. It is in
this formula that we find the key to a new ethical system, in this conception we get
our hand firmly on the notion of right, and by means of it we discover the object
which Kant failed to find, the object to which worth attaches, the object which is
so indispensable to the ideal of the whole as to authenticate unconditional
obligation or rightness in conduct with respect to it. It is as an ethical unit, as a
member of the infinite ethical manifold, that man has worth.(2)
In accordance with the above, the first principle of ethics may be expressed in the
following formulas:
A. Act as a member of the ethical manifold (the infinite spiritual universe).
B. Act so as to achieve uniqueness (complete individualization-the most
completely individualized act is the most ethical).
C. Act so as to elicit in another the distinctive, unique quality characteristic of him
as a fellow-member of the infinite whole.
A and B are comprised in C. I am taking three steps toward a fuller exposition of
the meaning of the principle. To act as a member according to A is to strive to
achieve uniqueness as declared in B. To achieve uniqueness as declared in C is to
seek to elicit the diverse uniqueness in others. The actual unique quality in myself

is incognizable, and only app ears, so far as it does appear, in the effect produced
by myself upon my fellows. Hence, to advance towards uniqueness I must project
dynamically my most distinctive mode of energy upon my fellow-members.
Since the finite nature of man is a clog and screen, clouding and checking the
action of man viewed as an ethical unit, it follows that no man will ever succeed in
carrying out completely the rule which is derived from the ideal pattern. He will
invariably meet with partial frustration in his efforts to do so, and yet in virtue of
his ethical character he will always renew the effort. While in physical science the
recurrence of phenomena supplies the occasion for exemplification or verification,
in conduct, or the sphere of volition, not recurrence but the persistence of the
effort after defeat is at least a help to verification, arguing in one's self a
consciousness, however obscured, of the relation of reciprocal interdependence
and of subjection to the urge or pressure thence derived.(3) It is our own realityproducing functions, exerted to their utmost, to which we are delivered over.
Hence the final formulation: So act as to raise up in others the ideal of the relation
of give and take, of universal interdependence in which they stand with an infinity
of beings like themselves, members of the infinite universe, irreducible, like and
unlike themselves in their respective uniqueness.
The simile that may be used is that of a ray of light which has the effect of
kindling other rays, unlike but complementary to itself. Each ethical unit, each
member of the infinite universe, is to be regarded as a center from which such a
ray emanates, touching other centers, and awakening there the light intrinsic in
them. Or we may think of a fountain from which stream forth jets of indescribable
life-power-playing out of it, playing into other life, and evoking there kindred and
yet unkindred life-waves, waves effluent and refluent. Whatever the symbolism
may be, inadequate in any case, the idea of the enmeshing of one's life in universal
life without loss of distinctness--the everlasting selfhood to be achieved on the
contrary, by means of the cross-relation -- is the cardinal point.
I have here to answer one question. By what warrant do I ascribe worth to any
human being? Where is the head deserving that this ray that streams out from me
shall light upon it? What man or woman merits that he be invested with this glory?
Does not the same objection opposed to Kant hold with respect to my own view?
It is true that he found no object at all, and sought indirectly to draw from the
empty notion of obligation the inference that man is an end per se. Perhaps it will
be admitted that the supremely worthwhile object has now been found, the holy
thing (holy in two ways, as being inviolable, reverence-inspiring, holding at a
distance those who would encroach: and intrinsically priceless as a component of
the ethical manifold, as indispensable in a perfect whole). But this object, you will
say, is in the air, or in the heavens, and how shall it be made to descend on
empirical man?

My answer is that certainly I do not discover the quality of worth in people as an

empirical fact. In many people I do not even discover value. Judging from the
point of view of bare fact, many of us could very well be spared. Many are even in
the way of what is called "progress." And the suggestion of some extreme
disciples of Darwin that the degenerate and defective should be removed, or the
opinion of others that pestilence and war should be allowed to take the unpleasant
business off our hands, is, from the empirical point of view, not easily to be
refuted. I can also enter into, if I do not wholly share, the pessimistic mood with
regard to actual human nature expressed by Schopenhauer and others. To the list of
repulsive human creatures mentioned by Marcus Aurelius in one of his morning
meditations, -- the back-biter, the scandal-monger, the informer, etc. -- might be
added in modern times, the white-slaver, the exploiter of child-labor, the- fawning
politician, and many another revolting type. And even more discouraging in a way,
than these examples of deepest human debasement -- the copper natures, as Plato
calls them, or the leaden natures, as we might call them -- is the disillusionment
we often experience with regard to the so-called gold natures, the discovery of the
large admixture of baser metal which is often combined with their gold.
It is imperative to acquaint oneself, nay, to impregnate one's mind thoroughly with
these contrary facts, if the doctrine of worth, the sanest and to my mind the most
real of all conceptions, is to be saved from the appearance of an optimistic illusion.
The answer to the objection is that I do not find worth in others or in myself, I
attribute it to them and to myself. And why do I attribute it? In virtue of the
reality-producing functions of my own mind. I create the ethical manifold. The
pressure of the essential rationality within me., seeking to complete itself in the
perfect fruition of these functions, i. e., in the positing of a total manifold and its
total unification, drives me forward. I need an idea of the whole in order to act
rightly, in such a way as to satisfy the dual functions within me. My own nature as
a spiritual being urges me to seek this satisfaction. This ideal whole as I have
shown, is a complexus of uniquely differentiated units. In order to advance toward
uniqueness, in order to achieve what in a word may be called my own truth, to
build myself into the truth, to become essentially real, I must seek to elicit the
consciousness of the uniqueness and the interrelation in others. I must help others
in order to save myself; I must look upon the other as an ethical unit or moral
being in order to become a moral being myself. And wherever I find consciousness
of relation, of connectedness, even incipient, I project myself upon that
consciousness, with a view to awaking in it the consciousness of universal
connectedness. Wherever I can hope to get a response I test my power. Fields and
trees do not speak to me, as Socrates said, but human beings do. I should attribute
worth to stones and to animals could they respond, were the power of forming
ideas, without which the idea of relation or connectedness is impossible, apparent
in them. Doubtless stones and trees and animals, and the physical world itself, are

but the screen behind which lies the infinite universe. But the light of that universe
does not break through the screen where it is made up of stones and trees and the
lower animals. It breaks through, however faintly, where there is consciousness of
relation: and wherever I discover that consciousness I find my opportunity. It is
quite possible that the men and women upon whom I try my power will not
actually respond. The complaint is often heard from moral persons, or persons
who think themselves such, that what they call the moral plan of rousing the moral
consciousness in others will not work. Perhaps the plan they follow is not the
moral plan at all, but the plan of sympathy or of some other empirically derived
rule. But be that as it may, the question is not whether we get the response but
whether we shall achieve reality or truth ourselves; in theological terms, save our
own life, by trying to elicit the response.
And here one profoundly important practical consideration will come to our aid,
namely, the sense of our own imperfection, coupled indeed with the consciousness
of inextinguishable power of moral renewal. Instead of attributing the lack of
response to the hopeless dullness of the person upon whom we labor, a sense of
humility, based on the knowledge of our own exceeding spiritual variability -- best
moments followed by worst moments, imperfect grasp on our own ideals, most
irnperfect fidelity in executing them-will lead us to turn upon ourselves, and far
from permitting us to despair of others, will impel us rather to make ourselves
more fitting instruments of spiritual influence than obviously as yet we are.(4)

Footnotes:
(1) Say not part or element, but member, to distinguish the components of the
ethical manifold from such concepts as are used in mathematics and physical
science.
(2) The distinction between value and worth must be stressed for it is capital.
Value is subjective. The worth notion is the most objective conceivable. Value
depends on the wants or needs of our empirical nature. That has value which
satisfies our needs or wants. We possess value for one another, for the reason that
each of us has wants which the others alone are capable of satisfying, as in the
case of sex, of cooperation, in the vocation, etc. But value ceases when the want or
need is gratified. The value which one human being has for another is transient.
There are, in the strict sense, no permanent values. The value which the majority
have for the more advanced and developed members of a community is small;
from the standpoint of value most persons are duplicable and dispensable.
Consider only the ease with which factory labor is replaced, in consequence of the

prolific fertility of the human race. The custom of speaking of ethics as a theory of
values is regrettable. It evidences the despair into which many writers on ethics
have fallen as to the possibility of discovering an objective basis for rightness.
(3) But the verification itself is the clearer and more explicit vision of the ethical relation, as it
ought to be.
(4) The term "ethical unit" used above should be found useful. The chemists have found the
concept of the atom useful, though no one has ever seen an atom. And all the sciences have
recourse to similar inventions, -- such as the electron, or the ion, or energy regarded as a
substance, and in mathematics the sublimated, space-transcending concepts. Looking through the
eyes of science, we are taught to see, underlying the grossest forms of matter, imaginary entities
which are well-nigh metaphysical in nature. Science starts from the realm of the sensible, and
constructs its super-rarefied devices on mechanical models. Then it leaves the field of the
intuitively perceptible, and rises by the path of analogy into realms where the notions with which
it operates are no longer imaginable. I do not wish, in speaking of an ethical, invisible, and
unimaginable entity, to derive the postulation of this conception from science. The ethical concept
transcends wholly the field of sensible experience. It is not discovered by way of analogy. It is
frankly and overtly super-sensible. It is not exemplified in the effects it produces in the world of
volition as the most nearly metaphysical concepts of science are exemplified in the field of
phenomena by the recurrences or uniformities which they serve to account for. The ethical
concepts are not verified by their results at all, not by recurrences of phenomena, but by the
persistence of the effort to attain that which is finitely never attained, and by the more explicit
perception of theideal itself which follows the persistent effort; for as has been shown above,
when face to face with fundamental truth, seeing is believing. But I allude to these matters in
order to show that the movement in ethical thinking represented by the system which I propose is
not contrary to the present-day movement in science, but in line with it, though beyond it. It does
not ask leave of science; it does not base its certainty on scientific precedent; but neither does it
expect a veto from the lips of science. The worthwhileness of scientific endeavor itself depends at
bottom on the sanction which the ideal of the complete carrying out of the reality-producing
functions lends to their incomplete execution in the world of the space and time manifold.

Felix Adler

Felix Adler, An Ethical Philosopy of Life

Chapter VIIThe Supreme Ethical Rule: Act So As To Elicit the
Best In Others and Thereby In Thy Self(1)
It is difficult to see the potentially divine nature in men when masked by the
forbidding traits which human beings so often exhibit.
A number of vital considerations will now have to be emphasized as pertinent to

the subject we are dealing with.

The first point is that the character of every person contains contrary elements.(2)
Let the two kinds of qualities be called the fair and foul, or more simply still the
plus and minus traits. The bright qualities, the plus traits, are undoubtedly more
predominant in some, the dark or minus traits in others. But potential plus qualities
exist in the worst characters, and potential minus traits may be surmised, and on
scrutiny will be found, in those whom the world most admires.
A second point is mentioned as an hypothesis not indeed as yet verified, but I
believe verifiable, namely, that certain defined minus traits will be found to go
with certain plus traits. Wherever bright qualities stand out we are likely to meet
with corresponding dark qualities or dispositions, and conversely. There are, I am
persuaded, uniformities of correspondence between the plus and minus traits, and
it would be of greatest practical help in judging others and ourselves if these
uniformities could be worked out. A kind of chart might then be made, a
description of the principal types of human character, with the salient defects and
qualities that belong to each. Extensive statistical treatment of a multitude of
biographies would lay the foundation for such an undertaking; also sketches of the
prominent characteristics of nations, like those furnished by Fouille would be
utilized. Also the study of the character traits of primitive races as partially carried
out by Waitz in his Anthropology and the character types of animals, so far as
accessible to observation, might be used for comparison. Instructed in this manner,
we should, on coming into contact with others, either on their attractive or
repellent side, be prepared to expect and to allow for the opposite traits. And we
should learn to see ourselves in the same manner; we should see our empirical
character as it really is, the dark traits side by side with the bright. The courage to
wish to know the truth about one's self is rare, and when the revelation comes or is
forced upon us, it often breeds a kind of sick self-disgust and despair. The saint at
such times in moral agony declares himself to be the worst of sinners. He has
striven to attain a higher than the average moral level, and behold he has slipped
into only deeper depths. The minister of religion, the revered teacher, the political
and social leader, when abruptly shocked into self-examination by some evidence
of grossness or deviousness in themselves, no longer to be glossed over or
explained away, are fated to go through the same ordeal. A profound despondency
is the consequence. It is not only the badness now exposed, but the previous state
of hypocrisy that seems in the retrospect intolerable. Some persons live what is
called a double life in the face of the world. But who is quite free from living a
double life in his own estimate? Achilles said of himself (greek omitted)
("cumberer of the ground"). Many a man has echoed that cry with a bitterness of
soul more poignant than that which Achilles felt when he uttered the words.
Now the principle of the duality(3) of character traits, or as we may also designate

it, the principle of the polarity of character, applies to our natural or empirical
character, and our empirical character is not our moral character. The distinction
between the two will serve, as we shall presently see, to rescue us from the state of
moral dejection just described. But first it is indispensable to fix attention on the
natural character, to recognize that we are composite, each and every one of us,
and that the all-important thing to know is which of our plus qualities go with
which of the minus. Here the psychologist can help us. Here a great field is open
for a practical science of ethology. This would give us a more adequate knowledge
of the empirical character, the substratum in which ethical character is to be
worked out.
Point three opens up a great enlightenment in regard to the whole subject. It is that
the distinction must be drawn, and ever be kept in mind, between the bright and
dark qualities and the virtues and vices. The bright qualities are not of themselves
virtues. The dark qualities are not of themselves vices. To suppose that they are, to
confuse the bright with virtue and the dark with viciousness, is the most prevalent
of moral fallacies.(4)
A person is found to be kind, sympathetic, gentle, and on this score is said to be
virtuous or good. But gentleness, kindness, a sympathetic disposition, while they
lend themselves to the process of being transformed into virtues, are not of
themselves moral qualities at all, but gifts of nature, happy endowments for which
the possessor can claim no merit. And sullenness, irascibility, the hot, fierce
cravings and passions with which some men are cursed, are not vices, though it is
obvious how readily they turn into vices as soon as the will consents to them.
The question becomes urgent: What then is a virtue? The fair qualities are the
basis, the natural substratum of the virtues., the material susceptible of
transformation into virtues. In what does the transformation consist? When does it
take place? The answer is, when the plus quality has been raised to the Nth degree,
and in consequence the minus qualities are expelled. This result, of course, is
never actually achieved. The concept here presented is a concept of limits. But in
the direction defined lies growth and continuous development not of but toward
ethical personality. In public addresses I have often said: Look to your virtues, and
your vices will take care of themselves. I can put this thought more exactly by
saying: Change your so-called virtues into real virtues: raise your plus qualities to
the Nth degree. And the degree to which you succeed in so doing you can judge of
by the extent, to which the minus qualities are in process of disappearing.
One or two examples will illustrate the pivotal thought thus reached in the
exposition of our ethical system with respect to its practical consequences. To raise
to the Nth degree is to infinitize a finite quality, or to enhance it in the direction of
infinity. I shall take two examples, one self-sacrifice, the other justice, both viewed

in their finite aspect as plus traits requiring to be subjected to the process of

transformation.
The empirical motive of self-sacrifice may be egocentric or altruistic. In
egocentric self-sacrifice, doing for others is a means of exalting the idea of self to
the mind of the doer. He uses others, not as sacred personalities, worth while on
their own account, but subtly exploits them by benefiting them. He uses them as
objects by means of which to achieve a finer self-aggrandizement. He may indeed
go to the utmost lengths of devotion for his friends. He may perform for them the
most repulsive offices. He may give freely of his means, denying himself
meanwhile comforts and even necessaries in order perhaps to extricate them from
pecuniary difficulties. He may contribute in refined ways to their pleasure. As a
physician he may watch night after night at the bedside of the sick, foregoing sleep
though fatigued to the point of exhaustion in order to be at hand to mitigate the
pains of the sufferer, jeopardizing his own health in order to assist others in
recovering theirs. Yes, he may even give of his own blood to renew their ebbing
life. In all this be will look for no material compensation. Gratitude, especially
gratitude expressed in words, is repugnant to him. The lofty image of self which
he strives to create would be marred if any such coarsely selfish motive were
allowed to intrude. All that he requires, but this he does inexorably require, is that
his beneficiaries shall silently confess their dependence on him, that he shall see
the exalted image of himself mirrored in their attitude, and that they shall move in
their orbits as satellites around his sun. The egocentrism is veiled and easily
confounded with the purest moral disposition. But it is there all the same, and the
proof of it is that the very same person who is thus friendly to his friends, and an
unstinting benefactor to those who pay him the kind of homage he exacts, is
capable of behaving with almost inconceivable hardness and even cruelty toward
others who will not stand in this subordinate relation to him, or who in any way
wound his self-esteem. Sister Dora, serving enthusiastically in a small-pox
hospital, while neglecting the nearer duties at home, intent on dramatic, histrionic
self-representation, is likewise a palpable instance of egocentric self-sacrifice.
The self is precious on its own account. The nonself, the other, equally so. A
virtuous act is one in which the ends of self and of the other are respected and
promoted jointly. It is an act which has for its result the more vivid consciousness
of this very jointness. Egocentric self-sacrifice errs on the one side, the personality
of another being made tributary to the empirical self, despite the actual benefits
conferred. Altruistic self-sacrifice errs in the opposite way. In it the personality of
the self is effaced or made servile to the interests or supposed interests of another.
Not, let me add, to the real interests, for the spiritual interests are never achievable
at the expense of other spiritual natures. The wife or mother is an instance, who
slaves for husband or children, obliterating herself, never requiring the services
due to her in return and the respect for her which such services imply, degrading

herself and thereby injuring the moral character of those whom she pampers. An
historic instance of the altruistic error on a larger scale is afforded by the Platonic
scheme of scientific breeding under state supervision, a suggestion revived in
modern times, in which freedom of choice between the sexes, and the integrity of
the personality of those concerned, is sacrificed to the supposed interests of the
community. Nietzsche's doctrine may possibly be regarded as a compound of the
two errors described, the Superman representing the egocentrism, while altruistic
self-sacrifice, entire annulment of their personalities is expected of the multitude.
It is easy to distinguish the plus and minus qualities in the characters of the
egocentrist and the altruist: in the one case, beneficence combined with hardness;
in the other, service of others combined with absence of self-respect.
The second example to be briefly considered is the finite trait commonly mistaken
for justice. A typical illustration of this is presented by the merchant who ascribes
to himself a just character on the ground that he is punctual in the payment of his
debts, that his word is as good as his bond; or by the manufacturer who entertains
the same opinion of himself because he pays scrupulously the wages on which he
has agreed with his employees.(5) One wonders that so great and profound a
notion as that of justice should be understood so superficially, restricted to such
narrow limits, and that rational human beings should claim to possess so lofty a
virtue on the score of credentials so inadequate. The reason is that the empirical
substratum of justice is mistaken for the ethical virtue itself. This substratum may
be described as an inborn propensity toward order in things and in relations, a
natural impatience of loose fringes, a certain mental neatness. Hence insistence on
explicitly defined arrangements and on simple, over-simple formulas. These are
favored because they keep out of sight the complex elements which if considered
might introduce uncertainty and possibly -disorder into the situation. Thus a
manufacturer, impatient of looseness, over-rating explicitness, will be led to grasp
at a formula of justice which reduces it to the bare literal performance of a fixed
agreement, no matter with what unfreedom, owing to the pressure of want, it was
entered into by the wage-earners, and no matter how deteriorating the effect of the
insufficient wage may prove to be on their standard of living.
But it is a far cry from this empirical predisposition to the sublime ethical idea
itself. The idea of "the just" as exemplified in any act performed by me includes
the totality of all those conditions which make for the development of the ethical
personality of others in so far as it can be affected by my action. To do a just act is
to act with the totality of these conditions in view, in order to promote the end in
view, which is the liberation of personality or at least the idea of personality in
.others and in myself.
It is thus evident that a just act -- an ideally, perfectly just act, -- can be performed

by no man. First because the right conditions of human development are but very
imperfectly known, and are only brought to light by slow degrees. Secondly
because even as to the known conditions of justice, for instance the abolition of
the evils of the present industrial wage system, a single employer, or even a group
of well-intentioned employers can bring about the desired changes only to a very
limited extent.
Raising the finite quality underlying justice to the Nth degree therefore means
opening an illimitable prospect. The ethical effort in this, as in all other instances,
is destined to be thwarted. It is an effort in the direction of the finitely
unattainable; the effort itself, with the conviction it fosters as to the reality of that
which is finitely unattainable, being the ethically valuable outcome. The just man,
therefore, in any proper sense of the word, is one who is convinced of the fact that
he is essentially not a just man, and a deep humility as to both his actual and
possible achievements will distinguish him from the "just man" so-called, who
arrogates to himself that sublime attribute on the ground of the scrupulous
payment of debts, or the fulfilment of contracts. Humility in fact will be found to
be the characteristic mark of those who have attained ethical enlightenment in any
direction. It is the outward sign from which we may infer that the finite quality in
them is in process of being raised to the Nth degree.
I have given these few specific illustrations of my meaning, but what has been said
applies equally to any of the plus qualities. The plus qualities are the ones which
are favorable for transformation into the infinitized ethical quality. The ethical
principle itself is one and indivisible. Amy one of the plus qualities, when
ethicized, will conduce to the same result. From whatever point of the periphery of
the ethical sphere we advance toward the center we shall meet with the same
experience. Thus self-affirmation or egoism when in idea raised to the Nth degree
will reveal that the highest selfhood can be achieved only when the unique power
of a spiritual being is deployed in such a way as to challenge the unique,
distinctive power that is lodged in each of the infinite multitude of spiritual beings
that are partners with us in the eternal life.
And altruism, or care for others, at its spiritual climax, will conversely involve the
recognition that true service to others can only be perfectly performed when the
power that is resident in ourselves is exercised in its most vigorous, most
spontaneous, and most self-affirming mode. And as the diverse empirical qualities
which we observe in one another all appear to be modes of or cognate with these
two principal tendencies-the self-affirming and the altruistic-the method of
transfiguring empirical qualities which has been set forth may be found to apply in
every instance.

Footnotes:
(1) Or more exactly act so as to elicit the sense of unique distinctive selfhood, as interconnected
with all other distinctive spiritual beings in the infinite universe.
(2) The conception underlying Robert L. Stevenson's sketch of Jekyl and Hyde is to be taken seriously, and applied
without exception mutatis mutandis to every human being whatsoever (but see footnote p. 76). It is not original with
Stevenson. The French, who are perhaps the keenest psychologists, long ago invented the apercu that everyone has the
defects of his qualities.
(3) The use of the term duality is not intended to exclude the possibility of multiplicity, but only to call attention to one
striking bifurcation of human character.
(4) Stevenson falls into this error. He confounds Jekyl with the virtuous and Hyde with the vicious side of character. In
reality the one should stand for the empirical plus traits, the other for the empirical minus traits.

(5) Contract-keeping is peculiarly, the moral rule applicable to mercantile

transactions. To apply it without modification to the dealings of employers and
wage-earners is to intrude the mercantile standard into the industrial sphere. This
is what we are now witnessing, The industrial standard is only in process of
development and clarification, and the accepted mercantile standard is really in
conflict with it. Among merchants it is of the very essence of their transactions
that a contract shall not be invalidated, despite the injurious consequences to one
or the other party which it may turn out later on to involve. The security of
commercial transactions would be gone if revision of the contract should be
permitted whenever consequent loss appears. Again, and this is particularly
important, merchants are assumed to be on a footing of equality in dealing with
one another, equally free in accepting or rejecting a proposed contract., equally
competent to take care of their respective interests. The relation of employers to
wage-earners however is not that of economic equals, but of the economically
stronger with the economically weaker. And this difference is of cardinal
importance in determining the rule of justice as it should obtain in the industrial
sphere. I do not of course intend to imply that an agreement between employer and
wage-earners once made should not as a rule be kept as scrupulously as that
between merchant and merchant. What I affirm is that in view of the greatness of
the injury possibly inflicted upon the weaker, the economically stronger party is
bound at least to share the responsibility with the weaker for the essential fairness
of the terms of the agreement before it is finally completed. Nay, I would go a step
farther, and say that despite the indispensable condemnation of contract-breaking,
provision should be made for possible revision in cases where it can be shown that
exceptional hardships have appeared, unforeseen and unforeseeable at the time
when the agreement was made.
Felix Adler2

Humanist Manifesto
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Part of a Philosophical series on

Humanism
Happy Human

International Humanistand
Ethical Union (IHEU)American
Humanist AssociationBritish
Humanist AssociationNational
Secular Society
Secular humanism
Council for Secular HumanismA
Secular Humanist Declaration
Amsterdam Declaration
Religious humanism
Christian humanismJewish
humanismBuddhist humanism
Related articles
Ethical CultureMarxist
humanismDeistic humanism
Cosmic humanismExistential
humanismIntegral humanism
TranshumanismPersonism
PosthumanismAntihumanism
Outline of humanismList of
humanists
History of humanism

Renaissance humanism
Humanism in Germany
Humanism in FranceHumanist
Manifesto
%

Philosophy Portal v t e

Humanist Manifesto is the title of three manifestos laying out a Humanist

worldview. They are the original Humanist Manifesto (1933, often referred
to as Humanist Manifesto I), the Humanist Manifesto II (1973), and
Humanism and Its Aspirations (2003, a.k.a. Humanist Manifesto III). The
Manifesto originally arose from religious Humanism, though secular
Humanists also signed.
The central theme of all three manifestos is the elaboration of a philosophy
and value system which does not necessarily include belief in any personal
deity or "higher power", although the three differ considerably in their tone,
form, and ambition. Each has been signed at its launch by various
prominent members of academia and others who are in general agreement
with its principles.
In addition, there is a similar document entitled A Secular Humanist
Declaration published in 1980 by the Council for Secular Humanism.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Humanist
Manifesto I

2 Humanist
Manifesto II

3 Humanist
Manifesto III

4 Other Manifestos
for Humanism
1

4.1 A
Secular Humanist
Declaration
4.2

Humanist Manifesto 2000

%

5 References

6 External links
1

6.1
Manifestos

6.2
Miscellaneous

[edit]

Humanist Manifesto I
Main article: Humanist Manifesto I
The first manifesto, entitled simply A Humanist Manifesto, was written in
1933 primarily by Roy Wood Sellars and Raymond Bragg and was
published with thirty-four signatories including philosopher John Dewey.
Unlike the later ones, the first Manifesto talked of a new "religion", and
referred to Humanism as a religious movement to transcend and replace
previous religions based on allegations of supernatural revelation. The
document outlines a fifteen-point belief system, which, in addition to a
secular outlook, opposes "acquisitive and profit-motivated society" and
outlines a worldwide egalitarian society based on voluntary mutual
cooperation, language which was considerably softened by the Humanists'
board, owners of the document, twenty years later.
The title "A Humanist Manifesto"rather than "The Humanist Manifesto"
was intentional, predictive of later Manifestos to follow, as indeed has been
the case. Unlike the creeds of major organized religions, the setting out of
Humanist ideals in these Manifestos is an ongoing process. Indeed, in
some communities of Humanists the compilation of personal Manifestos is
actively encouraged, and throughout the Humanist movement it is
accepted that the Humanist Manifestos are not permanent or authoritative
dogmas but are to be subject to ongoing critique.
[edit]

Humanist Manifesto II

Main article: Humanist Manifesto II

The second Manifesto was written in 1973 by Paul Kurtz and Edwin H.
Wilson, and was intended to update and replace the previous one. It
begins with a statement that the excesses of Nazism and World War II had
made the first seem "far too optimistic", and indicated a more hardheaded
and realistic approach in its seventeen-point statement, which was much
longer and more elaborate than the previous version. Nevertheless, much
of the unbridled optimism of the first remained, with hopes stated that war
would become obsolete and poverty would be eliminated.
Many of the proposals in the document, such as opposition to racism and
weapons of mass destruction and support of strong human rights, are fairly
uncontroversial, and its prescriptions that divorce and birth control should
be legal and that technology can improve life are widely accepted today in
much of the Western world.[citation needed] Furthermore, its proposal of an
international court has since been implemented. However, in addition to its
rejection of supernaturalism, various controversial stances are strongly
supported, notably the right to abortion. The general tone of the second
Manifesto has been perceived as moving away from sympathy with
libertarian socialism toward a more economically neutral stance.
Initially published with a small number of signatures, the document was
circulated and gained thousands more, and indeed the AHA website
encourages visitors to add their own name. A provision at the end noted
that signators do "not necessarily endors[e] every detail" of the document.
Among the oft-quoted lines from this 1973 Manifesto are, "No deity will
save us; we must save ourselves," and "We are responsible for what we
are and for what we will be," both of which may present difficulties for
members of certain Christian, Jewish, and Muslim sects, or other believers
in doctrines of submission to the will of an all-powerful God.
Expanding upon the role the public education establishment should play to
bring about the goals described in the Humanist Manifesto II, John Dunphy
wrote: "I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be
waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers that correctly

perceive their role as proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity

that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in
every human being...The classroom must and will become an arena of
conflict between the old and new -- the rotting corpse of Christianity,
together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of
humanism, resplendent with the promise of a world in which the neverrealized Christian ideal of 'love thy neighbor' will finally be achieved."[1]
[edit]

Humanist Manifesto III

Main article: Humanism and Its Aspirations
Humanism and Its Aspirations, subtitled Humanist Manifesto III, a
successor to the Humanist Manifesto of 1933, was published in 2003 by
the AHA, which apparently wrote it by committee [1]. Signatories included
21 Nobel laureates. The new document is the successor to the previous
ones, and the name "Humanist Manifesto" is the property of the American
Humanist Association.
The newest manifesto is deliberately much shorter, listing seven primary
themes, which echo those from its predecessors [2] :
%

Knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation,

and rational analysis. (See empiricism.)

Humans are an integral part of nature, the result of evolutionary

change, an unguided process.

Ethical values are derived from human need and interest as tested
by experience. (See ethical naturalism.)

Lifes fulfillment emerges from individual participation in the service

of humane ideals.

Humans are social by nature and find meaning in relationships. (A

reoccurring finding in positive psychology, for example)

Working to benefit society maximizes individual happiness.

Respect for differing yet humane views in an open, secular,

democratic, environmentally sustainable society

[edit]

Other Manifestos for Humanism

Aside from the official Humanist Manifestos of the American Humanist
Association, there have been other similar documents. "Humanist
Manifesto" is a trademark of the AHA. Formulation of new statements in
emulation of the three Humanist Manifestoes is encouraged, and examples
follow.
[edit]

A Secular Humanist Declaration

Main article: A Secular Humanist Declaration
In 1980, the Council for Secular Humanism, founded by Paul Kurtz, which
is typically more detailed in its discussions regarding the function of
Humanism than the AHA, published what is in effect its manifesto, entitled
A Secular Humanist Declaration. It has as its main points:
%

Free Inquiry

Separation of Church and State

The Ideal of Freedom

Ethics Based on Critical Intelligence

Moral Education

Religious Skepticism

Reason

Science and Technology

Evolution

Education

[edit]

Humanist Manifesto 2000

Humanist Manifesto 2000: A Call for New Planetary Humanism is a book
by Paul Kurtz published in 2000. It differs from the other three in that it is a
full-length book rather than essay-length, and was published not by the
American Humanist Association but by the Council for Secular Humanism.

In it, Kurtz argues for many of the points already formulated in Humanist
Manifesto 2, of which he had been co-author in 1973.
Humanist Manifesto
humanist manifest i ii iii

HUMANIST MANIFESTO I
First: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and
not created.
Second: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that
he has emerged as the result of a continuous process.
Third: Holding an organic view of life, humanists find that the
traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.
Fourth: Humanism recognizes that man's religious culture and
civilization, as clearly depicted by anthropology and history, are
the product of a gradual development due to his interaction with
his natural environment and with his social heritage. The
individual born into a particular culture is largely molded by that
culture.
Fifth: Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by
modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic
guarantees of human values. Obviously humanism does not deny
the possibility of realities as yet undiscovered, but it does insist
that the way to determine the existence and value of any and all
realities is by means of intelligent inquiry and by the assessment of
their relations to human needs. Religion must formulate its hopes
and plans in the light of the scientific spirit and method.

Sixth: We are convinced that the time has passed for theism,
deism, modernism, and the several varieties of "new thought."
Seventh: Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and
experiences which are humanly significant. Nothing human is alien
to the religious. It includes labor, art, science, philosophy, love,
friendship, recreation-all that is in its degree expressive of
intelligently satisfying human living. The distinction between the
sacred and the secular can no longer be maintained.
Eighth: Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of
human personality to be the end of man's life and seeks its
development and fulfillment in the here and now. This is the
explanation of the humanist's social passion.
Ninth: In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and
prayer the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a
heightened sense of personal life and in a co-operative effort to
promote social well-being.
Tenth: It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions
and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the
supernatural.
Eleventh: Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his
knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reasonable and
manly attitudes will be fostered by education and supported by
custom. We assume that humanism will take the path of social and
mental hygiene and discourage sentimental and unreal hopes and
wishful thinking.
Twelfth: Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in
living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to
encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.
Thirteenth: Religious humanism maintains that all associations

and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life. The

intelligent evaluation, transformation, control, and direction of
such associations and institutions with a view to the enhancement
of human life is the purpose and program of humanism. Certainly
religious institutions, their ritualistic forms ecclesiastical methods,
and communal activities must be reconstituted as rapidly as
experience allows, in order to function effectively in the modern
world.
Fourteenth: The humanists are firmly convinced that existing
acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be
inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and
motives must be established to the end that the equitable
distribution of the means of life are possible. The goal of
humanism is a free and universal society in which people
voluntarily and intelligently co-operate for the common good.
Humanists demand a shared life in a shared world.
Fifteenth: We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life rather than
deny it; (b)seek to elicit the possibilities of life not flee from it; and
(c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all,
not merely for a few. By this positive morale and intention
humanism will be guided, and from this perspective and alignment
the techniques and efforts of humanism will flow.
HUMANIST MANIFESTO I

HUMANISTMANIFESTOII
Humanist Manifesto II

Preface
It is forty years since Humanist Manifesto I (1933) appeared. Events
since then make that earlier statement seem far too optimistic. Nazism
has shown the depths of brutality of which humanity is capable. Other
totalitarian regimes have suppressed human rights without ending
poverty. Science has sometimes brought evil as well as good. Recent
decades have shown that inhuman wars can be made in the name of
peace. The beginnings of police states, even in democratic societies,
widespread government espionage, and other abuses of power by
military, political, and industrial elites, and the continuance of
unyielding racism, all present a different and difficult social outlook. In
various societies, the demands of women and minority groups for
equal rights effectively challenge our generation.
As we approach the twenty-first century, however, an affirmative and
hopeful vision is needed. Faith, commensurate with advancing
knowledge, is also necessary. In the choice between despair and hope,
humanists respond in this Humanist Manifesto II with a positive
declaration for times of uncertainty.
As in 1933, humanists still believe that traditional theism, especially
faith in the prayer-hearing God, assumed to live and care for persons,
to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something
about them, is an unproved and outmoded faith. Salvationism, based
on mere affirmation, still appears as harmful, diverting people with
false hopes of heaven hereafter. Reasonable minds look to other
means for survival.
Those who sign Humanist Manifesto II disclaim that they are setting
forth a binding credo; their individual views would be stated in widely
varying ways. This statement is, however, reaching for vision in a time
that needs direction. It is social analysis in an effort at consensus. New
statements should be developed to supersede this, but for today it is
our conviction that humanism offers an alternative that can serve

present-day needs and guide humankind toward the future.

- Paul Kurtz and Edwin H. Wilson (1973)

The next century can be and should be the humanistic century.

