Riley Wyna
Trad climber
A crack near you
|
|
. The Grand Inquisitor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Grand Inquisitor is a parable told by Ivan to his brother Alyosha in Fyodor Dostoyevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov (1879–1880). Alyosha is a novice monk and Ivan questions the possibility of a personal, benevolent God.
The Grand Inquisitor is an important part of the novel and one of the best-known passages in modern literature because of its ideas about human nature and freedom, and because of its fundamental ambiguity. Dostoyevsky's notebooks show that he was inspired to use the figure of the Grand Inquisitor after he encountered it in a play by Friedrich Schiller, Don Carlos (1785–1787). [citation needed]
Parable
The tale is told by Ivan with brief interruptive questions by Alyosha. In the tale, Christ comes back to earth in Seville at the time of the Inquisition. He performs a number of miracles (echoing miracles from the Gospels). The people recognize him and adore him, but he is arrested by Inquisition leaders and sentenced to be burnt to death the next day. The Grand Inquisitor visits him in his cell to tell him that the Church no longer needs him. The main portion of the text is devoted to the Inquisitor explaining to Jesus why his return would interfere with the mission of the Church. The Inquisitor frames his denunciation of Jesus around the three questions Satan asked Jesus during the temptation of Christ in the desert. These three are the temptation to turn stones into bread, the temptation to cast Himself from the Temple and be saved by the angels, and the temptation to rule over all the kingdoms of the world. The Inquisitor states that Jesus rejected these three temptations in favor of freedom, but the Inquisitor thinks that Jesus has misjudged human nature. He does not believe that the vast majority of humanity can handle the freedom which Jesus has given them. The Inquisitor thus implies that Jesus, in giving humans freedom to choose, has excluded the majority of humanity from redemption and doomed it to suffer. Despite declaring the Inquisitor to be an atheist, Ivan also has the Inquisitor saying that the Catholic Church follows "the wise spirit, the dread spirit of death and destruction," i.e. the Devil, Satan. He says "We are not with Thee, but with him, and that is our secret! For centuries have we abandoned Thee to follow him." For he, through compulsion, provided the tools to end all human suffering and for humanity to unite under the banner of the Church. The multitude then is guided through the Church by the few who are strong enough to take on the burden of freedom. The Inquisitor says that under him, all mankind will live and die happily in ignorance. Though he leads them only to "death and destruction," they will be happy along the way. The Inquisitor will be a self-martyr, spending his life to keep choice from humanity. He states that "Anyone who can appease a man's conscience can take his freedom away from him." The Inquisitor advances this argument by explaining why Christ was wrong to reject each temptation by Satan. Christ should have turned stones into bread, as men will always follow those who will feed their bellies. The Inquisitor recalls how Christ rejected this saying, "Man cannot live on bread alone," and explains to Christ "Feed men, and then ask of them virtue! That's what they'll write on the banner they'll raise against Thee." Casting himself down from the temple to be caught by angels would cement his godhood in the minds of people, who would follow him forever. Rule over all the kingdoms of the Earth would ensure their salvation, the Grand Inquisitor claims. The segment ends when Christ, who has been silent throughout, kisses the Inquisitor on his "bloodless, aged lips" instead of answering him. On this, the Inquisitor releases Christ but tells him never to return. Christ, still silent, leaves into "the dark alleys of the city." Not only is the kiss ambiguous, but its effect on the Inquisitor is as well. Ivan concludes, "The kiss glows in his heart, but the old man adheres to his idea." Christ's kiss may also mirror an event that occurs earlier in the novel when the elder Zosima bows before Dmitri Karamazov. No one seems to understand why Zosima did this. Fyodor Karamazov exclaims, "Was it symbolic of something, or what?" Not only does the parable function as a philosophical and religious work in its own right, but it also furthers the character development of the larger novel. Clearly, Ivan identifies himself with the Inquisitor. After relating the tale, Ivan asks Alyosha if he "renounces" Ivan for his views. Alyosha responds by giving Ivan a soft kiss on the lips, to which the delighted Ivan replies, "That's plagiarism... Thank you though." T
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
WOW! BRAVO MIKEL BRAVO
I wish I could have been here earlier but I've been busy with my Beautiful Daughter !
