The Tao and Space

I have finished reading this book and I have yet the task to understand it.
At the end I figured out what most of it was about, or at least that is what my innocent and yet not fully developed mind thinks. It is all about not interfering and just going with the flow. If there was a perfect place for Lao Tsu, it would be small and simple, where there are all types of opportunities for progress and at the same time it is not needed so it does not take place.
In this perfect world, there would be no wars of government, and people would be humble. His perfect world is one that I know would and will never happen. It is like the far never accomplished and never found Utopia.
Regarding what the Tao is, I don`t have idea, it is something that cannot be explained and there should be no attempt to explain. It is a mystery. It is there, but we cannot see it, or know its power, or hear it, or feel it, like the universe. Yeah it may be that this connection to the universe is not very elaborate or makes not much sense, but I have the task to connect it to the space pictures of the NASA, and that is what I am doing. The Tao is like space, we know it is there, but we cannot quite explain it.

The Tao is described more and more as I move on in the book, and I am afraid to say, that I am not getting half of what is said.
TEWNTY NINE says that we cannot change the universe because it is not possible and that is how my reading today started. Sometimes we humans think we can change everything to make it better, but from what I have observed, we cannot and what we have changed has become worse. After this it is said that men with ambitions and proud are not good men and are defiantly not fit to be leaders, “Achieve results, but never be proud” (THIRTY).
Then I understood better what was being said, one should not be proud of victory in a battle, one never should be proud of death. He says victory should be seen as a funeral. The Tao refuses the use of weapons and refers to the ones that use them, as un-wise. I know it has nothing to do with it, or maybe it does, but I couldn`t help not thinking in the president of Venezuela, Chavez and the threats with weapons and war he has been making the past weeks towards Colombia. I found it really interesting how he relates the right with violence and the left with wisdom. He says that it takes much of a strong and smart person to control oneself than others.
Lao Tsu then writes what are the standards to know if a man is truly wise. Resuming what I understood, I would say a good man is one that is one that is good and doesn`t know it and one that is wise is one that is and is not bragging about it. It is like being humble and at the same naturally modest. I don`t know how to describe it.
I once again was captivated by the parts where Tsu talked about detachment. He says that people that are not attached to what they have don`t suffer when they lose them and so on. This time I what specially called my attention was that desire was called a sin, “There is no greater sin than desire” (FORTY-SIX). I still don`t understand this teaching or idea, so to say, very well. I don`t understand how one could have a good life without liking anything or disliking anything, it seems so plain and boring to me. I think attachment is sometimes worth the suffering that comes with it, because life needs a little of spice, I think.
Ying and the yang where mentioned in the scroll FOURTY-TWO, “The ten thousand things carry yin and embrace yang. They achieve harmony by combining these forces”. First I was surprised when I realized it is Yin not YING, and second I wasn`t expecting to find this words here.
This is all for today, I am extremely tired and I feel I cannot write anything smart in this state.

Don`t want any thing, conform with your misfortune, and beleive in what you can`t see, touch, or hear. Why? Just do it!!!

I am finding that the Tao Te Ching shows many ideas about aspects of life that I agree with but never really paid attention to.
In the scroll THIRTEEN, I found something very interesting. It said that one should accept disgrace as to accept being unimportant as well as avoiding being concerned with loss or gain. I was also intrigued as misfortune was described as something that happens to everyone and it is part of nature, “Misfortune comes from having a body”. The similarity to the Bhagavad-Gita is appearing repeatedly, it is clearly said in the scroll TWENTY-SIX, “He remains unattached and calm”. I find it really hard for this to happen. It is really hard to be unattached to what happens to you. Up to what I know, everybody has at least a little bit of selfishness and desires something or mourns a loss. It is also mentioned that peace is acquired when one is not waiting for a change and accepts the monotony of nature. This thing about having nothing for thieves to no t exist and all this sounds a little mediocre to me though.
I have also noted the importance of simplicity and humility in the Tao. It criticizes the people that make shows, are self righteous, who boasts, and brags, Lao Tsu says all those things are unnecessary and do not bring happiness.
Scroll SIXTEEN, I identified with a lot. “They grow and flourish and then return to the source”, as you may see, this teaching, if I could call it like that, told how life is a cycle and everyone is destined to die someday. I agree and know that as much as we try, we cannot change it. It is something that is hard to accept, but we all will die someday and it is natural that it happens. But nothing would make any sense without death anyway, life wouldn’t be as valuable. On the other hand I noticed a very interesting thing; one can be with the Tao and be eternal. Is this like an after life? To me it is similar to the ‘be with god’ idea, “And though the body dies, the Tao will never pass away”. So is this Tao like a spirit?
There where two more things that caught my attention in the scrolls from THIRTEEN to TWENTY-NINE. The first was the mention of ‘the way’ in TWENTY THREE, and the mention and explanation for ‘faith’ in TWENTY-ONE. It again supported the idea of the Tao existing but it being impossible to know it does by seeing, hearing, of touching, but it being faith that it exists what supports it. This is what happens in many religions, people don`t have any physical evidence that what they believe in exists, but they still know it is there and don`t doubt it, through faith.
At last I was surprised when in the scroll TWENTY, Tao Tsu writes in first person, and tells us how he is different from all the rest of the people. He says “Give up learning, and put an end to your troubles” (thing that Confucius wouldn`t agree with hu?). he says he was not clever and didn`t do what everyone else did, but at the same time he writes he is alone and depressed, “but I am alone and depressed”.
And that’s the end! Ta Tan!

So. The Tao. What is it?

