Before I started this class I simply assumed that the Rastafarian culture was flourishing. For example I see Bob Marley tee shirts all over Seattle, dreadlocks are a prominent hairstyle, I simply assumed that if Rasta culture can make it all the way to Seattle it must be popular in Jamaica. I realize that now that Rastafari has become more mainstream culture and people adopt it because it looks cool, not because they are aware of the actual values behind the culture. The fact that few people understand the culture yet many adopt its symbols seems very contradictory to Rasta culture, they are supposed to be opposed to mainstream oppression. This made me wonder if Rastafari will continue to exist, or will they merge into a new group like the Burru merged into Rastafarian culture?

I and I believe that the Rastafarian culture will remain intact for generations to come, because they are a well-documented culture. There is enough known about Rasta’s to preserve the culture through writings. The culture is in no danger of being lost because many of their teachings still exist in scripture and music. As long as this form of media exists the culture can be preserved and if a favorable social environment rises again it could reemerge. Barrington mentioned how religions ebb and flow, I agree with him and I think that Rastafarian culture is simply experiencing an ebb, but the preservation of culture through media will allow it to flow again when conducive social pressures arise.

Rastafarian’s as a culture still have things to fight for in Jamaica. Jamaica is clearly no Zion and there is plenty of poverty and hardship. Rastafarian culture offers a spiritual way to deal with this hardship; Rasta’s are still oppressed by poverty and laws of Babylon. Recently they fought the Jamaican government for the decriminalization of Marijuana. The battle over decriminalization signifies that there are still reasons for the Rasta culture. Rastafarian’s still face battles to fight and oppression to overcome, which is why they will not disappear.

The militancy in Rastafarian culture may be gone, or it may be ebbing but this does not mean they will disappear. The militancy, which Rastafarianism was founded on, was primarily due to colonialism that hasn’t existed in Jamaica in the new generations lifetime. Yet, there are still people in the younger generations who are Rasta’s. Militancy may have shifted, but this does not mean the culture is in danger.

Rasta people may be undergoing some social changes but this is no indication their culture will disappear. Rasta’s have a well-documented culture, they still have things to fight for, and although beliefs are shifting this does not mean that their culture is disappearing. I think that the rising educated class of Rasta’s has a chance of unifying the religion in a way that does not threaten their central belief of rejecting Babylon society. The rejection of Babylon is so ingrained in Rasta culture that it will not disappear. I think this video illustrates that the rejection of Babylon is still strong, as is Rasta culture. 

                                                For lyrics click here.

What's That sign?

The most obvious system of symbols I noticed was the physical signs that the villagers have placed around their village to remind people of the teachings of Rastafarianism. I noticed that the first sign preached equality and justice for all, while two others appeared to have different connotations.

 

The video said the sign above stood for “goodness over evil”. The sign clearly says black over white. I was at first unsure how to interpret this sign.

The next sign made it more clear where “the R of righteousness [is] over the X of wrong”.  I first noticed that the R was written in black paint over the X which was written in white paint.

 These signs made me wonder if they were a metaphor for an underlying symbol of racism in Rastafarianism. Two methods of interpreting these symbols came to mind. One could interpret them very literally and say that Rasta’s are in fact opposed to people with a white skin tone. This is supported in our text on page 76 when our book talks about a group who's motto was "death to white oppressors". But racism would contradict that everything the spiritual and happy tone that Rastafarian's are legendary for. I think that as babylon became less of a physical place, and Rasta's became less concerned with actually returning to africa hatred towards white people died out. Racism is preaching evil while these signs were said to be preaching “right over wrong”. I came to one conclusion, which was consistent with the book. Rasta’s reject white culture, but they don’t hate white people. “The Rasta is simply “creating a cultural identity that synchronizes with… their African past”. The signs illustrate how Rasta’s must reject white culture in order to return to their roots. Independence is the root symbol these signs are expressing, it is the overarching theme that connects these signs to Rastafarianism.