Thank You Jesus for bringing Olive into my life
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Alyosha responds by giving Ivan a soft kiss on the lips, to which the delighted Ivan replies, "That's plagiarism..
It's actually imitation.
There are many imitators who pretend to be genuine in the present day and age and in the past.
But everyone knows real gold when they come upon it.
And that is the test and how one can tell .....
|
|
Riley Wyna
Trad climber
A crack near you
|
|
Werner - sold my boat tonight to a Krishna - My wife is great friends with his wife and she brought them over- such an amazing family and man - so intelligent - i am usually pretty antisocial these days - but we had a great conversation about many things - he is a Doctor and spent 6 years on a farm as a monk in Mexico - probably sometime in the 70's as he is 60 now.
One of those serendipitous things as I had also worked with this daughter and am very close with her - didnt find out until she wrote me on facebook and told me that i had just sold my boat to her mom and dad.
Thinking of taking my kids to India - maybe home school for 6 months and travel next year - no Internet - just travel and read books.
this Internet thing is the death of us all.
Nature and I spent a lot of time talking about the Bhagavad Gita while i was in Boulder
cheers, Riley
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Elk Creek, Idaho
|
|
Jan, your posts are superlative...I appreciate your perspective of the big picture.
Sadly, I'm afraid many intellectuals shun open internet forum discussion...perhaps they fear the stubborn public winds of opinion biasing their sifting of the truth.
...or perhaps they remember academics are often first to be silenced by du jour oligarchs coming to power.
The Uncivil War in the U.S. is accelerating...polarization is at its worst since Reconstruction. We seem oblivious to the lessons of twentieth century Europe ...we embrace our culture of demonization like a lost puppy come home.
...do you believe the U.S. is proceeding to a societal breakdown or will respect and tolerance be restored and a new empathetic social order be established?
...hope you continue to post. I think you have many readers who appreciate your expertise in cross-cultural comparison and other aspects of anthropological inquiry...probably more would comment but are avoiding the insults and put-downs.
|
|
MikeL
climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
|
|
"The kiss glows in his heart, but the old man adheres to his idea."
Love that line.
|
|
Donald Thompson
Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
|
|
The morally crippling aspect of Religion is the authoritarian political power structure that in fact it is.
I'll leave out the unenlightened, fatuous , and thoroughly forgettable comments about the nature of religion and focus (once again) on the utter ignorance of history revealed in the above comments.
As I have said, for the 10th time on this thread, most of our examples of totalitarian and authoritarian behavior, in terms of magnitude and scope, were the hideous attempts at social engineering carried out by the premiere socialist monstrosities of the last hundred years, namely, Nazism and Communism.
The rise of Islamic fundamentalism has clearly allowed the progressive atheist to gloss over and evade these historical facts. And yet, this Islamism, despite its current media and pop culture status, remains puny in scope and magnitude compared to the appalling atheistic regimes and ideologies that I have mentioned.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gotta love Howard Bloom. My favorite atheist:
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=wdJyafSBCb0&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DwdJyafSBCb0
If I were still eating gluten I'd be real hungry for a bagel about now.
|
|
Riley Wyna
Trad climber
A crack near you
|
|
Mike L.....my heart glows....with the knowledge that you love that line...
Thankyou.....
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
HFCS -- "Have the guts to change your mind."
After tasting Gold he thinks one should eat coal ........
|
|
Donald Thompson
Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
|
|
...hope you continue to post. I think you have many readers who appreciate your expertise in cross-cultural comparison and other aspects of anthropological inquiry...probably more would comment but are avoiding the insults and put-downs.
I'll comment. I hope that Jan keeps on posting. If anything I'd appreciate having a 'go-to' for my occasional forays into all things Neanderthal, and prehistorical.
But..... Still.......Gruyere cheese is a Swiss invention...not French!
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
JaN
I agree with the sentiment of your post on Dec.4
" It is possible for multiple belief systems to coexist and seems something worth striving for."
