Sunday, February 28, 2010

Philosophy and Spiritual Discipline

This teaching, as the word well describes it, is trying to teach us basically what is morally good.

Arjana, not sure what to do, asks Lord Krishna for advice. He says that he will not fight, and falls silent. Krishna starts talking about how he has nothing to worry about in killing people or in being killed, because although the body is killed, the spirit can never be destroyed. This sounded a lot to me like Buddhist teachings, as well as the rest of the chapter. It all revolved around the idea that killing a person's body would not really kill them, because every human has never seized to exist. This really gave me the idea that the author believed in reincarnation:


"It is not born,
it does not die;
having been,
it will never not be;
unborn, enduring,
constant, and primordial,
it is not killed
when the body is killed." (pg 34)


This means that we are basically immortal, and it is kind of the law of conservation of energy but with humans. Krishna said that instead of saving lives by not killing anyone, he was making his life worse, and like we have already seen in previous parts of the book, he used the technique of cause and effect to explain what would happen if he didn't fight, starting with:

"People will tell
of your undying shame..."

to

"If you are killed, you win heaven;
if you triumph, you enjoy earth;" (p. 37)

To explain that not fighting and giving up is bad, Krishna says:

"From anger comes confusion;
from confusion memory lapses;
from broken memory understanding is lost;
from loss of understanding, he is ruined." (p. 41)


This book more and more starts reminding me of some type of Book of Virtues, because it is like a moral fight between if it is good to kill your enemies because their soul will live on, or if it is good to stand back because you will destroy societies.

I would like to know at last which side of the story wins, and how the author will do to support his point.

Arjuna's Dejection

This is the beginning of another book. Unfortunately, I hadn't read these types of books in English for a long time, so I feel pretty lost.

What I took from this first chapter was that Dudyodhana said the names of all the people fighting for him, and said that all these people where in the war because of him, so they had to protect Brishma very good. Then they explained how everyone blew their conches in turn, and made the king happy.

Arjuna, who I guess is one of the warriors, saw something in the other people and asked if his chariot could be stopped. He started talking about what he thought of the other army:

"Arjuna saw them standing there:
fathers, grandfathers, teachers,
uncles, brothers, sons,
grandsons, and friends."

He said how he found no happiness in killing his kinsmen in battle, even if it was for "kingship, delight, and pleasure." He said that he wouldn't kill anyone and that if he himself was killed, it would be his reward. He laid down his bow and arrow.

Something that I really liked that I think inspired me and really made me think was this:


"When the family is ruined,
the timeless laws of family duty
perish; and when duty is lost,
chaos overwhelms the family.

In overwhelming chaos, Krishna,
women of the family are corrupted;
and when women are corrupted,
disorder is born in society."


I really liked this, and I think that it is very true, that while killing soldiers in war, you are also corrupting society, in an indirect way.

Sometimes you can know how old a book is by how it is written, but also by what happens in it. Most of the books written in the same era as the Bhagavad-Gita are about war. Because the first one of those that I really read was the Iliad, now all of the war books remind me of it, so this one does too. It's a little like the Iliad because of the war-is-what-drives-our-society view, but it is different in the fact that in this one someone doesn't want to fight, and in the Iliad they all fought.

For now, I like this book!

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Back From Nether World

In this tablet, at last, Gilgamesh is over. It starts with something very out-of-nowhere, because it starts talking about how Gilgamesh's drum and drumstick fell to Nether World, and he is asking everyone who can help him have it back. For a strange reason, Enkidu hears his cry and promises to help him.

Even though Gilgamesh gives him lots of instructions on what to do and what not to do, Enkidu doesn't follow any, and as Gilgamesh predicted, the Cry of the Dead seized him and held him. Gilgamesh, again, grieved for the death of Enkidu.

He told the story to many gods, but none interceded, until he talked to Ea, the god of the abyss. He interceded, and asked the god of the Nether World to open up a hole in the roof, so that Enkidu can rise like vapor into the normal world. The god does it, and Enkidu and Gilgamesh meet each other again.

Enkidu told Gilgamesh how it is down there, and Gilgamesh started to weep. Later, he asked Enkidu if he had seen all types of people, and Enkidu each time responded with a how their life was. That was how the book came to an end.



For me it was a little weird to read this book, because it has many aspects of life that are different from what we normally see. There are different beliefs about life and death, and culture in general is different. They believed in polytheism, so much of the story revolves around the different gods.

They also believed that anything the gods wanted to happen to us would happen, so they prayed to them and even looked for immortality by asking them. There was a difference in how people treated each other, like Enkidu and Gilgamesh. Also in the social structure; the kind of respect the town had towards Gilgamesh isn't exactly like that these days.

