Unity through ONE truth?

As I was thinking about the concept of the Baha'i faith, I went to their international website to see how they present themselves in the very public context of the internet. Their short explanatory blurb on the homepage sums up, in brief, all the detailed accounts of their faith, culture and message that we have come across in the Baha'u'llah's biography. (the Baha'i international web site) It is clear from both the biography and the web site that unity is a concept that is at the forefront of Baha'i faith : "Baha'i believe the crucial need facing humanity is to find a unifying vision of the nature and purpose of life and of the future of society". What I find interesting about this idea is that the "unifying vision" that we need to find is the vision explained by Baha'u'llah. This is interesting to me because, in effect, the Baha'i are not just saying we need to unite, but that we need to unite under the flag of truth--under the flag of Baha'u'llah. For some, they make this acceptance easier than others. By claiming that religions such as Christianity and Judaism are just chapters and components of the one true religion, it becomes slightly easier for someone of this faith to accept their claim. However, if an individual falls outside of this spectrum, say an Atheist, for them, unity (in this context) also means a complete reform of their personal beliefs. 

This sense of unity reminds me very much of the ideals of the Unitarian Universalist church. The difference I see, however, is the way the unity is attained. With the UU, they ask that any and all faiths come together, not under one universal truth, but that whatever your truth is, it can live in unity with other truths. This differs fundamentally from the Baha'i approach, as they feel that everyone can attain unity by accepting the one truth I have mentioned above. 

The Long and Winding Road...

As is clear from the example of Baha'u'llah and the Baha'i, the creation of a new religion is long, complex, and often trying task. It combines two elements of life that people tend to avoid and fear: change and contradiction to prominent beliefs. As discussed in the Rastafari book (by Weber), a spark of charisma is needed to propel a new idea into the realm of popular acceptance if that idea hopes to prevail and survive. In this context, the Bab was the creator of this new idea and the charisma of his followers (especially individuals like Tahirih, Quddus and Baha'u'llah himself) was the reason the idea persisted. After establishing what the new faith is to be about, the religion then goes through phases, almost like software upgrades, in order to fully develop and become something that many people can embrace. This is often the long part of a new religion's journey. With regards to the Baha'i, they started of with Babi version 1.0, but it was often unstable. Because there were many claims to leadership and severe opposition from Government forces it became difficult for the Babis to "settle" down with their religion. This is especially evident with the example of the Babis reduction to the "low morale and degraded state of the Babi community" (in Baghdad when Baha'u'llah was gone and living as a hermit). As division between sects was a major "bug" in the Babi community, what the new version needed--and what most religions need--to become stable was a unifying leader. This is were Baha'u'llah's claim to be the awaited messiah-esque figure comes in. Through this claim, and its acceptance in the community, the sometimes wavering seeds of this Babi faith were able to be unified and solidified, reforming/fixing Babi version 4.0 so much that it warranted the new name Baha'i. As a side note, it is possible, though not necessary, to say that persecution is often an element in the formation of a religion. As many new religions are faced with opposition due to their "radical" ideas, this oppression can often act as a force to unite people under that cause and empathize with fellow believers. 

African Drumming to Reggae, Reggae to Hip-Hop/Rock?

In the sixth chapter of Rastafari, Edmonds explores the musical progression of styles that led to the birth and popularization of Reggae. Like most other developments in music, new styles are often the product of multiple influences (i.e. modern jazz from dixie land and african music), and Edmonds conclusion is no exception. However, often, there is one style that stands out more than others in the development of a new musical genre, for Reggae, Edmund believes it to be Nyabinghi drumming. While there are other factors to take into consideration (other precursors like Ska and Rock Steady), Nyabinghi seems to comprise the deepest roots. After considering Edmunds conclusions, I began to make a few of my own (though they are supporter soley by personal experience and not legitamit research) as to what are the consequences of Reggae and what styles it has influenced or helped to develope. I first thought about hip-hop, and while there are some definite connections between it and Reggae, I feel that hip-hop's precursors are too many and varied to claim Reggae as its main derivative. However, the fusion of Hip-hop and Rock and Roll, as purely exemplified by Rage Against the Machine, has some very compelling links to Reggae. Using Rage Against the Machine (RATM) as a model for consideration, I began drawing connection betweeen it and Reggae. As far as the musical style and instrumentation goes, there is a striking similarity in the bass heavy (both bass guitar and drums) grooves of both styles. Also, the fact that these grooves are generated by acoustic instruments, as opposed to the digital beats often scene in rap and hip-hop, further strengthens the connection. Another connection is made in the vocal styles. Unlike standard rock and roll, where vocal emphasis is generally placed soley on melodic ideas, RATM combines ideas of strong rhythm as well as melody in their vocal parts--which is very similar to Reggae. The last connection I will mention here is the aspect of political/social awarness exhibited by RATM. Reggae's strong ties to Rastafarian themes of social change are very much reflected by the poetry in RATM songs. I have provided two videos that I think accurately portray the similarites between these two styles.

A difference of direction.