Dramatic scientific, technological, and ever-accelerating social and
political changes crowd our awareness. We have virtually conquered
the planet, explored the moon, overcome the natural limits of travel
and communication; we stand at the dawn of a new age, ready to
move farther into space and perhaps inhabit other planets. Using
technology wisely, we can control our environment, conquer poverty,
markedly reduce disease, extend our life-span, significantly modify our
behavior, alter the course of human evolution and cultural
development, unlock vast new powers, and provide humankind with
unparalleled opportunity for achieving an abundant and meaningful
life.
The future is, however, filled with dangers. In learning to apply the
scientific method to nature and human life, we have opened the door
to ecological damage, over-population, dehumanizing institutions,
totalitarian repression, and nuclear and bio-chemical disaster. Faced
with apocalyptic prophesies and doomsday scenarios, many flee in
despair from reason and embrace irrational cults and theologies of
withdrawal and retreat.
Traditional moral codes and newer irrational cults both fail to meet the
pressing needs of today and tomorrow. False "theologies of hope" and
messianic ideologies, substituting new dogmas for old, cannot cope
with existing world realities. They separate rather than unite peoples.

Humanity, to survive, requires bold and daring measures. We need to

extend the uses of scientific method, not renounce them, to fuse
reason with compassion in order to build constructive social and moral
values. Confronted by many possible futures, we must decide which to
pursue. The ultimate goal should be the fulfillment of the potential for
growth in each human personality - not for the favored few, but for all
of humankind. Only a shared world and global measures will suffice.
A humanist outlook will tap the creativity of each human being and
provide the vision and courage for us to work together. This outlook
emphasizes the role human beings can play in their own spheres of
action. The decades ahead call for dedicated, clear-minded men and
women able to marshal the will, intelligence, and cooperative skills for
shaping a desirable future. Humanism can provide the purpose and
inspiration that so many seek; it can give personal meaning and
significance to human life.
Many kinds of humanism exist in the contemporary world. The
varieties and emphases of naturalistic humanism include "scientific,"
"ethical," "democratic," "religious," and "Marxist" humanism. Free
thought, atheism, agnosticism, skepticism, deism, rationalism, ethical
culture, and liberal religion all claim to be heir to the humanist
tradition. Humanism traces its roots from ancient China, classical
Greece and Rome, through the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, to
the scientific revolution of the modern world. But views that merely
reject theism are not equivalent to humanism. They lack commitment
to the positive belief in the possibilities of human progress and to the
values central to it. Many within religious groups, believing in the
future of humanism, now claim humanist credentials. Humanism is an
ethical process through which we all can move, above and beyond the
divisive particulars, heroic personalities, dogmatic creeds, and ritual
customs of past religions or their mere negation.
We affirm a set of common principles that can serve as a basis for
united action - positive principles relevant to the present human

condition. They are a design for a secular society on a planetary scale.

For these reasons, we submit this new Humanist Manifesto for the
future of humankind; for us, it is a vision of hope, a direction for
satisfying survival.

Religion
FIRST: In the best sense, religion may inspire dedication to the highest
ethical ideals. The cultivation of moral devotion and creative
imagination is an expression of genuine "spiritual" experience and
aspiration.
We believe, however, that traditional dogmatic or authoritarian
religions that place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human
needs and experience do a disservice to the human species. Any
account of nature should pass the tests of scientific evidence; in our
judgment, the dogmas and myths of traditional religions do not do so.
Even at this late date in human history, certain elementary facts based
upon the critical use of scientific reason have to be restated. We find
insufficient evidence for belief in the existence of a supernatural; it is
either meaningless or irrelevant to the question of survival and
fulfillment of the human race. As nontheists, we begin with humans
not God, nature not deity. Nature may indeed be broader and deeper
than we now know; any new discoveries, however, will but enlarge our
knowledge of the natural.
Some humanists believe we should reinterpret traditional religions and
reinvest them with meanings appropriate to the current situation. Such
redefinitions, however, often perpetuate old dependencies and
escapisms; they easily become obscurantist, impeding the free use of
the intellect. We need, instead, radically new human purposes and
goals.
We appreciate the need to preserve the best ethical teachings in the
religious traditions of humankind, many of which we share in common.
But we reject those features of traditional religious morality that deny
humans a full appreciation of their own potentialities and

responsibilities. Traditional religions often offer solace to humans, but,

as often, they inhibit humans from helping themselves or experiencing
their full potentialities. Such institutions, creeds, and rituals often
impede the will to serve others. Too often traditional faiths encourage
dependence rather than independence, obedience rather than
affirmation, fear rather than courage. More recently they have
generated concerned social action, with many signs of relevance
appearing in the wake of the "God Is Dead" theologies. But we can
discover no divine purpose or providence for the human species. While
there is much that we do not know, humans are responsible for what
we are or will become. No deity will save us; we must save ourselves.
SECOND: Promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation
are both illusory and harmful. They distract humans from present
concerns, from self-actualization, and from rectifying social injustices.
Modern science discredits such historic concepts as the "ghost in the
machine" and the "separable soul." Rather, science affirms that the
human species is an emergence from natural evolutionary forces. As
far as we know, the total personality is a function of the biological
organism transacting in a social and cultural context. There is no
credible evidence that life survives the death of the body. We continue
to exist in our progeny and in the way that our lives have influenced
others in our culture.
Traditional religions are surely not the only obstacles to human
progress. Other ideologies also impede human advance. Some forms
of political doctrine, for instance, function religiously, reflecting the
worst features of orthodoxy and authoritarianism, especially when they
sacrifice individuals on the altar of Utopian promises. Purely economic
and political viewpoints, whether capitalist or communist, often
function as religious and ideological dogma. Although humans
undoubtedly need economic and political goals, they also need creative
values by which to live.

Ethics
THIRD: We affirm that moral values derive their source from human
experience. Ethics is autonomous and situational needing no
theological or ideological sanction. Ethics stems from human need and

interest. To deny this distorts the whole basis of life. Human life has
meaning because we create and develop our futures. Happiness and
the creative realization of human needs and desires, individually and in
shared enjoyment, are continuous themes of humanism. We strive for
the good life, here and now. The goal is to pursue life's enrichment
despite debasing forces of vulgarization, commercialization, and
dehumanization.
FOURTH: Reason and intelligence are the most effective instruments
that humankind possesses. There is no substitute: neither faith nor
passion suffices in itself. The controlled use of scientific methods,
which have transformed the natural and social sciences since the
Renaissance, must be extended further in the solution of human
problems. But reason must be tempered by humility, since no group
has a monopoly of wisdom or virtue. Nor is there any guarantee that
all problems can be solved or all questions answered. Yet critical
intelligence, infused by a sense of human caring, is the best method
that humanity has for resolving problems. Reason should be balanced
with compassion and empathy and the whole person fulfilled. Thus, we
are not advocating the use of scientific intelligence independent of or
in opposition to emotion, for we believe in the cultivation of feeling and
love. As science pushes back the boundary of the known, humankind's
sense of wonder is continually renewed, and art, poetry, and music
find their places, along with religion and ethics.

The Individual
FIFTH: The preciousness and dignity of the individual person is a
central humanist value. Individuals should be encouraged to realize
their own creative talents and desires. We reject all religious,
ideological, or moral codes that denigrate the individual, suppress
freedom, dull intellect, dehumanize personality. We believe in
maximum individual autonomy consonant with social responsibility.
Although science can account for the causes of behavior, the
possibilities of individual freedom of choice exist in human life and
should be increased.
SIXTH: In the area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes,
often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly

repress sexual conduct. The right to birth control, abortion, and

divorce should be recognized. While we do not approve of exploitive,
denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit,
by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults.
The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be
considered "evil." Without countenancing mindless permissiveness or
unbridled promiscuity, a civilized society should be a tolerant one.
Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals
should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue
their lifestyles as they desire. We wish to cultivate the development of
a responsible attitude toward sexuality, in which humans are not
exploited as sexual objects, and in which intimacy, sensitivity, respect,
and honesty in interpersonal relations are encouraged. Moral education
for children and adults is an important way of developing awareness
and sexual maturity.

Democratic Society
SEVENTH: To enhance freedom and dignity the individual must
experience a full range of civil liberties in all societies. This includes
freedom of speech and the press, political democracy, the legal right of
opposition to governmental policies, fair judicial process, religious
liberty, freedom of association, and artistic, scientific, and cultural
freedom. It also includes a recognition of an individual's right to die
with dignity, euthanasia, and the right to suicide. We oppose the
increasing invasion of privacy, by whatever means, in both totalitarian
and democratic societies. We would safeguard, extend, and implement
the principles of human freedom evolved from the Magna Carta to the
Bill of Rights, the Rights of Man, and the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.
EIGHTH: We are committed to an open and democratic society. We
must extend participatory democracy in its true sense to the economy,
the school, the family, the workplace, and voluntary associations.
Decision-making must be decentralized to include widespread
involvement of people at all levels - social, political, and economic. All
persons should have a voice in developing the values and goals that
determine their lives. Institutions should be responsive to expressed

desires and needs. The conditions of work, education, devotion, and

play should be humanized. Alienating forces should be modified or
eradicated and bureaucratic structures should be held to a minimum.
People are more important than decalogues, rules, proscriptions, or
regulations.
NINTH: The separation of church and state and the separation of
ideology and state are imperatives. The state should encourage
maximum freedom for different moral, political, religious, and social
values in society. It should not favor any particular religious bodies
through the use of public monies, nor espouse a single ideology and
function thereby as an instrument of propaganda or oppression,
particularly against dissenters.
TENTH: Humane societies should evaluate economic systems not by
rhetoric or ideology, but by whether or not they increase economic
well-being for all individuals and groups, minimize poverty and
hardship, increase the sum of human satisfaction, and enhance the
quality of life. Hence the door is open to alternative economic systems.
We need to democratize the economy and judge it by its
responsiveness to human needs, testing results in terms of the
common good.
ELEVENTH: The principle of moral equality must be furthered through
elimination of all discrimination based upon race, religion, sex, age, or
national origin. This means equality of opportunity and recognition of
talent and merit. Individuals should be encouraged to contribute to
their own betterment. If unable, then society should provide means to
satisfy their basic economic, health, and cultural needs, including,
wherever resources make possible, a minimum guaranteed annual
income. We are concerned for the welfare of the aged, the infirm, the
disadvantaged, and also for the outcasts - the mentally retarded,
abandoned, or abused children, the handicapped, prisoners, and
addicts - for all who are neglected or ignored by society. Practicing
humanists should make it their vocation to humanize personal
relations.
We believe in the right to universal education. Everyone has a right to
the cultural opportunity to fulfill his or her unique capacities and
talents. The schools should foster satisfying and productive living.

They should be open at all levels to any and all; the achievement of
excellence should be encouraged. Innovative and experimental forms
of education are to be welcomed. The energy and idealism of the
young deserve to be appreciated and channeled to constructive
purposes.
We deplore racial, religious, ethnic, or class antagonisms. Although we
believe in cultural diversity and encourage racial and ethnic pride, we
reject separations which promote alienation and set people and groups
against each other; we envision an integrated community where
people have a maximum opportunity for free and voluntary
association.
We are critical of sexism or sexual chauvinism - male or female. We
believe in equal rights for both women and men to fulfill their unique
careers and potentialities as they see fit, free of invidious
discrimination.

World Community
TWELFTH: We deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic
grounds. We have reached a turning point in human history where the
best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to
move toward the building of a world community in which all sectors of
the human family can participate. Thus we look to the development of
a system of world law and a world order based upon transnational
federal government. This would appreciate cultural pluralism and
diversity. It would not exclude pride in national origins and
accomplishments nor the handling of regional problems on a regional
basis. Human progress, however, can no longer be achieved by
focusing on one section of the world, Western or Eastern, developed or
underdeveloped. For the first time in human history, no part of
humankind can be isolated from any other. Each person's future is in
some way linked to all. We thus reaffirm a commitment to the building
of world community, at the same time recognizing that this commits us
to some hard choices.
THIRTEENTH: This world community must renounce the resort to
violence and force as a method of solving international disputes. We
believe in the peaceful adjudication of differences by international

courts and by the development of the arts of negotiation and

compromise. War is obsolete. So is the use of nuclear, biological, and
chemical weapons. It is a planetary imperative to reduce the level of
military expenditures and turn these savings to peaceful and peopleoriented uses.
FOURTEENTH: The world community must engage in cooperative
planning concerning the use of rapidly depleting resources. The planet
earth must be considered a single ecosystem. Ecological damage,
resource depletion, and excessive population growth must be checked
by international concord. The cultivation and conservation of nature is
a moral value; we should perceive ourselves as integral to the sources
of our being in nature. We must free our world from needless pollution
and waste, responsibly guarding and creating wealth, both natural and
human. Exploitation of natural resources, uncurbed by social
conscience, must end.
FIFTEENTH: The problems of economic growth and development can
no longer be resolved by one nation alone; they are worldwide in
scope. It is the moral obligation of the developed nations to provide through an international authority that safeguards human rights massive technical, agricultural, medical, and economic assistance,
including birth control techniques, to the developing portions of the
globe. World poverty must cease. Hence extreme disproportions in
wealth, income, and economic growth should be reduced on a
worldwide basis.
SIXTEENTH: Technology is a vital key to human progress and
development. We deplore any neo-romantic efforts to condemn
indiscriminately all technology and science or to counsel retreat from
its further extension and use for the good of humankind. We would
resist any moves to censor basic scientific research on moral, political,
or social grounds. Technology must, however, be carefully judged by
the consequences of its use; harmful and destructive changes should
be avoided. We are particularly disturbed when technology and
bureaucracy control, manipulate, or modify human beings without
their consent. Technological feasibility does not imply social or cultural
desirability.
SEVENTEENTH: We must expand communication and transportation

across frontiers. Travel restrictions must cease. The world must be

open to diverse political, ideological, and moral viewpoints and evolve
a worldwide system of television and radio for information and
education. We thus call for full international cooperation in culture,
science, the arts, and technology across ideological borders. We must
learn to live openly together or we shall perish together.

Humanity As a Whole
IN CLOSING: The world cannot wait for a reconciliation of competing
political or economic systems to solve its problems. These are the
times for men and women of goodwill to further the building of a
peaceful and prosperous world. We urge that parochial loyalties and
inflexible moral and religious ideologies be transcended. We urge
recognition of the common humanity of all people. We further urge the
use of reason and compassion to produce the kind of world we want a world in which peace, prosperity, freedom, and happiness are widely
shared. Let us not abandon that vision in despair or cowardice. We are
responsible for what we are or will be. Let us work together for a
humane world by means commensurate with humane ends.
Destructive ideological differences among communism, capitalism,
socialism, conservatism, liberalism, and radicalism should be
overcome. Let us call for an end to terror and hatred. We will survive
and prosper only in a world of shared humane values. We can initiate
new directions for humankind; ancient rivalries can be superseded by
broad-based cooperative efforts. The commitment to tolerance,
understanding, and peaceful negotiation does not necessitate
acquiescence to the status quo nor the damming up of dynamic and
revolutionary forces. The true revolution is occurring and can continue
in countless nonviolent adjustments. But this entails the willingness to
step forward onto new and expanding plateaus. At the present
juncture of history, commitment to all humankind is the highest
commitment of which we are capable; it transcends the narrow
allegiances of church, state, party, class, or race in moving toward a
wider vision of human potentiality. What more daring a goal for
humankind than for each person to become, in ideal as well as
practice, a citizen of a world community. It is a classical vision; we can

now give it new vitality. Humanism thus interpreted is a moral force

that has time on its side. We believe that humankind has the potential,
intelligence, goodwill, and cooperative skill to implement this
commitment in the decades ahead.
We, the undersigned, while not necessarily endorsing every detail of
the above, pledge our general support to Humanist Manifesto II for the
future of humankind. These affirmations are not a final credo or
dogma but an expression of a living and growing faith. We invite
others in all lands to join us in further developing and working for
these goals.
HUMANIST MANIFESTO II

HUMANISTMANIFESTOIII
HUMANISM AND ITS ASPIRATIONS
Humanist Manifesto III, a successor to the
Humanist Manifesto of 1933*
Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without
supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical
lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of
humanity.
The lifestance of Humanismguided by reason, inspired by
compassion, and informed by experienceencourages us to live life
well and fully. It evolved through the ages and continues to develop
through the efforts of thoughtful people who recognize that values and
ideals, however carefully wrought, are subject to change as our
knowledge and understandings advance.
This document is part of an ongoing effort to manifest in clear and
positive terms the conceptual boundaries of Humanism, not what we

must believe but a consensus of what we do believe. It is in this sense

that we affirm the following:
Knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation,
and rational analysis. Humanists find that science is the best method
for determining this knowledge as well as for solving problems and
developing beneficial technologies. We also recognize the value of new
departures in thought, the arts, and inner experienceeach subject to
analysis by critical intelligence.
Humans are an integral part of nature, the result of unguided
evolutionary change. Humanists recognize nature as self-existing. We
accept our life as all and enough, distinguishing things as they are
from things as we might wish or imagine them to be. We welcome the
challenges of the future, and are drawn to and undaunted by the yet
to be known.
Ethical values are derived from human need and interest as tested by
experience. Humanists ground values in human welfare shaped by
human circumstances, interests, and concerns and extended to the
global ecosystem and beyond. We are committed to treating each
person as having inherent worth and dignity, and to making informed
choices in a context of freedom consonant with responsibility.
Life's fulfillment emerges from individual participation in the service of
humane ideals. We aim for our fullest possible development and
animate our lives with a deep sense of purpose, finding wonder and
awe in the joys and beauties of human existence, its challenges and
tragedies, and even in the inevitability and finality of death. Humanists
rely on the rich heritage of human culture and the lifestance of
Humanism to provide comfort in times of want and encouragement in
times of plenty.
Humans are social by nature and find meaning in relationships.
Humanists long for and strive toward a world of mutual care and

concern, free of cruelty and its consequences, where differences are

resolved cooperatively without resorting to violence. The joining of
individuality with interdependence enriches our lives, encourages us to
enrich the lives of others, and inspires hope of attaining peace, justice,
and opportunity for all.
Working to benefit society maximizes individual happiness. Progressive
cultures have worked to free humanity from the brutalities of mere
survival and to reduce suffering, improve society, and develop global
community. We seek to minimize the inequities of circumstance and
ability, and we support a just distribution of nature's resources and the
fruits of human effort so that as many as possible can enjoy a good
life.
Humanists are concerned for the well being of all, are committed to
diversity, and respect those of differing yet humane views. We work to
uphold the equal enjoyment of human rights and civil liberties in an
open, secular society and maintain it is a civic duty to participate in
the democratic process and a planetary duty to protect nature's
integrity, diversity, and beauty in a secure, sustainable manner.
Thus engaged in the flow of life, we aspire to this vision with the
informed conviction that humanity has the ability to progress toward
its highest ideals. The responsibility for our lives and the kind of world
in which we live is ours and ours alone.
HUMANIST MANIFESTO III

HUMANISTMANIFESTOI
Humanist Manifesto I

The Manifesto is a product of many minds. It was designed to

represent a developing point of view, not a new creed. The individuals

whose signatures appear would, had they been writing individual
statements, have stated the propositions in differing terms. The
importance of the document is that more than thirty men have come
to general agreement on matters of final concern and that these men
are undoubtedly representative of a large number who are forging a
new philosophy out of the materials of the modern world.
- Raymond B. Bragg (1933)

The time has come for widespread recognition of the radical changes in
religious beliefs throughout the modern world. The time is past for
mere revision of traditional attitudes. Science and economic change
have disrupted the old beliefs. Religions the world over are under the
necessity of coming to terms with new conditions created by a vastly
increased knowledge and experience. In every field of human activity,
the vital movement is now in the direction of a candid and explicit
humanism. In order that religious humanism may be better
understood we, the undersigned, desire to make certain affirmations
which we believe the facts of our contemporary life demonstrate.
There is great danger of a final, and we believe fatal, identification of
the word religion with doctrines and methods which have lost their
significance and which are powerless to solve the problem of human
living in the Twentieth Century. Religions have always been means for
realizing the highest values of life. Their end has been accomplished
through the interpretation of the total environing situation (theology or
world view), the sense of values resulting therefrom (goal or ideal),
and the technique (cult), established for realizing the satisfactory life.
A change in any of these factors results in alteration of the outward

forms of religion. This fact explains the changefulness of religions

through the centuries. But through all changes religion itself remains
constant in its quest for abiding values, an inseparable feature of
human life.
Today man's larger understanding of the universe, his scientific
achievements, and deeper appreciation of brotherhood, have created a
situation which requires a new statement of the means and purposes
of religion. Such a vital, fearless, and frank religion capable of
furnishing adequate social goals and personal satisfactions may appear
to many people as a complete break with the past. While this age does
owe a vast debt to the traditional religions, it is none the less obvious
that any religion that can hope to be a synthesizing and dynamic force
for today must be shaped for the needs of this age. To establish such a
religion is a major necessity of the present. It is a responsibility which
rests upon this generation. We therefore affirm the following:
FIRST: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and
not created.
SECOND: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he
has emerged as a result of a continuous process.
THIRD: Holding an organic view of life, humanists find that the
traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.
FOURTH: Humanism recognizes that man's religious culture and
civilization, as clearly depicted by anthropology and history, are the
product of a gradual development due to his interaction with his
natural environment and with his social heritage. The individual born
into a particular culture is largely molded by that culture.
FIFTH: Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by
modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic
guarantees of human values. Obviously humanism does not deny the
possibility of realities as yet undiscovered, but it does insist that the
way to determine the existence and value of any and all realities is by
means of intelligent inquiry and by the assessment of their relations to

human needs. Religion must formulate its hopes and plans in the light
of the scientific spirit and method.
SIXTH: We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism,
modernism, and the several varieties of "new thought".
SEVENTH: Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and
experiences which are humanly significant. Nothing human is alien to
the religious. It includes labor, art, science, philosophy, love,
friendship, recreation--all that is in its degree expressive of
intelligently satisfying human living. The distinction between the
sacred and the secular can no longer be maintained.
EIGHTH: Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of
human personality to be the end of man's life and seeks its
development and fulfillment in the here and now. This is the
explanation of the humanist's social passion.
NINTH: In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer
the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened
sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social
well-being.
TENTH: It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions and
attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural.
ELEVENTH: Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his
knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reasonable and manly
attitudes will be fostered by education and supported by custom. We
assume that humanism will take the path of social and mental hygiene
and discourage sentimental and unreal hopes and wishful thinking.
TWELFTH: Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in
living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to
encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.
THIRTEENTH: Religious humanism maintains that all associations and
institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life. The intelligent
evaluation, transformation, control, and direction of such associations
and institutions with a view to the enhancement of human life is the
purpose and program of humanism. Certainly religious institutions,

their ritualistic forms, ecclesiastical methods, and communal activities

must be reconstituted as rapidly as experience allows, in order to
function effectively in the modern world.
FOURTEENTH: The humanists are firmly convinced that existing
acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be
inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and
motives must be instituted. A socialized and cooperative economic
order must be established to the end that the equitable distribution of
the means of life be possible. The goal of humanism is a free and
universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently cooperate
for the common good. Humanists demand a shared life in a shared
world.
FIFTEENTH AND LAST: We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life
rather than deny it; (b) seek to elicit the possibilities of life, not flee
from them; and (c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a
satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few. By this positive morale
and intention humanism will be guided, and from this perspective and
alignment the techniques and efforts of humanism will flow.
So stand the theses of religious humanism. Though we consider the
religious forms and ideas of our fathers no longer adequate, the quest
for the good life is still the central task for mankind. Man is at last
becoming aware that he alone is responsible for the realization of the
world of his dreams, that he has within himself the power for its
achievement. He must set intelligence and will to the task.
HUMANIST MANIFESTO I again

Hosea Ballou: A Short Essay on Universalism (c.1849)

We propose, in what we shall say in the few following pages, on
the subject of Universalism, to offer a few suggestions on several
subjects which relate to the doctrine, considered as a system of
theology, which distinguishes its believers, as a sect, from
Christians of denominations, and also in regard to some of the
different views which have been entertained respecting the

doctrine, by those who have professed and defended it. And, 1st.
As respects the one central idea, in which all, who have ever
professed to believe the doctrine, have agreed. This great and
paramount idea embraces the final end of all sin in the human
family, and the consequent holiness and happiness of all men. We
deem it proper to consider all who embrace this one item of faith
as Universalists, however they may differ in regard to the ways and
means which have been, or may be, used to carry into effect the
desired and glorious result; or however they may differ as to times
and seasons in which Divine wisdom may accomplish it. This item
of faith evidently distinguishes all its advocates from all who
believe that any of the human family will sin and suffer as long as
the Creator shall exist. 2nd. There is another item in the belief
entertained by Universalists, in which all its advocates are agreed.
And that is, that this great and glorious truth has its origin in the
nature of God, and is a necessary result flowing from all the Divine
attributes, which harmonize in infinite, unchangeable love. As it is
manifestly unreasonable to suppose that there can exist in any one
of the Divine attributes a tendency which conflicts with that of any
other attribute, so it is equally unreasonable to allow that Divine
justice can require any punishment or retribution which Divine
love does not desire. That the good of the subject is the object, is
the necessary conclusion. 3rd. All Universalists agree in the belief,
that their distinguishing doctrine is plainly taught by Divine
inspiration, in the scriptures of Old and New Testaments; and, of
course, they do not believe that the inspired Scriptures anywhere
express a contrary doctrine. They find this doctrine in the writings
of Moses, in the prophets, and in the Psalms; and most clearly set
forth in the teachings of Jesus and his apostles. The very spirit of
the gospel of the Son of God is that of love to enemies, and the
rendering of good for evil. And, 4th. All Universalists agree in
believing that the true Christian life consists in possessing, living,
and acting the spirit of love, as manifested in the life and teachings
of the Divine Master. And however we may fail, or come short of
this rule, even our delinquencies admonish us of its purity, and

compel us to acknowledge it. Having presented the reader with a

short compendium of the articles of our faith, in which
Universalists are agreed, we propose to set forth a concise view of
some of the most important differences in the opinions which have
been embraces by believers in the before- mentioned essential
particulars. It would not be consistent with our present purpose, or
with the limits prescribed to these pages, to go back in the early
ages of the church, and inquire into the particular tenets of those
learned divines who were believers in this doctrine, and who
taught it in the schools. Some of those, having imbibed many
notions taught by Grecian philosophers, thought it consistent with
Christianity to retain many heather opinions, and exerted more
labor, learning and criticism, to reconcile the ancien mythology
with Christianity, than to understand and teach the doctrine of
Jesus in its simplicity. What we now propose to do is to take
somewhat of a general survey of the opinions entertained by those
who, within the memory of living men, have believed and taught
Universalism. As this doctrine was first taught in this country, its
general aspect indicated that it had what we may call a Calvinistic
base! A work entitled "Calvinism Improved," designed to vindicate
Universalism, was not very essentially different from the views of
our Universalists in general fifty years ago. As the basis of
Calvinism is generally understood, we need not describe its
elements. Simply to improve it, so as to establish Universalism on
it, requires only to extend the merciful decrees of God, which
Calvin restricted to a part of the human family, so as to embrace
the whole, and do the same with the vicarious atonement made by
the Son of God, which Calvin confined to a chosen part. When a
Calvinist found that the Scriptures plainly teach that the Savior
gave himself a ransom for all men, having, by the grace of God,
tasted death for every man, it was easy for him to see the
impropriety of believing that God had, from all eternity doomed
any to endless woe. It does not appear that our earliest
Universalists doubted that man, by sin, had incurred the just
penalty of endless punishment, but fully ruled on the efficacy of

the atonement for a deliverance of all men from such a

condemnation. The doctrine of the Trinity was also held as an
essential part of the general system of doctrine. The great idea of
universal salvation filled its believers so full of joy, giving such an
impetus to the benevolence and love, that their zeal to impart its
light and comfort to their fellow-men seemed to correspond with
its vastness and glory. The natural consequence of this state of
things was to arouse the clergy, who had quietly settled in the
doctrine of endless misery, and were enjoying a comfortable living
with their people, who believed their doctrine, to look about them,
and to exert all the means in their power to oppose and put down a
doctrine, which, to them, appeared to be subversive of Diving
truth, and dangerous to the interests of souls committed to their
charge. The few defenders of Universalism found enough to do, in
contending with their numerous and learned opposers, without
retiring to their studies to call in question, and to examine, the
soundness of certain tenets which they had never doubted, and
which they could hold, not only without weakening their own
cause, but use successfully in opposing their adversaries, who
believed the same. While viewing these circumstances, in room of
wondering why our early preachers did not see the impropriety of
allowing the infinite demerit of sin, and the incongruous notion of
an infinite substitute for its penalty, we may marvel that they
should have been brought so far out of darkness as to behold that
one bright and glorious star in the midst of the gloom which
surrounded it. They were evidently men of strong minds, acute
discernment, and of moral courage. To a wonderful degree were
their labors blessed, and converts from the doctrine of endless
punishment became numerous, as trophies of their spiritual
warfare. But as believers were multiplied, and additions made to
the number of advocates of the impartial doctrine, it seems that
Divine wisdom saw fit to lead some minds to look inquiringly into
the soundness of many dogmas which had been suffered to lie
undisturbed in public opinion for ages. These inquiries were
directed to test the doctrine of the Trinity, of vicarious atonement,

of the infinite demerit of sin, of the justice of endless punishment,

of the common doctrine of a personal devil, and the existence of
that hell in which the church had so long believed, and which her
clergy had located in the invisible, eternal world. On examination
of the dogma of three distinct persons in one indivisible, infinite
being, each of which is infinite, it was discovered to be
embarrassed not only with mystery, defying even an approach by
the human understanding, but involving most palpable absurdity;
and when the fact was duly considered, that Jesus by his many
prayers acknowledged his dependence on his Father in heaven, and
when it was also duly realized that he acknowledged that he was
sent of the Father, and that all the power he possessed and
exercised was given him by the Father, the dogma was given up, as
resting on no better ground than human invention. Vicarious
atonement, when carefully examined, was believed to depend on
certain assumed notions, which had for their support neither
Scripture nor reason. If man justly deserved endless punishment, or
any punishment at all, neither Scripture nor reason would allow
that the innocent should suffer it in room and stead of the guilty. As
to reason, it frowns on such a dogma indignantly; and the
Scriptures, wherever they speak on the subject, assure us that God
will render to every man according to his works. As, in the very
nature of moral consciousness, guilt is the necessary retribution of
the commission of known wrong, it is impossible that the innocent
should suffer it. The doctrine of the infinite demerit of sin, and of
the justice of endless punishment, required no very deep or labored
research to result in exploding it. The eye of enlightened reason, at
one glance, could clearly see, that if sin be infinite, there can be no
difference or degrees in criminality, while the Scriptures clearly
teach a comparative distinction, and that while one offender is
justly liable to many stripes, another is exposed to but a few. As to
the justice of endless punishment, minds enjoying the liberty of
free inquiry could easily detect the diabolical character of such
justice, as it is the exact opposite of the Divine nature, which is
love. Such justice is evidently predicated on the false principle and

ungodly practice of rendering evil for evil. The commonly received

opinion, that there exists a personal being called the devil, seemed
as difficult to eradicate from people's minds as any of the
superstitions which had been nourished by learned divines in any
age. Such a being, it seems, was indispensable in contriving and
carrying on the scheme of man's eternal ruin! But when inquiry
demanded who was the author of this devil, and what he was made
for, and who it is that upholds him, and other kindred questions
were asked, the most plausible account which could be obtained
amounted to the startling blasphemy of attributing the whole to the
wisdom of God! These inquiring minds indulged in the liberty of
calling in question the existence of that hell., in the invisible,
eternal world, the belief of which the doctors of the church have
taught to their people for many ages. And now, what account were
our divines able to furnish concerning this dark, gloomy state of
endless woe? Nothing more than that they knew nothing about it.
True, they would say that we read of hell in the Bible, but they
were utterly unable to show that a single passage gave countenance
to the existence of such a hell as they professed to believe in, and
in which they taught the people to believe. And as such a belief is
evidently dis-honorable to the character of our heavenly Father, it
was rejected as an abominable superstition. As some of those
exploded superstitions had been retained by the early defenders of
Universalism, it was alarming to them to be assured that their
younger brethren, who preached the glorious doctrine of universal
salvation, had repudiated those doctrines which they had never
called in question. And now arose a conflict between the preachers
of Universalism, almost as sharp at that which had been carried on
between Universalists and their opposers; and had it not been that
the spirit imparted to all who believed in that one central idea of
universal, impartial, and unchangeable love, predominated in
directing their feelings and measures, lamentable consequences
might have been realized. But such as had been favored with new
discoveries, realizing that they first believed in universal salvation,
before they made those discoveries, and even by the assistance of

their fathers in the faith, would have been quite unreasonable, had
they been either uncharitable or ungrateful towards their elders and
benefactors. Such considerations were not without their favorable
influence. The doctrine of a future retribution, or of a state
hereafter in which the sins of this life will be punished, was not
denied by any of the early defenders of final restoration. The belief
that there will be an end of sin and of the punishment was received
with such transporting joy, that minor subjects were little thought
of. Those in our times, who are led to yield an assent to the
doctrine of Universalism, rarely feel such ecstatic joy as did the
first believers. The reason is, those who now become convinced of
the truth of the doctrine have so long lived in the atmosphere of the
doctrine, that they have, by degrees, become fully convinced,
having been inclined that way for years. As early as were
repudiated those opinions which have been noticed, that of a future
state of punishment was called in question, and in process of a few
years was by many disbelieved. By the writer of these pages this
doctrine has been doubted more than half a century, and for nearly
forty years has been disbelieved, as being taught in the Scriptures.
Difference of opinion on this question, though at one time, and for
a little while, produced a rent among our clergy; the healing power
of the main doctrine soon overcame all difficulty, which, for a long
time, has given us no trouble. Though there are some now who
believe in what is called future retribution, we know of none who
pretend to prove it by Divine revelation, or dwell on it in their
preaching. We know of no passages of Scripture, which teach the
doctrine of a future state, which imply the existence of either sin or
punishment in that state. Could we find any such testimony, we
should then need Scripture proof that such sin and punishment will
have an end, in order to be consistent Universalists. Owing to the
age and infirmities of the writer of this article, he cannot expect to
be able, much longer, to render any considerable service to the
infinitely glorious cause to whose interest he has had the happy
privilege of devoting his humble talents for nearly sixty years. But
while holding himself ready to resign his armor, at the word of

command, he cannot fully express his gratitude for what he sees of

the wonderful spread of truth, and for the numerous army which he
will leave in its future defense.

Hosea Ballou

Pip Pip: A Sideways Look at Time

Excerpts from the Book
Clocks: caging time. The watch: the manacle on the wrist. Deadlines like barbed
wire. Coercive, cruel, crushing speed. Punctuality next to godliness. The work
ethic. Efficiency ber alles . Western Christian time, linear, dry, masculine and
ripped away from nature, exemplified in the clock, tediously ticking you off,
count, count, count.
By contrast, picture this. A gibbet, a drawbridge, flags, turrets and oil drums.
Made of scrap metal, wit an anarchy; place of white cider and Attitude. Welcome
to Fort Trollheim, built by eco-activists who lived in their Fort, and up in
treehouses in the nearby trees, opposing a road in Devon, in the mid 90s. And
they had their manifesto: This is the Independent Free State of Trollheim... we
have no allegiance to the UK government... We do not recognize history,
patriarchy, matriarchy, politics, communists, fascists or lollipop men/ladies... We
have a hierarchy based on dog worship... Our currency is to be based on the quag
barter system . We do not recognize the Gregorian calendar: by doing so this
day shall be known as One ... Be afraid, be afraid, all ye that hear. Respect this
State'
Time is a political subject. It is a crucial part of the language of power , between
nations, and classes, between men and women, between humankind and nature.
Stealthily, nastily, one type of time has grown horribly dominant: clockdominated, work-oriented, coercive, capitalist and anti-natural: Hegemonic Time
.
The Benedictine monasteries first began scheduling time, controlling and
ordering time according to Christian dictat. With the sixth century Rule of Saint
Benedict, idleness, that impish spirit, was decreed the enemy of the soul.'
Crucially, bells would be rung not only through the day but through the night too,
for the night was the time when even the most well-behaved monks could slope
off, free in their dream times. By ringing bells through the day, the monasteries
commanded the bodies of the monks; by ringing bells through the night, the
order of Christian time would get into their very minds.