I wish someone in America would prvide a comfortable, peacefull arena
wherewhich we could gather a SpiritualLeader from all the different
Religions. Where they could for no other reason,other than sheer enlightenment. Sit down together to share and discuss the interwoveness
between them, and also the differences. Maybe at a park with a BBQ. Then
share it on Youtube. i thik it would be most entertaining. and educational.
this could bring to light, to the public conscienceness the legitiment understandings of Worship and Praise. Religions aren't defined by their
morles. The "whats" and "whys" of one's worshiping and praiseing are the defining points.
|
|
Bruce Kay
Gym climber
BC
|
|
I'll leave out the unenlightened, fatuous , and thoroughly forgettable comments about the nature of religion and focus (once again) on the utter ignorance of history revealed in the above comments.
Oh Donald , your such a typical right winger going off the deep end. I'l forget about your link of Naziism with socialism for now for the sake of agreement - yes Stalin and Hitler and a few others are top of the as#@&%e pile sure enough. By pointing out the authoritarian structures of religion I am not automatically equating it with Pol Pot. Sheesh!
However if you're going to run around presenting yourself as the unassailable pillar of moral conduct you gotta walk the talk. Hell, the bloody church of England can't even wrap their pointed little heads around women in the priesthood and they expect to be taken seriously on moral terms?
Blueblocr - such exists, but generally at odds with the most powerful, authoritarian and entrenched.
Just google "interfaith" or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interfaith_Alliance
Religions aren't defined by their
morles. The "whats" and "whys" of one's worshiping and praiseing are the defining points.
Maybe by your standard looking inward. When we look at you, or other religions or any other people we could give a hoot about how or why you praise or worship any more than we wonder why Shriners wear funny hats and have secret handshakes. We really don't care if Mormons wear magic underwear or Scientologists jump on couches. We care only about how you relate to us and others. I'm surprised that you say morality dosn't define you. surely that is how you define "others" ? Please don't tell me that the fact they don't worship your god is more important.
|
|
Donald Thompson
Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
|
|
However if you're going to run around presenting yourself as the unassailable pillar of moral conduct you gotta walk the talk. Hell, the bloody church of England can't even wrap their pointed little heads around women in the priesthood and they expect to be taken seriously on moral terms?
My little polemic with you until now had absolutely nothing to do with right- wingness , personal morality, or even anything to do with yourself or myself personally, outside of our respective comments.
Why would you want to make this sudden ,abrupt left turn into personal mischaracterizations,' walking the walk' -and the treatment of women by the Church of England ?
|
|
Bruce Kay
Gym climber
BC
|
|
Donald - why can't they allow women to be able to lead in their church? Because of the unwavering imperative of church doctrine controlled by the upper echelon levels of hierarchy. It dosn't matter what the world outside their little world knows now about gender equality. the rules that were established in the stone age and still conveniently support the establishment power structure over rule.
I only mentioned "right wing" because you clearly are and your over reaction to my audacity in criticizing religion is typical of right wing authoritarian behavior.
So don't take it personaly
Ah! perhaps when I said "You're" you thought i was referring directly to you. Sorry about that. No I should have made clear that I meant "religion" or the Church pretending to be the pillar of moral conduct.
|
|
Donald Thompson
Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
|
|
Okay I am not a spokesman for the Church of England but since this a hair up some people's rear end maybe I can hazard some guesses:
why can't they allow women to be able to lead in their church?
Why would any woman, knowing this to be the 1000 year old tradition of said church ,want to cause schisms and disruptions for that church?If a woman doesn't like this particular take on that churches tradition they are free to go to another church which will accommodate their desire to lead.
Similarly, why would you personally care what the doctrinal imperatives of any given church are, in regards to women, men, church mice or their current choice in ecclesiastical furniture?
I only mentioned "right wing" because you clearly are and your over reaction to my audacity in criticizing religion is typical of right wing authoritarian behavior.
Audacity? Ooooooooooookay.......or should I say ...........Oooooooooooomrkay
Excuse my stumbling desire to get all personal and co-dependent.
|
|
Bruce Kay
Gym climber
BC
|
|
Why would any woman, knowing this to be the 1000 year old tradition of said church .....