I liked the book a lot, because it helped me understand about the history of that period, and to understand better the differences in literature that have occurred since then. I liked the description of death that is portrayed, and how they show hell.

This is an image that I really liked that represents Gilgamesh and Enkidu at the moment of his death.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Still Looking for Paradise

In Tablet 11, Gilgamesh notices that Utnapishtim is also a person like him, so he asked him his story. Utnapishtitm tells him his story, and how he had to save all the animals and put them on a boat.

I think this part was way too familiar, because it sounded a lot like Noah's Arc, and like the Atrahasis Epic. Most of the lines are the same, and the whole point also.

After that, he told Gilgamesh that why should he have the same power as him? So he told him that if he stayed seven days without sleeping, he would be granted immortality. Still, right after he finished talking, Gilgamesh fell asleep.

Utnapishtim designed a way to know how much he had slept by using bread. After knowing his failure, Gilgamesh had to leave, but when he was getting back into the boat, Utnapishtim's wife told him to have mercy. He then told Gilgamesh how he could use a plant from the bottom of the ocean to become instantly younger.

Gilgamesh finally got it, but as he was taking a bath, a serpent caught it and shed its skin. Gilgamesh was mad.

This is the tablet that has the most noticeable proximity to other stories, and it's sad how Gilgamesh makes such a long trip, and fails in every aspect of it. His only way out now is to go back to Uruk and search for Enkidu!

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Looking for Paradise

In Tablets 9 and 10, Gilgamesh lost his most prized friend, and after noticing what would sooner or later happen to him too, he began his search for immortality.

Gilgamesh had once heard about some people who had survived a flood, and the gods had granted immortality. Now, knowing how dangerous that could turn out to be, he set out on a journey of life. He passed through about nine caves, always with the sun behind him, and when it was about to catch up with him, he got out. On the other side there was truly a paradise of sun and flowers, with the shiny see lying ahead.

He met various people on his journey, none of them really wanting him to go, but at last they all let him go. On a part of his journey, he killed the only creatures who could allow him to cross the sea, so he had to cut down lots of tress to make something to move the boat with. When he finally made it to his final destination, he again was asked why he looked like that, and he answered the usual.

The old man, Utnapishtim, instead of helping him, scolded him, and told him that he had to follow human's fate and that if he has to die, he shall die.

It's funny how the search for immortality has been in human's minds since the beginning of humanity. It seems like we have life, we are the most powerful creatures on Earth, and we have gotten to the maximum extent of developing technology, but it's just not enough for us. We want to have what we are sure we'll never get: an endless life.

Since the first work of literature it is already mentioned, and there is no doubt people will want it until the time when we finally achieve it (probably never).

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

A Grieving Gilgamesh

In Tablets 7 and 8, the Gods have a council, and decide that Enkidu must die for what he did in the Cedar Forest, so he gets sick for twelve days, and dies.

We can see how the author had the concept of hell very similar to what we know the Greeks had, and Enkidu had a dream that Death came to him and took him to hell, with all the dead kings and important people.

We had a QUESTion answered here, as we can infer that in that time people believed that they had no control over their future or destiny, but it was completely in the hands of the gods. The kings in hell might have been really good people, but because the gods didn't like them, they ended up in hell.

Gilgamesh was very melancholic about Enkidu's death; he asked everyone who had ever had anything to do with Enkidu to mourn him. In fact, that was all that Tablet 8 was about.

"May the grasslands wail as if they were your mother.
May the gazelle your mother and the wild ass

your father mourn for Enkidu their child." (p.46)

Gilgamesh also commanded that there be a statue of him made, and he did offerings to the gods in honor of Enkidu.
I thought the whole story was around the two, so now that Enkidu is dead, how will the story continue?

A modern version of this saddness because of a death could be represented by this video:

(YouTube doesn't seem to be working right and it doesn't let me embed the video, so here's the link):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKxtAv6TIiI


Or another in worst quality:

Sunday, February 14, 2010

It's Gilgamesh against the gods

I think this tablet of the book was specifically created to show how much power Gilgamesh has, and all that Enkidu and Gilgamesh can achieve if they stick together.
At the beggining, they explained to us how Gilgamesh got pretty after coming back from killing Huwawa, and they say the goddess Ishtar saw him and fell in love with him.

One would think a normal man would have to do as a god asks, but Gilgamesh shows he can be stronger than gods by saying the bad things Ishtar did. When the goddess sends him the Bull of Heaven, which killed hundreds of people, Gilgamesh, along with Enkidu, were stronger than the god's will and were able to destroy what was meant to destroy us.

