Friday, January 19, 2007

God

I wanted to write this earlier, after Dan commented in an earlier post about Richard Dawkins' disparagment of God. I don't think too much about it, but there's something to God, whatever that may mean.

I was raised Catholic, and recently learned that my grandfather was Jewish (later converted), so I'm of the tribe, as it were. (That adds a layer of interesting-ness to my flirtation with Judaism mid-HS, but nothing substantive enough to draw any conclusions from). Despite this, I stopped caring about God/religion a few years back.

But man, this song really has an effect on me. I'm not unself-conscious enough to be able to say straight-faced that it's profound or thereabouts, but there's something there to it, that really affects me. Just this sense of connection to something broader and less trivial, maybe.

This is one of the most attractive components of spirituality to me, and it's something that I saw in animism or other indigenous spirituality, which in turn opened me back up to God, again, whatever that means.

It's something hard for me to talk about since it all sounds so corny, but the idea of the well really makes sense for me. It's palpable the feeling I experience sometimes, when some feeling rises up from my core to my throat, and I just want to stay there in the moment. Man, I feel like a trashy novel writer, but it's legit, whatever it is I experience.

I don't know if we're supposed to stay there forever, as maybe some advocates of enlightenment suggest, but I think we could use a lot more of that. Likewise, there's probably room for life outside of language, and we can all use so much more of that from where we are now, trapped in linguistic jungles that are, to paraphrase Edward Abbey, symtomatic of an indoor philosophy. But there's still probably a place for spoken language, and there's probably a place for the mundanity of un-profound existence. We just have no balance now.

6 Comments:

Blogger Ted Heistman said...

I can't hear the song where I am but I liked this post.

12:21 PM  
Blogger Archangel said...

Thanks Ted.

Here are the lyrics if you're interested:http://www.metrolyrics.com/lyrics/2147429140/Matisyahu/King_WIthout_A_Crown

I found out that Moshiach means 'messiah' and am less comfortable with it. but anyway, in an interview, he talks about how music can connect people to godliness, and i think that's legit. he and his band really channel it well.

one of the reasons i don't think religionists have it wrong is because all over the world people have ideas of the spiritual. there's something there, something that people connect to, that's real, that's beautiful, that renders words meaningless next to feeling.

there's a good quote from one of the early essays in 'against civilization,' about wanting the profunity of existence, and not letting the religionists or the atheists getting in the way of it. the fact that we have a part of our brains hard-wired for this stuff means that it's important and real and necessary for us.

i don't want to get bogged down in dogma and creed, which is why i think i feel less comfortable with the reference to the messiah in the linked song. but i do want to encourage connection to the divine

anyway, thanks again.

6:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, I think that quote you are looking for is in John Landau's essay, Wildflowers: A Bouquet of Theses.

Definately one of my favourite essays!

What I desire is a return to the profundity of experience. I want a society where everyday activity, however mundane, is centered around how incredibly profound everything is. I want that profundity to become so immense that any mediations between us and it become totally unnecessary: we are in the marvel. When I am in that awe, words are so irrelevant, I don't really care if you call my experience "God" or not. All I know is it is the greatest pleasure possible: to hug a tree, to jump up and down at a beautiful sunset, to climb a magnificent hill, to take awe in what surrounds us. I am a hedonist, and I will have these pleasures; neither the religionist nor the atheist shall lock them away from me!

Perfect!

7:46 PM  
Blogger Archangel said...

hey dan,

that's totally it! thanks for digging it up.

and that's it- says it all!

8:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ya'll are so on point!!! messiah is an unsettling word Mr. Arch Angel because you draw singular context from it... (i mean this with love - but catholic jesus son of god - etc...) other messiahs too have been honored, some more so than others, but the question returns, if we are all in the image of the divine, thus we are divine, then are we not our own messiahs? is each person not asleep to the fullness of their very own divinity? where is this animus? is it indegnous? is it dogmatic? is it abstract? is it tangible? the answer is Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! express yourself multi-dimensionally!!! these 3d forms of spirit worship are caged, yet still contain the essence of the overall divine, merely subdued... it is my belief that "the new spirituality" or the "returning of ancient spiritual states of existence" in this AUGHT GENERATION is manifest in our multi-dimensionality... i can mix sallah, sit lotus and hum ohm, chant the hare krishna mantra, recite egyptian priest incantations, dance indigenous rituals, and partake in mass all equally... after having experience the lot i've learned where and when to draw from what and how... ths is that beautiful balance... with a large hefty dose of self-generated modes of worship, as these are as authentic to you as you can be!

3:59 PM  
Blogger Archangel said...

Flesh,

This is a good point- messiah isn't necessarily bogged down with abrahamic overtones.

And I think you're right- it's all means to the holy, to profundity as John Landau writes. What speaks truth to you and connects you is what's important.

Exciting things to consider and explore!

10:32 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home