The symbol of independence can be seen also in how The Rasta sees him self as a spider who uses his wit to survive the traps that white culture has set. In the video they lived in the Jamaican mountains “the closest possible place to heaven”, symbolizing their independence from Babylon society. Intentionally or unintentionally they had no water in the village, which can also be seen as a way of rejecting modern culture and escaping Babylon.

These symbols such as the signs give Rasta’s the belief that they can control their surroundings, and Rasta’s are not merely imprisoned in Babylon. It give significance to their lives. While at first they appear to be racist it is merely a symbolic mode of interpreting what they see around them. Rasta’s were oppressed by white culture so they use the color white to symbolize oppression.

Sheba and Solomon Did it Happen?

One aspect of religion in the Kebra Negast:

One aspect of Religion according to Gertz is to create an order of existence; The Kebra Negast establishes beautifully how Judaism came to exist in Ethiopia. The full Kebra Negast is the story is “the departure of god and his ark of the covenant from Jerusulem to Ethiopia” but the section we read explained the Queen of Sheba’s relationship to King Solomon.

Earlier in the year we saw a video made by students about how people would use stories to establish a way of believing the unexplainable. The story behind the spread of Judaism to Ethiopia is an unexplainable concept. From a theological standpoint one could truly believe in the story we read as fact. For example the Rastafari interpret the Kebra Negast literally and believe that Haile Selassie a former emperor of Ethiopia was literally a descended of Sheba and Solomon.

The Rastafari use the Kebra Negast as a System of symbols in order to create an ordered existence that makes their life tolerable, from a religious studies standpoint one has to be cautious. I would be wary of interpreting Halie Selassie as a direct descendent of King Solomon because there has been so much turmoil in Ethopia since Sheba’s reign, also the Story of the Kebra Negast has been impossible to verify. Because, there are several people in the bible called Sheba, and different religions choose to interpret the symbols in their own way. It is evident that both Islamic and Ethopian traditions have a different explanation for who Sheba really was, the Kebra Negast claims that Sheba was from Ethiopia, while Islamic traditions suggests she was from Marib. Both versions of the story add to the order of existence in their respective cultures, and thus disserve to be included as a part of religion.

The Kebra Negast was very elegant in the way it presented the events according to the Ethiopian point of view, whether they are historically correct is beside the point. One can read and enjoy the stories and not accept them as truth or fiction. My goal was simply to examine the facets that appeared to me to me most religious, based on the fact that they could apply to multiple faiths.  

             

Signs

I think the way beliefs change is a very interesting subject. Religion seems similar to a collaborative idea that mutates as it spreads. For example people have a will to spread Christianity but Christianity does not look the same in Latin America as it does in Spain or France. I believe that ones surroundings will influence how they read the bible or any religious scriptures. For example two conventional methods of studying religion include Theology and Religious studies. Theology is studying religion from the inside. In essence studying the beliefs in their application. Religious studies aims to study the religion using comprehensive historical methods and not necessarily applying it to ones self. It is not always practical to read the Bible in the same terms in church as in a religious studies class. The contexts of ones surroundings are very important when working on matters of religion because; there are so many ambiguous signs.

            St. Augustine suggests that people do not correctly interpret the signs. Many people take expressions in the bible literally when they are just meant figuratively. Part of the reason for this as St. Augustine suggests is that reading in large groups can lead to misinterpretation, because much of the bible and the psalms can be confusing in it’s context. Sometimes things are meant literally and sometimes they are meant figuratively. There are also concepts that can’t be applied to religion today. It is interesting trying to find the balance between religion and actual interpretation, between reading in large groups and personally. Religion seems to be all about finding a balance between two extremes. People are quick to suggest that there is a right way and a wrong way to practice religion. I believe more in the middle ground.

            Having said this I think it is important to keep in mind that ambiguous signs in the Psalms are very controversial. People need to be very thoughtful about the messages they interpret and as Augustine suggests look for the good in religious text, instead of interpreting it in a way that will cause spite towards our neighbors. 

Teaching Christianity

The meaning of the article How to Read the Bible by Todd Billings and Saint Augustine on Christian Doctrine contain similar yet contrasting messages on how to read the bible regarding interpretation of signs.