In the first scroll of Tao Te Ching the only thing clear was that the Tao was an eternal mystery that is eternal because it cannot be named. I think this meant that things that cannot be pointed out and truly understood and recognized always remain a mystery and therefore they are eternal. This mystical description repeats as it is described, “The Tao is an empty vessel; it is used, but never filled” (FOUR). What I understood is that it is a powerful thing that is hidden and that is the source, or the cause for other important things. However, it is mostly portrayed as something that cannot be explained, “Darkness within darkness. The gate to all mystery” (ONE), “I do not know from whence it comes. It is the father of the gods” (FOUR). Here I was a little surprised; In the other books that are written to teach the people something and to make them follow what is said, everything is explained in some way, but here, Lao Tsu writes that the Tao is a mystery, and clearly says that he doesn’t know where it comes from or what it really is (it does not need explanation).
A scroll I really found interesting was TWO. In my previous posts about the bible I was permanently questioning why God created evil, and this scroll gives a very good and convincing way of explaining it. It says that without evil one cannot see god, without ugly we would not tell if something was beautiful. Everything needs valance and everything has something to contrast it with. We measure small in contrast with big, and darkness when we compare it to something light. This is really familiar to me, the YING and YANG thing has similar foundations, or maybe this is the foundation, I don`t know. We know we are alive because we are not dead. So then if something is not born, then it is eternal and that is how heaven is described as endless later in SEVEN.
Other than this, I found many similarities to the Bhagavad-Gita regarding how impartiality and not desiring things resulted in peace and happiness, “Not seeing the desirable things prevents confusion of the heart” (THREE). On the other hand, they differ because the Tao Te Ching doesn`t find learning more and knowledge so important, on the contrary it is more about staying simple and avoiding doing more than what is needed. Until now I find that the Tao Te Ching has many ideas I would call conformist, where if nothing is done to have personal development and superiority everything will be well and even better. How I was raised I learned that I always had to strive to be the best that I could be.
I was interested by the mention of gods here in scroll FOUR when referring to the Tao, “It is the forefather of the gods”.
I was really intrigued by the whole scroll SIX, I don`t quite understand if it is saying something good to women or not. It is pricing our motherhood but the last part sounds like if we where a thing to use and find heaven as to have a good time. I am not sure if it that or that my twisted mind is taking the word wrongly.
“The valley spirit never dies;
It is the woman, primal mother.
Her gateway is the root of heaven and earth.
It is like a veil barely seen.
Use it; it will never fail.”

A Harsh Test

The next on God's chosen ones list is Job, and i would say he was by far the most unfortunate. It all starts when satan makes a bet with god that will eventually fall into the idea of testing Job's faith. This part, I found confusing and it initiated a great series of questions. First, it said something about satan being a son of God. Other thing that i really had a hard time understanding was why God listens to what satan has to say, Why does satan have a saying? Why does evil have a saying today?

Job suffers. His people are killed and after all he went through a seed of doubt starts to grow inside him. I am not a great beleiver of God. If he does exist then he is not perfect, powerfull, but i think he made mistakes. He made some bad choices as picking david further in the bible, and hey, he payed atention to what the live representation told him.

There are moments in life were beleivers start to doubt. When passing and struggling through an unfortunate event or enduring a terrible moment in life one may start wondering why this guy you are devoted to allows all this to happen, and wether he is with you for real. As many do, and with a really fair reason Job, doubts of God.

Job was passing through a difficult situation and ontop of everything he has crappy friends. They were causing more pain than what he already had. One said praclicly that he diserved it and other said he had to deal with it. Any how he had very bad friends. A friend is mainly someone you can trust, that will come to your aid and suport you when you need it. Even if they came unto him, the main part of suport was evidently lacking. With friends like Job's why have enemies.

David, Good or bad?

Once again God chooses a man, and once again I don´t understand why. I would think that the ones God directs his attention to are chosen because they are good and they have the merits for such important role. Maybe in the eyes of the bible they are good. It is hard to define what is good or not. This type of question´s answers are usually taken for granted, I thought my answer to what a good person is, was already clear and there. However when I was asked about It I realized that it is not so. Now after thinking it over I would say that a good person is one that has good wishes for others. It is someone that is fair and that has good actions towards others being authentic and because it is of ones nature to do it. With this I mean, have good intentions towards others and act to help others without any personal interest and being completely honest on why you are doing it. This was mentioned by the name of detachment in actions in the book of Bhagavad-Gita. Regarding David and how he acts according to the bible, I don´t think he is a good person.

David has proven to have many qualities as courage and many more as described in the following verse, “I have seen a son of Jesse the Beth-Lehemite, that is Cumming in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, and a comely person, and the LORD is with him”(I Samuel 16:18). Anyhow, are they enough for the lord to be with him? How about the bloodshed he has also demonstrated? David is shown to be violent and I would say cold blooded as you may see in the I Samuel: “This day will the lord deliver thee into mine hand, and I will smite thee; and take thine head from thee; and I will give the carcasses of the host of the Philistines this day unto the fowls of the air and to the wildest beasts of the earth”. Here god is pricing bloody slaughter. He has chosen to support a man like this? What criteria does this God have creating the tree and snake, listening to Satan, and backing a man who´s words are cold aggressive, violent, and represent slaughter?

I have always known about Moses. Nevertheless I was never aware of all the details regardless of his power to enchant snakes (which was not at all accurate), and his ability to open the sea in two.
Well for you that don`t know the story and are as uninformed as I was, this is what happened:
All his people are salves in Egypt and there are too many so the Pharaoh starts to stop babies from growing. Some mother puts her baby in a basket and sends him away in the Nile River. He is picked up by Egyptian royalty and raised as part of the family. he lives day by day witnessing how the slaves are treated and one day gets aggressive because of it. He runs and a bush talks to him. This actually reminds me of a friend I have who once told her mother that trees talked to her to get her nervous and experience more adrenaline rushes. Yeah, I have a schizophrenic friend, and what? Anyway, this is god telling him to free his people. I still don`t understand why he is the one chosen, God appears to choose people without any reason to be explained. To give him a hand God gives Moses some kind of paranormal skills so he can convince the Pharaoh to let his people free. I would defently freak out if I where the Pharaoh. Being a witness of water being turned into blood, a stampede of frogs, an invasion of insects, and the death of all the new born babies including the baby dearest to him, and seeing a man turn his staff into a snake, seems pretty scary and convincing to me. But I guess the Pharaoh thought very different, because, regardless all that Moses did, he refused to do as he desired and even when he did after the death of a member of his family, he went after him to continue the struggle.
Then comes my favorite part of the story. Moses divides the red sea in two creating a scenery similar to a modern aquarium. There are archeological records that there was actually a battle there and that it probably was this one, but there is still a vague idea of what really happened. Many may say that all that is written in the bible is not true, but considering the coincidences in different cultures and civilizations throughout the world and history I think many of what is said are interpretations of things that really happened.
You can find this same idea in my blog about Noah’s arch.
http://reflecting-on-it.blogspot.com/2010/04/many-generations-to-follow-and-new.html

A Quite Troubling Test

It was already time for Abraham to have a son; I mean he waited for a life time. No, I am not exaggerating. The point is, he had a son and he named him Isaac. I can imagine the happiness Abraham felt. Like when you really want to eat a piece of chocolate and you get it. Then God as unique as he is, asks him to kill him. Yeah, if I where Abraham I would also asked a simple and desperate question, what? By then, if I where Abraham, I would have killed God. O wait, he can`t. Your dad finally gets tired of you insisting and buys you the freaking chocolate. You have it in your hands, you waited so long to get it and it has a delicious smell, and you are so happy that your dad asks you to throw it away.
I still don`t understand it well, how did Abraham follow Gods orders. It’s his son for god sake! So, he takes his son uphill to sacrifice him, I could say, without a doubt or an insignificant moment of consternation of whether to kill his own son or not. What would God have done if he refused? Finally God sees he is actually faithful and loyal so he decides to stop him from killing Isaac, thanks God. But dear Abraham, I think you have some to explain. And it is not that easy as the pain ass task of answering the question, “Where do babies come from”?

