Re: an atheist speaks . . .
J J R (jrovira@juno.com)
Thu, 17 Sep 1998 19:17:28 -0400 (EDT)
<<this is no doubt all over the place, making little sense and i am
exhausted, in that just-finished-franny-and-zooey way and also in
that go-to-bed-you-silly-silly-man way and i apologise. think of it as
a smiling and enthusiastic monologue by a distant relative.
and a good night to you all . . .
craig king>>
eh, GOD that was a good post, Craig :).
Now, I have some thoughts on Franny and Zooey and Christ that's been
bumping around in my head that does, indeed, connect with you saying, "it
wasn't God, it was Us all along?" And about Salinger's texts and the
beliefs expressed through them and how all that fits in.
I think the spirituality underlying the Salinger fiction I've read is of
an Eastern variety. A Christian reading F and Z, and getting to that
line where the "fat lady" is Christ, well, will immediately think of,
"whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me" --
out of Matthew. For a Christian this would speak of Christ's
identification with His people, and how we are to love Him by loving
those around us. And he or she wouldn't be wrong. But approaching this
through an eastern construct, well, you get something entirely different.
Not entirely, I guess, but the same thing in an entirely different light
:)
Now, by "eastern" I'm speaking of the Vedas, really, and beliefs
influenced by them. Esp. the Upanishads. The chief revelation for a
human being to attain within the context of the Upanishads is to realize
that "I am God and God is me." That there is no difference between the
individual and the Divine--between anything and the Divine. That God is
the ground of all being and the underlying substance of everything. And
that, therefore, all differences are moot--are illusory, in fact.
On an aside, when those holding to Eastern frames of thought approach the
teachings of Christ and His claim to divinity, they of course see the
same thing. When people approach the teachings of Christ and his claims
within the context of monotheism (the context within which he spoke),
then you get Christian doctrine. How you interpret those teachings
depend upon the presuppositions you hold prior to reading the texts, what
you already believe is true. I won't argue for one side or the other
here and now, although I could.
But, at any rate, you read that last statement in Franny and Zooey within
an eastern construct and you see that yes, the Fat Lady was Christ. On a
more personal level, therefore, that Yes, Franny, you do serve your
ideals by serving those who seem to live up to them the least. That yes,
Franny, you yourself are something pretty special too, even though you
see your own hypocrisy more clearly than ever, as well as the hypocrisy
of others. And that yes, Franny, everyone is a hypocrite. But they are
all Christ too.
So when you please people, serve them, in this sick, false, hypocritical
world, you aren't compromising. You're serving the highest goals.
That's what makes your statements really interesting. I think, within
the context of the spirituality underlying Salinger's work, that when we
say, "wait, it was us all along," that is true. It was us AND it was
God, because there is no difference between the two.
Jim
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]