The Industrial Revolution radically altered the sense of time experienced by the
common people, and it created time-owners; the capitalist factory-owners,
erecting clock-bound fences of work-time and the sense that employers owned
the time of their employees, enslaving their time, enclosing time. This time, and
all the time-values which go with it, has been imposed on numerous cultures
across the world in a widespread and unacknowledged piece of cultural
imperialism.
What's the time? Dishonest question. A political question. There are thousands of
times, not one. But this one mono-time has worldwide dominance. Greenwich
Mean Time comes reeking with the language of imperialism and smug with the
knowledge that time is power: the chief clock at Greenwich in 1852 was called the
master' clock; it sent out signals to slave' clocks at London Bridge. All the history
of time-keeping and the discovery of longitude enabled Britons to rule the oceans
and then build its empires of land. Having built its empires of land, it set about
building empires of time, enslaving people's lives and enclosing other cultures'
times (plural) with the One Hegemonic Time. When missionaries arrived
amongst the Algonquin people of North America, the Algonquin, outraged, called
clock-time Captain Clock' because it seemed to command every act for the
Christians.
Time has always been allied to power, for revolutionaries, rulers or reactionaries.
Calendars and clocks have always been an ideological, political and religious
weapon. Potentates, princes and priests, hypnotized by hopes of hegemony, have
always stood on the borders of space and looked at time for time is a kingdom,
a power and a glory.
Pol Pot declared 1975 to be Year Zero', marking the beginning of his rule as if it
were the beginning of time itself. The Third Reich was to last a thousand years.
When the ancient Chinese empire had colonized some new region, the phrase
they used was both sinister and telling; the new territory had received the
calendar'. In a phrase which I also find very sinister, the ultra-right wing, in
power in the USA today, have their project for global domination named by Time:
the Project for the New American Century .
In 1370, Charles V of France gave an order that all clocks were to be set by the
magnificent clock in his palace; he was the ruler of lands and now would be ruler
of time. But wherever there are clock rulers, there are clock rebels, and in the
French Revolution, Charles V's clock was severely damaged in an act of articulate
vandalism. A new time-measurement was announced: 1792 made Year One.
Speed is intimately tied to power. It is an index to status, so waiters, those who
wait, putting their time on hold for others, are low-status, low-earning. VIPs,
whose time is considered valuable, must never be kept waiting. The entire
transport system, from Concorde to a Mercedes to high speed trains, is set up to
serve the rich, to serve them fastest. (Oh, what transports of lites.) Italian
Futurists wanted to straighten out the Danube so that it would flow faster; the
natural rivers of time literally made to run for human speed. There is a nasty,

steely connection between speed and fascism. Italian Futurist Marinetti glorified
speed and supported fascism. Nazis put money into land speed record attempts
and Hitler began a huge road-building project (propaganda films being entitled
Fast Roads and Roads Make Happiness).
By contrast, if you look at the notes on politically subversive singer Manu Chao's
CD Esperanza' it says: This CD was born of much work, many journeys, spliffs
and meetings. It was born without hurry , (because speed kills).' Westernized
cultures think speed is automatically good'. This is not a universal
understanding: to some people speed is immoral . To the Kabyle people of
Algeria, speed is considered both indecorous and demonically over-competitive.
(The Kabyle refer to the clock as the devil's mill'.)
Where there is Hegemonic Time, there is also subversive time, best represented
in carnival, play, the cyclical nature of women, all children, and the cultures
across the world who (just about) remember their own sense of time. For every
ruler, there has been a rebel, for every power-hungry politician, there has been a
carnivalesque protester, for every man too keen on imposing his white, linear
calendar, there has been a woman who cyclically bleeds all over it.
Subversive and mischievous, carnival reverses the norms, overturns the usual
hierarchies. Unlike Dominant Hegemonic Time, carnival is tied to nature's time;
linked to cyclic, frequently seasonal events. Carnival transforms work-time to
play-time, up-ends power structures and reverses the status quo . It is frequently
earthy and sexual. Carnival is vulgar: of the common people. And it is vulgar in
another sense: drunken, licentious, loud and lewd.
Few festivals are more flamboyantly vulgar than May Day, or Beltane. This was
one pagan festival which the disapproving Christian church did not could not
colonise; it kept its raw smell of sexual licence and its populist grassroots appeal
which was why it was such a natural choice for the socialist movement.
Vicarless and knickerless, traditionally lads and lasses went into the forests and
woods to get a tree for the Maypole and so doing let rip the glorious fornications
of May (May sex led to June weddings June was the commonest month for
marriages, with the full moon of June called the mead' moon the honey'
moon.) The May Day Green Man' or Jack in the Green, dressed in leaves, carried
a huge horn (nuff said). The Maypole, the phallic pole planted in mother' earth
was the key symbol of this erotic day.
Then came the Puritans, sniffing the rank sexuality and decrying the maypole as
this stinking idol' and in 1644 the Puritans banned Maypoles. In the nineteenth
century, Victorians bowdlerised and infantilised May Day, making it a child's
festival to emphasise innocence. Indeed.
Carnival emphasizes commonality; customs of common time celebrated by
common people on common land . In Britain, a huge number of these customs
disappeared as a result of one thing: enclosures, for when rights to common land
were lost, so were the common carnivals. And just as land was literally fenced off

 enclosed so the spirit of carnival broad, unfettered unbounded exuberance

was metaphorically enclosed.
Around the world, Christian missionaries outlawed carnivals and festivities of
other cultures; Native American potlatches banned. Australian Aboriginal
corroborees banned. South American traditional dances and festivals banned.
But carnival erupts, even today, the deliberate use of carnivalesque costume
amongst anti-globalization protesters today, CIRCA, the Clandestine Insurgent
Rebel Clown Army, seriously playing out the politics of carnival.
One thing which Dominant, Hegemonic Time has insisted on, is the importance
of harnessing peoples' time for work; Time is Money, they say, without quite
answering whose money is made out of whose time. When the Industrial
Revolution rolled in, it chucked thousands of people into factories working for
absurdly long hours. But there was protest. Workers in Britain, in the 1820s and
1830s smashed the clocks above the factory gates in protest at the theft of their
time. Trade Unions took on first the abuse of time, seeking shorter working
hours. Karl Marx highlighted the exploitation of workers' time in capitalism.
Dickens wrote Hard Times , his blistering portrait of factory time and its
deadening character: the deadly statistical clock which measured every second
with a beat like a rap upon a coffin lid.' British workers staunchly persisted in
honouring Saint Monday' and French workers Saint-Lundi' (in effect the patron
saint of hangovers). Protest continued, from the 1960s revolt against work, the
refusal to wear watches, the slogan Work less, Live more!' and today's
Downshifters' and assiduous Idlers.
So Let us Play. Play has long been opposed to the work-dominated Western time.
Play, that subversive beastie, anarchic, energetic and creative, is still hated by
modern day Puritans of corporate capitalism, overworking its employees. All over
the world, colonization included insistence on work time: Columbus, on first
meeting the Tainos people (San Salvador) was convinced the people should be
made to work, sow and do all that is necessary and to adopt our ways...' The Inuit
refer to themselves as rich in knowledge, meat and time' and anthropologists
have referred to hunter-gatherers as the original affluent society' in that the
pleasures and necessities of life could be secured with a minimum of work.
Traditionally, many indigenous peoples do not have a designated word for work,
and do not work for more than four hours a day; the length of time Bertrand
Russell suggested in In Praise of Idleness' reducing both overemployment and
underemployment. He also argues that there is far too much work done in the
world, that immense harm is caused by the belief that work is virtuous.' Leisure,
by contrast, is essential to civilisation.'
The play ethic is far more, well, ethical than the work ethic. Play is freedom, is
creation, is energy, is wicked flirtatiousness, is the helplessly laughing, the
leglessly laddered, the god of Things which Brimmeth Over, the pint down the
pub, the de trop overflow of excess, the resplendently unnecessary and the onetoo-many which make the whole damn thing worthwhile. Play is harvest, is

abundance, is generosity, the harvest of pleasure after work, the excess and the
gusto, the more-than-enough, the gifts, the spirit of exchange. Take the word
giggling.' A one-word harvest of play's superfluity, its liquid, lovely overindulgence, it has g's to spare, (g, the funniest consonant. You want proof? Gnu.
Gneed I say more?) and it fills the gaps with i' - the quickest, wittiest,
lickspittiest, trippiest and lightesthearted of all the vowels.
One of the most tenacious conceptual threats to work, and to Captain Clock's
Hegemonic Time, is childhood itself. Children have a dogged, delicious disrespect
for work-time, punctuality, efficiency and for schooled uniform time. Their time
is an eternal-present. They live (given half a chance) pre-industrially, in tuttifrutti time, roundabout time, playtime; staunch defenders of the ludic revolution,
their hours are stretchy, ribboned, enchanted and wild: which is why adults want
to tame their time so ferociously, making them clock-trained, teaching them
conventions of time-measurement as if they were concrete fact. The school clock
is pointed to as the ultimate authority which even the Head obeys.
The exterior public clock and calendar of Hegemonic Time is white, clean,
regular, predictable, objective, linear, homogenous and male. I'm not. No woman
is. It's in the blood, the inner, personal, idiosyncratic, cyclical time; red, staining.
When I'm ovulating, I'm not the same as when I'm premenstrual. At one pole I
may well be cooperative, relaxed and nice. A good time to fill in forms and be
polite. At the other, I play with fire and know my wildest most feral emotions. I
will be intense, difficult, powerful and unpredictable. (Probably.) Pliny the Elder
wrote of menstruating women: Hardly can there be found a thing more
monstrous than is that flux and course of theirs.' Well, no. It's more majestic than
monstrous, more mysterious than disgusting and its burning, volcanic energy is
more immense than Pliny ever knew. That Pliny died because of just such a
burning volcano give me a certain mischievous pleasure. (But only when I'm
premenstrual.)
Menstruation gives women an experience of time which inherently subverts
Hegemonic Time. It is a critical, cuspish catch of time, time coloured and fluxy,
flukey. Masculine society seeks to deny or penalize this time, to mock or scorn or
(at best) ignore it. But this is when many women find their power, veering off at a
subversive angle from the objective, public line of time. Menstrual absenteeism,
deplored by many employers, is rightly relished by many women, for these days
are quintessentially her own and do not belong to another. Weird and
exceptional, her time of the month is radically opposed to uniform straight-line
neat time.
Patriarchy hates flows the literal flow of menstruation most viscerally, but hates
all things which femalely flow, and does so with moral fervour. What is perfect' is
unflowing, unchangeable, eternal and male. Aristotle thought the male body
perfect and the female imperfect. Leonardo da Vinci used the male body to show
its supposed mathematical perfection. Aristotle also thought the heavens eternal
and male and the earth changeful and female; the superior/inferior statuses not

lost on the Christian church. Said Virgil: Women are ever things of many
changing moods.
Change less ness is privileged over change ful ness. Jesus Christ, like suburbia,
the same yesterday, today and forever. I'm not. We're not. We're bloody well
changing all the bloody time.
Our time is different. All our times are different. How many months are there in a
year? Twelve according to the male public calendar, thirteen moon months,
though, for women. The word for menstruation in so many languages is
connected to words for moon. The moon, worldwide, represents women, female
time and female deities while the sun gods are male. Moreover the characteristics
of the sun and moon, nature's greatest time pieces, are attributed to men and to
women respectively and given very different status. The sun does not change,
whereas the moon changes completely, from full to new. The changeful attributes
accorded to women have negative connotations; we are capricious, fickle, chancy;
Lady Luck, we are notorious for changing our minds. Above all, we are cyclical,
we turn and turn, we are time changing and returning, and herein is, to me, one
of the key aspects of the sexual politics of time; it underlines everything, from the
washing up to the triumph of patriarchal religions.
Let's start with the charladies. (The char in charlady' is from Anglo Saxon word
meaning to turn'; repetitive cyclical and low status chores' are for women.)
Few tasks are more like the torture of Sisyphus than housework, with its endless
repetition: the clean becomes soiled, the soiled is made clean, over and over, day
after day,' Simone de Beauvoir commented. Or: I hate housework! You make the
beds, you do the dishes and six months later you have to start all over again' as
Joan Rivers put it. Traditional women's work is cyclic, it must be done over and
over again. and it reveals a genderised attitude to time; what is cyclical, though it
keep life itself flowing, is devalued.
Leave the washing up for a further horizon. For hunter-gatherers or early
agricultural peoples, Time was seen as cyclical, moving in the seasons of the year,
visible in the cycles of the moon. This idea of Time as a cycle is by far the
commonest shape. The Native American Hopi people pictured time as a wheel. In
Hindu thought, time moves in the unimaginably long cycles of the Kalpas. The
modern western view of time, however, is linear, and one expert on the
philosophy of time says this is highly unusual, one of the peculiar characteristics
of the modern world.'
The image of linear time was forged by the great patriarchal religions, in
particular Judaeo-Christianity. St Augustine argued that the history of the
universe is single, irreversible, rectilinear'. Rebirth or reincarnation, with its
implied cyclic time, was overruled by the linear descent of father-son genealogies
(Salma begat Boaz and Boaz begat Obed and Obed begat Jesse.)
This is the nub of it: religions that saw time as linear phallic in shape were

those that were patriarchal phallic in character. Ever since, time has been
organised on male lines, rather than in female cycles
................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................
The Alcherringa or Dreamtime of Aboriginal Australians is perhaps the most
extraordinary of all ideas of time. To western eyes, the Dreamtime looks at first
sight like the past' but it isn't. Subtle, ambiguous and diffuse, the Dreamtime is
past, present and future merged, the Aboriginal now' porous to the Dreamtime
forever' - the past and the future are like permeable membranes surrounding the
present.
In the western view, the past can be discussed as an abstraction. All over the
world, indigenous peoples see the past as inextricably identified with and
embedded in the land. The Harakmbut people in the Peruvian Amazon say,
Without the knowledge of history, the land has no meaning and without the land
neither the Harakmbut history nor the culture has any meaning.' In Australia, the
Aboriginal Ancestors live' in spite of death: they disappeared, but did not die.
They did not become nothing' but became the country'. The past is immanent in
the land. History,' says Aboriginal Australian writer Herb Wharton, comes up
from the land.'
Perhaps the most chasmic difference between the two is that the western view
sees the past as dead', while the indigenous view sees the past as profoundly
alive'. The land is animated with the past, and the past still exists a different
modality of time and one which has a reciprocal relationship with the present.
Singing the stories of the Ancestors of the Dreamtime is not memory of time past,
but participation in a diffuse, metaphoric depth of time-present. The Dreamtime
sustains the present through djang', the spiritual energy in the land, while the
present, in turn, sustains the Dreamtime through myth and ritual. The
indigenous view of the past, then, is different from the western in representation,
in shape, character, significance and in vitality . But there's more. The inherently
differing notions of the past have direct and contemporary political
consequences. If the underground past is a source of sacred energy to indigenous
people, it is merely a source of literal energy, fuel, to the western mind. Mining
companies devastate indigenous land all over the world.
Gutenberg's printing press printed calendars before bibles; Hegemonic Time was
mass-produced to go global. In one of the most pernicious lies in history, the
Christian calendar and the clock of capitalism insisted that they represented time
itself. The Christian calendar, (abstract, numerical and inherently political) has
been used to deny the plurality of calendars across the world. Time itself,
sensuous, poetic and diverse, is not found in it.
Amongst many peoples, Time' is a matter of timing . It involves spontaneity
rather than scheduling, sensitivity to a quality of time. Unclockable. The San
Bushmen of the Kalahari do not plan when to hunt, but rather wait for the

moment to be lucky', reading and assessing animal patterns, looking for the
right' time. Timing for many indigenous peoples, for example, the Ilongot of the
Philippines, is variable and indeterminate and unpredictable. Time is a subtle
element where creativity and improvisation, flexibility, fluidity and
responsiveness can flourish. People's responses to timing issues are subtle and
graceful. But the dominant culture, far from respecting these socially graceful
ideas of time, chooses to refer disparagingly to being on Mexican time,' on Maori
time' on Indian time.'
What subverts the dead hand of the dominant clock? Life itself. The elastic,
chancy, sensitive times chosen for hunting depend on living things: how the
living moment smells. There is a biodiversity of time' imaged in cultures around
the world, time as a lived process of nature. There is a scent-calendar in the
Andaman forests, star-diaries for the Kiwi peoples of New Guinea and Aboriginal
Australians who begin the cultivation season when the Pleiades appear. In
Rajasthan a moment of evening is called cattle-dust time', the Native American
Lakota people have the Moon of the Snowblind.' One indigenous tribe in
Madagascar refers to a moment as in the frying of a locust'. The English language
still remembers time intrinsically connected to nature, doing something in two
shakes of a lamb's tail' or the (arbitrary and sadly obsolete) phrase pissing-while'.
For nature shimmers with time; and interestingly, many areas rich in myth and
indigenous history are shown to be places of high biodiversity; living history, life
at its liveliest. Both past and present equally vivacious, in a vital land.
The clock is not a synonym for time. It is, if anything, the opposite of time. The
leaders of the Zapatistas insisted their time was not the time of the Westernized
Mexican government. The Zapatistas took their orders from the peasants, and
this was a very slow and unschedulable process. We use time, not the clock. That
is what the government doesn't understand.' Subcomandante Marcos, in March
2001 in Mexico City spoke to thousands: Tlahuica . We walk time... Zoque . We
carry much time in our hands. Raramuri . Here the dark light, time and feeling.'
For time is not found in dead clocks and inert calendars, time is not money but is
life itself: in ocean tides and the blood in the womb, in every self-respecting
player, in the land, in every spirited protest for diversity and every refusal to let
another enslave your time, in the effervescent gusto of carnival; life revelling in
rebellion against the clock.
a sideways look at time

Jay Griffiths
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Jay Griffiths
Born

1965
Manchester, England

Occupation

Writer

Genres

Fiction, Non-fiction

Notable
work(s)

Wild: An Elemental Journey

Pip Pip: A Sideways Look at
Time
A Love Letter from a Stray
Moon
www.jaygriffiths.com

Jay Griffiths (born 1965 in Manchester) is an award-winning British writer

and author of Wild: An Elemental Journey, Pip Pip: A Sideways Look at
Time, Anarchipelago and A Love Letter from a Stray Moon.[1]
Contents [hide]
%

1 Biography

2 Works
1

2.1 Wild: An
Elemental Journey

2.2 Reviews

2.3 Pip Pip: A

Sideways Look at Time

4
5

2.4 Reviews
2.5 A Love
Letter from a Stray Moon

3 Awards

4 Notes

[edit]

Biography

Jay Griffiths was born in Manchester, England and grew up near Hampton
Court on the outskirts of London. [2] She once lived in a shed in Dial
House, on the outskirts of Epping Forest, and now lives in Mid Wales.[3]
After studies in English Literature at Oxford University, she traveled around
the world visiting indigenous communities and learning from them. Her
books are based on her learning and her travels.[4] Griffiths has appeared
in the London Review of Books and has contributed to programmes on
BBC Radio 4 and the World Service. Her columns have appeared in The
Guardian and The Ecologist, and since 2009 she has been a columnist for
Orion magazine.[5]
Jay Griffiths has also been a contributor at many cultural events including
the Adelaide Festival of Ideas,[6] the More Than Us conference with David
Abram and Scottish artists Dalziel + Scullion;[7] the Royal Academy with
artists Ackroyd & Harvey;[8] the International Sacred Arts Festival in Delhi
[9] and has been a part of the popular Radiolab podcasts. She has also
been a supporter of the Aluna project, for which she gave a talk in the
Hayward Gallery in March 2007.[10]
[edit]

Works
[edit]

Wild: An Elemental Journey

Wild is Jay Griffiths' second book. It describes an odyssey to wildernesses
of earth, ice, water, air and fire, exploring the connection between human
society and wild lands. It is also a journey into wild mind, as Griffiths
explores the words and meanings which shape our ideas and experience
of our own wildness, the wildness of the human spirit.[11] The book
includes the description of drinking ayahuasca with shamans in the
Amazon, as a treatment for depression, and discusses shamanism,
nomadism and freedom. Various chapters describe journeys to the Arctic,
to Australia and to the freedom fighters of West Papua.[4]
Wild is quoted on KT Tunstall's album Tiger Suit and has been nominated

by KT Tunstall as her number one favorite book.[12] The Strokes bassist

Nikolai Fraiture reads from Wild during their documentary for their album
Angles.[13]
In April 2011, Radiohead guitarist Ed O'Brien posted a recommendation of
Wild on the band's blog, stating that it is "an astonishing piece of writing "
and that "it was exactly what I needed to read".[14]
[edit]

Reviews
On publication in the UK, Wild was praised widely in major newspapers
and described as part travelogue, part call to arms and wholly original... A
vital, unique and uncategorisable celebration of the spirit of life.[15] The
Independent referred to it as remarkable and stupendous[16] while The
Guardian wrote: Jay Griffiths is a five-star, card-carrying member of the
hellfire club... a strange, utterly compelling book, Wild is easily the best,
most rewarding travel book that I have read in the last decade. [17] For The
Sunday Times Anthony Sattin wrote There is no getting away from the
book's brilliance[18] and The Independent on Sunday referred to Wild "as a
song of delight, and a cry of warning, poetic, erudite and insistent a
restless, unstintingly generous performance..."[19] and The Times referred
to "kaleidoscopic narrative", "exhilarating prose".[20] Wild was successful in
Australia where it received positive reviews in the Sydney Morning Herald,
described by Bruce Elder as "The best book I read all year".[21] During an
interview about the experiences discussed in Wild, Griffiths said, "To my
mind, at worst, the West operates a kind of intellectual apartheid the
idea that our way of thinking is the only one. Really, there are more ways of
living and thinking than we could ever imagine." [22]
[edit]

Pip Pip: A Sideways Look at Time

Jay Griffiths' first book, it explores Time as a political subject, showing how
indigenous cultures have diverse ways of considering time (past, present
and future) but illustrating how one, single, European time is colonizing all
these varieties of time. It is a manifesto for cyclical time and for the times of

nature, of carnival, of play: and argues that womens time is different from
mens.[23]
[edit]

Reviews
The book was described by The Independent as A wonderful, delightfully
humorous polemic against everything thats wrong with the way we deal
with time today.[24] The New Scientist described it as A whirl of a book.
Any page will get you hooked[25] and The New Internationalist called it:
Splendid, extraordinarily wide-ranging, emphasizing the political import of
the subject. Impressive, absorbing and radical, provocative, impassioned,
often outrageously witty.[26]
[edit]

A Love Letter from a Stray Moon

This short novel is published by Text Publishing. It is a novel partly based
on the life of Frida Kahlo.
[edit]

Awards
Pip Pip: A Sideways Look at Time won the Barnes & Noble Discover Award
for the best new non-fiction writer in the USA, 2003[27][broken citation]. Jay
Griffiths has produced nothing short of an original opening of the human
mind Her book is cleverness in the service of genius. (Citation on
winning the Barnes and Noble Discover award).[28]
Wild won the inaugural Orion Book Award for 2007,[29] was shortlisted for
the Orwell Prize in 2008 and the Spread The Word World Book Day Award
2009.
Jay Griffiths
griffiths, jay a sideways look at time-we worship the dog

Head of Brahma in sandstone from the Phnom Bok in

Bakheng style now in Guimet Museum in Paris.
Head of Vishnu in sandstone from the Phnom Bok in Bakheng
style now in Guimet Museum in Paris.
Head of Shiva in sandstone from the Phnom Bok in Bakheng
style now in Guimet Museum in Paris of the trimurti or
trimvarite of Hindu pantheon
Phnom Bok (Khmer: ) is a hill in the northeast

of Eastern Baray in Cambodia, with a prasat (temple) of the

same name built on it. It is one of the "trilogies of
mountains", each of which has a temple with similar layout.
The creation of the temple is credited to the reign of
Yasovarman I (889910) between 9th and 10th centuries;
established after he moved his capital to Angkor and named
it Yasodharapura. The two other sister temples, named after
the contiguous hills, are the Phnom Bakheng and Phnom
Krom.[1][2]
The site of the three hills was chosen by Yashovarman I
along with the Eastern Baray (where only the base of the
central shrine is surviving). In the 10th century, these
shrines had high religious value during the Angkorian rule. [3]
The temples called as part of an "architectural triad" brought
about an element of experimentation in architectural style in
the Angkorian period.[4] From the astronomical references
planned for thee temples, out of the four noted alignments
three, namely, equinox and winter and Solar Solstices could

be observed from inside the western entrance of Phnom Bok

hill temple, which is also known for the triple sanctuary
dedicated to the Trimurti.

Geography
Map
Phnom Bok is the third natural hill site. [5] Its elevation is 221
metres (725 ft).[3] The hill is about 25 kilometres (16 mi)
northeast of Siem Reap. It is approached from the road to
Banteay Srei. An eastbound road leads to Banteay Samre for
another 6 kilometres (3.7 mi) from whence the hill is
approached through 635 wide steps leading to the top where
the Phnom Bok temple is situated. From the top of this
mountain, though the temple is seen mostly in ruins, the
panoramic vistas seen all round are of the Tonle Sap Lake,
the Phnom Kulen to the north and vast plains of rice fields to
the south.[1][2][6] Like Phnom Krom, Phnom Bok consists of
sandstone which has a relatively high magnetic
susceptibility.[7]

History
Yasovarman I, son of Indravarman I (his capital was at
Hariharalaya), shifted the capital to Yashodarapura (the first
Angkor capital meaning "The City That Bears Glory" [8]). The
temples that he built, apart from Phnom Bok in 910 AD
consisted of the Loley (893 AD), Pra Vihear (893 AD), Phnom
Bakheng, the Royal temple (900 AD) and Phnom Khrom (910
AD).[1][9] However, Yashovarman did not choose Phnom Bok

as the capital city, near the city of Hariharalaya, as he

considered it unsuitable due to its "awkward and too high" a
location to mark as the centre of the city. He did not choose
Phnom Krom hill either, as he considered it too close to the
Tonle Sap Lake. Eventually, Phnom Bakhen of the triumvirate
of hills was chosen as the capital city due its low height and
large expanse of land available to establish a capital city. His
objective was also to build a temple for housing a linga,
which surpassed his fathers Indresvara and named it as
Yashodaresvara. He also named his capital as
Yashodarapura, which became the first capital city of Angkor.
He, however, installed the Trimurtis in the temples on the
other two hills of Phnom Bok and Phnom Krom. [10] Statues of
the Hindu Trimurti were found at both Phnom Bok and Phnom
Krom.[11]

Architecture
Prasat Phnom Bok, rectangular in shape and attributed to
the reign of Yasovarman I, is similar in design to the Phnom
Krom prasat. However, while the Phnom Krom central tower
is higher than the other two flanking towers, the Phnom Bok
prasat has three identical sanctum towers in a row on a
single terrace.[3][12][13]
The temple is an Angkor monument. It is dedicated to the
Trimurti of the Hindu pantheon: the Brahma, Vishnu and
Maheshwara or Shiva. It was built in Bakheng style (893
927) and designed with individual sanctums, which have
door openings to the east and west. These are raised on a

foundation with a plinth made of laterite stone. Frontons of

Bakheng and Phnom Bok are said to "represent heads of the
entire thirty-three deities of the Hindu pantheon. [11] There is
said to be a "fine example of the head of Shiva in the
Chandrasekhara form with the moon prominent on his locks"
at the temple.[14] The summer solstice occurring over Phnom
Bok hill temple, which had the images of Trimurtis defied in
it, can be observed from the temples western entrance. [10]
[15][16]

Angkor monuments built in Angkor period architecture in

Bakheng style[12] were made of sandstone and laterite but
brickwork was also adopted. Laterite has been used for the
walls, platforms and pavements. Greyish yellow sandstone
was the main stonework used in the temples. [12]
Though the temple is in a good condition, there is over
growth of two large frangipani (Plumeria) trees over the
ruined temple towers. It is said that when the flowers bloom
on these trees, the appearance of "some sort of extravagant
haircut" is discerned.[1]
Head of Brahma in sandstone from the Phnom Bok in Bakheng style
now in Guimet Museum in Paris

The third eye (also known as the inner eye) is a mystical

and esoteric concept referring to a speculative invisible eye
which provides perception beyond ordinary sight. [1] In
certain dharmic spiritual traditions such as Hinduism, the
third eye refers to the ajna, or brow, chakra.[2] In Theosophy
it is related to the pineal gland.[3] The third eye refers to the

gate that leads to inner realms and spaces of higher

consciousness. In New Age spirituality, the third eye often
symbolizes a state of enlightenment or the evocation of
mental images having deeply personal spiritual or
psychological significance. The third eye is often associated
with religious visions, clairvoyance, the ability to observe
chakras and auras,[4]precognition, and out-of-body
experiences. People who are claimed to have the capacity to
utilize their third eyes are sometimes known as seers.

Characteristics
In some traditions as Hinduism the third eye is said to be
located around the middle of the forehead, slightly above the
junction of the eyebrows. In other traditions, as in
Theosophy, it is believed to be connected with the pineal
gland. According to this theory, humans had in far ancient
times an actual third eye in the back of the head with a
physical and spiritual function. Over time, as humans
evolved, this eye atrophied and sunk into what today is
known as the pineal gland.[3] Dr. Rick Strassman has
controversially suggested that the pineal gland, which
maintains light sensitivity, is responsible for the production
and release of DMT (dimethyltryptamine), a psychedelic drug
which he believes to be excreted in large quantities at the
moments of birth and death.[5]

In religion
Hindu tradition associates the third eye with the sahasrara,

or crown, chakra.[1] Also, in the Tantra yoga system it is

associated with the sound Om, and is known as the Ajna
chakra. In Tantra, the crown is believed to be the Shivatic
lotus of ten thousand petals.[citation needed]
In Taoism and many traditional Chinese religious sects such
as Chan (a cousin to the Zen school), "third eye training"
involves focusing attention on the point between the
eyebrows with the eyes closed, and while the body is in
various qigong postures. The goal of this training is to allow
students to tune in to the correct "vibration" of the universe
and gain a solid foundation on which to reach more
advanced meditation levels. Taoism teaches that the third
eye, also called the mind's eye, is situated between the two
physical eyes, and expands up to the middle of the forehead
when opened. Taoism claims that the third eye is one of the
main energy centers of the body located at the sixth chakra,
forming a part of the main meridian, the line separating left
and right hemispheres of the body.[6]
According to the Christian teaching of Father Richard Rohr,
the concept of the third eye is a metaphor for non-dualistic
thinking; the way the mystics see. In Rhohr's concept,
mystics employ the first eye (sensory input such as sight)
and the second eye (the eye of reason, meditation, and
reflection), "but they know not to confuse knowledge with
depth, or mere correct information with the transformation of
consciousness itself. The mystical gaze builds upon the first
two eyesand yet goes further." Rohr refers to this level of

awareness as "having the mind of Christ". [7]

According to the neo-gnostic teachings of Samael Aun Weor,
the third eye is referenced symbolically and functionally
several times in the Book of Revelation 3:7-13, a work which,
as a whole, he believes describes Kundalini and its
progression upwards through three and a half turns and
seven chakras. This interpretation equates the third eye with
the sixth of the seven churches of Asia detailed therein, the
Church of Philadelphia.[8]
Adherents of Theosophy H.P. Blavatsky[9] have suggested
that the third eye is in fact the partially dormant pineal
gland, which resides between the two hemispheres of the
brain. Various types of lower vertebrates, such as reptiles
and amphibians, can actually sense light via a third parietal
eyea structure associated with the pineal glandwhich
serves to regulate their circadian rhythms, and for
navigation, as it can sense the polarization of light. C.W.
Leadbeater claimed that by extending an "etheric tube" from
the third eye, it is possible to develop microscopic and
telescopic vision.[4] It has been asserted by Stephen Phillips
that the third eye's microscopic vision is capable of
observing objects as small as quarks.[10]
According to Max Heindel's Rosicrucian writings, called
Western Wisdom Teachings, the third eye is localized in the
pituitary body and the pineal gland. It was said that in the far
past, when man was in touch with the inner worlds, these

organs were his means of ingress thereto. [citation needed]

Other interpretations
The third eye is a concept found in many meditation schools
and arts, such as in yoga, qigong, Aikido.
In the esoteric discipline of Kabbalah, the Ajna chakra is
attributed to the sphere of Hokhmah,[11] or Wisdom,
although others regard the third eye as corresponding to the
non-emanated sephirah of da'ath (knowledge).

See also
%

Ajna chakra

Parietal eye

Pineal gland

Third eye
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Third eye (disambiguation).
A Cambodian Shiva head showing a third eye.

The third eye (also known as the inner eye) is a mystical and esoteric
concept referring to a speculative invisible eye which provides perception
beyond ordinary sight.[1] In certain dharmic spiritual traditions such as
Hinduism, the third eye refers to the ajna, or brow, chakra.[2] In Theosophy
it is related to the pineal gland.[3] The third eye refers to the gate that leads
to inner realms and spaces of higher consciousness. In New Age

spirituality, the third eye often symbolizes a state of enlightenment or the

evocation of mental images having deeply personal spiritual or
psychological significance. The third eye is often associated with religious
visions, clairvoyance, the ability to observe chakras and auras,[4]
precognition, and out-of-body experiences. People who are claimed to
have the capacity to utilize their third eyes are sometimes known as seers.
Contents [hide]
%

1
Characteristics

2
In religion

3
Other
interpretations

4
See also

5
References
1
5.1
Citation
s
2
5.2
Bibliogr
aphy

[edit]

Characteristics
In some traditions as Hinduism the third eye is supposedly located around
the middle of the forehead, slightly above the junction of the eyebrows. In
other traditions, as in Theosophy, it is believed to be connected with the

pineal gland. According to this theory, humans had in far ancient times an
actual third eye in the back of the head with a physical and spiritual
function. Over time, as humans evolved, this eye atrophied and sunk into
what today is known as the pineal gland.[3] Dr. Rick Strassman has
controversially suggested that the pineal gland, which maintains light
sensitivity, is responsible for the production and release of DMT
(dimethyltryptamine), a psychedelic drug which he believes to be excreted
in large quantities at the moments of birth and death.[5]
[edit]

In religion
Hindu tradition associates the third eye with the sahasrara, or crown,
chakra.[1] Also, in the Tantra yoga system it is associated with the sound
Om, and is known as the Ajna chakra. In Tantra, the crown is believed to
be the Shivatic lotus of ten thousand petals.[citation needed]
In Taoism and many traditional Chinese religious sects such as Chan (a
cousin to the Zen school), "third eye training" involves focusing attention on
the point between the eyebrows with the eyes closed, and while the body is
in various qigong postures. The goal of this training is to allow students to
tune in to the correct "vibration" of the universe and gain a solid foundation
on which to reach more advanced meditation levels. Taoism teaches that
the third eye, also called the mind's eye, is situated between the two
physical eyes, and expands up to the middle of the forehead when opened.
Taoism claims that the third eye is one of the main energy centers of the
body located at the sixth chakra, forming a part of the main meridian, the
line separating left and right hemispheres of the body.[6]
According to the Christian teaching of Father Richard Rohr, the concept of
the third eye is a metaphor for non-dualistic thinking; the way the mystics
see. In Rhohr's concept, mystics employ the first eye (sensory input such
as sight) and the second eye (the eye of reason, meditation, and
reflection), "but they know not to confuse knowledge with depth, or mere
correct information with the transformation of consciousness itself. The
mystical gaze builds upon the first two eyesand yet goes further." Rohr

refers to this level of awareness as "having the mind of Christ".[7]

According to the neo-gnostic teachings of Samael Aun Weor, the third eye
is referenced symbolically and functionally several times in the Book of
Revelation 3:7-13, a work which, as a whole, he believes describes
Kundalini and its progression upwards through three and a half turns and
seven chakras. This interpretation equates the third eye with the sixth of
the seven churches of Asia detailed therein, the Church of Philadelphia.[8]
Adherents of Theosophy H.P. Blavatsky[9] have suggested that the third
eye is in fact the partially dormant pineal gland, which resides between the
two hemispheres of the brain. Various types of lower vertebrates, such as
reptiles and amphibians, can actually sense light via a third parietal eyea
structure associated with the pineal glandwhich serves to regulate their
circadian rhythms, and for navigation, as it can sense the polarization of
light. C.W. Leadbeater claimed that by extending an "etheric tube" from the
third eye, it is possible to develop microscopic and telescopic vision.[4] It
has been asserted by Stephen Phillips that the third eye's microscopic
vision is capable of observing objects as small as quarks.[10]
According to Max Heindel's Rosicrucian writings, called Western Wisdom
Teachings, the third eye is localized in the pituitary body and the pineal
gland. It was said that in the far past, when man was in touch with the inner
worlds, these organs were his means of ingress thereto.[citation needed]
[edit]

Other interpretations
The third eye is a concept found in many meditation schools and arts, such
as in yoga, qigong, Aikido.
In the esoteric discipline of Kabbalah, the Ajna chakra is attributed to the
sphere of Chokmah,[11] or Wisdom, although others regard the third eye as
corresponding to the non-emanated sephirah of da'ath (knowledge).
[edit]

See also

Ajna chakra

Parietal eye

Pineal gland
third eye

Ur
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the ancient city-state in Mesopotamia. For other uses,
see Ur (disambiguation).