Only One More Thing

Finally God is near fulfilling his promise, but guess what? There is one more condition, and a pretty painful one, I`d say, “And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you” (Genesis 17-11). Ouch! Poor Abraham, being circumcised at that age, o well, it’s worth it, isn`t it?
I understand that the bible, as many other creations of man regarding inducing beliefs into the people, explains why things are meant to be that way. Circumcision is a hygiene measure, and I think it was established by the people themselves to avoid infection and at the same time increase reproduction. As it is described in the bible, not having practicing it was an obstacle for men (Abraham) to reproduce. I think the pig thing, about the Jewish not being able to eat it, is for the same reason. The pigs of that time must have been by far the dirtiest animal. One would want to avoid eating it to stay well.

Consternation and Abraham

Many things happened from Genesis 10 to 16. Starting with a large confusing list of sons and generations and founders of places.There where so many things that my mind simple wasn`t able to organize them. I understood the following: Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and they had children, and those children had more children, and so on. They all formed different clans, if you can call them so, and established in many different places around.

And then came the story of the Babel tower. I had seen a movie about it before. One I found quite hard to understand, it was all about confusing languages and misunderstandings. Well I finally got it right. Everybody talked in the same language and everything seemed to be much easier. So, they where building a city and a tower, and God came by to look at what was going on. He decided he would mix up everything by making different languages and all of a sudden the people where not able to do it with such ease. Why would he do that and complicate life so much? Well I have a theory based on the following lines, “Got to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven” (Genesis 11- 4). I think god was afraid they wanted to be like him and reach him, so, to avoid it, he made things more difficult to the people. I wonder what life would be like today if we all spoke the same language. We would probably have technology that is beyond our imagination, or maybe we would have finished screwing this world up. I was reminded of the pyramids because they where as well built to reach the gods.

Then followed many generations and then the story of the journey of Abraham which I am familiar with, followed. Many wars have been happening because of this story over the ‘promised land’. I don`t find a reason why, but God made a covenant with him and promised he would give him a land and multiply his seed, as to he would reproduce and leave his mark in greater scale, I think. He left Ur and went with his wife Sarai, Lot, and some of his people following God’s commands. He traveled and got to Egypt in the middle of a famine. He let his wife pass as his sister and let her go to the pharaoh, I don’t understand well why he had to do that, why the Egyptians would kill him if he didn’t, and where the Egyptians come from. Are the Egyptians descendants of Noah too, or what? Then they where sent away when the Pharaoh realized that Sarai wasn’t exactly Abraham’s sister. Lot’s and Abraham’s people fight so Abraham asks him to separate; “And Abraham said unto Lot, let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdsmen and thy herdsmen; for we be brethren” (Genesis 13-8). Later on Lot is kidnapped in a confusing war and Abraham has to go and save him. In the journey Abraham comes to doubt, but God always repeats his words and assures him that his future is bright.
Since Sarai is not able to have children, she sends her handmaid with her own husband to give him a child for her. How could she bare her husband being with her maid? It is insane. Full of resentment towards her mistress, Hagar escapes pregnant and is asked to return by god’s angel. He tells her that her child will be named Ishmael and a threat to men, or something like that. Poor Hagar, can something like what happened to her be approved by God?

This part of the genesis, I considered to be a little heavy.

Many Generations to Follow and a New Beginning

Eve and Adam have their first child, Cain and then they have Abel. They are not described so much; Abel is a sheep keeper that gives the biggest sheep to God as sacrifice and Cain a farmer that also gives sacrifice to God. The reason he killed Abel I think is pure jealousy for God respects his brother and does not appreciate him as proven in the following verse: “And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering: But unto Cain and to his offering he had no respect” (Genesis 4-4, 4-5) I was also surprised as I found the word sin that hadn’t been mentioned before, on Genesis 4-7.

After this came many generations that where listed. If I probably wrote about it the most accurate thing that I could do is a family tree. While reading the names of the sons in the generation I realized that they where all that, sons, there where no women mentioned as if they were not significant or they didn´t have relevance. I was especially interested when the total years of the ones who had children where said, I was reminded about the theory I had wrote about before when reading Gilgamesh. In the theory of Zecharia Sitchin, there where semi gods and men that actually lived for a long time, like the ones mentioned in Genesis 5: “And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and begat Jared: And all the days of Mahalaleel where eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died” (15, 16). “That the sons of god saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose” (Genesis 6-2), this verse also reminded me of this theory for, children of daughters of men with sons of God are also included in many other religions and cultural believes like in the Greek culture, Zeus had Perseus with the daughter of the king of Argos, Danae. This part of the genesis is full of things that remind me of this man´s book and ideas as it also mentions giant men. I found myself interested when Enoch was said to walk with God and stop being, “And Enoch walked with god: and he was not; for god took him” (Genesis 5-24), this thing about walking with God is very familiar. I think it means following the right path. When it says ‘he was not’ I think it means he died, as, was comes from the verb to be and he was not, he does not exist, I suppose.

When it comes to the story of Noah, son of Lemoch, I also related it to Zecharia´s theory. The flood has been present in the records of many different parts of the world as in Gilgamesh there was a record of it when traveled to avoid death and found who seemed to be Noah. I believe there was a flood, that it actually happened, but not because God wanted it to be that way, I see it more like it was a natural disaster. Here god talked personally with Noah and I recall it to be the first time GOD speaks to man. Yes, Lord God talked to Adam and Eve and he also spoke to Cain questioning Abel’s death, but this time it was God who spoke to Noah and even talked in first person when describing his feelings about corruption and what he was to do about it: “And behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die”(Genesis 6-17). It is mentioned that God makes the decision because he sees that all he created became corrupt, He sacrificed every creature and everything that had life for the mistakes of men and female. The way the time that passed is described is very easy to follow only that it is related it to the years of Noah instead of a general record of time. Noah, his family and all the creatures are blessed by God that finds compassion and regrets having to sacrifice all of his creation. He promises it won´t ever happen again, “And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be flood to destroy the earth” (Genesis 9-11). I was confused at the end when Canaan son of Ham was cursed by Noah, I don´t understand well what he did. I read something about him being naked, which was seen badly after Adam and Eve tasted the fruit of the tree in the midst of the Garden of Eden. After rereading it many times I understand that he got him naked while drunk and so he was condemned to be a servant.