I think this shows us how much power Gilgamesh can have; how he can even measures up to the gods, and that will take more than a god's desire to put him outside the picture.

This can actually be compared to some other books of the time, like the Iliad, written during the Greek Empire, in which Achilles, the main character, is almost as strong as a God. That is kind of the way we can see Gilgamesh.

I question that I have for the future is, if Gods can't kill Gilgamesh, who will? Will Enkidu finally give up and attack him?

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

The Dream Swing

If I could pick one word to describe Tablet IV and V in the Epic of Gilgamesh, I would say Dream. I guess the tecnique of repeating things over and over again isn't really used that much in modern literature, because it is not something that you see every day. You simply don't read a chapter in which two pages say almost exactly the same thing about four times.

Appart from that, I thought it was very interesting how Gilgamesh, "the strongest one of all", was always scared because of his dreams, and needed Enkidu's reassurement in order to continue their way into the forest.

I also liked a lot how it always mentioned making an offering to the gods, which is something that can be seen in most novels from the era before Christianism ruled the world. It can be seen in old novels like the Iliad, between others.

It was very fun and grose at the same time how they killed Huwawa:
"Then the two of them together seized the demon
and by the tounge pulled all his insedes out,

and so he died."

That was a really cool description. I think that it is important to note that they took the head back, because they probably cared a lot about people's opinion and that they thought they were like gods.

Monday, February 8, 2010

Gilgamesh Tablets II and III

The beginning of this book is really good at giving you an the idea of what the book is going to be about. Since the start, we can see that the style of writing was different in the time it was written, which was something that I really liked. It was written in poem form, and sentences were cut down into a type of "paragraphs". It was something I had never seen done.

I also liked the fact that the story showed aspects of life that aren't really happening right now. We could see when Gilgamesh's power was threatened and fought, then kissed and hugged Enkidu. That normally wouldn't have happened. Another thing that was different was that Gilgamesh wanted to prove his force and his power by going to the forest where it was dangerous. In these times, people wouldn't do that; instead they would probably just ask for help to the police or the army. People were a lot braver.

I would like to know from the book later what is Enkidu's role in Gilgamesh's life, because he seemed like a pretty important character.I really liked the II and III tablets, and I hope it stays as fun as it is right now.


Tuesday, February 2, 2010

What is a blog?

A. According to this author, where does the word blog come from?

The Word "Blog" came from the word Weblog, which was then split in 1999 by Peter Merholz into We Blog, which then just became Blog.


B. Why might the writer object to a book about blogs? What is the difference between a blog and a book?

The writer might object to a book about blogs because one of the most important characteristics of blogs are links to other pages, which can’t be put on paper. In books you can put foot notes, but there is no way you can make an automatic and instant link to another site that helps you understand the content of the blog in the pages of a book. There is absolutely no way of putting links, videos, images… out of the amazing 3D world offered by computers and into the pages of a book. That is basically the difference between both; that blogs can be interactive and change to make the reader’s life easier, while what is written in books is written.


C. How have blogs changed recently?

Blogs have changed to become a very accessible and important aspect of the internet life. They can be reached by anyone who has internet available. They have developed themselves to include videos, photos, links, games, and other interactive stuff. They have also become more and more important with time, reaching a point at which they are used to write from news, to cartoon, to diaries, to fan clubs, and anything else. You can find a blog of about any topic possible.


D. Why might you read a blog rather than a book, or magazine or a newspaper?

You might read a blog rather than a book, a magazine, or a newspaper because unlike books, blogs can have interactive characteristics enjoyable by people, links that help you know more about any specific data, videos that make you understand better, pictures that bring you in on the background of the story, and many other different things unthinkable for the book business. With a blog you can compare to other news, see outside proof, check the validity of the information, and know anything you want to know about what you are reading. Basically, blogs are more complete.


E. Is there reason to doubt the objectivity of a blog? Why or why not?

There is a reason to doubt the objectivity of a blog, because the person who wrote might want to express their personal point of view, and they might put only links to articles or videos that support the same point of view as the author. The information and the extra information given might be all biased towards what the writer wants it to say.


F. If you kept your own blog, what would you title it?

Making Colombia Shine Too


G. Find three blogs that mention our summer reading.

http://peopleandresourcesfire.blogspot.com/2009/12/ishmael-by-daniel-quinn.html

http://peakoil.blogspot.com/2005/10/book-review-ishmael-by-daniel-quinn.html
http://ourpueblo.blogspot.com/2008/02/book-review-ishmael-by-daniel-quinn.html

Introduction

Hi! I am Andrea and in this blog I will be posting responses for all the books I read.Everytime I read something I will post it here. This is my first post, but there will be many more!!