Both book emphasize using discretion when looking at the bible. Many of the signs can be interpreted wrong which is dangerous and misconstrues the teachings of the Bible. For example the Westboro Baptist Church is famous for misconstruing scriptures for their advantage by taking part of the text out of context. As the article How to Read the Bible said, "any and all methods must be tamed in relation to the theological aims of Scripture and the ecclesial context within which the Bible is read as Scripture”. The articles differed in that St. Augustine wanted people to interpret the signs using history, while Billings was more in favor of not using history because it clouded the view of Gods glory. St. Augustine illustrated that the remedy for not knowing signs in the scriptures is knowledge of the language. I think that both authors would agree that if the scriptures are taken out of context we are not correctly interpreting the language.

St. Augustines words have a double meaning, because he could also be implying that one must know literally how to read and interpret different languages to understand the scriptures. Many people today find reading the Bible difficult because of the language. For example, Billings examines how most Christians “can’t truly understand god’s words because they aren’t scholars”. I think this is not necessarily true but it illustrates how the language can be difficult to understand, because of it’s historical references.

In Chapter 11 St. Augustine said that the “remedy for ignorance of signs is knowledge of language”. Billings suggests this same philosophy. He suggested that one couldn’t come to table with nothing and expect to understand the bible.

I think both Billings and Augustine characterized reading the scriptures as a difficult task that takes an immense amount of effort. It’s not something one can sit down and skim through. The scriptures require a great amount of focus and knowledge to interpret correctly. St. Augustine states that the bible signs require people not being careless otherwise they will be missed. I think this characterization places them in a positive light while at the same time maintaining their reverence.

free post

It is interesting to examine the purpose of the Psalms of Ascent. These Psalms were sung at large feasts and during pilgrimage to Jerusalem. The tone of these psalms seems to be meant to inspire. While other psalms talk about what will happen to sinners, these psalms focus on gods’ glory and use inspiring imagery. Psalm 126 mentions “ our mouth fill with laughter”. In Alters footnote he said that the tense was unclear. The laughter that is spoken of could be in present tense or it could be future tense. I find this really interesting, because it seems that the song is meant to inspire both in the present moment but also to give strength to carry on.            

Even in modern music we can see the motovation to inspire listeners. For example it’s a common practice to listen to music before sporting events, in order to increase performance. Songs such as hymns are also sung at the end of church services. I’ve always looked at this as a way to give one the strength to stay moral until next service. Using songs to inspire makes sense, but science can’t explain exactly why music triggers emotions. It is obvious that music can trigger emotions. I wish I could understand Hebrew, because I think hearing the Psalms sung would give me a totally different emotional response than reading them.

Hymn to the Aten Compared to Psalm 104

The Egyptian Hymn says, “In the underworld you make a Nile” (v.9). This shows a connection to Native American Indian mound culture. The Indians had a belief in the upper world and lower world. The lower world represented earth and water. This belief was expressed in the Indian mounds by the building of water spirits, which looked like panthers and lizards. It’s interesting that in this Hymn the Nile River represents the Egyptian underworld. Psalm 104 has a unified in verse 6 it seems to mention how God unified the earth. God also blocked movement between worlds in verse 9. Verse nine says “a boarder you fixed so they could not cross, so they could not come back to cover the earth”.  This shows a significant difference from the Egyptian hymn, which mentions nothing about a boarder.

The other striking difference between the hymns and Psalm 104 is the end. The Egyptian hymn ends with a tribute to “the Lord of the Two Lands” who is clearly Akhenaten. It seems as if the Egyptians are worshiping their king almost as much as they worship Aten. The Hymn says, “Who has come forth from your body”. They believe that Akhenaten is an incarnation of Aten. Worshiping the King stands in stark contrast to Psalm 104 where they have the lack of a king and are preying to God because they can’t believe in a king. In Psalm 104 it says, “may the lords glory be forever” where as in the Hymn to Aten it says “ Lord of the two lands… Living and young, forever and ever.” This is a very different message while Psalm 104 focuses on the Lord, the Hymn to Aten ends by focusing on their king.