The Tree of Knowledge and The Ruin of Man

Ok so, today in class we where discussing who is guilty for the ruin of men. Yeah, Adam tasted the fruit of the tree forbidden by God, Eve seduced him into doing it, and the serpent manipulated her into tasting it too; all of them share a small part of the fault but, who is really culpable for the ruin of men is Lord God. If you where to blame Adam, God created him imperfect, if you where to blame Eve, he also created her and gave her seducing abilities as well as he created the serpent, “Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the fields which the Lord God had made”(Genesis 3-1). I mean, why did he create the tree, the source of the whole dilemma, in the first place. As we can see in this verse he was even aware of what the tree meant to the future of men and what the fruit caused to who eats it, “ For God doth know in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3-5)

O, and he didn´t only create it, he made it as tempting as possible and placed it in the middle of the garden, “And when the women saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant for the eyes, and the tree to be desired to make one wise…”(Genesis 3-6). Yes he told the not to eat of the tree, however, when I am told not to do something inside me turns all the attention to that. And he wouldn’t have to tell them anyway if he didn´t create the tree. Everything comes back onto god and the mistakes of his creation, the tree the serpent, Adams weakness in denial and Eve´s seduction.

I declare Lord God guilty for the ruin of mankind.
It was very interesting how the hurt involved for the woman when giving birth is explained in the bible as Lord God´s punishment to the woman aside of expulsing her from the garden.

Creation in the Bible

In the first chapter of the Genesis, God creates everything that was known to exist at the time it was written. At the beginning everything was dark and so God creates light and with it he creates dawn and evening, he creates the day. From there on god continues to form earth In a process of seven days. He divided the water from the heaven and created land to separate the waters, then the herbs and trees, the beasts of world and so on. It is on the sixth day that man Is created. I have already noticed that humans are described hereaxc as the final and major purpose of the creation, they are created to subdue the world and make it theirs; “And God blessed them, and god said unto them, Be fruity and multiply, replenish the earth, and subdue it.” ( Genesis 1-29) I also noted, that as in Gilgamesh, the humans are meant to reproduce snd it is seen as a good thing and a part fulfilling the duty with God. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him…”(Genesis 1-27), I was specially interested about how god created man like him, maybe that is where the stereotypical idea of god being a beard man comes form and the writer of the bible probably also thought we where the closest thing on earth to god.

The second chapter is more like another version of the creation. Men is created first and then the creatures and herbs and trees for him. Here man was created form soil of the ground and God bring the beasts to accompany him, but he was still lonely so them he creates woman from one of his ribs: “And the rib, which Lord God had taken form man, made he a women , and brought her unto man” ( Genesis 2-22). Already there are sexist principles and I haven´t even started, how is it that woman is made from a part of men and brought to him. We are not made for men or them for us, we are our own property.

Ok anyway, in my journey through the fist beginning of the first book printed ever, I have been attracted by many versions and explanations of how things happen and what things are. I now remember that what religions attempt is to explain the doubts of the people. There are many versions of creation and this one I find very interesting.

Blind Love

I personally loved the story of Pomona and Vertumnus. I found it to be really cute for Vertumnus to do all that disguising to get Pomona´s love. He changed many times unto many things, he pretended to be a fisher man, a fruit collector and many other things but Pomona did not pay attention to him. Finally he decided to tell the story of Myrrha, a girl who does not find a suitor. The goddess Aphrodite is over with it and tells her she will fall in love no matter what. Surprisingly she chose her father, for, he seemed to be the only one suit for her. I don´t understand how someone´s mind have to be so twisted and sick to want to lay with her own father but anyway; the nurse maid set up a plan for Cinyas the king and father of Myrrha to sleep with his daughter. She tempts him by saying that a young woman wants to be with him but with the condition of being blind folded. When he discovers the truth and faces the shocking and quite disgusting reality he intends to drown her. This quite unique story Vertumnus told Pomona reminds me of a book we read for Spanish class, "Edipo Rey", where Edipo and his mom fall in love and get married and have kids without knowing that they are other and son. When they finally discover who they really are, one commits suicide and the other one takes his eyes out.

After hearing the story, Pomona tells Vertumnus to take of his disguise and as soon as she sees the god of spring she falls in love.

A Self Consuming Cycle

The story of Erysichthon is probably my favorite of all the stories of metamorphoses. Aside of it being very absurd and causing me a great doubt about whether you can eat yourself to death, I saw it as a perfect representation of human kind and our future. He is a man, which like humans in society, looks for the use in everything regardless of their meaning to the world and the effect taking them can cause. We have taken the resources of the earth as if they where of our property and even if we say we are aware of the problem, the majority of us, continue with the cycle knowing that our consumption is leading to the ruin of earth and its natural structure. We or I, if this does not include you, which I am really sure, does, hear the alert by all to stop abusing but we pretend we understand and don´t follow anyway.

The story begins when he wants to cut down a tree beloved by the god Ceres and he does it without listening to the wise advice of the narrator. In this exact moment I am wasting unnecessary energy and am making part of the destructive cycle by having this computer, this clothes, this house, the lights, everything. As many of us receive the information and warnings with one ear and dispose it with the other, Erysichthon disobeys and stubborn does what he wanted to do in the first place saying: “ It’s only a tree the goddess likes, but say it was the goddess herself, I´d cut it down just the same” (33). As Ceres hears the news he punishes him sending hunger to hunt him until his death. He gradually eats everything existing and even gets to a point in which he sells his mother for food. This represents how many humans do whatever is necessary, and loose all compassion, to achieve what they want. I also relate Eryschthon’s situation to the problems of hunger in the world today. The population is increasing by the second and a whole lot of people suffer of hunger. More food is produced to abolish it but then since there is more food the population increases once again. It is a cycle in which if a sacrifice is not made, the hunger of the world will remain forever until slowly we have finished up all the resources of food and chaos prevails, or we finish converting the earth into a place where no living thing can survive. This quote by the narrator explains quite well how we are always striving for more and more and never have enough, “The godless are always hungry”(40).

At the end of the story the character, full of emptiness, consumes himself as leading to his own death. The ending I loved, for, Ceres hands a plate, fork and knife, and concludes the story by saying “Bon Appétit”. Will we ever be able to stop this eternal symbiotic nightmare that will take human kind, and all the living things of the world with it, to self destruction? “There can be only one end to such a man… he will destroy himself” (40).

Not even pure love is free from danger.