When looking at the Rastafarian culture present in Boboshanti, as compared to the Rastafarian culture displayed by rastas like Bob Marley, I find a large difference to be the direction or orientation of their faith. The version of Rastafari exhibited by Bob Marley, the version most are familiar with, is very public and out-reaching. While it has the core ideals of Rastafari--ital living, anti-colonialism, ties to Ethiopia/pro-African heritage--it also has strong ties to social change. Rastas like Bob Marley would promote their views of life through public demonstration, music and in some cases militant action (both theoretical and physical). Their symbols were as much as a tool to further their agenda as they were a means of identification (this being visible throughout all aspects of reggae music and clothing/accessories). The Rastas of Boboshanti were much more introverted than the "classic" form of rastafari. Though they still maintain many of the ideals I listed above (and especially the association to Ethiopia/African roots), they do not seek to use these pillars of faith as an agent for social change. As a natural consequence of their relative seclusion, the symbols they use to identify themselves differ from other versions of Rastafari. Dreadlocks were first used as a method to signify a breaking away from accepted colonialist culture, whereas the turbans of the Boboshanti are worn as a way to connect to their ethiopian roots. Another difference between these two versions of Rastafari, is the organization of their daily lives. There appears to be a lot of weight placed on organization, structure, work and worship in the Boboshanti community which differs from the more unorganized and organicly-structured lifestyle of the "classic" Rastafari. 

Bob Marley: Charismatic Leader??

I put on some Bob Marley before I started reading (just to get in the mood) and by the time I had finished the first two chapters several questions about this musician came into mind. According to our reading, a charismatic leader is a often a key component to a movement's emergence and continued success. I began to wonder if people like Weber and Edmonds would consider Bob Marley as one of these charismatic leaders (and I understand that this will likely be addressed in the up-coming chapters, but there's no harm in talking about it now). My initial thought was that of course Bob Marley is a charismatic leader/figure in the Rastafarian faith. He's probably one of the most well known--if not THE most well known--figure of this group, and to get to that status you have to have the exceptional qualities (similar to divine qualities) that our reading discussed. But then I hit a brick wall as I thought about another characteristic of the charismatic leader: the idea that they are "innovators and agents of social change, not by making some technical adjustments or further systemizations of the prevailing ideas, but by espousing new ideas, making new demands, and creating new visions for potential followers". This made me stop because though Bob Marley is incredibly influential and important to the Rastafarian movement, he didn't create the ideas that make up their faith. He promotes them, perhaps to more people than anyone else in that faith, but they aren't his original ideas. This, however, did not sit well with. How could the arguably largest Rastafarian not be a "charismatic leader". After thinking some more I finally came up with an idea that I think would cast Bob Marley into the charismatic role: Though he did not originate the ideas/ideals that he speaks of in his music, he did create the music itself and was the main engine behind the spread of this genre of music, and thus through his creation of a music that speaks of Rastafarian faith, he in turn "espoused new ideas" and created "new visions for potential followers".

The story of King Solomon and Queen Sheba, in my mind, does a few things to set Ethiopia apart from other nations. By connecting Queen Sheba (and her son) to the direct blood-line of Solomon, Ethiopia's line of kings becomes important and has ties to places outside their own country. Because the connection to Solomon distinguishes Ethiopia from its sorroun ding neighbors, it also seperates them and in effect raising them above the sorrounding nations. This is especially interesting when thinking about the way in which Ethiopia will later be seperated by their Christianity (in contrast to their Muslim neighbors). Another interesting aspect of this story that makes Ethiopia of more note is their conversion from sun worshipers to the belief in the God of Israel. To me, this 180degree change (seemingly overnight) reflects the same ideas of extremes that were present when we read the Psalms. In the Psalms, the narrator (or whom ever he was symoblizing) was always on one end of the spectrum or the other. He was always completely guilty and in the worst degree, or completely in the Lord's faith and full to the top with his love--there was never any middle ground. With the Ethiopia conversion we see the same extremes. They went from heathinistic sun worshipers to believers in a "sophisticated" God and belief system.

Jesus Camp

This is a very interesting film that I'm sure some of you have seen. There are nine parts (if you click on the video itself it will take you to its youtube page were you can find the other eight parts).

Structure Mapping in Religious Models

Presented in the chapter on "Conceptual Blending and Analogy" in The Analogical Mind, is idea that our minds can take actions/ideas of the physical world and project them into that of a mental realm--"the remarkable human capacity for building novel conceptual/physical domains". Though the author dealt with the relationship between a mouse and a computer screen, the idea can also be thought of in a religious context. When analyzing the various structures and models that religion takes on throughout the world, it becomes clear there they are many and varied. For example, religions such as Christianity take on a structure that very closely resembles a kingdom or monarchy, while the structure of Indian mound builders in the midwest spiritual world resembles layers of the world (sky, earth, water) with no single "god" or "ruler". Applying the ideas conveyed by the relationship of a mouse to computer screen (something physical and "real" to something invented) it seems likely that the various structures of religion were modeled after the physical realities seen by their respective people. Both past and present Christians have often existed in societies that resembled a monarchy (Kingdoms, countries with presidents, etc.). It thus makes since that they took a model that made sense to them and used it as the structure for their religion--making God a reflection of a King. Similarly, the ancient Indians in the midwest lived in a tribal society that was so in touch with nature that it basis for almost every aspect of their society, and, without surprise, their spiritual society too. 

Many religious structures, however, don't exactly match the models they were based on. This fact is also explained in the chapter. In the description of the mouse-computer screen relationship, the author explains that the "correspondence between inputs can be highly imperfect" (i.e. the mouse can be touching the desk or not but only when it is will there be corresponding movement with the arrow on the screen). This idea also accounts for the way in which our society is often more complex or varied than that of an idealized religious model.