I've been thinking....

[cherydactyl]

which is of course a dangerous pastime.

Anyway, it occurs to me that Christianity, Pastafarianism, and other monotheisitc religions require faith in a creator-god-being, aka faith in a personification or agent. Buddhism is about faith in a *set of principles*, starting with The Four Noble Truths (which I will paraphrase as: suffering exists, we create a lot if not all of it ourselves, there is a way to end it--and it's not suicide, and that way is to follow the Dharma, or teachings). Buddhism is about faith in a set of ideas instead of a Being (or Beings, if you're a polytheist). It's no wonder I prefer the Buddhist model.

P.S. If someone gets a Flying Spaghetti Monster applique for my car (like the catholic fish...you've seen those, right?), it will be applied forthwith.

P.P.S. I wonder if there is a Dewey Decimal designation for Pastafarian-related works. Are they in religion or comedy or education or politics?

Comments

[tlatoani.livejournal.com]

(like the catholic fish...you've seen those, right?)

I always thought the "Jesus fish" was more of a Protestant Evangelical thing?

[cherydactyl.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure it's a catholic thing, at least originally. I've seen versions that have a little cross where the fish's eye is, too, which is probably some kind of differentiation. I guess I don't consider myself an expert in their taxonomy, but I've seen physical specimens of a fish, a fish with a cross, the FSM, ALiens (in a flying saucer shape), and possibly some others as well. But the fish is the one that is most common, thus my reference.

Here's a few references for the symbolism that I turned up. It's a rather old Christian symbol.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06083a.htm
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=83076 (Talks about the ICTHUS acromyn -> "I believe that in the Greek alphabet the first letters for "Jesus Christ, God's Son, Savior" are ICTHUS")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthys
http://hubpages.com/hub/catholic-symbols (Search down the page for "the fish")

[cherydactyl.livejournal.com]

I think I've seen a Cthulu version too, come to think of it.

Speaking of which, I'm going to have to read a couple of the original Lovecraft stories to S...she's been joking about "I'm a Cthulhu" making octopod motions around her face with her fingers. I told her recently I was pretty sure there was only one Cthulhu. ;-) Read them too her, because it's *less* likely to be nightmare-inducing if I can do the academic discussion distancing thing with her as opposed to her reading it on her own.

edited for misspelling of the old one's name. shame on me!

[evalerie.livejournal.com]

...and of course there's the Darwin fish. Jan has one on our car. It's a fish that has evolved little feet, and it says "Darwin" inside.

[cherydactyl.livejournal.com]

Right! I knew I was forgetting a variety I had seen. Love those too. But they are just not as pointed a rebuttal as FSM, IMO.

[evalerie.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I'm a fan of both the Darwin fish and also the flying spaghetti monster. But I worry about both of them being extremely highly offensive to religious people.

[cherydactyl.livejournal.com]

Well, Pastafarianism was created specifically to rebut creationism in schools, not religion in general. If sommeone is offended by either of these symbols, they are likely guilty of not doing unto others as they would have done unto themselves, and of being unable to agree to disagree or differentiate contextual spheres. There are Christians and other people of faith who are able to appreciate the FSM; it's something other than being religious per se that causes people to be offended by the FSM story.

Creationism is not appropriate to teach in schools simply because it does not match the definition of science. That is, it is NOT TESTABLE. Something less ridiculous than the FSM and thatis equally untestable would also make this point, but not as well or hilariously. Arguably, the DARWIN fish serves the same purpose in the opposite way. But I like it less because by implication it makes evolution into a BELIEF instead of a scientific theory by equating it as somehow equivalent to a religious symbol. (This is why I'd rather have an FSM badge than a DARWIN badge.)

The whole point should be that evolution is a scientific theory that has stood up to years of testing and peer review, while Creationism (especially those strains that assert God made fossils appear older than the Earth on purpose to fool us--which drives me bonkers, because it's a backdoor attempt to say nothing is testable and science is a fallacy) is not testable at all. The two ideas are not comparable, and claiming or implying that they are comparable as an either-or proposition offends my logical brain.