I found Alycone and Ceyx's story beautiful and very touching as well. It is about a king and his wife, two who love each other and live happily together. Ceyx, the husband, has to undergo a journey through water and risks his life to complete his mission. The idea of risking to loose her all, hunted Alycone, and so she begged him to travel by land. Her love towards him was so big, and the bond between them so strong, that she was willing to risk her life and accompany him, for, without him nothing made sense. However he won`t let her come to the journey to keep her safe from the dangers of the sea. "If you die my life is over and shall be cursed with every reluctant breath I draw."(PG 20); here Alycone proves how in the story love is portrayed as a feeling of dependence: without one`s lover, life is not worth continuing and every second is more painfull than the one before. Love has been reflected everywhere in stories throughout history, but...Does this kind of love really exist? It is admirable how love endures until death and is loyal and transforms people.It is similar to the story of Odiseus and Penelope, she refused to get married and waited for her husband for years until he returned ^from war disgized as a begger. There are not a lot of relationships like this one these days. I relate this situation to the one of the wives that see their man go away to war without the serenity of knowing they will return home. Is there no compassion, like the gods didn't have it with Alycone?

In his mission a storm caused his death and he prayed for his dearly and poor wife. Morpheus(Note that Morpheus comes from morphos that means shape)acquires his shape and warns Alycone in sleep. She looks and looks along the shores seeking the body without life of her lover, when she finds him, she becomes a bird. I don`t understand this transformation very well or it’s meaning. I interpret it as she becoming the one who is watching over everything. The fact that she had a premonition of his death and since many times the repeated visit of a bird is interpreted by many as a premonition that someone you lost is accompanying you, or that something is to happen or just happened, makes me think that is what it means.

I was interested about how sleep is a character and talks and acts.

Wait, what did he say?

I listened to this version of creation more than four times and the only thing I am sure about is that I did not understand it very well. Today we may find many versions of creation including the big bang and evolution, the creation by god and many others. Within the little information I was able to understand was that the earth was created to be equal and something about the creation of oceans, rivers, and lakes. In a part of the explanation the narrator used what I assumed was another language and I had a hard time following.

A Long Process and Arjuna's Final Decision

Throughout the different teachings Krishna convinces Arjuna to fight for different purposes and to stand for various principles. All of them funded on discipline and basically following his directions and his advice. “I will teach you the totality\ of knowledge and judgment;\ this known, Nothing else in the world need to be known.”(2, T7), he knows it all and the one who really understands him and his knowledge will triumph. “Vile, deluded sinners are the men\ who fail to take refuge in me;\ their knowledge ruined by magic,\ they fail prey to demonic power.”(15), Krishna throughout the book is basically telling him to follow him.

He also mentions that concentrating in him and mentioning the divine syllable OM results in infinite spirit, “At the time of death ,\ with the mind immovable,\ armed with devotion\ and strength of discipline,\ focusing vital breathe\ between the brows one attains the supreme\ divine spirit of men”(10, T8), men have always looked for a consolation to accept death, it is comforting to think that there is something beyond death, that it won´t all end forever, it is a pattern that is repeated in many believes around the world. “These bright and dark pathways\ are deemed constant for the universe; by one, a man escapes rebirth; by the other, he is born again”(26), I also recall this thing about choosing paths, in the catholic religion, there are also different paths, the one that follows the path of god is redeemed and lives in his refuge but the other does not, in this case is born once again and remains trapped in the continuous cycle.
As the book continues, Arjuna is taught about the mystery in faith and its magic as well as divine power. I specially liked the eleventh teaching as I was finally able to have an idea of what Krishna looked like. It is a very distortional image in my head as it is described as many things in one, with many bellies, and many eyes, and many arms, it is quite confusing; “Arjuna see my forms\ in hundreds and thousands;\ diverse, divine,\ of many colors and shapes”(5, T11).

The rest of the teachings basically described how to achieve your true spirit through faith in god and how there is good and demonic in man. Finally in teaching eighteen Arjuna fights.
I personally thought he was right since the beginning.

Comparing Religion

I was surprised when I found many familiar trends in the ideas, goals, and prices of sacrifice and fulfilling duty very similar to the ones of the Christian religion. In the third teaching I got started with a phrase that resembles how god is the creator and we are meant to procreate, as in Gilgamesh where the ones that reproduce have a better “after life”, “ When creating living beings and sacrifice, Prajapati, the primordial creator, said: ‘By the sacrifice will you procreate! Let it be your wish-granting cow!’”(10, T3). “Enriched by sacrifice, the gods\ will give you the delights you desire; \he is a thief who enjoys their gifts\ without giving to them in return.”(12), as it is shown in this phrase, in this teaching it is also mentioned that sacrifice is an obligation and it shall be done to pay back all that the gods granted men. This also leads to what we call sin. God shows himself as a complete authority, the one who does not follow what he commands and thinks and the one who does not defend them with their live in sin and is not free. We can also see this in teaching: “Surrender all your actions to me,\ and fix your reason on your inner self;…”(30), “Men who always follow my thought,\ trusting it without finding fault, \are freed, \even by their actions” (31). This, I found particularly interesting for, I recall many wars that still are found today for religious reasons, since by following their god they are freed from their actions or they are justified this wars are very accepted among people and happen easily and confidently.

“He who really knows my divine\ birth and my action, escapes rebirth\ when he abandons the body\ and he comes to me, Arjuna” (9, T4), here I was also able to notice that as in the catholic religion and as in many others, the ones who followed god completely and fulfilled their duty in earth end up in its presence to find complete peace and satisfaction. I was particularly intrigued when Krishna said that he created himself when there was chaos and that he had also lived many lives as humans but remembered them all. How would he create himself? I was interested in the fifth teaching as well when a lord was mentioned.

Discipline in Action

After reading teachings three, four, and five, my perception of what detachment, discipline in action and inaction are in the book has changed big time.

Action and discipline are almost all about taking control of your senses and learning to act in order to give to the gods and pay your dept with them to eventually elude evil “When his senses are controlled\ but he keeps recalling\ sense objects with his mind,\ he is a self-deluded hypocrite” (6, T3), “Enriched by sacrifice, the gods\ will give you delights you desire;\ he is a thief who enjoys their gifts\ without giving to them in return” (12, T3). In teaching three he describes how the ones who perform action detached are the ones with knowledge and that they must guide through inspiration the ones who are attached. Krishna says passion is the enemy of knowledge and all that stands for what is good, It is Desire and anger, arising\ from nature´s quality of passion;\ know it here as the enemy voracious and very evil” (37, T3)I had heard before about OM in that culture but I had never understood what it meant when it is mentioned, “Action comes from the spirit of prayer,\ who´s source is OM, sound of the imperishable; so the pervading infinite spirit\ is ever presented in rites of sacrifice” (15, T3).

In teaching four Krishna emphasized in the evil and the bad result of ambition and individuality. I was surprised by how he rejects one to follow his desire and deny his word and thought. Content with whatever comes in chance, \ beyond dualities, free from envy,\ impartial to failure and success,\ he is not bound even when he acts” (22, T4) this quote was hard to understand for me, this means one can not feel almost anything that is biased not even in suffering, it reminds me of the saying that everything happens because god wanted it that way and that it happens for a reason, it is a very conformist idea. Knowledge is also called a purifier in this teaching, knowledge justifies whatever action.