Ur
( Arabic)
The ruins of Ur, with the Ziggurat of Ur visible in the background

Shown within Iraq

Location

Tell el-Muqayyar, Dhi Qar Province, Iraq

Region

Mesopotamia

Coordinates

305745N 460611E
Coordinates: 305745N 460611E

Type

Settlement
This article contains special
characters. Without proper rendering
support, you may see question marks,
boxes, or other symbols.

Ur (Sumerian: Urim;[1] Sumerian Cuneiform: ??? URIM2KI or ??? URIM5KI;

[2] Akkadian: Uru;[3] Arabic: )was an important Sumerian city-state in

ancient Mesopotamia located at the site of modern Tell el-Muqayyar

(Arabic: ) in Iraq's Dhi Qar Governorate.[4] Once a coastal city near

the mouth of the Euphrates on the Persian Gulf, Ur is now well inland,
south of the Euphrates on its right bank, 16 kilometres (9.9 mi) from
Nasiriyah.[5]
The city dates from the Ubaid period circa 3800 BC, and is recorded in
written history as a City State from the 26th century BC, its first recorded
king being Mesh-Ane-pada. The city's patron deity was Nanna (in Akkadian
Sin), the Sumerian and Akkadian (Assyrian-Babylonian) moon god, and
the name of the city is in origin derived from the god's name, URIM2KI being
the classical Sumerian spelling of LAK-32.UNUGKI, literally "the abode
(UNUG) of Nanna (LAK-32)".[6]
The site is marked by the ruins of the Ziggurat of Ur, which contained the
shrine of Nanna, excavated in the 1930s. The temple was built in the 21st
century BC (short chronology), during the reign of Ur-Nammu and was
reconstructed in the 6th century BC by Nabonidus, the Assyrian born last
king of Babylon. The ruins cover an area of 1,200 metres (3,900 ft)
northwest to southeast by 800 metres (2,600 ft) northeast to southwest and
rise up to about 20 metres (66 ft) above the present plain level.[7]
Contents [hide]
%

1 History
1

1.1 Early history

1
2

1.1.1 Prehistory
1.1.2 Third
millennium BC (Early Bronze Age)

1.2 Later Bronze Age

1.3 Iron Age

2 Biblical Ur
1

2.1 Ur in Islamic tradition

3 Archaeology

3.1 Archaeological remains

3.2 Preservation

4 See also

5 Notes

6 References

7 External links

[edit]

History
This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No
cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this section if you can.
(February 2011)

[edit]

Early history
[edit]

Prehistory
Archaeologists have discovered evidence of an early occupation at Ur
during the Ubaid period. These early levels were sealed off with a sterile
deposit that was interpreted by excavators of the 1920s as evidence for the
Great Flood of the book of Genesis and Epic of Gilgamesh . It is now
understood that the South Mesopotamian plain was exposed to regular
floods from the Euphrates and the Tigris, with heavy erosion from water
and wind, which may have given rise to the Mesopotamian and derivative
Biblical Great Flood beliefs.[8] The further occupation of Ur only becomes
clear during its emergence in the third millennium BC (although it must
already have been a growing urban center during the fourth millennium).
The third millennium BC is generally described as the Early Bronze Age of
Mesopotamia, which ends approximately after the demise of the Third
Dynasty of Ur in the 21st century BC.
[edit]

Third millennium BC (Early Bronze Age)

Mesopotamia in the 3rd millennium BC.

There are two main sources which inform scholars about the importance of
Ur during the Early Bronze Age. The first is a large body of cuneiform

documents, mostly from the empire of the so-called Third Dynasty of Ur at

the very end of the third millennium. This was the most centralized
bureaucratic state the world had yet known. Concerning the earlier
centuries, the Sumerian King List provides a tentative political history of
ancient Sumer.
The second source of information is archaeological work in modern Iraq.
Although the early centuries (first half of the third millennium and earlier)
are still poorly understood, the archaeological discoveries have shown
unequivocally that Ur was a major urban center on the Mesopotamian
plain. Especially the discovery of the Royal Tombs have confirmed its
splendour. These tombs, which date to the Early Dynastic IIIa period
(approximately in the 25th or 24th century BC), contained immense
amounts of luxury items made out of precious metals, and semi-precious
stones all of which would have had to been imported from long distances
(Iran, Afghanistan, India, Asia Minor, the Persian Gulf).[7] This up to then
unparalleled wealth is a testimony of Ur's economic importance during the
Early Bronze Age.[9]
Archaeological research of the region has also contributed greatly to our
understanding of the landscape and long-distance interactions that took
place during these ancient times. We know that Ur was the most important
port on the Persian Gulf, which extended much further inland than it does
today. All the wealth which came to Mesopotamia by sea had to pass
through Ur.[citation needed]
So far evidence for the earliest periods of the Early Bronze Age in
Mesopotamia is very limited. Mesh-Ane-pada is the first king mentioned in
the Sumerian King List, and appears to have lived in the 26th century BC.
That Ur was an important urban centre already then seems to be indicated
by a type of cylinder seal called the City Seals. These seals contain a set
of proto-cuneiform signs which appear to be writings or symbols of the
name of city-states in ancient Sumer. Many of these seals were found in
Ur, and the name of Ur is prominent on them.[10]

Empire of the Third Dynasty of Ur

The third dynasty was established when the king Ur-Nammu came to
power, ruling between ca. 2047 BC and 2030 BC. During his rule, temples,
including the ziggurat, were built, and agriculture was improved through
irrigation. His code of laws, the Code of Ur-Nammu (a fragment was
identified in Istanbul in 1952) is one of the oldest such documents known,
preceding the code of Hammurabi by 300 years. He and his successor
Shulgi were both deified during their reigns, and after his death he
continued as a hero-figure: one of the surviving works of Sumerian
literature describes the death of Ur-Nammu and his journey to the
underworld.[11] About that time, the houses in the city were two-storied
villas with 13 or 14 rooms, with plastered interior walls.[12][dubious discuss]
Ur-Nammu was succeeded by Shulgi, the greatest king of the Third
Dynasty of Ur who solidified the hegemony of Ur and reformed the empire
into a highly centralized bureaucratic state. Shulgi ruled for a long time (at
least 42 years) and deified himself halfway through his rule.[citation needed]
The Ur empire continued through the reigns of three more kings with
Semitic Akkadian names,[8] Amar-Sin, Shu-Sin, and Ibbi-Sin. It fell around
1940 BC to the Elamites in the 24th regnal year of Ibbi-Sin, an event
commemorated by the Lament for Ur.[13][14]
According to one estimate, Ur was the largest city in the world from c. 2030
to 1980 BC. Its population was approximately 65,000.[15]
2011 research indicates that the area was struck by drought conditions
from 2200-2000 BCE. The population dropped by 93%. Ur was sacked
twice by nomads during this time. At the end of this drought use of the
Sumerian language died out.[16]
[edit]

Later Bronze Age

The city of Ur lost its political power after the demise of the Third Dynasty
of Ur. Nevertheless its important position which kept on providing access to
the Persian Gulf ensured the ongoing economical importance of the city
during the second millennium BC. The splendour of the city, the might of

the empire, the greatness of king Shulgi, and undoubtedly the efficient
propaganda of the state endured throughout Mesopotamian history. Shulgi
was a well known historical figure for at least another two thousand years,
while historical narratives of the Mesopotamian societies of Assyria and
Babylonia kept names, events, and mythologies in remembrance. The city
came to be ruled by Babylon which rose to prominence in southern
Mesopotamia in the 18th century BC. It later became a part of the Dynasty
of the Sealand after the death of the Babylonian emperor Hammurabi, and
was reconquered into Babylonia by the Kassites in the 16th century BC.
[edit]

Iron Age
The city, along with the rest of southern Mesopotamia and much of the
Near East, Asia Minor, North Africa and southern Caucasus, fell to the
north Mesopotamian Assyrian Empire from the 10th to late 7th centuries
BC. From the end of the 7th century BC Ur was ruled by the so-called
Chaldean Dynasty of Babylon. In the 6th century BC there was new
construction in Ur under the rule of Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon. The last
Babylonian king, Nabonidus (who was Assyrian born, and not a Chaldean),
improved the ziggurat. However the city started to decline from around 550
BC and was no longer inhabited after about 500 BC by which time
Babylonia had fallen to the Persian Achaemenid Empire.[8] The demise of
Ur was perhaps owing to drought, changing river patterns, and the silting of
the outlet to the Persian Gulf.
[edit]

Biblical Ur
Main article: Ur Kasdim
Ur is considered by many to be the city of Ur Kasdim mentioned in the
) as the birthplace of the Hebrew
Book of Genesis (Biblical Hebrew (
patriarch Abram (Abraham; Aramaic: Oraham, Arabic: Ibrahim),
traditionally believed to be sometime in the 2nd millennium BC.
Ur is mentioned four times in the Torah or Old Testament, with the

distinction "of the Kasdim/Kasdin"traditionally rendered in English as "Ur

of the Chaldees". The Chaldeans were already settled in the vicinity by
around 850 BC, but were not the rulers of Ur until the late 7th century BC.
The name is found in Genesis 11:28, Genesis 11:31, and Genesis 15:7. In
Nehemiah 9:7, a single passage mentioning Ur is a paraphrase of
Genesis. (Nehemiah 9:7)
The Book of Jubilees states that Ur was founded in 1688 Anno Mundi (year
of the world) by 'Ur son of Kesed, presumably the offspring of Arphaxad,
adding that in this same year wars began on Earth.
"And 'Ur, the son of Kesed, built the city of 'Ara of the Chaldees, and called
its name after his own name and the name of his father." (i.e., Ur Kasdim)
(Jubilees 11:3).
[edit]

Ur in Islamic tradition
According to Islamic texts, the prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) was thrown into
the fire here. In the story, the temperature of the fire of Nimrod was
reduced by God, saving the life of Ibrahim. While the Qur'an does not
mention the king's name, Muslim commentators have assigned Nimrod as
the king based on Jewish sources, namely the Book of Jasher (11:1 and
12:6).[17]
[edit]

Archaeology
In 1625, the site was visited by Pietro della Valle, who recorded the
presence of ancient bricks stamped with strange symbols, cemented
together with bitumen, as well as inscribed pieces of black marble that
appeared to be seals.
The site was first excavated in 1853 and 1854 by John George Taylor,
British vice consul at Basra from 1851-1859.[18][19][20] He worked on
behalf of the British Museum. He had been instructed to do so by the
Foreign Office. Taylor found clay cylinders in the four corners of the top
stage of the ziggurat which bore an inscription of Nabonidus (Nabuna`id),

the last king of Babylon (539 BC), closing with a prayer for his son Belsharuzur (Bel-arra-Uzur), the Belshazzar of the Book of Daniel. Evidence was
found of prior restorations of the ziggurat by Ishme-Dagan of Isin and ShuSin of Ur, and by Kurigalzu, a Kassite king of Babylon in the 14th century
BCE. Nebuchadnezzar also claims to have rebuilt the temple. Taylor further
excavated an interesting Babylonian building, not far from the temple, part
of an ancient Babylonian necropolis. All about the city he found abundant
remains of burials of later periods. Apparently, in later times, owing to its
sanctity, Ur became a favorite place of sepulchres, so that even after it had
ceased to be inhabited, it continued to be used as a necropolis.
Typical of the era, his evacuations destroyed information and exposed the
tell. Natives used the now loosened 4000 year old bricks and tile for
construction for the next 75 years while the site lay unexplored.[21][dubious
discuss]

After Taylor's time the site was visited by numerous travelers, almost all of
whom have found ancient Babylonian remains, inscribed stones and the
like, lying upon the surface. The site was considered rich in remains, and
relatively easy to explore. After some soundings were made in 1918 by
Reginald Campbell Thompson, H. R. Hill worked the site for one season for
the British Museum in 1919, laying the groundwork for more extensive
efforts to follow.[22][23]
Excavations from 1922 to 1934 were funded by the British Museum and the
University of Pennsylvania and led by the archaeologist Sir Charles
Leonard Woolley.[24][25][26] A total of about 1,850 burials were uncovered,
including 16 that were described as "royal tombs" containing many
valuable artifacts, including the Standard of Ur. Most of the royal tombs
were dated to about 2600 BC. The finds included the unlooted tomb of a
queen thought to be Queen Puabi[27]the name is known from a cylinder
seal found in the tomb, although there were two other different and
unnamed seals found in the tomb. Many other people had been buried with
her, in a form of human sacrifice. Near the ziggurat were uncovered the
temple E-nun-mah and buildings E-dub-lal-mah (built for a king), E-gi-par
(residence of the high priestess) and E-hur-sag (a temple building).

Outside the temple area, many houses used in everyday life were found.
Excavations were also made below the royal tombs layer: a 3.5-metre
(11 ft)-thick layer of alluvial clay covered the remains of earlier habitation,
including pottery from the Ubaid period, the first stage of settlement in
southern Mesopotamia. Woolley later wrote many articles and books about
the discoveries.[28] One of Woolley's assistants on the site was the
archaeologist Max Mallowan. The discoveries at the site reached the
headlines in mainstream media in the world with the discoveries of the
Royal Tombs. As a result the ruins of the ancient city attracted many
visitors. One of these visitors was the already famous Agatha Christie who
as a result of this visit became the wife of Max Mallowan.
Most of the treasures excavated at Ur are in the British Museum and the
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. At
the UPenn Museum the exhibition Iraq's Ancient Past,[29] which includes
many of the most famous pieces from the Royal Tombs, opened to visitors
in late Spring 2011. Previously, the Penn Museum had sent many of its
best pieces from Ur on tour in an exhibition called "Treasures From the
Royal Tombs of Ur." It traveled to eight American museums, including
those in Cleveland, Washington and Dallas, ending the tour at the Detroit
Institute of Art in May 2011.
In 2009, an agreement was reached for a joint University of Pennsylvania
and Iraqi team to resume archaeological work at the site of Ur.[30]
[edit]

Archaeological remains
Though some of the areas that were cleared during modern excavations
have sanded over again, the Great Ziggurat is fully cleared and stands as
the best-preserved and most visible landmark at the site.[31] The famous
Royal tombs, also called the Neo-Sumerian Mausolea, located about 250
metres (820 ft) south-east of the Great Ziggurat in the corner of the wall
that surrounds the city, are nearly totally cleared. Parts of the tomb area
appear to be in need of structural consolidation or stabilization.
There are cuneiform (Sumerian writing) on many walls, some entirely

covered in script stamped into the mud-bricks. The text is sometimes

difficult to read, but it covers most surfaces. Modern graffiti has also found
its way to the graves, usually in the form of names made with coloured
pens (sometimes they are carved). The Great Ziggurat itself has far more
graffiti, mostly lightly carved into the bricks. The graves are completely
empty. A small number of the tombs are accessible. Most of them have
been cordoned off. The whole site is covered with pottery debris, to the
extent that it is virtually impossible to set foot anywhere without stepping on
some. Some have colours and paintings on them. Some of the "mountains"
of broken pottery are debris that has been removed from excavations.
Pottery debris and human remains form many of the walls of the royal
tombs area. It can only be speculated whether this is of ancient making or
modern restoration, but it is a fact that they are, literally, filled up with
pottery debris.[citation needed]
In May 2009, the United States Army returned the Ur site to the Iraqi
authorities, who hope to develop it as a tourist destination.[32]
[edit]

Preservation
Since 2009, non-profit organization Global Heritage Fund (GHF) has been
working to protect and preserve Ur against problems of erosion, neglect,
inappropriate restoration, and war and conflict. GHF's stated goal for the
project is to create an informed and scientifically-grounded Master Plan to
guide the sites long-term conservation and management, which will enable
sustainability and can serve as a model for other sites stewardship.[33]
[edit]

See also
The Standard of Ur mosaic is made of red limestone, bitumen, lapis lazuli, and shell,
depicts peacetime, from the royal tombs of Ur.
Ancient Near East
portal

Cities of the ancient Near East

History of Iraq

History of Sumer

Lyres of Ur

Ram in a Thicket

Royal Game of Ur

Short chronology timeline

Standard of Ur

Imports to Ur
Ur

Scorpion I
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Scorpion I
Pharaoh of Egypt
Reign

Unknown, Protodynastic

Predecessor

U-k unknown

Successor

Double Falcon or U-i

Royal titulary
[show]

Burial

Tomb U-j,
Umm el-Qa'ab, Abydos

Scorpion I was the first of two kings so-named of Upper Egypt during the
Protodynastic Period. His name may refer to the scorpion goddess Serket.
He is believed to have lived in Thinis one or two centuries before the rule of
the better known King Scorpion of Nekhen and is presumably the first true
king of Upper Egypt. To him belongs the U-j tomb found in the royal
cemetery of Abydos where Thinite kings were buried. That tomb was

plundered in antiquity, but in it were found many small ivory plaques, each
with a hole for tying it to something, and each marked with one or more
hieroglyph-type scratched images which are thought to be names of towns,
perhaps to tie to offerings and tributes to keep track of which came from
which town. Two of those plaques seem to name the Delta towns Baset
and Buto, showing that Scorpion's armies had penetrated the Nile Delta. It
may be that the conquests of Scorpion started the Egyptian hieroglyphic
system by starting a need to keep records in writing.[1]
Recently a 5,000-year-old graffito has been discovered by Professor John
Darnell of Yale University that also bears the symbols of Scorpion and
depicts his victory over another protodynastic ruler (possibly Naqada's
king). The defeated king or place named in the graffito was "Bull's Head", a
marking also found in U-j.[1]
Scorpion's tomb is known in archaeology circles for its possible evidence of
ancient wine consumption. In a search of the tomb, archaeologists
discovered dozens of imported ceramic jars containing a yellow residue
consistent with wine, dated to about 3150 BC. Grape seeds, skins and
dried pulp were also found.[2]

King Scorpion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Scorpion II)

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about Scorpion II. For the first, see Scorpion I.
For other uses, see Scorpion King (disambiguation).

Scorpion
The Scorpion Macehead, Ashmolean
Museum.
Pharaoh of Egypt
Reign

Unknown, Protodynastic

Predecessor

Ka?

Successor

Narmer?
Royal titulary
[show]

Consort(s)

Shesh I[1]

Children

possibly Narmer

Scorpion, or Selk, also King Scorpion or Scorpion II refers to the

second of two kings so-named of Upper Egypt during the Protodynastic
Period. Their names may refer to the scorpion goddess Serket. The name
of the queen who was his consort was Shesh I, the mother of Narmer and
the great-grandmother of another queen, Shesh II.
The only pictorial evidence of his existence is the so-called Scorpion
Macehead that was found in the Main deposit by archeologists James E.
Quibell and Frederick W. Green in a temple at Nekhen (Hierakonpolis)
during the dig season of 1897/1898.[2] It is currently on display at the
Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. The stratigraphy of this macehead was lost
due to the methods of its excavators, but its style seems to date it to the
very end of the Predynastic Period.[3] Though badly damaged, the visible
parts are extraordinary records from this early time in Egyptian history. He
is believed to have lived just before or during the rule of Narmer at Thinis
for this reason, and also because of the content of the macehead.
Contents [hide]
%

1
Scorpion
Macehead

2
Theories

3
In popular
culture

4
See also

References

[edit]

Scorpion Macehead
Head of king Scorpion on his mace head

The Scorpion Macehead depicts a single large figure wearing the White
Crown of Upper Egypt. He holds a hoe, which has been interpreted as a
ritual either involving the pharaoh ceremonially cutting the first furrow in the
fields, or opening the dikes to flood them.[4] The name "Scorpion" is
derived from the image of a scorpion that appears immediately in front of
his face that may represent the scorpion goddess Serket, just below a
flower with seven petals; the use and placement of the iconography is
similar to the depiction of the pharaoh Narmer on the obverse side of the
Narmer Palette. Protodynastic hieroglyphs are difficult to read, but the dead
lapwings (meaning Lower Egyptians) and the nine bows (meaning the
traditional enemies of Egyptians) found on the macehead are interpreted
as evidence that he began the attacks on Lower Egypt which eventually
resulted in Narmer's victory and unification of the country.[5] The lapwing
was also used as a hieroglyph meaning "common people", so the
standards they are attached to may represent the names of particular
towns Scorpion conquered.[6]
A second, smaller macehead fragment is referred to as the Minor Scorpion
Macehead.[7] Little is left of this macehead, though it clearly depicts the
pharaoh wearing the Red Crown of Lower Egypt.
[edit]

Theories
There are several theories regarding his identity. Some[who?] argue that,
because Egyptian kings of the First Dynasty seem to have had multiple
names,[8] Scorpion was the same person as Narmer, simply with an
alternative name. Others have identified the king Scorpion with Narmer's

predecessor, Ka (or Sekhen); Edwards in 1965 considered Ka's glyph, the

outstretched arms of the ka sign, as simply a stylistically different version of
a scorpion.[9] The historian Susan Wise Bauer maintains that Scorpion II
and Narmer were indeed two separate kings, but that Scorpion II reigned in
3200 BC, a century before Narmer.[10] Because Scorpion II is not attested
at Abydos, he could be a contemporary king to Narmer, who eventually lost
or bequeathed Nekhen to Narmer.
A British television programme[11] proposed that the macehead was a
tribute by Narmer to King Scorpion I (whose tomb at Abydos is known).
According to this theory, there was only one protodynastic king Scorpion,
rather than two as is commonly maintained.
[edit]

In popular culture
%

William Golding's 1971 novella The Scorpion God is loosely based

upon this period of Egyptian history.

The Scorpion King's name was used in the 2001 film The Mummy
Returns, and its spin-offs The Scorpion King (2002) and The
Scorpion King 2: Rise of a Warrior (2008).

An action-adventure video game The Scorpion King: Rise of the

Akkadian was released in 2002.

The 2007 children's novel Pharaoh by Jackie French deals with

events in the court of King Scorpion, and the rivalry between his
sons Narmer and Prince Hawk.

[edit]

See also
%

Pharaoh

Scorpion I

Narmer

Menes

scorpion kings-same time eaghwar came to be

meredith monk scared song
sacred song on itunes, misspelled
john coletrane
africa brass - 1/2 hour on e key

Buddhism
About Buddhism
Some 2,500 years ago, an Indian prince, Siddhartha Gautama,
sat quietly in a place known as Deer Park at Sarnath and began
to offer simple teachings, based on his own experience. These
teachings, referred to as the dharma, meaning simply "truth,"
were practical instructions on how to free oneself from suffering
by relating to the everyday experience of life and mind.
Because his realization was profound, he became known as the
Buddha, which means "the awakened one." The teachings he
offered came to be known as the buddhadharma, and these form
the core of Buddhism still today. The Buddhist teachings proclaim
the possibility of awakening wisdom and compassion within every
human being, and they provide a practical method for doing so.
This practical method, passed down from generation to
generation, consists of meditation that develops mindfulness and
awareness.
Buddhist is a living tradition, passed from teacher to student, as
a set of pragmatic instructions and techniques for cultivating
sanity and brilliance in ourselves and our world. Its ancient
wisdom is as relevant and useful today as over the centuries of
its long history.

Historical Overview
The historical Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, was born around
560 B.C. at Lumbini, in present-day Nepal. He was brought up as

a prince of the Shakya clan and excelled in all the worldly arts of
his day. Growing weary of the pleasures of palace life, Siddhartha
ventured forth and encountered for the first time the ravages of
old age, sickness and death as well as the promise of the spiritual
path. Understanding the inevitable impermanence and suffering
in human life, at the age of twenty-nine he left his kingdom to
seek spiritual understanding.
After several years studying with many spiritual teachers,
Siddhartha realized that neither worldly pleasures nor strict
asceticism could bring him fulfillment. He chose the middle way,
accepting rice milk from a girl named Sujata in order to
strengthen his body and mind. He then sat under a tree in what
is now Bodh Gaya and vowed not to rise until he had discovered
the truth about life and death. Through examining the nature of
his body and mind, he attained enlightenmentcomplete
awakening.
The Buddha's discovery cannot adequately be described as a
religion, a philosophy, or a psychology. It is better described as a
journey or way of life. This journey entails seeing things as they
are, beyond the fixation of our ego and the agitation of negative
emotions. Chgyam Trungpa called the Buddhist path a "journey
without goal," because waking up to the way things are occurs in
the present moment, at any time, in any place, right now.
The Buddha taught several approaches to liberation from
suffering at different times and places during his long teaching
career. It is traditionally explained that he taught different topics
to different groups depending on their inclinations and level of
spiritual advancement. These developed into distinctive branches
of Buddhism:
% the schools focusing on the Buddha's foundational teachings
for individual liberation of which Theravada today survives
(sometimes referred to as the hinayana or "narrow
vehicle");
% the teachings of the mahayana (or "great vehicle")
emphasizing universal compassion and analyzing the
ultimate nature of reality;

and the vajrayana (or "diamond vehicle") containing a host

of skillful means for swift accomplishment.
While it is said that the Buddha taught each of these approaches
during his lifetime, historically Buddhist scriptures appeared over
a period of centuries in India, allowing for new developments in
philosophy and meditation techniques. Buddhism thrived in India
until the twelfth century, when it was wiped out in military
incursions by subsequent waves of Turko-Afgani invaders.
Over the centuries, Buddhism spread throughout most of Asia.
The Theravada spread to Southeast Asia (Sri Lanka, Burma,
Thailand), the Mahayana to East Asia (China, Japan, Korea), and
the Vajrayana northward to Nepal and across Himalaya to Tibet.
Tibetan Buddhism is unique in its synthesis of all three
approaches or "vehicles" as progressive stages on a
comprehensive path of practice and study.

Buddhism in Tibet
Buddhism came to Tibet in two waves. The first occurred in the
7th to 9th centuries during the height of its empire, when Tibet
dominated vast tracts of central Asia. The Tibetan king Songtsen
Gampo commissioned a script to be devised based on Sanskrit
(the ancient language of India), and his successor Trisong Detsun
presided over a massive translation effort to render the corpus of
Buddha's teaching into Tibetan. After the collapse of empire,
there was a "dark period" of political and cultural fragmentation.
Toward the end of the 10th century, Tibetans once again made
the intrepid journey across Himalaya to seek out Buddhist texts
and spiritual techniques in India. Some visited the great Buddhist
universities in India, such as Nalanda, to study philosophy and
the arts. Some wandered to remote and desolate places to seek
out oral instructions from accomplished meditation masters. Out
of this, distinctive traditions of scholasticism and meditation
developed in Tibet.
There are now four main schools of Tibetan Buddhism. The
Nyingma (or "old school") trace their origin to the first wave of
Buddhism's propagation in Tibet and the Sarma (or "new

schools")which consolidated into the Sakya, Kagyu, and Geluk

developed out of the second wave. Some lineages, like the
Sakya and Geluk, put special emphasis on an intellectual
approach to the teachings, training students as scholars and
logicians. Others, like the Kagyu and Nyingma, put special
emphasis on the practice of meditation; they are often referred
to as "practice lineages." Within each of these four main schools
are distinct teachings transmitted from master to disciple over
subsequent generations in an unbroken succession.
The founder of the Shambhala community, Chgyam Trungpa
Rinpoche, was a holder of both Kagyu and Nyingma lineages as
the abbot and 11th descendent in the line of Trungpa tulkus
(incarnate lama) of Surmang Monastery in eastern Tibet. His
eldest son and spiritual heir, Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche , is the
reincarnation of the renowned 19th century Nyingma master, Ju
Mipham.

Shambhala Terma
Since the 11th century, the revelation of terma is one way that
Tibetans have continued to introduce innovative teachings in
every generation, appropriate to the needs of the time. Terma
literally means "treasure" and refers to a set of teachings hidden
way until the time is ripe to propagate them.
Most tertns or "treasure revealers" trace their past lives back to
the 8th century as direct disciples of the tantric master
Padmasambhava. Terma are considered to be teachings originally
given by Padmasambhava (or another comparable master) and
later hidden away in the Tibetan landscape and in the
mindstream of tertns. In eastern Tibet, many tertns also trace
their past lives to the time of the legendary king Gesar as one of
the generals in his army or ladies in his court.
The process of treasure revelation involves awakening a memory
from the tertn's past life and decoding arcane symbols that
might appear in the landscape, on yellow scrolls, or in the mind
of the tertn. It is the task of each tertn along with his or her
students and lineage holders to further unravel the meaning of a
terma into a coherent cycle of teachings and system that can be

used for an individual's regime of meditation and in community

practice.
Chgyam Trungpa, the founder of Shambhala, was himself a
tertn. He began revealing terma before leaving Tibet, but few of
these survive. The Shambhala teachings emerged as terma out
of the visions and revelations of Chgyam Trungpa after he had
come to the west. In recent years, Sakyong Mipham has been
elaborating his father's terma into a complete system of training
for students in English. These teachings contain the essence of
ancient wisdom, yet are tailored to the specific challenges of
modern living.
Shambhala is a union of the Kagyu and Nyingma lineages of
Tibetan Buddhism with the Shambhala teachings introduced by
Chgyam Trungpa in the 1970s, based on the warrior tradition of
Tibet's legendary king Gesar.

Way Of Shambhala Practice and Study

The Way of Shambhala curriculum is comprised of a series of
workshops (Shambhala Training Levels I-V) and courses
providing an experiential overview of meditation practices,
wisdom teachings, contemplative arts, and physical disciplines
rooted in the ancient traditions of Shambhala and Tibetan
vajrayana Buddhism.
Open to all students, this course of study and practice will also
prepare students for other core path programs.
shambhala-buddhism-bypass fear

Hosanna
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Hosanna (disambiguation).

Look up hosanna in
Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Hosanna is a liturgical word in Judaism and Christianity. In Judaism, it is

always used in its original Hebrew form, Hoshana.
Contents [hide]
%
%

1 Etymology
2 Liturgical use
in different traditions
1

2.1
Judaism

2.2
Christianity

3 Other
examples of modern usage

4 See also

5 References

[edit]

Etymology
The word hosanna is etymologically derived from Latin osanna,[1] hosanna
which itself was derived from Greek , ,
[1] representing
Hebrew ,[2] h-n[1] which is short for h-n
from Aramaic [ 2] meaning "save, pray".[1] Christian usage has
come through the Greek Bible, giving it the form ,hsann.
In liturgical context, it refers to a shout of praise and worship [3] and
adoration,[4] or referring to a cry expressing an appeal for divine help.[3] It
appears in numerous verses including in "Hosanna; blessed is the one who
comes in the name of the Lord" (Mark 11.9), "hosanna in the highest"
(Mark 11.10); "hosanna to the Son of David" (Matt 21:9), "help" or "save, I
pray" (Psalm 118:25).
[edit]

Liturgical use in different traditions

[edit]

Judaism
"Hoshana" ( )is a Hebrew word meaning please save or save now.
[5] In Jewish liturgy, the word is applied specifically to the Hoshana Service,
a cycle of prayers from which a selection is sung each morning during
Sukkot, the Feast of Booths or Tabernacles. The complete cycle is sung on
the seventh day of the festival, which is called Hoshana Rabbah (
(, "Great Hosanna").[6]
[edit]

Christianity
"Hosanna" (Greek transcription: ,hsanna) is the cry of praise or
adoration shouted in recognition of the Messiahship of Jesus on his entry
into Jerusalem, Hosanna! Blessed is the one who comes in the name of
the Lord![7] It is used in the same way in Christian praise.
Overall, it seems that "Hosanna" is a cry for salvation; while at the same
time is a declaration of praise. Therefore, it may be derived that this plea
for help is out of an agreeably positive connotation.
The old interpretation "Save, now!" which may be a popular etymology, is
based on Psalm 118:25 (Hebrew

hOshEeah-nna) (Possibly
"Savior"). This does not fully explain the occurrence of the word in the
Gospels, which has given rise to complex discussions.[8]
[edit]

Other examples of modern usage

The "Hosanna Anthem",[9] based on the phrase Hosanna, is a traditional
Moravian Church anthem written by Bishop Christian Gregor of Herrnhut
sung on Palm Sunday and the first Sunday of Advent. It is antiphonal, i.e. a
call-and-response song; traditionally, it is sung between the children and
adult congregation, though it is not unheard of for it to be done in other

ways, such as between choir and congregation, or played between

trombone choirs.
Hosanna was the subject of a religious song by Henry Purcell.
Architect Frank Lloyd Wright famously used the word in his exclamation
"Hosanna! A client!" after securing a commission, breaking a long, dry
spell.[10]
Harry Belafonte recorded a song entitled "Hosanna" on his popular 1956
album Calypso.
"Hosanna" is also the name of one of the songs featured in the 1971 rock
opera Jesus Christ Superstar by Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd Webber. The
song occurs in the scene in which Jesus rides on a donkey into Jerusalem,
as in the above Biblical passages. Jesus is mocked by the high priest
Caiaphas while his followers praise him as the Messiah.
Argentinian music and comedy group Les Luthiers recorded "Gloria
Hosanna, That's the Question" on their 1971 album Sonamos Pese A
Todo.
In the 1972 musical 1776, a song entitled "Cool, Cool Considerate Men"
uses Hosanna repeatedly in the refrain to celebrate John Adams' absence
from the Continental Congress.
British rock band Kula Shaker's first track on their 1999 album Peasants,
Pigs and Astronauts is titled "Great Hosannah".
The English band Killing Joke uses the word in their 2006 album
Hosannas from the Basements of Hell.
Many songs for church use bear the title "Hosanna", including songs
written by New Zealand singer Brooke Fraser Ligertwood (released on the
2007 Hillsong United albums All of the Above and live on Saviour King and
covered by the Canadian group Starfield on their album I Will Go); another
song by Paul Baloche on his 2006 album A Greater Song; another by
gospel artist Kirk Franklin, and another by Andrew Peterson on his 2008
album Resurrection Letters II. Sidney Mohede's "Hosanna (Be Lifted High)"
was included on Israel Houghton's 2011 Grammy Award-winning album

Love God, Love People.

In Tim Heidecker and Eric Wareheim's 2010 Funny or Die Presents
segment "Morning Prayer With Skott & Behr", the title characters greatly
overuse the word "hosanna", often as a virtual filler word.
A. R. Rahman composed the song "Hosanna" for the 2010 Tamil movie
Vinnaithaandi Varuvaayaa. Here the word is used as an exclamation of joy
when a man sees his beloved. The Catholic Christian Secular Forum
(CSF) objected to this song and asked film-makers Fox Star Studios to
remove it from the final cut of the Hindi remake of the film, Ekk Deewana
Tha.[11]
[edit]

See also
%

Aramaic of Jesus#Hosanna

Hallelujah

Hosanna Shout (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints)

Hosanna (song) by A.R.Rahman

[edit]

Hosanna

HebrewWordsforPraise

1.Halal
HalalisaprimaryHebrewrootwordforpraise.Ourword

"hallelujah"comesfromthisbaseword.Itmeans"tobeclear,
toshine,toboast,show,torave,celebrate,tobeclamorously
foolish."
Ps113:13Praise(halal)yetheLord,praise(halal)oye
servantsoftheLord,praise(halal)thenameoftheLord.
Ps150:1Praise(halal)theLord!Praise(halal)Godinhis
sanctuary;Praise(halal)himinhismightyexpanse.
Ps149:3Letthempraise(halal)hisnameinthedance:letthem
singpraiseswiththetimbrelandharp.
(Otherreferences:1Chr2)

2.Yadah
2Chr8:14Ezra3:10Ps22:22Ps63:5Ps69:30
Yadahisaverbwitharootmeaning,"theextendedhand,to
throwoutthehand,thereforetoworshipwithextendedhand."
AccordingtotheLexicon,theoppositemeaningis"tobemoan,
thewringingofthehands."
2Chr20:21Givethanks(yadah)totheLord,forhis
lovingkindnessiseverlasting.
Ps63:1SoIwillblesstheeaslongasIlive;Iwill(yadah)liftup
myhandsinthyname.
Ps107:15Ohthatmenwouldpraise(yadah)theLordforhis
goodness,andforhiswonderfulworkstothechildrenofmen.

