An excerpt from a recent letter to my father. He's a doctor of theology, in case you're wondering why any one would talk to their father about this kind of stuff. I think I brought up some decent points though.
"...Also, I came across this website by a doctor named J. Dominguez. He had notes on Annihilation, which drew my attention since I've been labeled a 'nihilist' by a philosophical friend. This captured my attention and I wondered whether, being of the same profession, you agree or disagree? I think, the application of nihilism is misinterpreted in many cases, such as mine, and the following:
" 1- The first aim of most Oriental religion is salvation from Reincarnation, including Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism...
The greatest fear for them is not to die, but to reincarnate... all the ascetic sacrifices, all the hard yoga and puja practices, is to avoid reincarnation... to live nude or without food of a Jainist is to avoid the next reincarnation... the great sacrifices of a Buddhist in a monastery for life, is to obtain enlightenment, thus avoiding reincarnation...
2- Nihilism is the final aim of these religions with "moska", the final union of their soul with Brahman, with no more reincarnations.
And the main problem of these Eastern religions, what makes me cry, is that after so many sacrifices and yoga, this final union with Brahman, this "moska" is like a drop of water falling into the ocean, there is no more identity of any individual, there is no more "person", it is the nihilism, personal annihilation, to become nothingness, unrecognizable by anybody, not even by himself, because there is no more "self", no more consciousness of being... not heaven, not paradise... "nothingness", "to disappear as a person", like a speck in the universe... "
I find the Westerner's perception of Eastern philosophy to be very strange, or any other religion for that matter. I had also been in the car recently listening to the Christian talk radio station my grandma had on. I find a lot of their topics interesting and applicable no matter what religion a person may be. But again their perception of other religions boggles my mind. I think the one that caught my attention last was a discussion about Wicca. There seemed to be so many times during the program where I kept saying to my grandma, "That's not true!" For some reason, the speaker kept attempting to categorize paganism as Satanism, when really they are vastly different. In fact, I find them to be nearly opposites. The satanists are truly nihilistic, finding no meaning in anything, and therefore glorifying only the self, and annihilating the Self. Whereas the Wiccans, or naturalists, apply meaning into all aspects of life. So I suppose, what I'm wondering, is that in your education what were you taught about other religions? Were you taught just the basics, and left open to your own interpretation? Did they discuss the correlations, the differences? I guess that it just confuses me when I see so many correlations between things and yet people still will fight to the death for an ideology whose foundation is essentially the same as the presumed 'enemy'. There is a verse I like from the Fall of Lucifer, though taken out of context, I would like to think that its meaning could be applied to all denominations and religions of similar belief: Isaiah 14:18 "All the kings of the nations, All of them, sleep in glory, Everyone in his own house."
Also, what's interesting, is that this preacher thought of Wicca as a threat to Christianity. Some of what he said was right, but I think that where he failed is in truly asking himself why it is a threat. Psychologically speaking, it is said that when a girl reaches a certain age she has a tendency to reject her father. As you can imagine, this age lies within the early teen years. It is also said, that when a girl rejects her father she tends not to only reject her worldly father, but also her idea of God. Perhaps it comes from some sort of feeling of oppression. I can admit that the preacher was right in claiming Wicca to be a threat when it comes to young girls, because when I was younger, and when I first grew frustrated with Christianity and began to explore other religions, Wicca was the first that I embraced. And this preacher was right, Wicca embraces the idea of femininity more than the patriarchal teachings of the Bible. It demonstrates a duality, but also a peaceful co-existence between all things, just as eastern philosophy does. The idea of the God and the Goddess is only a representation of the embodiment of both genders within the vastness of God. I personally find there to be nothing 'evil' about this, and therefore the preachers relations of Wicca and Paganism to Satanic origin to be ignorant. But more importantly, rather than just being angry about this, I thought it might be beneficial to relay the ideas to someone who can make good use of it. As a preacher yourself, I suggest that you pay close attention to the younger girls in your congregation. I remember even around the age of 8, I had all ready such a firm grasp on all the Biblical stories that I was ahead of my Sunday school group, so instead I got to help teach. I became wearisome of teaching David and Solomon and all the great kings to young girls. I think it may be kind of hard to be a feminist at such a young age, but I was definitely strong willed and prideful. My grandma gave me a book when I was younger entitled, "The Women of the Bible." But I found them to be rarely discussed in church. Everyone knows of Elijah, Jeremiah, Abraham, et cetera. But what about Anna, Miriam, Deborah- were they not prophets as well? And my favorite book, Esther, I read on my own, but rarely heard it spoken of in church. And Hagar, a single mother, did she also not bare a son who became a leader of a great nation? It seems the only time women are really regarded in the Bible is through the miracle of childbirth- Mary, Elizabeth, Sarah. But what else is there? A lot of people seem to recognize names like Delilah, "Samson loved Delilah, she betrayed him, and, what is worse, she did it for money." Or Jezebel, or Eve. I find the view of Eve to be most unfortunate, because in previous arguments with idiotic men over the nature and roles of men and women, on more than one occasion I've heard them argue based on the idea of original sin. It seems to me, through my own upbringing in the Christian church, that the only women frequently heard of are those who are miraculously impregnated, or those who deceived great men. Though the pregnancies of Mary, Elizabeth, and Sarah could surely be regarded as miracles, what does it really prove about their virtue? What about also the dedication, strength, and loyalty of Ruth? "Don't urge me to leave you or to turn back from you. Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there I will be buried. May the LORD deal with me, be it ever so severely, if anything but death separates you and me."
I just find it unfortunate that I seemed to learn so little about these women in church. And that is why I think its necessary to let you know this. I can assure you that the youth are skeptical. In order to keep them faithful, particularly the females, I think its important to acknowledge their relevance. Some are bound to feel lost, and ask questions such as: Who can we relate to? Is there a place for us to make a difference? What role do we play in this religion? Certainly young boys can easily fantasize playing the roles of great men such as David, or Elijah. But who can we relate to?"