Teaching five repeats all the principles of the previous ones and reinforces the importance of knowledge. When someone understands he acts well and thought, I believe that as well. I say to be happy you should learn to accept defeats and be impartial of things; I wish I could apply that some day. A new thing is mentioned bonding renunciation and discipline, “Renunciation is difficult to attain\ without discipline;\ a sage armed with discipline\ soon reaches the infinite spirit” (6, T5).

Reincarnation and Honor by Spiritual Discipline

I was able to identify principles of reincarnation that called my attention. Krishna told Arjuna that everybody is somehow eternal and that nothing ever ends or begins. It is a very complex ideology. “He who thinks this self a killer\ and he who thinks it killed, \ both fails to understand; it does not kill, nor is it killed.”(19) He justifies the killing of all the ones in the battle by saying that they will die someday anyway and that even if they died there inner body would remain. This all makes me wonder if this principle of reincarnation is really true, and relating it to all the other culture that believe there is a life after death and that the soul is eternal it makes a lot of sense. Do we really go somewhere else or is it just a consolation to all humans? Why do we assume that only humans have an after life? What about animals? We all make part of the natural cycle of death. But this teaching, I think, is more about honor and the glory of the ones who fulfill their duty as great warriors.

Krishna talks about the importance of duty and how discipline is so important in life and brings peace and joy. He also says that detachment in action is also important and makes the discipline. “When like a tortoise retracting\ its limbs, he withdraws his senses\ completely from sensuous objects, \ his insight is sure.”(58), here and in the previous phrases the god is saying that living without feeling any preference, without having feelings towards anything, and abandoning individuality you are a man who´s thought is sure. I, on the other hand, think that one should experience different things and be themselves; sometimes a moment of happiness and attachment is worth a life time of suffering.

Why Fight?

We have begun to read The Bhagavad-Gita, one of, or if not the most influencial books representing the indu beleives. At the beginning of the first teaching of I was confused about what was happening, many different supreme characters where mentioned, and they where described as son´s or grandson´s of others. I found this very interesting as I noticed the role of the past generations and who the ancestors of a person where determined a great part of one´s identity. Then I realized what is happening is a war between the son´s of two different god´s (a religious war).

“Honor forbids us to kill\ our cousins, Dhritarashtra´s sons; \ how can we know happiness\ if we kill our own kinsmen?”(37) Arjuna argues how kingship and self pleasure is not worth the death of his people, people who have a life and an important role in society. I have to say I agree with his point of view regarding fighting or not. Many families suffer for their member´s death and for what, for anything; people all throughout history have died fighting for one´s they don´t even know and principals they don´t follow. He also brings into consideration the importance and spiritual value of the family and how the war will cause disorder, “The sins of men who violate\ the family create disorder in society\ that undermines the constant laws\ of caste and family duties.”(44) Family as in the roman culture is a quite serious institution that has to be respected to its maximum.

I was intrigued by a specific thing Arjuna said about three worlds, “I do not want to kill them\ even if I am killed Krishna; \not for kingship of all three worlds, \ much less for the earth! (35). I wonder what three worlds he is talking about are, and what they represent.

Tablet XII, The Nether world

From all the Tablets I read, this was by far the most confusing. It was, I think a description of an after life, and it was like hell, the Nether world. Enkidu went there for Gilgamesh, and in some point he incarnated Gilgamesh, wearing perfume and nice clothing, for which he was not welcome there. I think it means that people with luxuries where hated and not treated well in the after life. It was interesting as well that they believe there is a soul within the corpse and how we reencounter the ones we lost in the past. Enkidu returns from there meaning that there is a return, and he embraces Gilgamesh.

Enkidu describes the Nether world to Gilgamesh. In the description he narrated how the ones who had more sons were the ones who were happier and treated the best, while the ones with one or no sons lived in misery. This shows the importance of having sons in that time and may represent how reproducing was a duty, and failing it was punished in the life after death. He also describes how the different types of deaths were rewarded. "'And he whose corpse was thrown away unburied’ he wanders without rest through the world down there'" (pg. 92)

Tablet XI, The End of his Journey

As Utnapishtim told Gilgamesh his story, it was really hard to keep Noe`s story out of my mind. The story of Noe's arch is reflected on this story as Enlil, a god, decides to create a flood that end with the life of all, one is warned about it and told to build a boat. "The voice of Ea telling me the secret came whispering through the reed walls of my house." (pg. 66)The technique of sending birds, the sketch of the boat, and many other details, match the biblical story. It is very interesting and hard to explain how both stories coming from different times and places are connected in such manner. I couldn`t continue ignoring the mention of the number seven. Seven where the terrors of Huwawa, seven were the days from the one Enkidu fell ill to the day of his death, seven days it took Utnapishtim to build the boat and seven for the storm that covered the glorious city to end, seven days Gilgamesh had to stay awake and seven the days the time he slept. I don`t think it is a coincidence.

The plant he was given, and his entire search, reminds me of the same search made and written of by people all throughout history. One perfect example is the fountain of youth, mentioned in many cultures. This extensive search continues today with all the devices, medicines and researches that take place today and that are meant to extend our lives. People today live more than people one hundred years ago.

At the end of this story, when Gilgamesh becomes himself again and the plant his journey was rewarded with is stolen by the snake, he finally understands the truth of immortality. He is tired of his suffering and feels proud of the greatness of his city and at the same time of his greatness. As he tells the boatman to measure his city he teaches us that eternity is accomplished by leaving a legacy; his legacy being the great city of Uruk.

Tablet X, A Quest for Inmortality

When Gilgamesh reaches the tavern on the shore of the glittering sea, the keeper doesn`t let him in. It is evident that the death of Enkidu has transformed Gilgamesh's life completely and who he is. He is no longer the King who`s life seemed perfect and who was always handsome and impeccable; he is no longer as overbearing as before, he is aware of his weakness. "she said to herself, 'who is it, hairy-bodied, wearing ...looking like one who has undergone a journey, his face bitten by huger or by sorrow?' She was afraid, and shut the door to her tavern."(pg. 54) Gilgamesh is asked the same thing by all the people who he encounters in his journey (the tavern Keeper, the boat man and the old man standing on the faraway shore) and he always answers it is for the death of his dear brother.
The words of the old man at the end of this tablet where incredibly wise and made me think a lot about death and its meaning. “The simple man and the ruler resemble each other. The face of one will darken like that of the other." Death doesn`t have race, social class, status, education or gender, we are all equal when it comes to facing death. “There they established that there is life and death. The day of death is set, though not made known"(pg.64) It is very interesting that there are attempts to explain destiny from such a long time ago. Does destiny truly exist? Is there a way of avoiding it? These are questions Gilgamesh must have faced during his journey and that are simply too complex to be answered. I personally don`t think there is a way to avoid it and we should not waist our time delaying it. I don`t mean not taking care of our health or doing suicidal activities, I mean I don`t think it is worth holding ourselves from doing things we want to simply to avoid taking a risk. Why should we stop from traveling because of a fear of the airplane falling if the place you left can be destroyed by an earthquake while you’re gone? There is nothing as a totally safe place.
Things happen as they are meant to happen, and I think they happen for a reason. One should live their life as happy as they can, for at the end you don`t want to realize your life was worthless because you were trying to make it long. I have always asked myself: How would life be without death? Well I don`t see any sense in life without death; knowing that we could die in any moment makes every second more valuable and helps us treasure every opportunity we are given. I value death because it is what makes our life precious.