Otherreferences:Gen49:82Chr7:62Chr20:21Isa12:4Jer
33:11

3.Towdah
Towdahcomesfromthesameprinciplerootwordasyadah,
butisusedmorespecifically.Towdahliterallymeans,"an
extensionofthehandinadoration,avowal,oracceptance."By
wayofapplication,itisappratentinthePsalmsandelsewhere
thatitisusedforthankingGodfor"thingsnotyetreceived"as
wellasthingsalreadyathand.
Ps50:14OfferuntoGodpraise(towdah)andpaythyvows
untotheMostHigh.
Ps50:23Whosoofferethpraise(towdah)glorifiethme:andto
himthatorderethhisconversationarightwillIshewthe
salvationofGod.
Otherreferences:2Chr29:31Jer33:11Ps42:4

4.ShabachShabachmeans,"toshout,toaddressinaloud
tone,tocommand,totriumph."
Ps47:1Oclapyourhands,allpeoples;shout(shabach)toGod
withthevoiceofjoy(ortriumph).
Ps145:4Onegenerationshallpraise(shabach)thyworksto
anotheranddeclarethymightyacts.
Isa12:6Cryaloudandshout(shabach)forjoy,Oinhabitantof
Zion,ForgreatinyourmidstistheHolyOneofIsrael.

Otherreferences:Ps63:14Ps.117:1Ps35:27Ps106:47

5.Barak
Barakmeans"tokneeldown,toblessGodasanactof
adoration."
Ps95:6Ocomeletusworshipandbowdown;letuskneel
(barak)beforetheLordourmaker.
1Chr29:20ThenDavidsaidtoalltheassembly,"Nowbless
(barak)theLordyourGod."Andalltheassemblyblessed
(barak)theLord,theGodoftheirfathers,andbowedlowand
didhomagetotheLordandtotheking.
Ps34:1Iwillbless(barak)theLordatalltimes;Hispraise
shallcontinuallybeinmymouth.
Otherreferences:Job1:21Ps96:2Ps103:12Ps18:46

6.Zamar
Zamarmeans"topluckthestringsofaninstrument,tosing,to
praise;amusicalwordwhichislargelyinvolvedwithjoyful
expressionsofmusicwithmusicalinstruments.
Ps21:13BeexaltedOLord,inThineownstrength,sowillwe
singandpraise(zamar)Thypower.
1Chr16:9SingtoHim,singpraises(zamar)toHim;speakof
allHiswonders.
Ps57:89Awakemyglory;awakeharpandlyre,Iwillawaken

thedawn!IwillgivethankstoThee,OLordamongthe
peoples;Iwillsingpraises(zamar)toTheeamongthenations.
Otherreferences:Ps66:24Isa12:5Ps27:6Ps149:3Ps30:4

7.Tehillah
Tehillahisderivedfromthewordhalalandmeans"the
singingofhalals,tosingortolaud;perceivedtoinvolvemusic,
especiallysinging;hymnsoftheSpirit.
Ps22:3YetThouartholy,OThouwhoartenthroneduponthe
praises(tehillah)ofIsrael.
Ps33:1RejoiceintheLord,oyerighteous,forpraise(tehillah)
iscomelyfortheupright.
Isa61:3TogranttothosewhomourninZion,Givingthema
garlandinsteadofashes,Theoilofgladnessinsteadof
mourning,Themantleofpraise(tehillah)insteadofthespirit
offainting,Sotheyshallbecalledoaksofrighteousness,The
plantingoftheLord,thatHemaybeglorified.
Otherreferences:Ps34:11Chr16:352Chr20:22Deut10:21
Exod15:11Ps147:12
Hebrew Words for Praise
language of praise
lethal texts, nam-shubs - spiritual poison is nam shubs, causes
forgetfulness which is death, breaks one away from living, severs,
spiritual poison makes a person into a zombie

Heliopolis (ancient)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The Al-Masalla obelisk, the largest surviving monument from Heliopolis

Heliopolis (English pronunciation: /hilipls/; Greek: , "City of

the Sun" or "City of Helios"; Egyptian: wnw; Arabic: , Ain Shams,
"Eye of the Sun") was one of the oldest cities of ancient Egypt, the capital
of the 13th Lower Egyptian nome that was located five miles (8 km) east of
the Nile to the north of the apex of the Nile Delta. Heliopolis has been
occupied since the Predynastic Period,[1] with extensive building
campaigns during the Old and Middle Kingdoms. Today it is mostly
destroyed; its temples and other buildings were used for the construction of
medieval Cairo; most information about the ancient city comes from textual
sources.
Beneath a maze of busy narrow streets of a middle and lower-class district,
lie vast hidden remains of ancient Heliopolis about fifteen to twenty metres
down. This ancient Egyptian site lies predominantly in the northern Cairo
suburb of Al-Matariyyah,[1] and also covers the districts of Ain Shams and
Tel Al-Hisn east of the Nile.[2] It also straddles the Cairo Metro line 12 km
west of the edge of the 20th century modern Heliopolis,[1] a suburb in the
district Masr al-Gidedah (Arabic: , "New Egypt").
The site of Heliopolis has now been brought for the most part under
cultivation and suburbanization, but some ancient city walls of crude brick
can be seen in the fields, a few granite blocks bearing the name of
Ramesses II remain, and the position of the great Temple of Re-Atum is
marked by the Al-Masalla obelisk. Archaeological sites below including
recent tomb discoveries.[3]
The only surviving remnant of Heliopolis is the Temple of Re-Atum obelisk

located in Al-Masalla of the Al-Matariyyah district. It was erected by

Senusret I of the Twelfth dynasty, and still stands in its original position.[4]
The 68 ft (20.73 m) high red granite obelisk weighs 120 tons (240,000 lbs).
Contents [hide]
%

1 Etymology

2 History
1

2.1
Egyptian Heliopolis

2.2
Greco-Roman
Heliopolis

2.3
Greek era

2.4
Roman era

2.5
Biblical Heliopolis

3 See also

4
References

5 External
links

[edit]

Etymology

o
r
Iunu
in
hiero

glyp
hs

The name Heliopolis is of ancient Greek origin, , meaning city

of the sun as it was the principal seat of sun worship to Re-Atum or AtumRe, "the evening sun". Originally, this ancient city was known by the
Egyptians as Iunu, from the transliteration wnw,[5] probably pronounced
*wanu, and means "(Place of) Pillars". In biblical Hebrew Heliopolis was
referred to as, n ( ) or wen ( ) , Greek: .
[edit]

History
[edit]

Egyptian Heliopolis
The Egyptian god Atum, was the chief deity of the city Iunu (Heliopolis),
who was worshipped in the primary temple, known as Per-Aat (*Par-at,
written pr-t, 'Great House') and Per-Atum (*Par-Atma, written pr-tmw
'Temple [lit. 'House'] of Atum"'; Hebrew: Pithom). Iunu was also the
original source of the worship of the Ennead pantheon. Although in later
times, as Horus gained in prominence, worship focused on the syncretic
solar deity Ra-harakhty (literally Ra, [who is] Horus of the Two Horizons).
The main cult of Ra(or Re) was in Heliopolis, however the High Priests of
Ra are not as well documented as the high priests of other deities. The AlMasalla area of the Al-Matariyyah district contains the underground tombs
of High Priests of Ra of the Sixth Dynasty (c. 2345 BCE2181 BCE),
which were found in the southeast corner of the great Temple of RaAtum
archaeological site.[6]
During the Amarna Period, Pharaoh Akhenaten introduced monotheistic
worship of Aton, the deified solar disc, built here a temple named Wetjes
Aton (ws tn "Elevating the Sun-disc"). Blocks from this temple were later
used to build the city walls of medieval Cairo and can be seen in some of
the city gates. The cult of the Mnevis bull, an embodiment of the god Ra,

had its centre here, and possessed a formal burial ground north of the city.
Egyptian mythology, and later GrecoRoman mythology, said that the
phoenix (Bennu), after rising from the ashes of its predecessor, would bring
the ashes to the altar of the sun god in Heliopolis.
[edit]

Greco-Roman Heliopolis
Heliopolis was well known to the ancient Greeks and Romans, being noted
by most major geographers of the period, including: Ptolemy, iv. 5. 54;
Herodotus, ii. 3, 7, 59; Strabo, xvii. p. 805; Diodorus, i. 84, v. 57; Arrian,
Exp. Alex. iii. 1; Aelian, H. A. vi. 58, xii. 7; Plutarch, Solon. 26, Is. et Osir.
33; Diogenes Laertius, xviii. 8. 6; Josephus, Ant. Jud. xiii. 3, C. Apion. i.
26; Cicero, De Natura Deorum iii. 21; Pliny the Elder, v. 9. 11; Tacitus,
Ann. vi. 28; Pomponius Mela, iii. 8. The city also merits attention by the
Byzantine geographer Stephanus of Byzantium, s. v. .
[edit]

Greek era
Alexander the Great, on his march from Pelusium to Memphis, halted at
this city (Arrian, iii. 1); and, according to Macrobius (Saturn. i. 23), Baalbek,
or the Syrian Heliopolis, was a priest-colony from its Egyptian namesake.
The temple of Ra was said to have been, to a special degree, a depository
for royal records, and Herodotus states that the priests of Heliopolis were
the best informed in matters of history of all the Egyptians. Heliopolis
flourished as a seat of learning during the Greek period; the schools of
philosophy and astronomy are claimed to have been frequented by
Orpheus, Homer,[7] Pythagoras, Plato, Solon, and other Greek
philosophers. From Ichonuphys, who was lecturing there in 308 BC, and
who numbered Eudoxus among his pupils, the Greek mathematician
learned the true length of the year and month, upon which he formed his
octaeterid, or period of eight years or ninety-nine months. Ptolemy II had
Manethon, the chief priest of Heliopolis, collect his history of the ancient
kings of Egypt from its archives. The later Ptolemies probably took little

interest in their "father" Ra, and Alexandria had eclipsed the learning of
Heliopolis; thus with the withdrawal of royal favour Heliopolis quickly
dwindled, and the students of native lore deserted it for other temples
supported by a wealthy population of pious citizens. By the 1st century BC,
in fact, Strabo found the temples deserted, and the town itself almost
uninhabited, although priests were still present.
[edit]

Roman era
In Roman times Heliopolis belonged to the Augustamnica province. Its
population probably contained a considerable Arabic element. (Plin. vi. 34.)
In Roman times obelisks were taken from its temples to adorn the northern
cities of the Delta, and even across the Mediterranean to Rome, including
the famed Cleopatra's Needle that now resides on the Thames
embankment, London (this obelisk was part of a pair, the other being
located in Central Park, New York). Finally the growth of Fustat and Cairo,
only 6 miles (9.7 km) to the southwest, caused the ruins to be ransacked
for building materials. The site was known to the Arabs as Ayn ams ("the
well of the sun"), more recently as Arab al-in.
[edit]

Biblical Heliopolis
Heliopolis was the capital of the Province of Goshen, country that
comprised much of the northern Egyptian territory of the Nile Delta. This
was one of three main store-city locations that grain was kept during the
winter months and during the seven year famine discussed in the Joseph
narrative of the Book of Genesis. The city gained recognition as place of
bread.
In the time of the major prophets, Isaiah made a reference to the City of
the Sun as one of the five cities of Egypt that would come to speak
Hebrew. However he made a wordplay on "city of the sun" (ir haeme) by
writing ir haheres which literally means "city of destruction".[8] These play
of words were a prophetic description later reinforced by both Jeremiah
and Ezekiel.[9] The Hebrew name, Beth-shemesh, where Beth means

"temple" and shemesh means "Sun" was also used to describe Heliopolis
by Jeremiah. He prophesied this city's fate specifically when he declared
that the king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, would shatter the obelisks of
Heliopolis and burn the temple of the sun in fire.[10] Jeremiahs
contemporary Ezekiel, reinforced this message by saying that the "young
men of Aven (or Beth-Aven) would fall by the sword". Like Isaiah, Ezekiel
also made a word play on the original Hebrew name of Heliopolis that was
used in the time of Joseph, the city of On. The Hebrew word aven means
"folly" or "iniquity", so that his reference implied "temple of folly" or "temple
of iniquity".[11]
[edit]

See also
%

Heliopolis (Cairo Suburb) - the 20th century suburb, northeast of

downtown Cairo

Heliopolis style - the early 20th century Moorish-Arabic revival

architectural style of the Heliopolis suburb

Ancient Egyptian creation myths - in reference to the religious belief

system of Iunu at Heliopolis

List of Egyptian dynasties - in reference to the reigns centered at Heliopolis

Heliopolis
414px-Obelisk-SesostrisI-Heliopolis
heliopolis-20 ' underground, also suburbs, recall that space is
created by mindset of inhabitants-name of cyclops city near
eaghwar in Fateland

Cronus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Not to be confused with Chronos, the personification of time.
For other uses, see Cronus (disambiguation).

Cronus/Kronos
Abode

Earth

Symbol

Sickle/Scythe

Consort

Rhea

Parents

Gaia and Uranus

Siblings

Rhea, Oceanus, Hyperion, Theia,

Coeus, Phoebe, Iapetus, Crius,
Mnemosyne, Tethys and Themis

Children Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, Hades,

Hestia, Demeter, Chiron
Roman
Saturn
equivalen
t

Greek deities
series
TitansOlympiansAquatic deitiesChthonic
deitiesPersonified conceptsOther deities
Titans
The Twelve Titans:Oceanus and Tethys,
Hyperion and Theia,Coeus and Phoebe,
Cronus and Rhea,Mnemosyne, Themis,Crius,
IapetusChildren of Oceanus:Oceanids,
Potamoi, CalypsoChildren of Hyperion:Helios,
Selene, EosDaughters of Coeus:Leto and
AsteriaSons of Iapetus:Atlas, Prometheus,
Epimetheus, MenoetiusSons of Crius:
Astraeus, Pallas, Perses

% vte
In the most classic and well known version of Greek mythology, Cronus or
Kronos[1] (Ancient Greek: ,pronounced [krnos]) was the leader

and the youngest of the first generation of Titans, divine descendants of

Gaia, the earth, and Uranus, the sky. He overthrew his father and ruled
during the mythological Golden Age, until he was overthrown by his own
son, Zeus and imprisoned in Tartarus.
Cronus was usually depicted with a sickle or scythe, which was also the
instrument he used to castrate and depose Uranus, his father. In Athens,
on the twelfth day of the Attic month of Hekatombaion, a festival called
Kronia was held in honour of Cronus to celebrate the harvest, suggesting
that, as a result of his association with the virtuous Golden Age, Cronus
continued to preside as a patron of harvest. Cronus was also identified in
classical antiquity with the Roman deity Saturn.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Greek mythology and early myths

1

1.1 Libyan account by Diodorus Siculus

1.2 Sibylline Oracles

2 Name and comparative mythology

3 El, the Phoenician Cronus

4 Roman mythology and later culture

5 Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek mythology

6 References

7 External links

Greek mythology and early myths[edit source]

In ancient myth recorded by Hesiod's Theogony, Cronus envied the power
of his father, the ruler of the universe, Uranus. Uranus drew the enmity of
Cronus' mother, Gaia, when he hid the gigantic youngest children of Gaia,
the hundred-handed Hecatonchires and one-eyed Cyclopes, in the
Tartarus, so that they would not see the light. Gaia created a great stone
sickle and gathered together Cronus and his brothers to persuade them to
castrate Uranus.[2]
Only Cronus was willing to do the deed, so Gaia gave him the sickle and
placed him in ambush. When Uranus met with Gaia, Cronus attacked him
with the sickle castrating him and casting his testicles into the sea. From

the blood that spilled out from Uranus and fell upon the earth, the
Gigantes, Erinyes, and Meliae were produced. The testicles produced a
white foam from which the goddess Aphrodite emerged.[2] For this, Uranus
threatened vengeance and called his sons Titenes (; according to
Hesiod meaning "straining ones," the source of the word "titan", but this
etymology is disputed) for overstepping their boundaries and daring to
commit such an act.

Giorgio Vasari: The Mutilation of Uranus by Saturn (Cronus)

In an alternate version of this myth, a more benevolent Cronus overthrew

the wicked serpentine Titan Ophion. In doing so, he released the world
from bondage and for a time ruled it justly.
After dispatching Uranus, Cronus re-imprisoned the Hecatonchires, the
Gigantes, and the Cyclopes and set the dragon Campe to guard them. He
and his sister Rhea took the throne of the world as king and queen. The
period in which Cronus ruled was called the Golden Age, as the people of
the time had no need for laws or rules; everyone did the right thing, and
immorality was absent.
Cronus learned from Gaia and Uranus that he was destined to be
overcome by his own sons, just as he had overthrown his father. As a
result, although he sired the gods Demeter, Hestia, Hera, Hades and
Poseidon by Rhea, he devoured them all as soon as they were born, to
preempt the prophecy. When the sixth child, Zeus, was born Rhea sought
Gaia to devise a plan to save them and to eventually get retribution on
Cronus for his acts against his father and children. Another child Cronus is
reputed to have fathered is Chiron, by Philyra.

Painting by Peter Paul Rubens of Cronus devouring one of his children, Poseidon

Rhea secretly gave birth to Zeus in Crete, and handed Cronus a stone
wrapped in swaddling clothes, also known as the Omphalos Stone, which
he promptly swallowed, thinking that it was his son.

Rhea kept Zeus hidden in a cave on Mount Ida, Crete. According to some
versions of the story, he was then raised by a goat named Amalthea, while
a company of Kouretes, armored male dancers, shouted and clapped their
hands to make enough noise to mask the baby's cries from Cronus. Other
versions of the myth have Zeus raised by the nymph Adamanthea, who hid
Zeus by dangling him by a rope from a tree so that he was suspended
between the earth, the sea, and the sky, all of which were ruled by his
father, Cronus. Still other versions of the tale say that Zeus was raised by
his grandmother, Gaia.
Once he had grown up, Zeus used an emetic given to him by Gaia to force
Cronus to disgorge the contents of his stomach in reverse order: first the
stone, which was set down at Pytho under the glens of Mount Parnassus to
be a sign to mortal men, and then his two brothers and three sisters. In
other versions of the tale, Metis gave Cronus an emetic to force him to
disgorge the children, or Zeus cut Cronus' stomach open. After freeing his
siblings, Zeus released the Gigantes, the Hecatonchires, and the
Cyclopes, who with the help of Hephaestus, forged for him his
thunderbolts, Poseidon's trident and Hades' helmet of darkness.
In a vast war called the Titanomachy, Zeus and his brothers and sisters,
with the help of the Gigantes, Hecatonchires, and Cyclopes, overthrew
Cronus and the other Titans. Afterwards, many of the Titans were confined
in Tartarus, however, Atlas, Epimetheus, Menoetius, Oceanus and
Prometheus were not imprisoned following the Titanomachy. Gaia bore the
monster Typhon to claim revenge for the imprisoned Titans.
Accounts of the fate of Cronus after the Titanomachy differ. In Homeric and
other texts he is imprisoned with the other Titans in Tartarus. In Orphic
poems, he is imprisoned for eternity in the cave of Nyx. Pindar describes
his release from Tartarus, where he is made King of Elysium by Zeus. In
another version[citation needed], the Titans released the Cyclopes from
Tartarus, and Cronus was awarded the kingship among them, beginning a
Golden Age. In Virgil's Aeneid[citation needed], it is Latium to which Saturn
(Cronus) escapes and ascends as king and lawgiver, following his defeat
by his son Jupiter (Zeus).

One other account referred by Robert Graves[3] (who claims to be following

the account of the Byzantine mythographer Tzetzes) it is said that Cronus
was castrated by his son Zeus just like he had done with his father Uranus
before. However the subject of a son castrating his own father, or simply
castration in general, was so repudiated by the Greek mythographers of
that time that they suppressed it from their accounts until the Christian era
(when Tzetzes wrote).

Libyan account by Diodorus Siculus[edit source]

In a Libyan account related by Diodorus Siculus (1st century BC), Cronus
or Saturn, son of Uranus and Titea, is said to have reigned over Italy, Sicily,
and Northern Africa. He cites as evidence the heights in Sicily that were in
his time known as Cronia. Cronus, joined by the Titans, makes war against
and eventually defeats his brother Jupiter, who reigns in Crete, and his
brother-in-law Hammon, who reigns at Nysa, an island on the river Triton,
somewhere in Africa.
Cronus takes his sister Rhea from Hammon, to be his own wife. Cronus in
turn is defeated by Hammon's son Bacchus or Dionysus, who appoints
Cronus' and Rhea's son, Jupiter Olympus, as governor over Egypt.
Bacchus and Jupiter Olympus then join their forces to defeat the remaining
Titans in Crete, and on the death of Bacchus, Jupiter Olympus inherits all
the kingdoms, becoming lord of the world. (Diodorus, Book III)

Sibylline Oracles[edit source]

Cronus is again mentioned in the Sibylline Oracles, particularly book three,
which makes Cronus, 'Titan' and Iapetus, the three sons of Uranus and
Gaia, each to receive a third division of the Earth, and Cronus is made king
over all. After the death of Uranus, Titan's sons attempt to destroy Cronus'
and Rhea's male offspring as soon as they are born, but at Dodona, Rhea
secretly bears her sons Zeus, Poseidon and Hades and sends them to
Phrygia to be raised in the care of three Cretans. Upon learning this, sixty
of Titan's men then imprison Cronus and Rhea, causing the sons of
Cronus to declare and fight the first of all wars against them. This account
mentions nothing about Cronus either killing his father or attempting to kill

any of his children.

Name and comparative mythology[edit source]

H. J. Rose in 1928[4] observed that attempts to give Kronos a Greek
etymology had failed.
Recently, Janda (2010) offers a genuinely Indo-European etymology of
"the cutter", from the root *(s)ker- "to cut" (Greek (keir), c.f. English
shear), motivated by Cronus' characteristic act of "cutting the sky" (or the
genitals of anthropomorphic Uranus). The Indo-Iranian reflex of the root is
kar, generally meaning "to make, create" (whence karma), but Janda
argues that the original meaning "to cut" in a cosmogonic sense is still
preserved in some verses of the Rigveda pertaining to Indra's heroic
"cutting", like that of Cronus resulting in creation:
RV 10.104.10 See Tfdrdayad vtram akod uloka "he hit Vrtra fatally,
cutting [> creating] a free path"RV 6.47.4 See Tfdvarma divo akod
"he cut [> created] the loftiness of the sky."
This may point to an older Indo-European mytheme reconstructed as
*(s)kert wersmn diwos "by means of a cut he created the loftiness of the
sky".[5] The myth of Cronus castrating Uranus parallels the Song of
Kumarbi, where Anu (the heavens) is castrated by Kumarbi. In the Song of
Ullikummi, Teshub uses the "sickle with which heaven and earth had once
been separated" to defeat the monster Ullikummi,[6] establishing that the
"castration" of the heavens by means of a sickle was part of a creation
myth, in origin a cut creating an opening or gap between heaven (imagined
as a dome of stone) and earth enabling the beginning of time (Chronos)
and human history.[7]
During antiquity, Cronus was occasionally interpreted as Chronos, the
personification of time;[8] according to Plutarch the Greeks believed that
Cronus was an allegorical name for Chronos.[9] During the Renaissance,
the identification of Cronus and Chronos gave rise to "Father Time"
wielding the harvesting scythe.
A theory debated in the 19th century, and sometimes still offered

somewhat apologetically,[10] holds that Kronos is related to "horned",

assuming a Semitic derivation from qrn.[11] Andrew Lang's objection, that
Cronus was never represented horned in Hellenic art,[12] was addressed
by Robert Brown,[13] arguing that in Semitic usage, as in the Hebrew Bible
qeren was a signifier of "power". When Greek writers encountered the
Levantine deity El, they rendered his name as Kronos.[14]
Robert Graves proposed that cronos meant "crow", related to the Ancient
Greek word corn () "crow", noting that Cronus was depicted with
a crow, as were the deities Apollo, Asclepius, Saturn and Bran.[15]

El, the Phoenician Cronus[edit source]

When Hellenes encountered Phoenicians and, later, Hebrews, they
identified the Semitic El, by interpretatio graeca, with Cronus. The
association was recorded c. AD 100 by Philo of Byblos' Phoenician history,
as reported in Eusebius' Prparatio Evangelica I.10.16.[16] Philo's
account, ascribed by Eusebius to the semi-legendary pre-Trojan War
Phoenician historian Sanchuniathon, indicates that Cronus was originally a
Canaanite ruler who founded Byblos and was subsequently deified. This
version gives his alternate name as Elus or Ilus, and states that in the 32nd
year of his reign, he emasculated, slew and deified his father Epigeius or
Autochthon "whom they afterwards called Uranus". It further states that
after ships were invented, Cronus, visiting the 'inhabitable world',
bequeathed Attica to his own daughter Athena, and Egypt to Thoth the son
of Misor and inventor of writing.[17]

Roman mythology and later culture[edit source]

4th-century Temple of Saturn in the Roman Forum.

Main article: Saturn (mythology)

While the Greeks considered Cronus a cruel and tempestuous force of
chaos and disorder, believing the Olympian gods had brought an era of
peace and order by seizing power from the crude and malicious Titans, the

Romans took a more positive and innocuous view of the deity, by conflating
their indigenous deity Saturn with Cronus. Consequently, while the Greeks
considered Cronus merely an intermediary stage between Uranus and
Zeus, he was a larger aspect of Roman religion. The Saturnalia was a
festival dedicated in his honour, and at least one temple to Saturn already
existed in the archaic Roman Kingdom.
His association with the "Saturnian" Golden Age eventually caused him to
become the god of "time", i.e., calendars, seasons, and harvestsnot now
confused with Chronos, the unrelated embodiment of time in general;
nevertheless, among Hellenistic scholars in Alexandria and during the
Renaissance, Cronus was conflated with the name of Chronos, the
personification of "Father Time",[8] wielding the harvesting scythe.
As a result of Cronus' importance to the Romans, his Roman variant,
Saturn, has had a large influence on Western culture. The seventh day of
the Judaeo-Christian week is called in Latin Dies Saturni ("Day of Saturn"),
which in turn was adapted and became the source of the English word
Saturday. In astronomy, the planet Saturn is named after the Roman deity.
It is the outermost of the Classical planets (those that are visible with the
naked eye).

Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek

mythology[edit source]

Cronus

Cronus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Not to be confused with Chronos, the personification of time.

For other uses, see Cronus (disambiguation).

Cronus/Kronos
Abode

Earth

Symbol

Sickle/Scythe

Consort

Rhea

Parents

Gaia and Uranus

Siblings

Rhea, Oceanus, Hyperion, Theia,

Coeus, Phoebe, Iapetus, Crius,
Mnemosyne, Tethys and Themis

Children Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, Hades,

Hestia, Demeter, Chiron
Roman
Saturn
equivalen
t

Greek deities
series
TitansOlympiansAquatic deitiesChthonic
deitiesPersonified conceptsOther deities
Titans
The Twelve Titans:Oceanus and Tethys,
Hyperion and Theia,Coeus and Phoebe,
Cronus and Rhea,Mnemosyne, Themis,Crius,
IapetusChildren of Oceanus:Oceanids,
Potamoi, CalypsoChildren of Hyperion:Helios,
Selene, EosDaughters of Coeus:Leto and
AsteriaSons of Iapetus:Atlas, Prometheus,
Epimetheus, MenoetiusSons of Crius:
Astraeus, Pallas, Perses

% vte
In the most classic and well known version of Greek mythology, Cronus or
Kronos[1] (Ancient Greek: ,pronounced [krnos]) was the leader
and the youngest of the first generation of Titans, divine descendants of
Gaia, the earth, and Uranus, the sky. He overthrew his father and ruled

during the mythological Golden Age, until he was overthrown by his own
son, Zeus and imprisoned in Tartarus.
Cronus was usually depicted with a sickle or scythe, which was also the
instrument he used to castrate and depose Uranus, his father. In Athens,
on the twelfth day of the Attic month of Hekatombaion, a festival called
Kronia was held in honour of Cronus to celebrate the harvest, suggesting
that, as a result of his association with the virtuous Golden Age, Cronus
continued to preside as a patron of harvest. Cronus was also identified in
classical antiquity with the Roman deity Saturn.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Greek mythology and early myths

1

1.1 Libyan account by Diodorus Siculus

1.2 Sibylline Oracles

2 Name and comparative mythology

3 El, the Phoenician Cronus

4 Roman mythology and later culture

5 Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek mythology

6 References

7 External links

Greek mythology and early myths[edit source]

In ancient myth recorded by Hesiod's Theogony, Cronus envied the power
of his father, the ruler of the universe, Uranus. Uranus drew the enmity of
Cronus' mother, Gaia, when he hid the gigantic youngest children of Gaia,
the hundred-handed Hecatonchires and one-eyed Cyclopes, in the
Tartarus, so that they would not see the light. Gaia created a great stone
sickle and gathered together Cronus and his brothers to persuade them to
castrate Uranus.[2]
Only Cronus was willing to do the deed, so Gaia gave him the sickle and
placed him in ambush. When Uranus met with Gaia, Cronus attacked him
with the sickle castrating him and casting his testicles into the sea. From
the blood that spilled out from Uranus and fell upon the earth, the
Gigantes, Erinyes, and Meliae were produced. The testicles produced a

white foam from which the goddess Aphrodite emerged.[2] For this, Uranus
threatened vengeance and called his sons Titenes (; according to
Hesiod meaning "straining ones," the source of the word "titan", but this
etymology is disputed) for overstepping their boundaries and daring to
commit such an act.

Giorgio Vasari: The Mutilation of Uranus by Saturn (Cronus)

In an alternate version of this myth, a more benevolent Cronus overthrew

the wicked serpentine Titan Ophion. In doing so, he released the world
from bondage and for a time ruled it justly.
After dispatching Uranus, Cronus re-imprisoned the Hecatonchires, the
Gigantes, and the Cyclopes and set the dragon Campe to guard them. He
and his sister Rhea took the throne of the world as king and queen. The
period in which Cronus ruled was called the Golden Age, as the people of
the time had no need for laws or rules; everyone did the right thing, and
immorality was absent.
Cronus learned from Gaia and Uranus that he was destined to be
overcome by his own sons, just as he had overthrown his father. As a
result, although he sired the gods Demeter, Hestia, Hera, Hades and
Poseidon by Rhea, he devoured them all as soon as they were born, to
preempt the prophecy. When the sixth child, Zeus, was born Rhea sought
Gaia to devise a plan to save them and to eventually get retribution on
Cronus for his acts against his father and children. Another child Cronus is
reputed to have fathered is Chiron, by Philyra.

Painting by Peter Paul Rubens of Cronus devouring one of his children, Poseidon

Rhea secretly gave birth to Zeus in Crete, and handed Cronus a stone
wrapped in swaddling clothes, also known as the Omphalos Stone, which
he promptly swallowed, thinking that it was his son.
Rhea kept Zeus hidden in a cave on Mount Ida, Crete. According to some
versions of the story, he was then raised by a goat named Amalthea, while

a company of Kouretes, armored male dancers, shouted and clapped their

hands to make enough noise to mask the baby's cries from Cronus. Other
versions of the myth have Zeus raised by the nymph Adamanthea, who hid
Zeus by dangling him by a rope from a tree so that he was suspended
between the earth, the sea, and the sky, all of which were ruled by his
father, Cronus. Still other versions of the tale say that Zeus was raised by
his grandmother, Gaia.
Once he had grown up, Zeus used an emetic given to him by Gaia to force
Cronus to disgorge the contents of his stomach in reverse order: first the
stone, which was set down at Pytho under the glens of Mount Parnassus to
be a sign to mortal men, and then his two brothers and three sisters. In
other versions of the tale, Metis gave Cronus an emetic to force him to
disgorge the children, or Zeus cut Cronus' stomach open. After freeing his
siblings, Zeus released the Gigantes, the Hecatonchires, and the
Cyclopes, who with the help of Hephaestus, forged for him his
thunderbolts, Poseidon's trident and Hades' helmet of darkness.
In a vast war called the Titanomachy, Zeus and his brothers and sisters,
with the help of the Gigantes, Hecatonchires, and Cyclopes, overthrew
Cronus and the other Titans. Afterwards, many of the Titans were confined
in Tartarus, however, Atlas, Epimetheus, Menoetius, Oceanus and
Prometheus were not imprisoned following the Titanomachy. Gaia bore the
monster Typhon to claim revenge for the imprisoned Titans.
Accounts of the fate of Cronus after the Titanomachy differ. In Homeric and
other texts he is imprisoned with the other Titans in Tartarus. In Orphic
poems, he is imprisoned for eternity in the cave of Nyx. Pindar describes
his release from Tartarus, where he is made King of Elysium by Zeus. In
another version[citation needed], the Titans released the Cyclopes from
Tartarus, and Cronus was awarded the kingship among them, beginning a
Golden Age. In Virgil's Aeneid[citation needed], it is Latium to which Saturn
(Cronus) escapes and ascends as king and lawgiver, following his defeat
by his son Jupiter (Zeus).
One other account referred by Robert Graves[3] (who claims to be following

the account of the Byzantine mythographer Tzetzes) it is said that Cronus

was castrated by his son Zeus just like he had done with his father Uranus
before. However the subject of a son castrating his own father, or simply
castration in general, was so repudiated by the Greek mythographers of
that time that they suppressed it from their accounts until the Christian era
(when Tzetzes wrote).

Libyan account by Diodorus Siculus[edit source]

In a Libyan account related by Diodorus Siculus (1st century BC), Cronus
or Saturn, son of Uranus and Titea, is said to have reigned over Italy, Sicily,
and Northern Africa. He cites as evidence the heights in Sicily that were in
his time known as Cronia. Cronus, joined by the Titans, makes war against
and eventually defeats his brother Jupiter, who reigns in Crete, and his
brother-in-law Hammon, who reigns at Nysa, an island on the river Triton,
somewhere in Africa.
Cronus takes his sister Rhea from Hammon, to be his own wife. Cronus in
turn is defeated by Hammon's son Bacchus or Dionysus, who appoints
Cronus' and Rhea's son, Jupiter Olympus, as governor over Egypt.
Bacchus and Jupiter Olympus then join their forces to defeat the remaining
Titans in Crete, and on the death of Bacchus, Jupiter Olympus inherits all
the kingdoms, becoming lord of the world. (Diodorus, Book III)

Sibylline Oracles[edit source]

Cronus is again mentioned in the Sibylline Oracles, particularly book three,
which makes Cronus, 'Titan' and Iapetus, the three sons of Uranus and
Gaia, each to receive a third division of the Earth, and Cronus is made king
over all. After the death of Uranus, Titan's sons attempt to destroy Cronus'
and Rhea's male offspring as soon as they are born, but at Dodona, Rhea
secretly bears her sons Zeus, Poseidon and Hades and sends them to
Phrygia to be raised in the care of three Cretans. Upon learning this, sixty
of Titan's men then imprison Cronus and Rhea, causing the sons of
Cronus to declare and fight the first of all wars against them. This account
mentions nothing about Cronus either killing his father or attempting to kill
any of his children.