I had to check!

[yukontodd.livejournal.com]

The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster by Bobby Henderson comes in at 818/.607, the 800's sadly being "literature and rhetoric. 818 seems to be a Misc. American Lit. section. I think devotees of the FSM should picket their local libraries to get FSM literature moved to the 200's. Not because it's an outrage to me, I'd just find it amusing.

Re: I had to check!

[yukontodd.livejournal.com]

Wow. Did you know that Christian subjects cover 200 through to the 280's, while Buddhism with all its sutras gets 294.3? Maybe the Buddhists should join the FSM's!:)

Re: I had to check!

[cherydactyl.livejournal.com]

I didn't know, but it doesn't surprise me at all. It's kind of like that New Yorker cartoon, the world view from New York...certain things loom large and other things are way off in the distance squashed on the horizon. :)

Re: I had to check!

[cherydactyl.livejournal.com]

Pastafarian Picketers Protest Paltry Partition! Awesome Alliteration And Altercations Abound!

Re: I had to check!

[yukontodd.livejournal.com]

Hah! Awesome.:)

[pattimst3k.livejournal.com]

I like the gefilte fish one.

Also, I miss you Cheryldactyl. Note: This message will repeat until we see each other.

[cherydactyl.livejournal.com]

I haven't seen a gfelte fish one...that would make me chuckle too.

I miss you too!

[presterjon.livejournal.com]

God, Goddess, or various Gods has one advantage over a set of principles. It gives an object to be loved. Bhakti Yoga or devotion to the divine is an ageless path that leads many to the Truth. (Whatever the hell that Truth is, cause I sure don't have any personal experience with it)Its hard to passionately and completely love a principle. Lets face it, Krishna and Christ, Sarasvati and Mary..they can all be hot sexy objects of devotion.

Devotion is a non-intellectual path. Love enough and ego dissolves. No education, can't read and write, everybody loves their mother. That's why the buddhists have saints too.

[cherydactyl.livejournal.com]

You make a very good point.

I think not being interested in deity as devotional object for me is about trust issues, which I have in spades. I haven't met an authority figure I can fully trust yet, of any variety, and very few if any peers. I would love to be able to have such a devotional object as a benevolent and trusted God/dess...but I just don't believe such a thing exists.

Though I am kind of working on making truth and good works into such a devotional object, as a matter of respecting self and others; not telling white lies has been a major focus of practice for me at some points in the last few years, and random acts of kindness is another practice i have focued on.

[presterjon.livejournal.com]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teresa_of_Avila

Check out her writings. This woman had sex with God all the time.

Her God thrust passionately with His Being into her Soul.

If I offend anyone but cherydactyl (who will be amused most likely) tough crap.

[cherydactyl.livejournal.com]

In another vision, a Seraph drove the fiery point of a golden lance repeatedly through her heart, causing an ineffable spiritual-bodily pain.

Yikes.

See, with the assertion that she had sex with God (which I assume was her own report), I inherently start thinking I wonder who was -ahem- causing her to have such visions, which might have been someone taking advantage of her, or someone taking advantage of a particularly vivid bit of human experience to inspire her. Or both. The line is fine if not actively fuzzy.

Which makes me feel creeped out and interested at the same time.

[(Anonymous)]

The sex act and union with divinity, is a historically used metaphor. I have been told and have read that the experience of samadhi is very much like orgasm. Many religions are happy to use this metaphor, amongst them various Hindu and Buddhist sects. Its not to say they are the same thing, just that they are analagous in terms of human experience. I don't think its creepy, its certainly interesting though.

On that note, early buddhist Shamantha meditation practice results in the union of the meditator and the object/concept meditated upon. Later Vipashyana practice results in the dissolution of self. Still very interesting and worth thinking about.