Because yhvhworld's neat post on some of the differences between the Hindu approach to cognition and the Buddhist approach got me thinking about those differences, and *that* got me thinking about comparing different belief systems, period, here's a rap for those who are interested in comparative religion/spirituality. All others can safely press the 'Next' key now. :-)
One of the reasons I like to look at the *myths* that underlie a belief system is because in my opinion it's important to do so -- those myths provide a "template" that pretty much structures and limits everything else within the belief system. It's all about inheritance. Those of you who are object-oriented programmers will understand this. Objects in an object-oriented pro- gramming language come with "baggage." They have *inheritance*. That is, if the lowest-level version of the object has property X, then pretty much all higher-level (descendant) variants of that object will *inherit* property X. In terms of a belief system, I tend to believe that the *myths* on which they are based often provide the "lowest-level object" in their object-oriented system. In Judaism/Christianity, the lowest-level myths have to do with 1) a moment of creation, before which the universe did not exist; 2) the universe *being* created by someone/something, in this case, God; 3) human beings having been created by God and subject to his/her/its will; 4) God actually *having* a will, caring what happens in his/her/its creation enough to micromanage it; and 5) God actually having the *ability* to micro- manage his/her/its creation. All of these things are implied by the Adam/Eve/Eden creation myth. In my view, this myth *has* to be understood to under- stand everything else that comes up with regard to either Judaism or Christianity. These five elements form the *baseline* beliefs of the entire belief system. They are inherited by all other dogma in the system. *None* of the five beliefs inherent in the Adam/Eve/Eden myth are *ever* challenged by the subsequent dogma of the systems that are based on that myth. The myth forms a set of *baseline assumptions* that become sacrosanct, never to be challenged or doubted. This is just a theory on my part, but I think there is some validity in it. If you want to understand a philosophy or belief system, look to its myths, especially its creation myths. *They* will structure the entire rest of the philosophy/belief system, by virtue of being "inherited" by all other objects in that philosophy/belief system. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