Name and comparative mythology[edit source]

H. J. Rose in 1928[4] observed that attempts to give Kronos a Greek
etymology had failed.
Recently, Janda (2010) offers a genuinely Indo-European etymology of
"the cutter", from the root *(s)ker- "to cut" (Greek (keir), c.f. English
shear), motivated by Cronus' characteristic act of "cutting the sky" (or the
genitals of anthropomorphic Uranus). The Indo-Iranian reflex of the root is
kar, generally meaning "to make, create" (whence karma), but Janda
argues that the original meaning "to cut" in a cosmogonic sense is still
preserved in some verses of the Rigveda pertaining to Indra's heroic
"cutting", like that of Cronus resulting in creation:
RV 10.104.10 See Tfdrdayad vtram akod uloka "he hit Vrtra fatally,
cutting [> creating] a free path"RV 6.47.4 See Tfdvarma divo akod
"he cut [> created] the loftiness of the sky."
This may point to an older Indo-European mytheme reconstructed as
*(s)kert wersmn diwos "by means of a cut he created the loftiness of the
sky".[5] The myth of Cronus castrating Uranus parallels the Song of
Kumarbi, where Anu (the heavens) is castrated by Kumarbi. In the Song of
Ullikummi, Teshub uses the "sickle with which heaven and earth had once
been separated" to defeat the monster Ullikummi,[6] establishing that the
"castration" of the heavens by means of a sickle was part of a creation
myth, in origin a cut creating an opening or gap between heaven (imagined
as a dome of stone) and earth enabling the beginning of time (Chronos)
and human history.[7]
During antiquity, Cronus was occasionally interpreted as Chronos, the
personification of time;[8] according to Plutarch the Greeks believed that
Cronus was an allegorical name for Chronos.[9] During the Renaissance,
the identification of Cronus and Chronos gave rise to "Father Time"
wielding the harvesting scythe.
A theory debated in the 19th century, and sometimes still offered
somewhat apologetically,[10] holds that Kronos is related to "horned",

assuming a Semitic derivation from qrn.[11] Andrew Lang's objection, that

Cronus was never represented horned in Hellenic art,[12] was addressed
by Robert Brown,[13] arguing that in Semitic usage, as in the Hebrew Bible
qeren was a signifier of "power". When Greek writers encountered the
Levantine deity El, they rendered his name as Kronos.[14]
Robert Graves proposed that cronos meant "crow", related to the Ancient
Greek word corn () "crow", noting that Cronus was depicted with
a crow, as were the deities Apollo, Asclepius, Saturn and Bran.[15]

El, the Phoenician Cronus[edit source]

When Hellenes encountered Phoenicians and, later, Hebrews, they
identified the Semitic El, by interpretatio graeca, with Cronus. The
association was recorded c. AD 100 by Philo of Byblos' Phoenician history,
as reported in Eusebius' Prparatio Evangelica I.10.16.[16] Philo's
account, ascribed by Eusebius to the semi-legendary pre-Trojan War
Phoenician historian Sanchuniathon, indicates that Cronus was originally a
Canaanite ruler who founded Byblos and was subsequently deified. This
version gives his alternate name as Elus or Ilus, and states that in the 32nd
year of his reign, he emasculated, slew and deified his father Epigeius or
Autochthon "whom they afterwards called Uranus". It further states that
after ships were invented, Cronus, visiting the 'inhabitable world',
bequeathed Attica to his own daughter Athena, and Egypt to Thoth the son
of Misor and inventor of writing.[17]

Roman mythology and later culture[edit source]

4th-century Temple of Saturn in the Roman Forum.

Main article: Saturn (mythology)

While the Greeks considered Cronus a cruel and tempestuous force of
chaos and disorder, believing the Olympian gods had brought an era of
peace and order by seizing power from the crude and malicious Titans, the
Romans took a more positive and innocuous view of the deity, by conflating

their indigenous deity Saturn with Cronus. Consequently, while the Greeks
considered Cronus merely an intermediary stage between Uranus and
Zeus, he was a larger aspect of Roman religion. The Saturnalia was a
festival dedicated in his honour, and at least one temple to Saturn already
existed in the archaic Roman Kingdom.
His association with the "Saturnian" Golden Age eventually caused him to
become the god of "time", i.e., calendars, seasons, and harvestsnot now
confused with Chronos, the unrelated embodiment of time in general;
nevertheless, among Hellenistic scholars in Alexandria and during the
Renaissance, Cronus was conflated with the name of Chronos, the
personification of "Father Time",[8] wielding the harvesting scythe.
As a result of Cronus' importance to the Romans, his Roman variant,
Saturn, has had a large influence on Western culture. The seventh day of
the Judaeo-Christian week is called in Latin Dies Saturni ("Day of Saturn"),
which in turn was adapted and became the source of the English word
Saturday. In astronomy, the planet Saturn is named after the Roman deity.
It is the outermost of the Classical planets (those that are visible with the
naked eye).

Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek

mythology[edit source]
Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek mythology

Uran

Oceanus

Hyperion

Coe

Cronus

Rhea

Teth

Zeus

Hera

Hes

Ares

Aphrodite

Metis

Athena

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Gaia
Gaia, by Anselm Feuerbach (1875)
Primordial Being of the Earth
Earth

Consort Uranus, Zeus, Pontus, and

Poseidon
Parents

Aether and Hemera or Chaos

Siblings Eros, Tartarus, Uranus and Nyx

Children Cronus, Pontus, the Ourea,
Hecatonchires, Cyclopes, Titans,
The Gigantes, Nereus, Thaumus,
Phorcys, Ceto, Eurybia, and Typhon
Roman Terra
equivale
nt

Gaia (/e./ or /a./; from Ancient Greek , a poetical form of G

Gaia (mythology)

Abode

Hephaestus

Herm

, "land" or "earth";[1] also Gaea, or Ge) was the goddess or

personification of Earth in ancient Greek religion,[2] one of the Greek
primordial deities. Gaia was the great mother of all: the primal Greek
Mother Goddess; creator and giver of birth to the Earth and all the
Universe; the heavenly gods, the Titans and the Giants were born from her
union with Uranus (the sky), while the sea-gods were born from her union
with Pontus (the sea). Her equivalent in the Roman pantheon was Terra.[3]
Contents [hide]
%

1 Etymology

2 Greek mythology
1

2.1 Hesiod

2.2 Other sources

3 Children

4 Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek mythology

5 Interpretations

6 Neopaganism

7 Modern ecological theory

8 See also

9 Notes

10 References

11 External links

Etymology[edit source]
The Greek word "" (trans. as gaia or gaea pronounced: Geea) is a
collateral form of ""[4] (g, Doric "" -ga and probably "" da[5][6])
meaning Earth,[7] a word of unknown origin.[8] In Mycenean Greek Ma-ka
(trans. as Ma-ga: Mother Gaia) also contains the root ga-.[9][10]

Greek mythology[edit source]

Greek deities
series
%

Titans and
Olympians

Aquatic deities

Personified
concepts

Other deities

Primordial deities
%

Ch
ao
s

Eros

Erebus

Ae
th
er

Nyx

Tartaru
s

Ga
ia

Ur
an
us
Chthonic deities

Hades and Persephone,

Gaia, Demeter, Hecate,
Iacchus, Trophonius,
Triptolemus, Erinyes

Hesiod[edit source]
Hesiod's Theogony tells how, after Chaos, "wide-bosomed" Gaia (Earth)
arose to be the everlasting seat of the immortals who possess Olympus
above,[11] and the depths of Tartarus below (as some scholars interpret
it[12]). Gaia brought forth her equal Uranus (or Ouranos in Ancient Greek)
(Heaven, Sky) to "cover her on every side" and to be the abode of the
gods.[13] Gaia also bore the hills (ourea), and Pontus (Sea), "without sweet
union of love."[14] Afterwards with Uranus, she gave birth to the Titans, as
Hesiod tells it:
She lay with Heaven and bore deep-swirling Oceanus, Coeus and Crius
and Hyperion and Iapetus, Theia and Rhea, Themis and Mnemosyne and

gold-crowned Phoebe and lovely Tethys. After them was born Cronos the
wily, youngest and most terrible of her children, and he hated his lusty sire.
[15]

According to Hesiod, Gaia conceived further offspring with Uranus

(Ouranos), first the giant one-eyed Cyclopes: Brontes ("Thunder"),
Steropes ("Lightning") and Arges ("Bright");[16] then the Hecatonchires:
Cottus, Briareos and Gyges, each with a hundred arms and fifty heads.[17]
As each of the Cyclopes and Hecatonchires were born, Uranus hid them in
a secret place within Gaia, causing her great pain. So Gaia devised a plan.
She created a grey flint (or adamantine) sickle. And Cronus used the sickle
to castrate his father Uranus as he approached Gaia to have intercourse
with her. From Uranus' spilled blood, Gaia produced the Erinyes, the
Giants and the Meliae (ash-tree nymphs). From the testicles of Uranus in
the sea came forth Aphrodite.[18]
By her son Pontus, Gaia bore the sea-deities Nereus, Thaumas, Phorcys,
Ceto, and Eurybia.[19]
Because Cronus had learned from Gaia and Uranus, that he was destined
to be overthrown by his own child, Cronus swallowed each of the children
born to him by his Titan sister Rhea. But when Rhea was pregnant with her
youngest child Zeus, she sought help from Gaia and Uranus. And when
Zeus was born Gaia took the child into her care, and in place of Zeus,
Rhea gave Cronus a stone wrapped in swaddling-clothes, which he
swallowed.[20]
With Gaia's advice[21] Zeus defeated the Titans. But afterwords Gaia in
union with Tartarus, bore the youngest of her sons Typhon, who would be
the last challenge to Zeus' authority.[22]

Other sources[edit source]

According to Apollodorus, Gaia and Tartarus were the parents of Echidna.
[23]

Zeus hid Elara, one of his lovers, from Hera by hiding her under the earth.
His son by Elara, the giant Tityos, is therefore sometimes said[by whom?] to

be a son of Gaia, the earth goddess.

Gaia is believed by some sources[24] to be the original deity behind the
Oracle at Delphi. Depending on the source, Gaia passed her powers on to
Poseidon, Apollo or Themis. Apollo is the best-known as the oracle power
behind Delphi, long established by the time of Homer, having killed Gaia's
child Python there and usurped the chthonic power. Hera punished Apollo
for this by sending him to King Admetus as a shepherd for nine years.
[

citation needed]

In classical art Gaia was represented in one of two ways. In Athenian vase
painting she was shown as a matronly woman only half risen from the
earth, often in the act of handing the baby Erichthonius (a future king of
Athens) to Athena to foster (see example below). In mosaic
representations, she appears as a woman reclining upon the earth
surrounded by a host of Carpi, infant gods of the fruits of the earth (see
example below).[citation needed]
Gaia also made Aristaeus immortal.[citation needed]
Oaths sworn in the name of Gaia, in ancient Greece, were considered the
most binding of all.[citation needed]

Children[edit source]
Gaia hands her newborn, Erichthonius, to Athena as Hephaestus watches - an Attic redfigure stamnos, 470460 BC

Aion and Gaia with four children, perhaps the personified seasons, mosaic from a
Roman villa in Sentinum, first half of the 3rd century BC, (Munich Glyptothek, Inv. W504)

Gaia is the personification of the Earth and these are her offspring as
related in various myths. Some are related consistently, some are
mentioned only in minor variants of myths, and others are related in
variants that are considered to reflect a confusion of the subject or
association.

By herself

Uranus

Pontus

Ourea

With Uranus

Cyclopes
1 Arges
2 Brontes
3 Steropes

Hecatonchires
1 Briareus
2 Cottus
3 Gyes

Titans
1 Coeus
2 Crius
3 Cronus
4 Hyperion
5 Iapetus
6 Mnemosyne
7 Oceanus
8 Phoebe
9 Rhea
10 Tethys
11 Theia
12 Themis

Other
1 Mneme
2 Melete
3 Aoide
4 Gigantes*
5 Erinyes*

6 Meliae*
7 Elder Muses
Some said that children marked with a * were born from Uranus' blood
when Cronus defeated him.
% With Pontus
%

Ceto

Phorcys

Eurybia

Nereus

Thaumas

With Poseidon

Antaeus

Charybdis[Laistrygones Laistrygon

With Oceanus

Kreousa

Triptolemos

With Tartarus

1.

Typhon

2.

Echidna (more commonly held to be child of Phorcys and Ceto)

3.

Campe (presumably)

With Zeus

1.

Manes

With Hephaestus

1.

Erichthonius of Athens

With Aether

1.

Uranus (more commonly held to be child of Gaia alone)

2.

Aergia

Unknown father or through parthenogenesis

1.

Pheme

2.

Cecrops

3.

Python

Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek

mythology[edit source]
Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek mythology

Aph
rodit

Interpretations[edit source]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2012)
Some modern sources, such as James Mellaart, Marija Gimbutas and
Barbara Walker, claim that Gaia as Mother Earth is a later form of a preIndo-European Great Mother, venerated in Neolithic times. Her existence is
a speculation, and controversial in the academic community. Some modern
mythographers, including Karl Kerenyi, Carl A. P. Ruck and Danny Staples
interpret the goddesses Demeter the "mother," Persephone the "daughter"
and Hecate the "crone," as aspects of a former Great goddess identified by
some[who?] as Rhea or as Gaia herself. In Crete, a goddess was worshiped
as Potnia Theron (the "Mistress of the Animals") or simply Potnia
("Mistress"), speculated[by whom?] as Rhea or Gaia; the title was later
applied in Greek texts to Demeter, Artemis or Athena. The mother-goddess
Cybele from Anatolia (modern Turkey) was partly identified by the Greeks
with Gaia, but more so with Rhea and Demeter.

Neopaganism[edit source]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2006)
Many Neopagans worship Gaia. Beliefs regarding Gaia vary, ranging from

the belief that Gaia is the Earth to the belief that she is the spiritual
embodiment of the earth, or the Goddess of the Earth.

Modern ecological theory[edit source]

Main article: Gaia hypothesis
The mythological name was revived in 1979 by James Lovelock, in Gaia: A
New Look at Life on Earth; his Gaia hypothesis was supported by Lynn
Margulis. The hypothesis proposes that living organisms and inorganic
material are part of a dynamic system that shapes the Earth's biosphere,
and maintains the Earth as a fit environment for life. In some Gaia theory
approaches the Earth itself is viewed as an organism with self-regulatory
functions. Further books by Lovelock and others popularized the Gaia
Hypothesis, which was widely embraced and passed into common usage
as part of the heightened awareness of environmental concerns of the
1990s.

See also[edit source]

Greek mythology
portal
Hellenismos portal

Bhumi

Dewi Shri

Earth Mother

Gaia hypothesis

Gaia philosophy

Great Mother

Titan

Mother Nature

Tellus Mater

Terra (mythology)

The Seven Deadly Sins of Modern Times (painting)

Notes[edit source]

1.

^ Liddell, Henry George; Scott, Robert, "", A Greek-English Lexicon

2.

^ Ian Brooks, ed. (2003). The Chambers Dictionary (9th ed.).

3.

^ Larousse Desk Reference Encyclopedia, The Book People, Haydock,

1995, p. 215.

4.

^ , Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, on

Perseus

5.

^ , Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, on

Perseus

6.

^ , Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, on

Perseus

7.

^ , Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, on

Perseus

8.

^ Gaia, Online etymology dictionary

9.

^ Beekes.Greek Etymological Dictionary

10.

^ "Paleolexicon". Retrieved 21 April 2012.

11.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 116118.

12.

^ Hesiod, Theogony, 119. Translated by Glenn W. Most in Loeb Classical

Library

13.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 126128.

14.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 129132.

15.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 132138.

16.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 139146.

17.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 147153.

18.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 154200.

19.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 233239.

20.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 453491.

21.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 626.

22.

^ Hesiod, Theogony 820880.

23.

^ Apollodorus, Library 2.1.2

24.

^ Joseph Fontenrose 1959

References[edit source]
%

Apollodorus, Apollodorus, The Library, with an English Translation by

Sir James George Frazer, F.B.A., F.R.S. in 2 Volumes, Cambridge,
MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd.

1921
%

Fontenrose, Joseph, Python: A Study of Delphic Myth and its

Origins, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959; reprint 1980

Hesiod, Theogony, in The Homeric Hymns and Homerica with an

English Translation by Hugh G. Evelyn-White, Cambridge,
MA.,Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd.
1914.

Kerenyi, Karl, The Gods of the Greeks 1951

Ruck, Carl A.P. and Danny Staples, The World of Classical Myth,
1994.

Smith, William; Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and

Mythology, London (1873). "Gaea"

External links[edit source]

Wikimedia Commons has
media related to: Gaia

Theoi Project, Gaia references to Gaia in classical literature and art.

Gaia

Theogony
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The Theogony (Greek: ,Theogona, pronounced [teoona], i.e.
"the genealogy or birth of the gods"[1]) is a poem by Hesiod (8th 7th
century BC) describing the origins and genealogies of the Greek gods,
composed circa 700 BC. It is written in the Epic dialect of Homeric Greek.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Descriptions

2 Creation of the world-mythical cosmogonies

3 First generation

4 Second generation

5 Third and final generation

6 Influence on earliest Greek Philosophy

7 See also

8 References

9 Sources

10 Selected translations

11 External links

Descriptions[edit source]
Hesiod's Theogony is a large-scale synthesis of a vast variety of local
Greek traditions concerning the gods, organized as a narrative that tells
how they came to be and how they established permanent control over the
cosmos. It is the first Greek mythical cosmogony. The initial state of the
universe is chaos, a dark indefinite void considered as a divine primordial
condition from which everything else appeared. Theogony is a part of
Greek mythology which embodies the desire to articulate reality as a
whole; this universalizing impulse was fundamental for the first later
projects of speculative theorizing.[2]
In many cultures, narratives about the origin of the cosmos and about the
gods that shaped it are a way for society to reaffirm its native cultural
traditions. Specifically, theogonies tend to affirm kingship as the natural
embodiment of society. What makes the Theogony of Hesiod unique is that
it affirms no historical royal line. Such a gesture would have sited the
Theogony in one time and one place. Rather, the Theogony affirms the
kingship of the god Zeus himself over all the other gods and over the whole
cosmos.
Further, in the "Kings and Singers" passage (80103)[3] Hesiod
appropriates to himself the authority usually reserved to sacred kingship.
The poet declares that it is he, where we might have expected some king
instead, upon whom the Muses have bestowed the two gifts of a scepter
and an authoritative voice (Hesiod, Theogony 303), which are the visible
signs of kingship. It is not that this gesture is meant to make Hesiod a king.

Rather, the point is that the authority of kingship now belongs to the poetic
voice, the voice that is declaiming the Theogony.
Although it is often used as a sourcebook for Greek mythology,[4] the
Theogony is both more and less than that. In formal terms it is a hymn
invoking Zeus and the Muses: parallel passages between it and the much
shorter Homeric Hymn to the Muses make it clear that the Theogony
developed out of a tradition of hymnic preludes with which an ancient
Greek rhapsode would begin his performance at poetic competitions. It is
necessary to see the Theogony not as the definitive source of Greek
mythology, but rather as a snapshot of a dynamic tradition that happened
to crystallize when Hesiod formulated the myths he knewand to
remember that the traditions have continued evolving since that time.
The written form of the Theogony was established in the sixth century.
Even some conservative editors have concluded that the Typhon episode
(82068) is an interpolation.[5]
Hesiod was probably influenced by some Near-Eastern traditions, such as
the Babylonian Dynasty of Dunnum,[6] which were mixed with local
traditions, but they are more likely to be lingering traces from the
Mycenaean tradition than the result of oriental contacts in Hesiod's own
time.
The decipherment of Hittite mythical texts, notably the Kingship in Heaven
text first presented in 1946, with its castration mytheme, offers in the figure
of Kumarbi an Anatolian parallel to Hesiod's Uranus-Cronus conflict.[7]

Creation of the world-mythical cosmogonies[edit

source]
In the Theogony the initial state of the universe, or the origin (arche) is
Chaos, a gaping void (abyss) considered as a divine primordial condition,
from which appeared everything that exists. Then came Gaia (Earth),
Tartarus (the cave-like space under the earth; the later-born Erebus is the
darkness in this space), and Eros (Sexual Desire -the urge to reproduce,
not the emotion of love as is the common misconception). Hesiod made an

abstraction because his original chaos is something completely indefinite.

[8]

By contrast, in the Orphic cosmogony the unaging Chronos produced

Aether and Chaos and made a silvery egg in divine Aether. From it
appeared the bisexual god Phanes, identified by the Orphics as Eros, who
becomes the creator of the world.[9]
Some similar ideas appear in the Hindu cosmology which is similar to the
Vedic. In the beginning there was nothing in the universe but only darkness
and the divine essence who removed the darkness and created the
primordial waters. His seed produced the universal germ (Hiranyagarbha),
from which everything else appeared.[10]
In the Babylonian creation story Enuma Elish the universe was in a
formless state and is described as a watery chaos. From it emerged two
primary gods, the male Apsu and female Tiamat, and a third deity who is
the maker Mummu and his power for the progression of cosmogonic births
to begin.[11]
In Genesis the world in its early state after its creation is described as a
watery chaos and the earth "without form and void". The spirit of Elohim
moved upon the dark face of the waters and commanded there to be light.
[12]

Norse mythology also describes Ginnungagap as the primordial abyss from

which sprang the first living creatures, including the giant Ymir whose body
eventually became the world, whose blood became the seas, and so on;
another version describes the origin of the world as a result of the fiery and
cold parts of Hel colliding.

First generation[edit source]

After the speaker declares that he has received the blessings of the Muses
and thanks them for giving him inspiration, he explains that Chaos arose
spontaneously. Then came Gaia (Earth), the more orderly and safe
foundation that would serve as a home for the gods and mortals, and
Tartarus, in the depths of the Earth, and Eros,[13] the fairest among the

deathless gods. Eros serves an important role in sexual reproduction,

before which children had to be produced asexually
From Chaos came Erebus (place of darkness between the earth and the
underworld) and Nyx (Night). Erebus and Nyx reproduced to make Aether
(the outer atmosphere where the gods breathed) and Hemera (Day). From
Gaia came Uranus (Sky), the Ourea (Mountains), and Pontus (Sea).
Uranus mated with Gaia to create twelve Titans: Oceanus, Coeus, Crius,
Hyperion, Iapetos, Theia, Rhea, Themis, Mnemosyne, Phoebe, Tethys and
Cronus; three cyclopes: Brontes, Steropes and Arges; and three
Hecatonchires: Kottos, Briareos, and Gyges.[14]

Second generation[edit source]

Uranus was disgusted with his children, the Hecatonchires, so he hid them
away somewhere in Gaia. Angered by this, Gaia asked her children the
Titans to punish their father. Only Cronus was willing to do so. Cronus
castrated his father with a sickle from Gaia. The blood from Uranus
splattered onto the earth producing Erinyes (the Furies), Giants, and
Meliai. Cronus threw the severed testicles into the Sea (Thalassa), around
which foam developed and transformed into the goddess of Love,
Aphrodite (which is why in some myths, Aphrodite was daughter of Uranus
and the goddess Thalassa).
Meanwhile, Nyx, though she married Erebos, produced children
parthenogenetically: Moros (Doom), Oneiroi (Dreams), Ker and the Keres
(Destinies), Eris (Discord), Momos (Blame), Philotes (Love), Geras (Old
Age), Thanatos (Death), Moirai (Fates), Nemesis (Retribution), Hesperides
(Daughters of Night), Hypnos (Sleep), Oizys (Hardship), and Apate
(Deceit).
From Eris, following in her mother's footsteps, came Ponos (Pain),
Hysmine (Battles), the Neikea (Quarrels), the Phonoi (Murders), Lethe
(Oblivion), Makhai (Fight), Pseudologos (Lies), Amphilogia (Disputes),
Limos (Famine), Androktasia (Manslaughters), Ate (Ruin), Dysnomia
(Anarchy and Disobedient Lawlessness), the Algea (Illness), Horkos

(Oaths), and Logoi (Stories).

After Uranus's castration, Gaia married Pontus and they have a
descendent line consisting of sea deities, sea nymphs, and hybrid
monsters. One child of Gaia and Pontus is Nereus (Old Man of the Sea),
who marries Doris, a daughter of Oceanus and Tethys, and has Nereids,
the fifty nymphs of the sea, one of whom is Thetis. Another child of Gaia
and Pontus is Thaumas, who marries Electra, a sister of Doris, and has Iris
(Rainbow) and two Harpies.
Phorcys and Ceto, two siblings, marry each other and have the Graiae, the
Gorgons, Echidna, and Ophion. Medusa, one of the Gorgons, has two
children with Poseidon: the winged horse Pegasus and giant Chrysaor, at
the instant of her decapitation by Perseus. Chrysaor marries Callirhoe,
another daughter of Oceanus, and has the three-headed Geryon.
Gaia also marries Tartarus and has Typhon, whom Echidna marries and
has Orthos, Kerberos, Hydra, and Chimera. From Orthos and either
Chimera or Echidna were born the Sphinx and the Nemean Lion.
In the family of the Titans, Oceanus and Tethys marry and have three
thousand rivers (including the Nile and Skamandar) and three thousand
Okeanid Nymphs (including Electra, Calypso, and Styx). Theia and
Hyperion marry and have Helios (Sun), Selene (Moon), and Eos (Dawn).
Kreios and Eurybia marry to bear Astraios, Pallas, and Perses. Eos and
Astraios will later marry and have Zephyros, Boreas, Notos, Eosphoros,
Hesperos, Phosphoros and the Stars (foremost of which are Phaenon,
Phaethon, Pyroeis, Stilbon, those of the Zodiac and those three
acknowledged before).[clarification needed]
From Pallas and Styx (another Okeanid) came Zelus (Zeal), Nike (Victory),
Cratos (Strength), and Bia (Force). Koios and Phoibe marry and have Leto,
Asteria (who later marries Perses and has Hekate). Iapetos marries
Klymene (an Okeanid Nymph) and had Atlas, Menoetius, Prometheus, and
Epimetheus.

Third and final generation[edit source]

Cronus, having taken control of the Cosmos, wanted to ensure that he

maintained power. Uranus and Gaia prophesied to him that one of his
children would overthrow him, so when he married Rhea, he made sure to
swallow each of the children she birthed: Hestia, Demeter, Hera, Hades,
Poseidon, Zeus (in that order). However, Rhea asked Gaia and Uranus for
help in saving Zeus by sending Rhea to Crete to bear Zeus and giving
Cronus a huge stone to swallow thinking that it was another of Rhea's
children. Gaia then took Zeus and hid him deep in a cave beneath the
Aegean Mountains.
Tricked by Gaia (the Theogony does not detail how), Cronus regurgitated
his other five children.[15] Joining with Zeus, they waged a great war on the
Titans for control of the Cosmos. The war lasted ten years, with the
Olympian gods, Cyclopes, Prometheus and Epimetheus, the children of
Klymene, on one side, and the Titans and the Giants on the other (with
only Oceanos as a neutral force). Eventually Zeus released the HundredHanded ones to shake the earth, allowing him to gain the upper hand, and
cast the fury of his thunderbolts at the Titans, throwing them into Tartarus.
Zeus later battled Typhon, a son of Gaia and Tartarus, created because
Gaia was angry that the Titans were defeated, and was victorious again.
Because Prometheus helped Zeus, he was not sent to Tartarus like the
other Titans. However, Prometheus sought to trick Zeus. Slaughtering a
cow, he took the valuable fat and meat, and sewed it inside the cow's
stomach. Prometheus then took the bones and hid them with a thin layer of
fat. Prometheus asked Zeus' opinion on which offering pile he found more
desirable, hoping to trick the god into selecting the less desirable portion.
However, Hesiod relates that Zeus saw through the trick and responded in
a fury. Zeus declared that the ash tree would never hold fire, in effect
denying the benefit of fire to man. In response, Prometheus sneaked into
the gods' chambers and stole a glowing ember with a piece of reed.
Prometheus then defies the gods and gives fire to humanity (theft of fire).
For this theft, Zeus punished Prometheus by chaining him to a cliff, where
an eagle fed on his ever-regenerating liver every day. Prometheus would
not be freed until Heracles, a son of Zeus, came to free him. Since man

had access to fire, Zeus devised woman as a general punishment, in trade.

Hephaistos and Athena built woman with exquisite detail, and she was
considered beautiful by all men and gods. (It is generally agreed in
academic translations that this woman was Pandora.) Hesiod writes that,
despite her beauty, woman is a bane for mankind, attributing women with
laziness and a waste of resources. Hesiod notes that Zeus' curse,
womankind, can only bring man suffering, whether by taking a woman as
his wife, or by trying to avoid marriage.
Zeus married seven wives. The first was the Oceanid Metis, whom he
swallowed to avoid begetting a son who, as had happened with Cronus
and Uranus, would overthrow him, as well as to absorb her wisdom so that
she could advise him in the future. He would later "give birth" to Athena
from his head, which would anger Hera enough for her to produce her own
son parthenogenetically, Typhaon, the part snake, part dragon sea
monster, or in other versions Hephaistos, god of fire and blacksmiths. The
second wife was Themis, who bore the three Horae (Hours): Eunomia
(Order), Dik (Justice), Eirene (Peace); and the three Moirai (Fates):
Clotho (Spinner), Lachesis (Alotter), Atropos (Unturned), as well as Tyche
(Luck). Zeus then married his third wife Eurynome, who bore the three
Charites (Graces): Aglaia, Euphrosyne, and Thalia.
The fourth wife was his sister, Demeter, who bore Persephone. The fifth
wife of Zeus was another aunt, Mnemosyne, from whom came the nine
Muses: Clio, Euterpe, Thaleia, Melpomene, Terpsikhore, Erato, Polymnia,
Urania, and Calliope. The sixth wife was Leto, who gave birth to Apollo and
Artemis. The seventh and final wife is Hera, who gave birth to Hebe, Ares,
Enyo, Hephaistos, and Eileithyia. Of course, though Zeus no longer
marries, he still has affairs with many other women, such as Semele,
mother of Dionysus, Danae, mother of Perseus, Leda, mother of Castor
and Polydeuces and Helen, and Alkmene, the mother of Heracles, who
married Hebe.
Poseidon married Amphitrite and produced Triton. Aphrodite, who married
Hephaistos, nevertheless had an affair with Ares to have Eros (Love),
Phobos (Fear), Deimos (Cowardice), and Harmonia (Harmony), who would

later marry Cadmus to sire Ino (who with her son, Melicertes would
become a sea deity), Semele (Mother of Dionysos), Autono (Mother of
Actaeon), Polydorus, and Agave (Mother of Pentheus). Helios and Perseis
birthed Circe. Circe, with Poseidon, in turn, begat Phaunos, god of the
forest, and, with Dionysos, mothered Comos, god of revelry and festivity.
After coupling with Odysseus, Circe would later give birth to Agrius,
Latinus, and Telegonos.[16] Atlas' daughter Calypso would also bear
Odysseus two sons, Nausithoos and Nausinous.[17]

Influence on earliest Greek Philosophy[edit source]

The heritage of Greek mythology already embodied the desire to articulate
reality as a whole and this universalizing impulse was fundamental for the
first projects of speculative theorizing. It appears that the order of being
was first imaginatively visualized before it was abstractly thought. Hesiod,
impressed by necessity governing the ordering of things, discloses a
definite pattern in the Genesis and appearance of the Gods. These ideas
made something like cosmological speculation possible. The earliest
rhetoric of reflection all gravitates about two interrelated things, the
experience of wonder as a living involvement with the divine order of things
and the absolute conviction that, beyond the totality of things, reality forms
a beautiful and harmonious Whole.[18]
In the Theogony the origin (arche) is Chaos, a divine primordial condition
and there are the roots and the ends of the earth, sky, sea and Tartarus.
Pherecydes of Syros (6th century BC), believed that there were three preexistent divine principles and called the water also Chaos.[19] In the
language of the archaic period (8th 6th century BC), arche (or archai),
designates the source, origin or root of things that exist. If a thing is to be
well established or founded, its arche or static point must be secure, and
the most secure foundations are those provided by the gods: the
indestructible, immutable and eternal ordering of things.[20]
In ancient Greek philosophy, arche is the element or first principle of all
things, a permanent nature or substance which is conserved in the
generation of the rest of it. From this all things come to be and into it they

are resolved in a final state. (Aristotle, Metaph. A983,b6ff). It is the divine

horizon of substance that encompasses and rules all things. Thales (7th
6th century BC), the first Greek philosopher, claimed that the first principle
of all things is water. Anaximander (6th century BC) was the first
philosopher who used the term arche for that which writers from Aristotle
on call the "substratum" (Hippolitus I,6,I DK B2). Anaximander claimed that
the beginning or first principle is an endless mass (Apeiron) subject to
neither age nor decay, from which all things are being born and then they
are destroyed there. A fragment from Xenophanes (6th century BC) shows
the transition from Chaos to Apeiron: "The upper limit of earth borders on
air. The lower limit of earth reaches down to the unlimited (i.e the
Apeiron)."[21]

See also[edit source]

%

Gigantomachy

Theomachy

Titanomachy

Ancient literature
Theogony

Dionysus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Bacchus" redirects here. For other uses, see Bacchus (disambiguation).
This article is about the Greco-Roman deity. For other uses of the names
"Dionysus" and "Dionysos", see Dionysos (disambiguation). For other uses
of the theophoric name "Dionysius", see Dionysius (disambiguation).