I was also captivated when he called the gods Annunaki, the way Sitchin calls the creatures of his theory.

Tablets VIII and IX, The Death Of the Companion

Many of us are aware that death exists but we don`t see that we are as close to death as any other. People are dying all over the world, and we understand that it can happen to anyone, even to us, but we sometimes don`t really believe it. This continues only until someone close to us or even us suffers from a deadly experience, like the case of Gilgamesh in tablets VIII and IX. As his companion dies, the strongest and most perfect of all, finally starts to value Enkidu's role and is decided to keep him in the memory of all. "On the dangerous errand, in the confusions of noises, he was the shield that went before in the battle; he was the weapon at hand to attack and defend."(pg. 44) He also reacts in a pretty interesting and confusing way, which I found hard to understand: "and Gilgamesh will wear the skins of beasts and wander hairy-bodied grieving in the wilderness for you."(pg. 47) I think he is doing this to fill the space that Enkidu left and somehow soften his grief.

Enkidu finally died and Gilgamesh suddenly awakens and lands in the reality where he is as vulnerable as any other mortal. "Enkidu has died. Must I die too? Must Gilgamesh be like that?" (pg. 48) The idea that death was close to him and had overcome the greatness of Enkidu, equal to his, made Gilgamesh start a Journey to avoid it. Gilgamesh traveled 12 leagues in darkness, alone and blind, with fear. “After he struggled, blind, his companionless way through eleven leagues of darkness …” (pg. 52) Maybe in this journey he was blind and fearful because he didn`t have his companion, and his guide, with him. Gilgamesh finally passes the mountain Mashu and the two peaks and arrives to a garden.

Tablet VII, A Sacrifice for Civilization

The gods make a council and decide that Gilgamesh and Enkidu cannot live at the same time and that one should be sacrificed. Enkidu falls ill and Gilgamesh mourns the departure of his brother. They fall in misery for, they understand they will be separated, “"Why am I left to live while my brother dies? Why should he die and I spare to live?"” (pg. 38)The dream the wild man has before his end, I interpret as death approaching; Enkidu fights with the same strength as he did with Huwawa and the bull but he cannot defeat death. He also says how he was alone and he cried for his brother's help but he didn`t come to his rescue, showing him he was alone in his fight with death. " I cried out in the dark to Gilgamesh 'Two people, companions' but the man overpowered me, and raged like a wild bull over me in glory, and Gilgamesh was afraid and did not help me." (pg. 42)
Enkidu starts to regret, he regrets falling for the temple prostitute and curses her for bringing him into the city, and he regrets his search for the tallest cedar tree to build the gate. Shamash tells him he should not regret, for, he was now praised as a king by all, and his brother would honor his memory and celebrate his fame.

I was intrigued by the description of the place where the dead go and again insist in the similitude of it to the kingdom of Ares of the Greek culture (where there is also the Olympus/ council of the gods). “He seized an arm and led me to the dwelling of Irkalla, the House of Darkness, the house of no return." (pg. 42) The companions also talk about a door that separates them, and separates as well the dead from the alive.

Tablet VI, A Second Triunf Together

After they finally succeed in their mission, Gilgamesh cleans up and acquires his image of attractive king. The goddess Ishtar desires him and asks him to lay with her. We can see how love makes us all do crazy things and take mistaken conclusions when he rejects her proposal and points out her previous love experiences and the unfortunate destiny of her lovers, and she reacts violently. She requests the bull of heaven to punish Gilgamesh. It is killed by Gilgamesh with the significant support of Enkidu, his companion. The act of Enkidu defending Gilgamesh and insulting the goddess in agreement to his new friend reinforces my suggestion of a close and fond relationship between the two "heroes".

This tablet and the story in general, refer to gods as living things that can be seen and touched by humans, more than an idea. This reminds me of a theory stated by an archeologist and writer, Zecharia Sitchin, which says that creatures more advanced than us and from the space, may have been on the earth and have been interpreted by humans as gods. He demonstrates how many cultures have gods that share roles and are very similar in personality. It may sound quite impossible, somewhat illogical and crazy, but if you read his books and investigate well it becomes possible. “Then Ishtar was enraged and the goddess climbed the parapet of the city of Uruk and spoke her curse.” (pg. 34) The way Ishtar acts reminds me of the Greek and Egyptian gods, imperfect gods that feel and think as we do. The possible interaction of gods with a mortal and the idea of demigods are also very familiar to these cultures.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oa5r0nQ8ms
http://www.sitchin.com/

Tablets IV and V, A Dream upon a Quest

The quest to kill Huwawa begins and Enkidu and Gilgamesh submit to arduous days of travel following Shamash, the god of the sun. Everyday they survive under the water that Enkidu finds and the shelters Enkidu builds to protect from the wind. Every night Gilgamesh`s sleep is disturbed by fearful dreams that are later interpreted by his wild companion as fortunate. Gilgamesh’s dreams take a great role in this part of the story, as they keep the quest going and remind them that they are not alone. Sometimes dreams may really mean something and can help us find out how some things are affecting us as well as find what some things that are happening or that are to come make us feel.
Both of them, as humans in general, are meant to conquer and overcome what is in their way; in this special mission they are to conquer the cedar forest to end with the demon, enemy of the gods, Huwawa. As Enkidu and Gilgamesh start feeling his deadly aura and it becomes inevitable to find his face everywhere they looked, a new fear makes them indecisive and in one point they consider returning to the plains and escaping the danger of their purpose, but they support each other and continue. As Gilgamesh faces Huwawa at last and receives the help from Shamash, the demon intends to convince him of folding his purpose and tries to turn him against Enkidu. “” Huwawa said: Do not listen to him who has neither father nor mother, child of wilderness. When Enlil hears of this, the fisrt of gods, the god of wilderness Enkidu knows that there will be a curse because of this.”(pg. 28) Enkidu convinces him of the contrary and Huwawa is finally put to death. In older posts I have insisted that Gilgamesh is like the culture described in Ishmael but now I have changed my mind and consider that that inner voice in our society is more likely to be Huwawa. He can be seen now as the evil conscience within all, one that tells us to do what is wrong as if it were right, and one that is hard to kill and must be destroyed by all humankind working together. The gate to be built for the city represents what separates civilization from nature , the raft they build to return represents a new beginning, and the head of Huwawa represents the end of a fear and a proof of how two, almost opposites, worked perfectly together as a team.