Fair enough, but then one shouldn't be too surprised to see many people leave what up til then has been a respected and beneficial institution over a point of morality born a thousand years ago and doggedly unchanged despite much more recent evidence to the contrary.
Tradition shouldn't be immune from challenge any more than anything else. Of course the answer to that is "God said so".
About why should I care, I've already stated that I don't except where it relates to us, and if they chose to carry their misogynistic imperatives into my secular political sphere then I intend to give then what for. Same goes for their dominionist notions about global warming. Etc etc.
However they can wear their funny hats and engage in strange sexual behavior in our secular world all they want because that dosn't hurt us. If they wish to apply their authoritarianism on us they can go to hell, or at least keep it confined to their club house.
|
|
Donald Thompson
Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
|
|
Fair enough, but then one shouldn't be too surprised to see many people leave what up til then has been a respected and beneficial institution over a point of morality born a thousand years ago and doggedly unchanged despite much more recent evidence to the contrary.
People will continue ,and have consistently been leaving these traditional churches for a myriad of profound historical , social ,and philosophical causes. Me thinks the number of persons leaving said churches due to their unhappiness over the churches failure to embrace their particular obsession with whatever the current pop political environment dictates, is relatively small in any case, and not of particular concern to church hierarchy or laity at this time- I could be wrong.
Mr. Kay, as regards tradition, it is perhaps fruitless to get you to understand , coming as you do from a secular mindset, the power and significance of traditional modes of thought in people's daily lives.
Suffice to say that some people are bound to cling to tradition, despite every attempt to convince them of their folly, backwardness, and social and political incorrectness. They are not convinced, as you are, of the objective validity of your own ways of thinking.
For instance , why would an Amish person give up his anachronistic community to go live in your secular, ever -changing world , where he can enjoy the heady progressive delights of watching people murdered continually on the streets and on television?
The Amish are as appalled by your insane world as you are of his lack of modern conformity to your own ways of thinking and behavior.
Attempts to deracinate people from their traditional choices, by an appeal to your brand of social morality is destined to fail. Maybe you should be content and pleased with the fact that there are so many of your type of individual and so few of the traditional minded individuals.
I'll have more to say on the new conformity in later posts.
amish I don't have a beef with
Hear that Amish people? For now it looks like you are safe.
|
|
Bruce Kay
Gym climber
BC
|
|
Mr. Kay, as regards tradition, it is perhaps fruitless to get you to understand , coming as you do from a secular mindset, the power and significance of traditional modes of thought.
Why say that? Why wouldn't I be fully cognizant such power and significance? Hell thats precisely why I raise it -because of its power and significance. Anyway, like I said, the amish I don't have a beef with mostly because they don't foist their religious imperatives on the rest of us. How many times do I have to say it - If the amish wish to wear funny hats or engage in homosexual activity I could care less. But here's a good question. How about the Mormon fundamentalists? They wish to practice polygammy with underage girls and they sure don't foist it on us - they stick to themselves just fine.
Why should we get all hot and bothered with them? What if they practiced ritualized rape? Hells bells, is that in fact what they do?
|
|
Bruce Kay
Gym climber
BC
|
|
OK so you're taking a pee break. we'll get back to it later.
How about this since we're on the topic of Mormons (Jennie chime in any time)
Here's a good example of Morals evolving, even within a religion. Not long ago the Mormons were faced with a choice - extinction or give up polygammy. Well next thing you know one of those messages from heaven arrived just in time.... Polygammy is no longer a mandate and ticket to heaven! Praise the lord and lets get going to Utah.
Now assuming for a moment that not only did god say so but in fact the morality of the situation changed. Why was it so hard to say "you know, the heathens have a point, polygammy really does suck." Well I'll tell you and it dosn't in fact have anything to do with an evolution in morality. It had to do with a completely pragmatic directive from authority, most likely the US Government but if you believe the stories it actually came from god himself via the trickle down effect. Either way that which was once moral was suddenly immoral.
But the question remains, why was it so hard - impossible actually - to say the heathens were right on this point? Because it would validate the heathens as moral equals and by its very nature throw Mormonism in doubt as the pillar of morality.
Religion is tribal first, moral second
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!