Dionysus

2nd-century Roman statue of Dionysus, after a

Hellenistic model (ex-coll. Cardinal Richelieu,
Louvre)[1]
God of Wine, Merry Making, Theatre and
Ecstasy
Abode

Mount Olympus

Symbol

Thyrsus, grapevine, leopard skin,

panther, tiger, leopard

Consort

Ariadne

Parents

Zeus and Semele

Siblings

Ares, Athena, Apollo, Artemis,

Aphrodite, Hebe, Hermes,
Heracles, Helen of Troy,
Hephaestus, Perseus, Minos, the
Muses, the Graces

Mount

Mount Olympus

Roman
Bacchus, Liber
equivalen
t

Dionysus /da.nass/ (Ancient Greek: ,Dionysos) was the

god of the grape harvest, winemaking and wine, of ritual madness and
ecstasy in Greek mythology. His name in Linear B tablets shows he was
worshipped c. 15001100 BC by Mycenean Greeks: other traces of
Dionysian-type cult have been found in ancient Minoan Crete.[2] His origins
are uncertain, and his cults took many forms; some are described by
ancient sources as Thracian, others as Greek.[3][4][5] In some cults, he
arrives from the east, as an Asiatic foreigner; in others, from Ethiopia in the
South. He is a god of epiphany, "the god that comes", and his
"foreignness" as an arriving outsider-god may be inherent and essential to
his cults. He is a major, popular figure of Greek mythology and religion, and
is included in some lists of the twelve Olympians. Dionysus was the last
god to be accepted into Mt. Olympus. He was the youngest and the only
one to have a mortal mother.[6] His festivals were the driving force behind
the development of Greek theatre. He is an example of a dying god.[7][8]

The earliest cult images of Dionysus show a mature male, bearded and
robed. He holds a fennel staff, tipped with a pine-cone and known as a
thyrsus. Later images show him as a beardless, sensuous, naked or halfnaked androgynous youth: the literature describes him as womanly or
"man-womanish".[9] In its fully developed form, his central cult imagery
shows his triumphant, disorderly arrival or return, as if from some place
beyond the borders of the known and civilized. His procession (thiasus) is
made up of wild female followers (maenads) and bearded satyrs with erect
penises. Some are armed with the thyrsus, some dance or play music. The
god himself is drawn in a chariot, usually by exotic beasts such as lions or
tigers, and is sometimes attended by a bearded, drunken Silenus. This
procession is presumed to be the cult model for the human followers of his
Dionysian Mysteries. In his Thracian mysteries, he wears the bassaris or
fox-skin, symbolizing a new life. Dionysus is represented by city religions
as the protector of those who do not belong to conventional society and
thus symbolizes everything which is chaotic, dangerous and unexpected,
everything which escapes human reason and which can only be attributed
to the unforeseeable action of the gods.[10]
He was also known as Bacchus (/bks/ or /bks/; Greek: ,
Bakkhos), the name adopted by the Romans[11] and the frenzy he induces,
bakkheia. His thyrsus is sometimes wound with ivy and dripping with
honey. It is a beneficent wand but also a weapon, and can be used to
destroy those who oppose his cult and the freedoms he represents. He is
also called Eleutherios ("the liberator"), whose wine, music and ecstatic
dance frees his followers from self-conscious fear and care, and subverts
the oppressive restraints of the powerful. Those who partake of his
mysteries are possessed and empowered by the god himself.[12] His cult is
also a "cult of the souls"; his maenads feed the dead through bloodofferings, and he acts as a divine communicant between the living and the
dead.[13]
In Greek mythology, he is presented as a son of Zeus and the mortal
Semele, thus semi-divine or heroic: and as son of Zeus and Persephone or
Demeter, thus both fully divine, part-chthonic and possibly identical with

Iacchus of the Eleusinian Mysteries. Some scholars believe that Dionysus

is a syncretism of a local Greek nature deity and a more powerful god from
Thrace or Phrygia such as Sabazios[14] or Zalmoxis.[15]
Contents [hide]
%

1 Names
1

1.1 Etymology

1.2 Epithets

2 Mythology
1

2.1 Birth

2.2 Infancy at Mount Nysa

2.3 Childhood

2.4 Other stories

2.4.1 Midas

2.4.2 Pentheus

2.4.3 Lycurgus

2.4.4 Prosymnus

2.4.5 Ampelos

2.4.6 Chiron

2.4.7 Secondary myths

2.5 Consorts and children

3 Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek mythology

4 Parallels with Christianity

5 Symbolism

6 Bacchus and the Bacchanalia

7 In Art
1

7.1 Classical

7.2 Modern views

8 Names originating from Dionysus

9 Gallery

10 See also

11 Notes

12 References

13 Further reading

14 External links

Names[edit source]
Etymology[edit source]
Dionysian procession on a marble sarcophagus, possibly indicating that the deceased
was an initiate into Dionysian mysteries

The dio- element has been associated since antiquity with Zeus (genitive
Dios). The earliest attested form of the name is Mycenaean Greek di-wonu-so, written in Linear B syllabic script, presumably for /Diwo(h)nsos/,
found on two tablets at Mycenaean Pylos and dated to the 12th or 13th
century BC.[16][17]
Later variants include Dionsos and Dinsos in Boeotia; Dien(n)sos in
Thessaly; Deonsos and Deunsos in Ionia; and Dinnsos in Aeolia,
besides other variants. A Dio- prefix is found in other names, such as that
of the Dioscures, and may derive from Dios, the genitive of the name of
Zeus.[18]
The second element -nsos is associated with Mount Nysa, the birthplace
of the god in Greek mythology, where he was nursed by nymphs (the
Nysiads),[19] but according to Pherecydes of Syros, nsa was an archaic
word for "tree."[20]
The cult of Dionysus was closely associated with trees, specifically the fig
tree, and some of his bynames exhibit this, such as Endendros "he in the
tree" or Dendrits, "he of the tree." Peters suggests the original meaning as
"he who runs among the trees," or that of a "runner in the woods." Janda
(2010) accepts the etymology but proposes the more cosmological
interpretation of "he who impels the (world-)tree." This interpretation
explains how Nysa could have been re-interpreted from a meaning of "tree"
to the name of a mountain: the axis mundi of Indo-European mythology is
represented both as a world-tree and as a world-mountain.[21]

Epithets[edit source]

Dionysus was variably known with the following epithets:

Acratophorus, ("giver of unmixed wine"), at Phigaleia in Arcadia.[22]
Acroreites at Sicyon.[23]
Adoneus ("ruler") in his Latinised, Bacchic cult.[citation needed][24]
Aegobolus ("goat killer") at Potniae, in Boeotia.[25]
Aesymnetes ("ruler" or "lord") at Aro and Patrae in Achaea.
Agrios ("wild"), in Macedonia.
Briseus ("he who prevails") in Smyrna.[26][27]
Bromios ("Roaring" as of the wind, primarily relating to the central
death/resurrection element of the myth,[28] but also to the god's famous
transformations into lion and bull.[29] Also refers to the "boisterousness" of
those who imbibe spirits, and is cognate with the "roar of thunder",
although this aspect is corollary in that it is a reference to the god's
parentage, not his innate qualities.)
Dendrites ("he of the trees"), as a fertility god.
Dithyrambos, form of address used at his festivals, referring to his
premature birth.
Eleutherios ("the liberator"), an epithet for both Dionysus and Eros.
Endendros ("he in the tree").[30]
Enorches ("with balls,"[31] with reference to his fertility, or "in the testicles"
in reference to Zeus' sewing the baby Dionysus into his thigh, i.e., his
testicles).[32] used in Samos and Lesbos.
Erikryptos ("completely hidden"), in Macedonia.
Evis, in Euripides' play, The Bacchae.
Iacchus, possibly an epithet of Dionysus and associated with the
Eleusinian Mysteries. In Eleusis, he is known as a son of Zeus and
Demeter. The name "Iacchus" may come from the (Iakchos), a
hymn sung in honor of Dionysus.

Liknites ("he of the winnowing fan"), as a fertility god connected with the
mystery religions. A winnowing fan was used to separate the chaff from the
grain.
Lyaeus ("he who unties") or releases from care and anxiety.
Melanaigis ("of the black goatskin") at the Apaturia festival.
Oeneus, as god of the wine press.
Pseudanor ("false man"), in Macedonia.
In the Greek pantheon, Dionysus (along with Zeus) absorbs the role of
Sabazios, a Thracian/Phrygian deity. In the Roman pantheon, Sabazius
became an alternate name for Bacchus.[33]

Mythology[edit source]
Birth[edit source]
Birth of Dionysus, on a small sarcophagus that may have been made for a child (Walters
Art Museum)[34]

Dionysus had a strange birth that evokes the difficulty in fitting him into the
Olympian pantheon. His mother was a mortal woman, Semele, the
daughter of king Cadmus of Thebes, and his father was Zeus, the king of
the gods. Zeus' wife, Hera, discovered the affair while Semele was
pregnant. Appearing as an old crone (in other stories a nurse), Hera
befriended Semele, who confided in her that Zeus was the actual father of
the baby in her womb. Hera pretended not to believe her, and planted
seeds of doubt in Semele's mind. Curious, Semele demanded of Zeus that
he reveal himself in all his glory as proof of his godhood.
Though Zeus begged her not to ask this, she persisted and he agreed.
Therefore he came to her wreathed in bolts of lightning; mortals, however,
could not look upon an undisguised god without dying, and she perished in
the ensuing blaze. Zeus rescued the fetal Dionysus by sewing him into his
thigh. A few months later, Dionysus was born on Mount Pramnos in the
island of Ikaria, where Zeus went to release the now-fully-grown baby from

his thigh. In this version, Dionysus is born by two "mothers" (Semele and
Zeus) before his birth, hence the epithet dimtr (of two mothers)
associated with his being "twice-born."
In the Cretan version of the same story, which Diodorus Siculus follows,[35]
Dionysus was the son of Zeus and Persephone, the queen of the Greek
underworld. Diodorus' sources equivocally identified the mother as
Demeter.[36] A jealous Hera again attempted to kill the child, this time by
sending Titans to rip Dionysus to pieces after luring the baby with toys. It is
said that he was mocked by the Titans who gave him a thyrsus (a fennel
stalk) in place of his rightful sceptre.[37] Zeus turned the Titans into dust
with his thunderbolts, but only after the Titans ate everything but the heart,
which was saved, variously, by Athena, Rhea, or Demeter. Zeus used the
heart to recreate him in his thigh, hence he was again "the twice-born."
Other versions claim that Zeus recreated him in the womb of Semele, or
gave Semele the heart to eat to impregnate her.
The rebirth in both versions of the story is the primary reason why
Dionysus was worshipped in mystery religions, as his death and rebirth
were events of mystical reverence. This narrative was apparently used in
several Greek and Roman cults, and variants of it are found in Callimachus
and Nonnus, who refer to this Dionysus with the title Zagreus, and also in
several fragmentary poems attributed to Orpheus.[citation needed]
The myth of the dismemberment of Dionysus by the Titans, is alluded to by
Plato in his Phaedo (69d) in which Socrates claims that the initiations of
the Dionysian Mysteries are similar to those of the philosophic path. Late
Neo-Platonists such as Damascius explore the implications of this at
length.[38]

Infancy at Mount Nysa[edit source]

Hermes and the Infant Dionysus by Praxiteles, (Archaeological Museum of Olympia).

According to the myth Zeus gave the infant Dionysus into the charge of
Hermes. One version of the story is that Hermes took the boy to King

Athamas and his wife Ino, Dionysus' aunt. Hermes bade the couple raise
the boy as a girl, to hide him from Hera's wrath.[39] Another version is that
Dionysus was taken to the rain-nymphs of Nysa, who nourished his infancy
and childhood, and for their care Zeus rewarded them by placing them as
the Hyades among the stars (see Hyades star cluster). Other versions
have Zeus giving him to Rhea, or to Persephone to raise in the
Underworld, away from Hera. Alternatively, he was raised by Maro.
Dionysus in Greek mythology is a god of foreign origin, and while Mount
Nysa is a mythological location, it is invariably set far away to the east or to
the south. The Homeric hymn to Dionysus places it "far from Phoenicia,
near to the Egyptian stream." Others placed it in Anatolia, or in Libya
('away in the west beside a great ocean'), in Ethiopia (Herodotus), or
Arabia (Diodorus Siculus).
According to Herodotus:
As it is, the Greek story has it that no sooner was Dionysus born than Zeus
sewed him up in his thigh and carried him away to Nysa in Ethiopia beyond
Egypt; and as for Pan, the Greeks do not know what became of him after
his birth. It is therefore plain to me that the Greeks learned the names of
these two gods later than the names of all the others, and trace the birth of
both to the time when they gained the knowledge.
Herodotus, Histories 2.146
The Bibliotheca seems to be following Pherecydes, who relates how the
infant Dionysus, god of the grapevine, was nursed by the rain-nymphs, the
Hyades at Nysa.

Childhood[edit source]
Kylix (6th century BC) depicting Dionysus among the sailors transformed to dolphins
after attempting to kidnap him

When Dionysus grew up, he discovered the culture of the vine and the
mode of extracting its precious juice; but Hera struck him with madness,
and drove him forth a wanderer through various parts of the earth. In
Phrygia the goddess Cybele, better known to the Greeks as Rhea, cured

him and taught him her religious rites, and he set out on a progress
through Asia teaching the people the cultivation of the vine. The most
famous part of his wanderings is his expedition to India, which is said to
have lasted several years. Returning in triumph he undertook to introduce
his worship into Greece, but was opposed by some princes who dreaded
its introduction on account of the disorders and madness it brought with it
(e.g. Pentheus or Lycurgus).

North African Roman mosaic: Panther-Dionysus scatters the pirates, who are changed to
dolphins, except for Acoetes, the helmsman. (Bardo National Museum)

Dionysus was exceptionally attractive. One of the Homeric hymns recounts

how, while disguised as a mortal sitting beside the seashore, a few sailors
spotted him, believing he was a prince. They attempted to kidnap him and
sail him far away to sell for ransom or into slavery. They tried to bind him
with ropes, but no type of rope could hold him. Dionysus turned into a
fierce lion and unleashed a bear on board, killing those he came into
contact with. Those who jumped off the ship were mercifully turned into
dolphins. The only survivor was the helmsman, Acoetes, who recognized
the god and tried to stop his sailors from the start.[40]
In a similar story, Dionysus desired to sail from Icaria to Naxos. He then
hired a Tyrrhenian pirate ship. However, when the god was on board, they
sailed not to Naxos but to Asia, intending to sell him as a slave. So
Dionysus turned the mast and oars into snakes, and filled the vessel with
ivy and the sound of flutes so that the sailors went mad and, leaping into
the sea, were turned into dolphins.

Other stories[edit source]

Midas[edit source]
Once, Dionysus found his old school master and foster father, Silenus,
missing. The old man had been drinking, and had wandered away drunk,
and was found by some peasants, who carried him to their king
(alternatively, he passed out in Midas' rose garden). Midas recognized him,

and treated him hospitably, entertaining him for ten days and nights with
politeness, while Silenus entertained Midas and his friends with stories and
songs. On the eleventh day, he brought Silenus back to Dionysus.
Dionysus offered Midas his choice of whatever reward he wanted.
Midas asked that whatever he might touch should be changed into gold.
Dionysus consented, though was sorry that he had not made a better
choice. Midas rejoiced in his new power, which he hastened to put to the
test. He touched and turned to gold an oak twig and a stone. Overjoyed, as
soon as he got home, he ordered the servants to set a feast on the table.
Then he found that his bread, meat, daughter and wine turned to gold.
Upset, Midas strove to divest himself of his power (the Midas Touch); he
hated the gift he had coveted. He prayed to Dionysus, begging to be
delivered from starvation. Dionysus heard and consented; he told Midas to
wash in the river Pactolus. He did so, and when he touched the waters the
power passed into them, and the river sands changed into gold. This was
an etiological myth that explained why the sands of the Pactolus were rich
in gold.

Pentheus[edit source]
Pentheus torn apart by Agave and Ino. Attic red-figure lekanis (cosmetics bowl) lid, c.
450-425 BCE (Louvre)

Euripides composed a tragedy about the destructive nature of Dionysus in

The Bacchae. Since Euripides wrote this play while in the court of King
Archelaus of Macedon, some scholars believe that the cult of Dionysus
was malicious in Macedon but benign in Athens.
In the play, Dionysus returns to his birthplace, Thebes, which is ruled by his
cousin Pentheus. Dionysus wants to exact revenge on Pentheus and the
women of Thebes (his aunts Agave, Ino and Autonoe) for not believing his
mother Semele's claims of being impregnated by Zeus, and for denying
Dionysus's divinity (and therefore not worshiping him).
Dionysus slowly drives Pentheus mad, lures him to the woods of Mount

Cithaeron, and then convinces him to spy/peek on the Maenads (female

worshippers of Dionysus, who often experienced divine ecstasy). The
Maenads are in an insane frenzy when Pentheus sees them (earlier in the
play they had ripped apart a herd of cattle), and they catch him but mistake
him for a wild animal. Pentheus is torn to shreds, and his mother (Agave,
one of the Maenads), not recognizing her own son because of her
madness, brutally tears his limbs off as he begs for his life.
As a result of their acts the women are banished from Thebes, ensuring
Dionysus's revenge.

Lycurgus[edit source]
When King Lycurgus of Thrace heard that Dionysus was in his kingdom, he
imprisoned Dionysus' followers, the Maenads. Dionysus fled and took
refuge with Thetis, and sent a drought which stirred the people into revolt.
Dionysus then drove King Lycurgus insane and had him slice his own son
into pieces with an axe in the belief that he was a patch of ivy, a plant holy
to Dionysus. An oracle then claimed that the land would stay dry and
barren as long as Lycurgus was alive. His people had him drawn and
quartered. Following the death of the king, Dionysus lifted the curse. This
story was told in Homer's epic, Iliad 6.136-7. In an alternative version,
sometimes shown in art, Lycurgus tries to kill Ambrosia, a follower of
Dionysus, who was transformed into a vine that twined around the enraged
king and restrained him, eventually killing him.[41]

Prosymnus[edit source]
A better-known story is that of his descent to Hades to rescue his mother
Semele, whom he placed among the stars.[42] Dionysus feared for his
mother, whom he had not seen since birth. He bypassed the god of death,
known as Thanatos, thus successfully returning Semele to Mount
Olympus. Out of the twelve Olympians, he was of the few that could restore
the deceased from the underworld back to life.[43] He made the descent
from a reputedly bottomless pool on the coast of the Argolid near the
prehistoric site of Lerna. He was guided by Prosymnus or Polymnus, who
requested, as his reward, to be Dionysus' lover. Prosymnus died before

Dionysus could honor his pledge, so in order to satisfy Prosymnus' shade,

Dionysus fashioned a phallus from an olive branch and sat on it at
Prosymnus' tomb.[44] This story survives in full only in Christian sources
whose aim was to discredit pagan mythology. It appears to have served as
an explanation of the secret objects that were revealed in the Dionysian
Mysteries.[45]

Ampelos[edit source]
Another myth according to Nonnus involves Ampelos, a satyr, who was
loved by Dionysus.[46] Foreseen by Dionysus, the youth was killed in an
accident riding a bull maddened by the sting of an Ate's gadfly. The Fates
granted Ampelos a second life as a vine, from which Dionysus squeezed
the first wine.[47]

Chiron[edit source]
Young Dionysus was also said to have been one of the many famous
pupils of the centaur Chiron. According to Ptolemy Chennus in the Library
of Photius, "Dionysius was loved by Chiron, from whom he learned chants
and dances, the bacchic rites and initiations."[48]

Secondary myths[edit source]

Bacchus and Ariadne by Titian, at the National Gallery in London.

When Hephaestus bound Hera to a magical chair, Dionysus got him drunk
and brought him back to Olympus after he passed out.
A third descent by Dionysus to Hades is invented by Aristophanes in his
comedy The Frogs. Dionysus, as patron of the Athenian dramatic festival,
the Dionysia, wants to bring back to life one of the great tragedians. After a
competition Aeschylus is chosen in preference to Euripides.
When Theseus abandoned Ariadne sleeping on Naxos, Dionysus found
and married her. She bore him a son named Oenopion, but he committed
suicide or was killed by Perseus. In some variants, he had her crown put
into the heavens as the constellation Corona; in others, he descended into
Hades to restore her to the gods on Olympus. Another different account

claims Dionysus ordered Theseus to abandon Ariadne on the island of

Naxos for he had seen her as Theseus carried her onto the ship and had
decided to marry her.
Psalacantha, a nymph, failed at winning the love of Dionysus as his main
love interest at the moment was Ariadne, and ended up being changed into
a plant.
Callirrhoe was a Calydonian woman who scorned Coresus, a priest of
Dionysus, who threatened to afflict all the women of Calydon with insanity
(see Maenad). The priest was ordered to sacrifice Callirhoe but he killed
himself instead. Callirhoe threw herself into a well which was later named
after her.
Acis, a Sicilian youth, was sometimes said to be Dionysus' son.

Consorts and children[edit source]

Topics in Greek mythology
Gods
%

Primordial gods and Titans

Zeus and the Olympians

Pan and the nymphs

Apollo and Dionysus

Sea-gods and Earth-gods

Heroes
%

Heracles and his Labors

Achilles and the Trojan War

Odysseus and the Odyssey

Jason and the Argonauts

Perseus and Medusa/Gorgon

Pirithous and the

Centauromachy

Oedipus and Thebes

Orpheus and theOrphic

Mysteries
%

Theseus and the Minotaur

Triptolemus and theEleusinian

Mysteries

Atalanta and Hippomenes'

Race(Golden apple)

Related
%

Satyrs, centaurs and dragons

Religion in Ancient Greece

Greek mythology portal

%

vte

Aphrodite
%

Charites (Graces)
1 Pasithea
2 Euphrosyne
3 Thalia

Priapus

Hymenaios

Ariadne
%

Oenopion

Staphylus

Thoas

Peparethus

Phanus

Eurymedon

Euanthes

Latramys

Tauropolis

Ceramus

Maron

Enyeus

Nyx
%

Althaea
%

Iacchus

twin of Iacchus, killed by Aura instantly upon birth

Nicaea
Telete

Araethyrea or Chthonophyle (or again Ariadne)

%

Comus

Aura

%
%

Deianeira

Circe
%

Phthonus

Phlias

Physcoa
%

Narcaeus

Pallene

Carya

Percote
%

Chione, Naiad nymph

%

Carmanor

Alphesiboea
%

Priapus (possibly)[50]

Alexirrhoe
%

Priapus (possibly)[49]

Medus

unnamed
%

Thysa[51]

Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek

mythology[edit source]
Genealogy of the Olympians in Greek mythology

Parallels with Christianity[edit source]

Main article: Jesus Christ in comparative mythology
The earliest discussions of mythological parallels between Dionysus and
the figure of the Christ in Christian theology can be traced to Friedrich
Hlderlin, whose identification of Dionysus with Christ is most explicit in
Brod und Wein (18001801) and Der Einzige (18011803).[52]
Modern scholars such as Martin Hengel, Barry Powell, Robert M. Price,
and Peter Wick, among others, argue that Dionysian religion and
Christianity have notable parallels. They point to the symbolism of wine
and the importance it held in the mythology surrounding both Dionysus and
Jesus Christ;[53][54] though, Wick argues that the use of wine symbolism in
the Gospel of John, including the story of the Marriage at Cana at which
Jesus turns water into wine, was intended to show Jesus as superior to
Dionysus.[55]
Scholars of comparative mythology identify both Dionysus and Jesus with
the dying-and-returning god mythological archetype.[8] Other elements,
such as the celebration by a ritual meal of bread and wine, also have
parallels.[56] Powell, in particular, argues precursors to the Catholic notion
of transubstantiation can be found in Dionysian religion.[56]
Another parallel can be seen in The Bacchae where Dionysus appears
before King Pentheus on charges of claiming divinity which is compared to
the New Testament scene of Jesus being interrogated by Pontius Pilate.[55]
[56][57]

E. Kessler in a symposium Pagan Monotheism in the Roman Empire,

Exeter, 1720 July 2006, states that Dionysian cult had developed into
strict monotheism by the 4th century CE; together with Mithraism and other
sects the cult formed an instance of "pagan monotheism" in direct
competition with Early Christianity during Late Antiquity.[58]

Symbolism[edit source]

Satyr giving a grapevine to Bacchus as a child; cameo glass, first half of the 1st century
AD; from Italy

The bull, serpent, ivy, and wine are characteristic of Dionysian atmosphere.
Dionysus is also strongly associated with satyrs, centaurs, and sileni. He is
often shown riding a leopard, wearing a leopard skin, or in a chariot drawn
by panthers, and may also be recognized by the thyrsus he carries.
Besides the grapevine and its wild barren alter-ego, the toxic ivy plant, both
sacred to him, the fig was also his symbol. The pinecone that tipped his
thyrsus linked him to Cybele. Dionysus had two extreme natures to his
personality. For instance, he could shift from bringing bliss and relaxation,
which then often transitioned into bitterness and fury. Dionysus personified
the nature of wine. When used reasonably it can be pleasant, however, if
misused it can provoke negative effects.[59] The Dionysia and Lenaia
festivals in Athens were dedicated to Dionysus. Initiates worshipped him in
the Dionysian Mysteries, which were comparable to and linked with the
Orphic Mysteries, and may have influenced Gnosticism[citation needed].
Orpheus was said to have invented the Mysteries of Dionysus.[60]
Dionysus was another god of resurrection who was strongly linked to the
bull. In a cult hymn from Olympia, at a festival for Hera, Dionysus is invited
to come as a bull; "with bull-foot raging." Walter Burkert relates, "Quite
frequently [Dionysus] is portrayed with bull horns, and in Kyzikos he has a
tauromorphic image," and refers also to an archaic myth in which Dionysus
is slaughtered as a bull calf and impiously eaten by the Titans.[8] In the
Classical period of Greece, the bull and other animals identified with deities
were separated from them as their agalma, a kind of heraldic show-piece
that concretely signified their numinous presence.[8]

Bacchus and the Bacchanalia[edit source]

Main article: Bacchanalia
Bacchus by Caravaggio

A mystery cult to Bacchus was brought to Rome from the Greek culture of
southern Italy or by way of Greek-influenced Etruria. It was established

c.200 BC in the Aventine grove of Stimula by a priestess from Campania,

near the temple where Liber Pater ("The Free Father") had a Statesanctioned, popular cult. Liber was a native Roman god of wine, fertility,
and prophecy, patron of Rome's plebeians (citizen-commoners) and a
close equivalent to Bacchus-Dionysus Eleutherios.
In Livy's account, the new Bacchic mysteries were originally restricted to
women and held only three times a year; but were corrupted by the
Etruscan-Greek version, and thereafter drunken men and women of all
ages and social classes cavorted in a sexual free-for-all five times a month.
Livy relates various their various outrages against Rome's civil and
religious laws and morality; a secretive, subversive and potentially
revolutionary counter-culture. The cult was suppressed by the State with
great ferocity; of the 7,000 arrested, most were executed. Modern
scholarship treats much of Livy's account with skepticism; more certainly, a
Senatorial edict, the Senatus consultum de Bacchanalibus was distributed
throughout Roman and allied Italy. It banned the former Bacchic cult
organisations. Each meeting must seek prior senatorial approval through a
praetor. No more than three women and two men were allowed at any one
meeting, Those who defied the edict risked the death penalty.
Bacchus was conscripted into the official Roman pantheon as an aspect of
Liber, and his festival was inserted into the Liberalia. In Roman culture,
Liber, Bacchus and Dionysus became virtually interchangeable
equivalents. Bacchus was euhemerised as a wandering hero, conqueror
and founder of cities. He was a patron deity and founding hero at Leptis
Magna, birthplace of the emperor Septimius Severus, who promoted his
cult. In some Roman sources, the ritual procession of Bacchus in a tigerdrawn chariot, surrounded by maenads, satyrs and drunks, commemorates
the god's triumphant return from the conquest of India, the historical
prototype for the Roman Triumph.

In Art[edit source]
Main article: Bacchic art

"Bacchus" by Michelangelo (1497)

Classical[edit source]
The god appeared on many kraters and other wine vessels from classical
Greece. His iconography became more complex in the Hellenistic period,
between severe archaising or Neo Attic types such as the Dionysus
Sardanapalus and types showing him as an indolent and androgynous
young man and often shown nude (see the Dionysus and Eros, Naples
Archeological Museum). The 4th-century Lycurgus Cup in the British
Museum is a spectacular cage cup which changes colour when light
comes through the glass; it shows the bound King Lycurgus being taunted
by the god and attacked by a satyr.
Elizabeth Kessler has theorized that a mosaic appearing on the triclinium
floor of the House of Aion in Nea Paphos, Cyprus, details a monotheistic
worship of Dionysus.[61] In the mosaic, other gods appear but may only be
lesser representations of the centrally imposed Dionysus.

Modern views[edit source]

Dionysus has remained an inspiration to artists, philosophers and writers
into the modern era. In The Birth of Tragedy (1872), the German
philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche contrasted Dionysus with the god Apollo
as a symbol of the fundamental, unrestrained aesthetic principle of force,
music, and intoxication versus the principle of form, beauty, and sight
represented by the latter. Nietzsche also claimed that the oldest forms of
Greek Tragedy were entirely based on suffering of Dionysus. Nietzsche
continued to contemplate the character of Dionysus, which he revisited in
the final pages of his 1886 work Beyond Good and Evil. This reconceived
Nietzschean Dionysus was invoked as an embodiment of the central will to
power concept in Nietzsche's later works The Twilight of the Idols, The
Antichrist and Ecce Homo.
Kroly Kernyi, a scholar in classical philology and one of the founders of
modern studies in Greek mythology characterized Dionysus as
representative of the psychological life force (Zo).[62] Other scholars

proposing psychological interpretations have placed Dionysus' emotionality

in the foreground by focusing on the joy, terror or hysteria associated with
the god.[63][64][65][66][67]
The Russian poet and philosopher Vyacheslav Ivanov elaborated the
theory of Dionysianism, which traces the roots of literary art in general and
the art of tragedy in particular to ancient Dionysian mysteries. His views
were expressed in the treatises The Hellenic Religion of the Sufering God
(1904), and Dionysus and Early Dionysianism (1921).
Inspired by James Frazer, some have labeled Dionysus a life-death-rebirth
deity. The mythographer Karl Kerenyi devoted much energy to Dionysus
over his long career; he summed up his thoughts in Dionysos: Archetypal
Image of Indestructible Life (Bollingen, Princeton, 1976).

Bacchus and the Choir of Nymphs (1888)

by John Reinhard Weguelin

Dionysus is the main character of Aristophanes' play The Frogs, later

updated to a modern version by Burt Shevelove (libretto) and Stephen
Sondheim (music and lyrics) ("The time is the present. The place is ancient
Greece. ... "). In the play, Dionysus and his slave Xanthius venture to
Hades to bring a famed writer back from the dead, with the hopes that the
writer's presence in the world will fix all nature of earthly problems. In
Aristophanes' play, Euripides competes against Aeschylus to be recovered
from the underworld; In Sondheim and Shevelove's, George Bernard Shaw
faces William Shakespeare.
The Romanised equivalent of Dionysus was referenced in the 1852
plantation literature novel Aunt Phillis's Cabin, which featured a character
named Uncle Bacchus, who was so-named due to his excessive
alcoholism.
Both Eddie Campbell and Grant Morrison have utilised the character.
Morrison claims that the myth of Dionysus provides the inspiration for his
violent and explicit graphic novel Kill Your Boyfriend, whilst Campbell used
the character in his Deadface series to explore both the conventions of

super-hero comic books and artistic endeavour.

Dionysus is one of the central myths explored in the 2011 Weaponized
anthology The Immanence of Myth.[68]
Walt Disney has depicted the character on a number of occasions. The first
such portrayal of Dionysus, as the Roman Bacchus, was in the "Pastoral"
segment of Walt Disney's third classic Fantasia. In keeping with the more
fun-loving Roman god, he is portrayed as an overweight, happily drunk
man wearing a tunic and cloak, grape leaves on his head, carrying a goblet
of wine, and riding a drunken donkey named Jacchus ("jackass"). He is
friends with the fauns and centaurs, and is shown celebrating a harvest
festival. Other portrayals have appeared in both the Disney movie and spinoff TV series of Hercules. He was depicted as an overweight drunkard as
opposed to his youthful descriptions in myths. He has bright pink skin and
rosy red cheeks hinting at his drunkenness. He always carries either a
bottle or glass of wine in his hand, and like in the myths, wears a wreath of
grape leaves upon his head. In the series he is known by his Roman name
"Bacchus," and in one episode headlines his own festival known as the
"Bacchanal."
In music Dionysius (together with Demeter) was used as an archetype for
the character Tori by contemporary artist Tori Amos in her 2007 album
American Doll Posse, and the Canadian rock band Rush refer to a
confrontation and hatred between Dionysus and Apollo in the Cygnus X-1
duology.
Dionysus along with Lilith are central characters in James Curcio's 2011
novel Fallen Nation: Party At The World's End.
In literature, Dionysius has proven equally inspiring. Rick Riordan's series
of books Percy Jackson & The Olympians presents Dionysus as an
uncaring, childish and spoilt god who as a punishment for chasing a nymph
has to work in Camp Half-Blood and stay off alcohol (The film adaptation
Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters expands on this by making it that
Dionysus can pour himself wine but it automatically turns into water in his
glass). In Fred Saberhagen's 2001 novel, God of the Golden Fleece, a

young man in a post-apocalyptic world picks up an ancient piece of

technology shaped in the likeness of the Dionysus. Here, Dionysus is
depicted as a relatively weak god, albeit a subversive one whose powers
are able to undermine the authority of tyrants.
A version of Bacchus also appears in C. S. Lewis' Prince Caspian, part of
The Chronicles of Narnia. Lewis depicts him as dangerous-looking,
androgynous young boy who helps Aslan awaken the spirits of the Narnian
trees and rivers. He does not appear in the 2008 film version.
In 2009 the poet Stephen Howarth and veteran theatre producer Andrew
Hobbs collaborated on a play entitled Bacchus in Rehab with Dionysus as
the central character. The authors describe the piece as "combining
highbrow concept and lowbrow humour."[69]
The second season of True Blood involves a plot line wherein a maenad,
Maryann, causes mayhem in the Louisiana town of Bon Temps in attempt
to summon Dionysus.
Dionysus, going by his Roman name "Bacchus," is a character in the 2011
video game Rock of Ages. Bacchus is a playable character in the
multiplayer online battle arena Smite. He is a melee tank and is nicknamed
"God of Wine".[70]

Names originating from Dionysus[edit source]

%

Dion (also spelled Deion, Deon and Dionne)

Denise (also spelled Denice, Daniesa, Denese, and Denisse)

Dennis, Denis or Denys (including the derivative surnames Denison

and Dennison), Denny, Dennie

Denis (Croatian), Dionis, Dionisie (Romanian)

Dnes (Hungarian)

Dionisio/Dyonisio (Spanish), Dionigi (Italian)

, , (Dionysios, Dionysis, Nionios

Modern Greek)

Deniska (diminutive of Russian Denis, itself a derivative of the

Greek)

Dionsio (Portuguese)

Dionizy (Polish)

Deniz (Turkish)

Gallery[edit source]
%
%

The Ludovisi Dionysus with panther, satyr and grapes on a vine (Palazzo
Altemps, Rome)

%
%

Dionysos riding a leopard, 4th-century BC mosaic from Pella

Statue of Dionysus (Sardanapalus) (Museo Palazzo Massimo Alle Terme,

Rome)

Dionysus extending a drinking cup (kantharos), late 6th century BC

Drinking Bacchus (1623) Guido Reni

See also[edit source]

Hellenismos portal
Greek mythology
portal

Apollonian and Dionysian

Ascolia

Bacchanalia

Bacchic art

Dionysian Mysteries

Orgia

Theatre of Dionysus

Titan (mythology)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the race of the Titans in Greek mythology. For the

Greek sun-deity sometimes referred to as "Titan", see Helios. For other

uses, see Titan.

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this a
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2012)

Greek deities
series

TitansOlympiansAquatic deitiesChthonic deitiesPersonified concept

Titans

The Twelve Titans:Oceanus and Tethys,Hyperion and Theia,Coeus and Phoebe,Cronus and Rhea,Mnem
Oceanids, Potamoi, CalypsoChildren of Hyperion:Helios, Selene, EosDaughters of Coeus:Leto and Aste
MenoetiusSons of Crius:Astraeus, Pallas, Perses

In Greek mythology, the Titans (Greek: Ti-tan; plural:

Ti-tnes) were a primeval race of powerful deities, descendants of Gaia
(Earth) and Uranus (Sky), that ruled during the legendary Golden Age.
They were immortal beings of incredible strength and stamina and were
also the first pantheon of Greek gods and goddesses.
In the first generation of twelve Titans, the males were Oceanus, Hyperion,
Coeus, Cronus, Crius, and Iapetus and the femalesthe Titanesses
were Mnemosyne, Tethys, Theia, Phoebe, Rhea, and Themis. The second
generation of Titans consisted of Hyperion's children Eos, Helios, and
Selene; Coeus's daughters Leto and Asteria; Iapetus's children Atlas,
Prometheus, Epimetheus, and Menoetius; Oceanus' daughter Metis; and
Crius's sons Astraeus, Pallas, and Perses.
The Titans were overthrown by a race of younger gods, the Olympians, in
the Titanomachy ("War of the Titans"). This represented a mythological
paradigm shift that the Greeks may have borrowed from the Ancient Near
East.[1]
Contents [hide]
%

1 Titanomachy

2 In Orphic sources

3 Modern interpretations

4 In popular culture

5 Notes

6 References

7 External links

Titanomachy[edit source]
Main article: Titanomachy
Greeks of the classical age knew of several poems about the war between
the Olympians and Titans. The dominant one, and the only one that has
survived, was in the Theogony attributed to Hesiod. A lost epic,
Titanomachiaattributed to the legendary blind Thracian bard Thamyris
was mentioned in passing in an essay On Music that was once attributed
to Plutarch. The Titans also played a prominent role in the poems
attributed to Orpheus. Although only scraps of the Orphic narratives
survive, they show interesting differences with the Hesiodic tradition.
The Greek myths of the Titanomachy fall into a class of similar myths
throughout Europe and the Near East concerning a war in heaven, where
one generation or group of gods largely opposes the dominant one.
Sometimes the elders are supplanted, and sometimes the rebels lose and
are either cast out of power entirely or incorporated into the pantheon.
Other examples might include the wars of the sir with the Vanir and
Jotuns in Scandinavian mythology, the Babylonian epic Enuma Elish, the
Hittite "Kingship in Heaven" narrative, the obscure generational conflict in
Ugaritic fragments, and the rebellion of Lucifer in Christianity. The
Titanomachy lasted for ten years.