Tablets II and III, The Importance of Balance

Enkidu moves away from his life with the animals of the grasslands and learns some ways of civilization, he later on arouse against the king of Uruk, Gilgamesh, to stop him from laying with the temple prostitute that brought him into a different life. “…Full of anger said: “take me to Uruk, the city of Gilgamesh, whose aura and power cannot be withstood. I will cry out in Uruk, challenging him: ‘it is I Enkidu. The strength of the wild man cannot be withstood.’” (pg.14) He stands up and demonstrates there is one who can overpower the king that seemed so supreme and unbeatable to the rest of society, and withstand his desire. After this, both fall into a weak sentimental demonstration and embrace and kiss each other openly, indicating that they have a feeling in common and that they find a friendship or important relationship of mutual understanding. It was interesting to see how this culture was more open to physical contact between men as well as how the prostitute was viewed.
“He is like Gilgamesh, twice the size of ordinary men, stronger and taller than a battlement.”(pg.12) Enkidu and Gilgamesh share the same shape and are physically similar, but it is not that, but their different and unique characteristics combined that will take role in the quest they are to start. The king, aware of his power and force, declares to his mother and the sons and daughters of his city that it will be him who will kill Huwawa and bring the glory to all men and women of Uruk. On the other hand, the wise remark the significance of the participation of Enkidu and the importance of his knowledge. “Let Enkidu, who knows the way to the forest, who knows the wilderness, let him go first.” (pg.18) As I have said in previous posts, Enkidu represents the wild side of man, the one many Indian cultures of today still treasure, and Gilgamesh represents civilization and the image of prosperity and perfection society has about it. I interpret Gilgamesh`s declarations as our belief and need to always be forcing our teachings and our knowledge into everyone’s mind and how our society sometimes ignores the fact that we have multiple values to learn and follow from Indian cultures all over the world. The qualities of both different ways of thinking and being shall be put together in balance, as a team, to face Huwawa, the fear of all humankind.

Tablet I, Starting From the Beginning

As I mentioned before, questions that explain humanity have been answered by many throughout history; what better way to get started than learning from the very first writings?

When I read the beginning of Gilgamesh I found myself intrigued by how the writer tells the story, the way the characters are described in a divine level and how it brings to light a potential bond between two different sides of perfection. "Two-thirds a god, one-third a man, the king." (pg.4) Gilgamesh and Enkidu are similar regarding their power and the power of the impression they cause in the ones who live their presence. "His father said: Go to Uruk and there present yourself to the king, who is the strongest of all, the perfect, the terror, the wise shepherd, protector of the people." I sense that the king takes the role of an idol, representing all that is right and determining what is wrong in society. He can as well be related to the culture we have grown since the beginning of times and that is permanently judging us as good or bad, described in the book Ishmael. Enkidu, on the other hand, represents a man that lives and makes part of nature in a perfect balance as well as an obstacle for men to abuse of its resources. The prostitute may represent his corruption and, a weakness that every man has and that will take him away from his nature. “he feeds upon grasslands with gazelles; he visits the watering places with the beasts; he has unset my traps and filled my hunting pits; the creatures of the grasslands get away free." (pg.6)

The importance of these characteristics, I still don`t understand, but I am quite sure this ancient sumerian story will lead to the discovery of answers.

Questions for bloggers and blogs

a. According to this author where did the word blog come form?
The word blog is a portmanteau word for weblog, started in 1997 by Jorn Barger, known as the keeper of the Robot Wisdom. Two years later it was divided by Peter Merholz, becoming "we blog", and leading to the creation of the word blog, used as a noun or as a verb.

b.Why might the writer object to a book about blogs? What is the difference between a blog and a book?
"It could not be done, I was sure. Books are tight. Blogs are reckless. Books are slow. Blogs are fast. Books ask you to stay between their covers. Blogs invite you to stray. Books fret over copyright and libel. Blogs grab whatever they want with impunity—news, gossip, pictures, videos. Making a book out of bloggy material, if it could be done at all, would kill it, wouldn't it?" The author explains that doing a book about blogs would be unic and succesfull due to the differences between both.

c.How have blogs changes recently?
Today blogs are widely open to the public, and include an impresively broad variety of themes. The way of communicating to the visitors includes new tecnological methods like videos, photos, and cartoons, and the blogs aproach the people more easily with links, tags and other techniques.

d.Why might you read a blog rather than a book, or a magazine, or a newspaper?
BLogs give you the information you are willing to get in a brief and easy way. It takes less time to read many different points of view, and helps one find further information on the topic taking him/her to other sources. I like about blogs that you can participate and expose YOUR point of view and ideas.

e.Is there reason to doubt the objectivity of a blog? Why? Why not?
Within many types of blogs, you may find subjective blogs that are based on opinions, feelings, and personal experiences and ideas, it all depends on the type of blog and the purpose of the blogger. Other blogs are persuasive, in which case, the blog would be evidently biased.

f.If you kept your own blog, what would you title it?
As you may have noticed i would call it Reflect on it. I would defenitly concentrate on showing mi position to certain events and aspects of society.

g.Find three blogs that mention our summer reading.
http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~miles/works/Ishmael.html
http://www.ishmael.org/origins/Ishmael/
http://www.csrinternational.org/?p=5095

Have you thought of it?

Yesterday i happened to enter my new english class expecting it to be like any other, but it was not only one more of the many courses I`ve had, it is an oportunity to explore questions that have been answered by many and trully understood by few. "Who are we?" We, and mankind in general, believe humans are superior to the rest of the creatures that inhabit the planet, the final result of evolution, we can control the world and all its resources and have the right to take any usable material for ourselves, after all, we own the planet. A culture shaped on ambition and a lack of bounderies embraces our society. Can we really control the climate? natural desasters? destiny? All species that keep this world alive, have to survive everyday, some get eaten for others to live, and so on, but it all flows naturally, and without it, without balance, everything would fall into caos ( what our way of living, where nothing is enough, is leading to). Why can`t we acept our role in nature as the rest of the animals do? "Why are we here and how did we get here?" This are some of the questions that writers throughout history have intended to answer, but, ¿do we really know the truth?