In Orphic sources[edit source]

Rhea, Cronus' wife, one of the Titans

Hesiod does not have the last word on the Titans. Surviving fragments of
poetry ascribed to Orpheus preserve some variations on the myth. In such

text, Zeus does not simply set upon his father violently. Instead, Rhea
spreads out a banquet for Cronus so that he becomes drunk upon
fermented honey. Rather than being consigned to Tartarus, Cronus is
draggedstill drunkto the cave of Nyx (Night), where he continues to
dream throughout eternity.
Another myth concerning the Titans that is not in Hesiod revolves around
Dionysus. At some point in his reign, Zeus decides to give up the throne in
favor of the infant Dionysus, who like the infant Zeus is guarded by the
Kouretes. The Titans decide to slay the child and claim the throne for
themselves; they paint their faces white with gypsum, distract Dionysus
with toys, then dismember him and boil and roast his limbs. Zeus, enraged,
slays the Titans with his thunderbolt; Athena preserves the heart in a
gypsum doll, out of which a new Dionysus is made. This story is told by the
poets Callimachus and Nonnus, who call this Dionysus "Zagreus", and in a
number of Orphic texts, which do not.
One iteration of this story, that of the Late Antique Neoplatonist philosopher
Olympiodorus, recounted in his commentary of Plato's Phaedrus,[2] affirms
that humanity sprang up out of the fatty smoke of the burning Titan
corpses. Pindar, Plato and Oppian refer offhandedly to man's "Titanic
nature". According to them, the body is the titanic part, while soul is the
divine part of man. Other early writers imply that humanity was born out of
the malevolent blood shed by the Titans in their war against Zeus. Some
scholars consider that Olympiodorus' report, the only surviving explicit
expression of this mythic connection, embodied a tradition that dated to the
Bronze Age, while Radcliffe Edmonds has suggested an element of
innovative allegorized improvisation to suit Olympiodorus' purpose.[3]

Modern interpretations[edit source]

Cronus armed with sickle; after a carved gem (Aubin-Louis Millin de Grandmaison,
Galerie mythologique, 1811).

Some scholars of the past century or so, including Jane Ellen Harrison,

have argued that an initiatory or shamanic ritual underlies the myth of

Dionysus' dismemberment and cannibalism by the Titans.[where?] She also
asserts that the word "Titan" comes from the Greek , signifying
white earth, clay or gypsum, and that the Titans were "white clay men", or
men covered by white clay or gypsum dust in their rituals.[where?] M.L. West
also asserts this in relation to shamanistic initiatory rites of early Greek
religious practices.[4]
According to Paul Faure, the name "Titan" can be found on Linear A written
as "Tan" or "Ttan", which represents a single deity rather than a group.[5]
Other scholars believe the word is related to the Greek verb (to
stretch), a view Hesiod himself appears to share: "But their father Ouranos,
who himself begot them, bitterly gave to them to those others, his sons, the
name of Titans, the Stretchers, for they stretched out their power
outrageously."[6]

In popular culture[edit source]

Main article: Titans in popular culture
Out of conflation with the Gigantes, various large things have been named
after the Titans, for their "titanic" size, for example the RMS Titanic or the
giant predatory bird Titanis walleri. The familiar name and large size of the
Titans have made them dramatic figures suited to market-oriented popular
culture. Something titanic is usually considered bigger than something
gigantic.
The element titanium is named after the Titans, additionally, many of
Saturn's moons are named after various Titans.
Many professional and amateur sports teams use a titan as their mascot.
Most notably, the National Football League's Tennessee Titans, the New
York Jets were originally known as the New York Titans, California State
University, Fullerton and Ohio State University, Newark Campus's athletic
teams are known as the Titans, and the Australian professional rugby
league team Gold Coast is also known as the Titans.
The Titans appear as the main antagonists in Percy Jackson & the

Olympians, led by the Titan Kronos (Cronus) . As they awake, they use the
help of rebel demigods and some minor gods to attempt to overthrow
Olympus.
The Titan Prometheus appears in the American TV show Supernatural
episode Remember the Titans where Sam and Dean Winchester help him
break his curse and kill Zeus.
There is an anime and mange called Attack on Titan. The story centers
around the lives of Eren Yeager, his adoptive sister Mikasa Ackerman, and
their friend Armin Arlert, who live in a world where the remnants of the
human population live inside cities surrounded by enormous walls due to
the sudden appearance of the Titans, gigantic humanoid creatures who
devour humans seemingly without reason.
Titan

Titanomachy (epic poem)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Titanomachia)

Jump to: navigation, search

See also: Titanomachy
The Titanomachy: A beardless Zeus is depicted launching a thunderbolt against a
kneeling Titan at the Gorgon pediment from the Temple of Artemis in Corfu as exhibited
at the Archaeological Museum of Corfu

The Titanomachy (Greek: ) is a lost epic poem, which is a

part of Greek mythology. It deals with the struggle that Zeus and his
siblings, the Olympian Gods, had in overthrowing their father Cronus and
his divine generation, the Titans.
The poem was traditionally ascribed to Eumelus of Corinth, a semilegendary bard of the Bacchiad ruling family in archaic Corinth,[1] who was
treasured as the traditional composer of the Prosodion, the processional
anthem of Messenian independence that was performed on Delos.

Even in Antiquity many authors cited Titanomachia without an author's

name. M. L. West[2] in analyzing the evidence concludes that the name of
Eumelos was attached to the poem as the only name available. From the
very patchy evidence, it seems that "Eumelos"' account of the
Titanomachy differed from the surviving account of Hesiod's Theogony at
salient points. The 8th century BCE date for the poem is not possible; West
ascribes a late seventh-century date as the earliest.[2]
The Titanomachy was divided into at least two books. The battle of
Olympians and Titans was preceded by some sort of theogony, or
genealogy of the primal gods, in which, the Byzantine writer Lydus
remarked,[3] the author of Titanomachy placed the birth of Zeus, not in
Crete, but in Lydia, which should signify on Mount Sipylus.
Titanomachy

Titanomachy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Greek deities
series
TitansOlympiansAquatic deitiesChthonic
deitiesPersonified conceptsOther deities
Titans
The Twelve Titans:Oceanus and Tethys,
Hyperion and Theia,Coeus and Phoebe,
Cronus and Rhea,Mnemosyne, Themis,Crius,
IapetusChildren of Oceanus:Oceanids,
Potamoi, CalypsoChildren of Hyperion:Helios,
Selene, EosDaughters of Coeus:Leto and
AsteriaSons of Iapetus:Atlas, Prometheus,
Epimetheus, MenoetiusSons of Crius:

Astraeus, Pallas, Perses

% vte
In Greek mythology, the Titanomachy /tatnmki/ or War of the
Titans (Greek: ), was the ten-year[1] series of battles which
were fought in Thessaly between the two camps of deities long before the
existence of mankind: the Titans, based on Mount Othrys, and the
Olympians, who would come to reign on Mount Olympus. This
Titanomachia is also known as the Battle of the Titans, Battle of Gods, or
just The Titan War.
Greeks of the Classical age knew of several poems about the war between
the gods and many of the Titans. The dominant one, and the only one that
has survived, is the Theogony attributed to Hesiod. A lost epic,
Titanomachia, attributed to the blind Thracian bard Thamyris, himself a
legendary figure, was mentioned in passing in an essay On Music that was
once attributed to Plutarch. The Titans also played a prominent role in the
poems attributed to Orpheus. Although only scraps of the Orphic narratives
survive, they show interesting differences from the Hesiodic tradition.
Contents [hide]
%

1 Prior events

2 Titanomachy

3 Similar myths in other cultures

4 See also

5 References

Prior events[edit source]

The stage for this important battle was set after the youngest Titan, Cronus
(Kronos), overthrew his own father, Uranus (, the Heaven itself
and ruler of the cosmos), with the help of his mother, Gaia (, the
earth).
Uranus drew the enmity of Gaia when he imprisoned her children the
Hecatonchires and Cyclopes in Tartarus. Gaia created a great sickle and
gathered together Cronus and his brothers to convince them to castrate

Uranus. Only Cronus was willing to do the deed, so Gaia gave him the
sickle and placed him in a bush.
When Uranus met with Gaia, Cronus attacked Uranus, and, with the sickle,
cut off his genitals, casting them into the sea. In doing so, he became the
King of the Titans. As Uranus lay dying, he made a prophecy that Cronus's
own children would rebel against his rule, just as Cronus had rebelled
against his own father. Uranus' blood that had spilled upon the earth, gave
rise to the Gigantes, Erinyes, and Meliae. From his semen or blood of his
cut genitalia, Aphrodite arose from the sea:
"...so soon as he had cut off the members with flint and cast them from the
land into the surging sea, they were swept away over the main a long time:
and a white foam spread around them from the immortal flesh, and in it
there grew a maiden..."[2]
Cronus took his father's throne after dispatching Uranus. He then secured
his power by re-imprisoning his siblings the Hecatonchires and Cyclopes,
and his (newly-created) siblings the Gigantes, in Tartarus.
Cronus, paranoid and fearing the end of his rule, now turned into the
terrible king his father Uranus had been, swallowing each of his children
whole as they were born from his sister-wife Rhea. Rhea, however,
managed to hide her youngest child Zeus, by tricking Cronus into
swallowing a rock wrapped in a blanket instead.
Rhea brought Zeus to a cave in Crete, where he was raised by Amalthea.
Upon reaching adulthood, he masqueraded as Cronus' cupbearer. Once
Zeus had been established as a servant of Cronus, Metis gave him a
mixture of mustard and wine which would cause Cronus to vomit up his
swallowed children. After freeing his siblings, Zeus led them in rebellion
against the Titans.
According to Hyginus, the cause of the Titanomachy is as follows: "After
Hera saw that Epaphus, born of a concubine, ruled such a great kingdom
(Egypt), she saw to it that he should be killed while hunting, and
encouraged the Titans to drive Zeus from the kingdom and restore it to
Cronus, (Saturn). When they tried to mount heaven, Zeus with the help of

Athena, Apollo, and Artemis, cast them headlong into Tartarus. On Atlas,
who had been their leader, he put the vault of the sky; even now he is said
to hold up the sky on his shoulders."[3]
Following their final victory, the three brothers divided the world amongst
themselves: Zeus was given domain over the sky and the air, and was
recognized as overlord. Poseidon was given the sea and all the waters,
whereas Hades was given the Underworld, the realm of the dead. Each of
the other gods was allotted powers according to the nature and proclivities
of each. The earth was left common to all to do as they pleased, even to
run counter to one another, unless Zeus was called to intervene.

Titanomachy[edit source]
The Titanomachy: A beardless Zeus is depicted launching a thunderbolt against a
kneeling Titan at the Gorgon pediment from the Temple of Artemis in Corfu as exhibited
at the Archaeological Museum of Corfu

Main article: Titanomachy (epic poem)

A lost Titanomachy that dealt with the struggle that Zeus and his siblings,
the Olympian Gods, had in overthrowing their father Cronos and his divine
generation, the Titans, was traditionally ascribed to Eumelus of Corinth, a
semi-legendary bard of the Bacchiad ruling family in archaic Corinth,[4]
who was treasured as the traditional composer of the Prosodion, the
processional anthem of Messenian independence that was performed on
Delos.
Even in Antiquity many authors cited Titanomachia without an author's
name. M. L. West in analyzing the evidence concludes that the name of
Eumelos was attached to the poem as the only name available.[5] From the
very patchy evidence, it seems that "Eumelos"' account of the Titanomachy
differed from the surviving account of Hesiod's Theogony at salient points.
The eighth century BCE date for the poem is not possible; M.L. West
ascribes a late seventh-century date as the earliest.[5]
The Titanomachy was divided into two books. The battle of Olympians and

Titans was preceded by some sort of theogony, or genealogy of the

Primeval Gods, in which, the Byzantine writer Lydus remarked,[6] the
author of Titanomachy placed the birth of Zeus, not in Crete, but in Lydia,
which should signify on Mount Sipylus.

Similar myths in other cultures[edit source]

These Greek stories of the Titanomachy fall into a class of similar myths
throughout Europe and the Near East, where one generation or group of
gods by and large opposes the dominant one. Sometimes the Elder Gods
are supplanted. Sometimes the rebels lose, and are either cast out of
power entirely or incorporated into the pantheon. Other examples might
include the Babylonian epic Enuma Elish, the Hittite "Kingship in Heaven"
Kumarbi narrative, the struggle between the Tuatha D Danann and the
Fomorians in Celtic mythology, The sirVanir War in Norse mythology,
and the obscure generational conflict in Ugaritic fragments.

See also[edit source]

%

Gigantomachy

Pergamon Altar

Theomachy

Ragnarok
titan mythology
hammurabi-legal code

Alessandro Alessandroni -The Whistler!

ron mccroby

Puccalo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this art
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (October 2006)
Puccalo is the term used for the highest level of human oral mouth
whistling. The term is derived from combining the words "pucker" and
"piccolo" and it refers to a level of skill and talent in human whistling which
produces notes and tones that are so clear and precise, they remind the
listener of someone playing a wind instrument. Playing the puccalo is
distinguished from casual whistling, and places the instrument at the same
prestige as other musical instruments.
[edit]

History
Puccalo was a term first coined by the late jazz musician Ron McCroby,
one of the leading puccaloists of the 20th century.
Like other highly skilled musicians, puccalo players have mastered their
instrument, allowing them to perform most genres of music - from folk,
jazz, rock, blues, ethnic, to western and eastern classical music.
[edit]

Leading performers
%

Ron McCroby

Toots Thielemans

Francesco Bonifazi

Geert Chatrou

David Vincent

Robert Stemmons

Bobbejaan Schoepen

Brad Terry

Roger Whittaker

Luke Janssen

Fred Lowery
Puccalo

Silbo Gomero language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The narrow valleys of La Gomera.

Silbo Gomero (Spanish for 'Gomeran Whistle'), also known as "el silbo"
('the whistle'), is a whistled language spoken by inhabitants of La Gomera
in the Canary Islands to communicate across the deep ravines and narrow
valleys (gullies) that radiate through the island.[1] A speaker of Silbo
Gomero is sometimes referred to in Spanish as a "silbador" ('whistler'). It
was declared as a Masterpiece of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of
Humanity by UNESCO in 2009.
Contents [hide]
%
1
History
%
2
Function
1
2.1
Vowel
s
2
2.2
Cons
onant

s
%
3
References
%
4
Other
sources
%
5
External
links

[edit]

History
Little is known of the original language or languages of the Canaries,
though it is assumed they must have had a simple enough
phonological/phonetic system to allow an efficient whistled language.[2]
Invented before their arrival by the original inhabitants of the island, the
Guanches, and "spoken" also on el Hierro, Tenerife, and Gran Canaria,
Silbo was adapted to Spanish by the last Guanches and adopted by the
Spanish settlers in the 16th century and thus survived. In 1976 Silbo barely
remained on el Hierro, where it had flourished at the end of the 19th
century.[3] When this unique medium of communication was about to die
out in the late 20th century, the local government required all Gomeran
children to study it in school. The language's survival before that point was
due to topography or terrain and the ease with which it is learned by native
speakers.[3] It now has official protection as an example of intangible
cultural heritage.
[edit]

Function
As with other whistled forms of non-tonal languages, the Silbo works by

retaining approximately the articulation of ordinary speech, so "the timbre

variations of speech appear in the guise of pitch variations" (Busnel and
Classe: v). The language is a whistled form of a dialect of Spanish.[4]
Manuel Carreiras of the University of La Laguna and David Corina of the
University of Washington published research on Silbo in 2004 and 2005
arguing that Silbo was understood by the brain in much the same way as a
spoken language.[5] Their study of speakers of Spanish (some of whom
"spoke" Silbo and some of whom did not) showed (by monitoring brain
activity with functional magnetic resonance imaging) that while nonspeakers of Silbo merely processed Silbo as whistling, speakers of Silbo
processed the whistling sounds in the same linguistic centers of the brain
that processed Spanish sentences.
[edit]

Vowels
Ramn Trujillo of the University of La Laguna published his book "EL
SILBO GOMERO anlisis lingstico" in 1978. This work containing almost
a hundred spectrograms concludes in a theory that there are only two
vowels and four consonants in the Silbo Gomero language.[6][7] In Trujillo's
work Silbo's vowels are given one quality, pitch. Either high or low.
However, the work of Julien Meyer (2005 - in French only (pg 100), 2008)
gives a statistical analysis of the vowels of Silbo showing that there are 4
vowels statistically distinguished in production and that they are also
perceived so.[8][9] Also in 2005, Annie Rialland of the University of Paris III:
Sorbonne Nouvelle published an acoustic and phonological analysis of
Silbo based on new materials, showing that not only gliding tones but also
intensity modulation plays a role in distinguishing different whistled sounds.
[10]

Trujillo's 2005 collaboration with Gomeran whistler Isidro Ortiz and others
("EL SILBO GOMERO Materiales didcticos" - qv. pdf link below) revises
his earlier assertions to state that 4 vowels are indeed perceived (qv. pg 63
ref. cit.),[11] and describes in detail the areas of divergence between his
empirical data and Classes phonetic hypotheses. Despite Trujillo's 2005

work acknowledging the existence of 4 vowels, his 2006 bilingual work ("El
Silbo Gomero. Nuevo estudio fonolgico") inexplicably reiterates his 1978
two-vowel theory. Trujillo's 2006 work directly addresses many of Rialland's
conclusions, but it seems that at the time of that writing he was unaware of
Meyer's work.
Meyer suggests that there are 4 vowel classes of /i/, /e/, /a/, /u, o/. However
Meyer goes on to say that there are 5 perceived vowels with significant
overlap. Rialland (2005) and Trujillo (1978) both agree that the harmonic of
the whistle matches the second formant of the spoken vowels. Spoken /a/'s
F2 and whistled /a/'s H1 match in their frequency (1480 Hz). However there
is a disconnect in harmonics and formants near the frequency basement.
Spoken speech has a wide range of F2 frequencies (790 Hz to 2300 Hz),
whistles are limited to 1200 Hz to 2400 Hz. Vowels are therefore shifted
upwards at the lower end (maintaining 1480 Hz as /a/) increasing
confusion between /o/ (spoken F2 freq 890 Hz, whistled <1300 Hz) and /u/
(spoken freq 790 Hz, Whistled <<1300 Hz). In whistling the frequency
basement must be raised to the minimum whistle harmonic of 1000 Hz
reducing frequency spacing in the vowels, which increases
misidentification in the lower vowels.
[edit]

Consonants
Trujillo (1978) suggested that the consonants are either rises or dips in the
melody line which can be broken or continuous. Further investigation by
Meyer, and by Rialland suggest that vowels are stripped to their inherent
class of sound which is communicated in the whistle in these ways: Voice
(/k/ vs /g/) is transmitted by the whistled feature -continuity. A silent pause
in the whistle communicates +voice (/g/). While a +continuous consonant
gives the quality -voice (/k/). Placement of the consonant (dental, palatal,
fricative) are transmitted in whistle by the loci of the formant transitions
between vowels. Consonant classes are simplified into four classes. Extra
high loci (near vertical formant loci) denotes affricates and stridents, rising
loci denotes alveolar, medial (loci just above the vowel formant) denotes
palatal, and falling (low loci) denotes pharyngeal, labial, and fricative. This

gives 8 whistled consonants, but including tone gradual decay (with

intensity falling off) as a feature on continuous and interrupted sounds
gives 10 consonants. In these situations gradual decay is given +voice,
and continuous is given +liquid.
Silbo Gomero language

Whistled language
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this a
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2009)
Whistled languages use whistling to emulate speech and facilitate
communication. A whistled language is a system of whistled
communication which allows fluent whistlers to transmit and comprehend a
potentially unlimited number of messages over long distances. Whistled
languages are different in this respect from the restricted codes sometimes
used by herders or animal trainers to transmit simple messages or
instructions. Generally, whistled languages emulate the tones or vowel
formants of a natural spoken language, as well as aspects of its intonation
and prosody, so that trained listeners who speak that language can
understand the encoded message.
Whistled language is rare compared to spoken language, but it is found in
cultures around the world. It is especially common in tone languages where
the whistled tones transmit the tones of the syllables (tone melodies of the
words). This might be because in tone languages the tone melody carries
more of the functional load of communication while non-tonal phonology
carries proportionally less. The genesis of a whistled language has never
been recorded in either case and has not yet received much productive
study.
Contents [hide]

1
Techniques

2
Examples

3 In
Africa

4
Usage and cultural
status

5
Fiction

6
Ecology

7
Physics

8 List
of whistled
languages

9 See
also

10
Notes

11
References

12
External links

[edit]

Techniques
Whistled languages differ according to whether the spoken language is
tonal or not, with the whistling being either tone or articulation based (or
both).
Tonal languages are often stripped of articulation, leaving only
suprasegmental features such as duration and tone, and when whistled

retain the spoken melodic line. Thus whistled tonal languages convey
phonemic information solely through tone, length, and, to a lesser extent,
stress, and most segmental phonemic distinctions of the spoken language
are lost.
In non-tonal languages, more of the articulatory features of speech are
retained, and the normally timbral variations imparted by the movements of
the tongue and soft palate are transformed into pitch variations.[1] Certain
consonants can be pronounced while whistling, so as to modify the
whistled sound, much as consonants in spoken language modify the vowel
sounds adjacent to them.
"All whistled languages share one basic characteristic: they function by
varying the frequency of a simple wave-form as a function of time,
generally with minimal dynamic variations, which is readily understandable
since in most cases their only purpose is long-distance communication." [1]
Different whistling styles may be used in a single language. Sochiapam
Chinantec has three different words for whistle-speech: sie3 for whistling
with the tongue against the alveolar ridge, juii32 for bilabial whistling, and
juo2 for finger-in-the-mouth whistling. These are used for communication
over varying distances. There is also a kind of loud falsetto (hh32) which
functions in some ways like whistled speech.
The expressivity of whistled speech is likely to be somewhat limited
compared to spoken speech (although not inherently so), but such a
conclusion should not be taken as absolute, as it depends heavily on
various factors including the phonology of the language. For example in
some tonal languages with few tones, whistled messages typically consist
of stereotyped or otherwise standardized expressions, are elaborately
descriptive, and often have to be repeated. However, in languages which
are heavily tonal, and therefore convey much of their information through
pitch even when spoken, such as Mazatec and Yoruba, extensive
conversations may be whistled. In any case, even for non-tonal languages,
measurements indicate that high intelligibility can be achieved with whistled
speech (90% of intelligibility of non-standardized sentences for Greek [2]

and the equivalent for Turkish.[3]

In continental Africa, speech may be conveyed by a whistle or other
musical instrument, most famously the "talking drums". However, while
drums may be used by griots singing praise songs or for inter-village
communication, and other instruments may be used on the radio for station
identification jingles, for regular conversation at a distance whistled speech
is used. As two people approach each other, one may even switch from
whistled to spoken speech in mid-sentence.
[edit]

Examples
Silbo on the island of La Gomera in the Canary Islands, based on Spanish,
is one of the best-studied whistled languages. The number of distinctive
sounds or phonemes in this language is a matter of disagreement, varying
according to the researcher from two to five vowels and four to nine
consonants. This variation may reflect differences in speakers' abilities as
well as in the methods used to elicit contrasts. The work of Meyer [2][4]
clarifies this debate by providing the first statistical analyzes of production
for various whistlers as well as psycholinguistic tests of vowel identification.
Other whistled languages exist or existed in such parts of the world as
Turkey (Kuky, "Village of the Birds"), France (the village of Aas in the
Pyrenees), Mexico (the Mazatecs and Chinantecs of Oaxaca), South
America (Pirah), Asia (the Chepang of Nepal), and New Guinea. They are
especially common and robust today in parts of West Africa, used widely in
such populous languages as Yoruba and Ewe. Even French is whistled in
some areas of western Africa.[citation needed]
[edit]

In Africa
As well as the Canary Islands, whistled speech occurs in some parts of
Southern Africa and Eastern Africa.
Most whistle languages, of which there are several hundred, are based on

tonal languages.
Only the tone of the speech is saved in the whistle, things such as
articulation and phonation are eliminated. These are replaced by other
features such as stress and rhythmical variations. However, some
languages, like that of the people of Aas in the Zezuru who speak a
Shona-derived dialect, include articulation so that consonants interrupt the
flow of the whistle. A similar language is the Tsonga whistle language used
in the highlands in the Southern parts of Mozambique.
This should not be confused with the whistled sibilants of Shona.
[edit]

Usage and cultural status

In the Greek village of Antia, only few whistlers remain now [2] but in 1982
the entire population knew how to whistle their speech.
Whistled speech may be very central and highly valued in a culture.
Shouting is very rare in Sochiapam Chinantec. Men in that culture are
subject to being fined if they do not handle whistle-speech well enough to
perform certain town jobs. They may whistle for fun in situations where
spoken speech could easily be heard.
In Sochiapam, Oaxaca, and other places in Mexico, and reportedly in West
Africa as well, whistled speech is men's language: although women may
understand it, they do not use it.
Though whistled languages are not secret codes or secret languages (with
the exception of a whistled language used by aigos insurgencies in
Cuba during Spanish occupation),[1] they may be used for secretive
communication among outsiders or others who do not know or understand
the whistled language though they may understand its spoken origin.
Stories are told of farmers in Aas during World War II, or in La Gomera,
who were able to hide evidence of such nefarious activities as milkwatering because they were warned in whistle-speech that the police were
approaching.[1]

[edit]

Fiction
In popular culture whistled languages are common in robots. R2-D2 is a
well-known whistler from the Star Wars series of films who uses modulated
whistles to communicate with other droids and express emotion. The
emotions articulated in the film are understood by the human audience
without the aid of facial expressions.
In the Dune series By Frank Herbert, the Face Dancers are controlled by
such a language.
[edit]

Ecology
Whistled languages are normally found in locations with difficult
mountainous terrain, slow or difficult communication, low population
density and/or scattered settlements, and other isolating features such as
shepherding and cultivation of hillsides.[1] They have been more recently
found in dense forests like the Amazon where they may replace spoken
dialogues in the villages, while hunting or fishing to overcome the pressure
of the acoustic environment.[2][4] The main advantage of whistling speech
is that it allows the speaker to cover much larger distances (typically 12
kilometres (0.621.2 mi) but up to 5 km (3.1 mi) in mountains and less in
reverberating forests) than ordinary speech, without the strain (and lesser
range) of shouting. The long range of whistling is enhanced by the
mountainous terrain found in areas where whistled languages are used.
Many areas with such languages work hard to preserve their ancient
traditions, in the face of rapidly advancing telecommunications systems in
many areas.
[edit]

Physics
A whistled tone is essentially a simple oscillation (or sine wave), and thus
timbral variations are impossible. Normal articulation during an ordinary lip-

whistle is relatively easy though the lips move little causing a constant of
labialization and making labial and labiodental consonants (p, b, m, f, etc.)
problematical.[1] "Apart from the five vowel-phonemes [of Silbo Gomero]
and even these do not invariably have a fixed or steady pitchall whistled
speech-sound realizations are glides which are interpreted in terms of
range, contour, and steepness." [1]
In a non-tonal language, segments may be differentiated as follows:
Vowels are replaced by a set of relative pitch ranges generally tracking the
f2 formant of spoken language.
Stress is expressed by higher pitch or increased length
Consonants are produced by pitch transitions of different lengths and
height, plus the presence or absence of occlusion. ("Labial stops are
replaced by diaphragm or glottal occlusions.")
[edit]

List of whistled languages

The following list is of languages that exist or existed in a whistled form, or

of ethnic groups that speak such languages. In some cases (e.g.
Chinantec) the whistled speech is an important and integral part of the
language and culture; in others (e.g. Nahuatl) its role is much lesser.
%

Americas
1 Mexico: Amuzgo, Chinantec, Ch'ol, Kickapoo, Mazatec,
Nahuatl, Otomi, Tepehua, Totonac, Zapotec
2 Bolivia: Siriono
3 Brazil: Pirah
4 Alaska: Yupik[5][6]

Asia
1 Burma: Chin
2 Nepal: Chepang
3 Turkey: Turkish (village of Kuky)
4 for Siberian Yupik inhabitants of St. Lawrence Island, see
Yupik, Alaska, America mentioned above

Europe and Canary Islands

1 France (village of Aas, Pyrenees): Occitan language
2 Greece (village of Antia on the island of Euboea)
3 Spain (La Gomera and El Hierro, Canary Islands): "Silbo
Gomero"

West Africa: Bafia, Bape, Birifor, Bobo, Burunsi, Daguri, Diola, Ewe,
Fongbe, Marka, Ngwe, Twi, Ule (among others)

Oceania
1 New Guinea: Gadsup, Binumarien

[edit]

See also
%

Musical language

Language of the birds

Solresol

Sweep (puppet)

Whistled speech among Kickapoo Indians in Mexico

Whistled language

Whistling
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article's use of external links may not follow Wikipedia's policies or guidel
excessive or inappropriate external links, and converting useful links where appropr
Whistling
A human whistling.

The Whistling Boy, Frank Duveneck (1872)

Human whistling is the production of sound by means of carefully

controlling a stream of air flowing through a small hole. Whistling can be
achieved by creating a small opening with one's lips and then blowing or
sucking air through the hole. The air is moderated by the lips, tongue, teeth
or fingers (placed over the mouth) to create turbulence, and the mouth acts
as a resonant chamber to enhance the resulting sound by acting as a type
of Helmholtz resonator, producing a pure tone like a sine wave. Whistling
can also be produced by blowing air through enclosed, cupped hands or
through an external instrument, such as a whistle or even a blade of grass
or leaf.
Contents [hide]
%

1
Musical/melodic whistling

2
Functional whistling
1

2.1
Whistling as a
language

2.2
Sport

3
Superstition

4 Popular
culture

5 See also

6
References

7 External
links

[edit]

Musical/melodic whistling
Whistling can be musical: many performers on the music hall and

Vaudeville circuits were professional whistlers, the most famous of which

were Ronnie Ronalde and Fred Lowery. Both had several notable songs
featuring whistling.
Pucker whistling is the most common form of whistling used in most
Western music. Typically, the tongue tip is lowered, often placed behind the
lower teeth, and pitch altered by varying the position of the tongue. In
particular, the point at which the tongue body approximates the palate
varies from near the uvula (for low notes) to near the alveolar ridge (for
high notes). Although varying the degree of pucker will change the pitch of
a pucker whistle, expert pucker whistlers will generally only make small
variations to the degree of pucker, due to its tendency to affect purity of
tone. Pucker whistling can be done by either only blowing out or blowing in
and out alternately . In the ' only blow out' method , a consistent tone is
achieved but a negligible pause has to be taken to breathe in. In the
alternating method there is no problem of breathlessness or interruption as
breath is taken when one whistles breathing in . But a disadvantage of this
method is that many a times , the consistency of tone is not maintained
and it fluctuates.
Many expert musical palatal whistlers will substantially alter the position of
the lips to ensure a good quality tone. Venetian gondoliers are famous for
moving the lips while they whistle in a way that can look like singing. A
good example of a palatal whistler is Luke Janssen winner of the 2009
world whistling competition.
The term puccalo refers to highly skilled jazz whistling.
The most significant whistling competition is run by the International
Whistlers Convention in North Carolina, USA. Held every year (recently
every other has been in other countries), it brings together whistlers from
all over the world who battle for the crown of 'International Grand
Champion'
[edit]

Functional whistling

Apart from being used as simply a method of calling the attention of

another (or others), or a musical endeavour, whistling has long been used
as a specialized communication between laborers. For example, whistling
in theatre, particularly on-stage, is used by flymen to cue the lowering or
raising of a batten pipe or flat. This method of communication became
popular before the invention of electronic means of communication, and is
still in use, primarily in older "hemp" houses during the set and strike of a
show. Traditionally, sailors were often used as stage technicians, working
with the complicated rope systems associated with flying. Coded whistles
would be used to call cues, so it is thought that whistling on-stage may
cause, for example, a cue to come early, a "sailor's ghost" to drop a setpiece on top of an actor, or general bad luck in the performance.
[edit]

Whistling as a language
In the Spanish canary island of La Gomera, a traditional whistled language
named silbo gomero is still taught in school. Six separate whistling sounds
are used to produce two vowels and four consonants, allowing this
language to convey more than 4000 words. This language allowed people
(e.g. shepherds) to communicate over long distances in the island, when
other communication means were not available.
[edit]

Sport
Whistling is often used by spectators at sporting events to express their
opinions of the action taking place before them, but has different meanings
depending on where the event takes place. In the United States and
Canada, whistling is used much like applause, to express approval or
appreciation for the efforts of a team or a player, such as a starting pitcher
in baseball who is taken out of the game after having pitched well. Often, a
finger whistling technique is used to produce the desired sound.
Conversely, in much of the rest of the world, especially Europe, whistling is
used to express displeasure with the action or disagreement with an
official's decision. This whistling is often loud and cacophonous.

[edit]

Superstition

This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this s
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2011)
In Russian and other Slavic cultures (also in Romania and the Baltic
states), whistling indoors is superstitiously believed to bring poverty
("whistling money away"), whereas whistling outdoors is considered
normal.[1] In Serbia, it is said that whistling indoors will attract mice,[citation
needed] while in Korea, Japan, parts of South East Asia, and South India,
whistling at night is thought to bring snakes.[citation needed]. In Hawaiian
lore, whistling at night is considered bad luck because it mimics the sound
of Nightmarchers[citation needed]. In the Philippines, it is considered
disrespectful to whistle in public places especially in the presence of
women. When women do so it is simply improper.[citation needed]
Whistling on board a sailing ship is thought to encourage the wind strength
to increase. This is regularly alluded to in the Aubrey-Maturin books by
Patrick O'Brian. Theater practice has plenty of superstitions. One of them
is whistling: in most theaters (especially in opera houses, where the odds
are that a catchy opera tune will be unconsciously whistled), whistling on
stage is thought to bring bad luck or at least a bad performance.[citation
needed] The reason may be that stagehands used whistled signals to
communicate in the old houses, before radio links and other devices where
introduced. On-stage whistling could be distracting or even dangerous, as
it could be wrongly interpreted as a signal or stage cue.
In previous years in England, women were cautioned not to whistle as it
was believed "A whistling woman never marries", leaving her to be a
spinster.
[edit]

Popular culture
%

Ronnie Ronalde detailed his musical career in his autobiography

entitled Around the World On a Whistle.

%

Harpo Marx was known to communicate through whistling in both his

onstage and on-film roles (such as A Night in Casablanca).

Roger Whittaker was first known as a musical whistler.

Bobbejaan Schoepen, a Flemish entertainer, singer, guitarist,

composer, former actor, and founder of one of the most popular
theme parks in Europe: Bobbejaanland, was well known for his
outstanding whistling, but in the late 1980s he lost the ability due to
surgery.

Toots Thielemans is a Belgian jazz artist well known for his guitar,
harmonica playing, and also for his highly accomplished professional
whistling.

The Whistler radio series ran from 1942-1948. The show opened
with the sound of footsteps and an eerie whistle.

Bing Crosby whistled and trilled in some of his songs, including

"White Christmas". He could imitate a birdcall and then riff on it with
a swing styling.

Mary Martin in a duet with Bing Crosby on "Wait Till the Sun Shines
Nellie" in a segment from a 1962 Bing Crosby Christmas special.

Elmo Tanner toured with the Ted Weems Orchestra and whistled in
"Heart Aches" and "The High and the Mighty".

Brother Bones 1903-1974, had a big hit with "Sweet Georgia Brown"
which is still used as the warm up music of the Harlem Globetrotters.

I Was Kaiser Bill's Batman by Whistling Jack Smith was a popular

1967 novelty song featuring whistling.

Andy Offutt Irwin, storyteller, singer-songwriter, and humorist, is able

to whistle on both inhalation and exhalation, allowing him to whistle
without appearing to take a breath for a minute and a half. Irwin
whistling can be heard on his solo performances and albums, but
also in appearances with the chamber music group Kandinsky Trio.
[2]

Roy Orbison on "Here Comes the Rain, Baby" from his 1967 album
Cry Softly Lonely One.

John Lennon in his song "Jealous Guy" from the album Imagine.

[edit]

See also
%

Irish whistling champions

Puirt a beul

Puccalo

Silbo Gomero language

Slide whistle

Tin whistle

Wolf-whistling

Whistle register

Whistled language

[edit]

Whistling
whistler-whistled language