50 Things You're Not Supposed To Know: Religion (17 page)
Read 50 Things You're Not Supposed To Know: Religion Online
Authors: Daniele Bolelli
BOOK: 50 Things You're Not Supposed To Know: Religion
11.38Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
Let's say you just invented a time machine and decide to go hang out in Mesopotamia a few thousands of years ago. Let's also say that you find yourself in dire need of the expert services of a hooker.
What to do … what to do …
?!? How would you go about finding an honest prostitute in the streets of Ur, or Babylon, or any other Mesopotamian city? Could you buy a copy of the “Babylonian Times” and check out the personal ads in the classified section? Where exactly could you go? As it turns out, your best bet may be to head out to the temple.
What to do … what to do …
?!? How would you go about finding an honest prostitute in the streets of Ur, or Babylon, or any other Mesopotamian city? Could you buy a copy of the “Babylonian Times” and check out the personal ads in the classified section? Where exactly could you go? As it turns out, your best bet may be to head out to the temple.
Once upon a time I lived in a crappy, overheated town named Claremont (which looks and feels like the kind of place where Los Angeles goes to die). For reasons that are still beyond my understanding, the main businesses in
town were Christian bookstores and strip joints—usually located next door to each other (I’ve always wondered if they had the same clientele …).
town were Christian bookstores and strip joints—usually located next door to each other (I’ve always wondered if they had the same clientele …).
In ancient Mesopotamia, a similar trend existed, since sex for sale and religion often went hand in hand. Many historians, in fact, tell that the temples were populated by hookers …
ehm
, I meant to say by priestesses who would routinely get paid for sex. And most of the money would then be offered to the altars of the deities worshipped there—in particular to Inanna, the Sumerian goddess of love, who was revered by many Indo-European populations under different names (including Ishtar, Aphrodite, Astarte, Cybele, etc.). Just how hot the cult of the goddess was can be inferred by this Sumerian composition that was supposed to come from the lips of the goddess herself: “Who wants to plow my womb? Who wants to plow the grain that grows so high? Who wants to make my moistened fields bear fruit?”
ehm
, I meant to say by priestesses who would routinely get paid for sex. And most of the money would then be offered to the altars of the deities worshipped there—in particular to Inanna, the Sumerian goddess of love, who was revered by many Indo-European populations under different names (including Ishtar, Aphrodite, Astarte, Cybele, etc.). Just how hot the cult of the goddess was can be inferred by this Sumerian composition that was supposed to come from the lips of the goddess herself: “Who wants to plow my womb? Who wants to plow the grain that grows so high? Who wants to make my moistened fields bear fruit?”
The Greek historian Herodotus is our main source for this torrid tale of “sacred prostitution.” In his masterpiece,
The Histories
, he wrote that Babylonian women were required at least once in their lifetime to have sex with unknown men in order to raise money for the temple of Ishtar. Even other writers, who discount Herodotus as an old, horny, Greek bastard whose fantasy made up these titillating stories, are forced to admit that there is indeed some evidence of fertility rituals involving sex with priestesses among many Mediterranean and Middle Eastern peoples. The infamous
Hieros Gamos
, for example, was a ceremony for the fertility of the earth which featured the king and the high priestess getting it on (how exactly the exchange of bodily fluids between king and priestess was supposed to make the grain grow is a matter we better not speculate too much on …).
The Histories
, he wrote that Babylonian women were required at least once in their lifetime to have sex with unknown men in order to raise money for the temple of Ishtar. Even other writers, who discount Herodotus as an old, horny, Greek bastard whose fantasy made up these titillating stories, are forced to admit that there is indeed some evidence of fertility rituals involving sex with priestesses among many Mediterranean and Middle Eastern peoples. The infamous
Hieros Gamos
, for example, was a ceremony for the fertility of the earth which featured the king and the high priestess getting it on (how exactly the exchange of bodily fluids between king and priestess was supposed to make the grain grow is a matter we better not speculate too much on …).
One thing you can always count on scholars to do is to squeeze the fun out of anything that's even remotely enjoyable. Most of them love nothing more than to climb out of their academic graves to shake their reproaching finger against popular culture, and anything that could bring a smile on people's faces. Faithful to their reputation, the evil academics do in this case the only thing they know how to do: spoil a good story. In recent times, some of them have attacked the authenticity of all these references to Mesopotamian temple sex by suggesting that Herodotus and several Jewish writers who reported similar tales were just slandering foreign religions with lurid lies. Since the actual
evidence pro or con is lost in time, it's a matter of faith whether one wants to trust modern scholars or Herodotus & co. For my part, when the choice is between the joyless ghosts of academia and the tellers of a good sex story … well, do I even have to finish this sentence?
45 IF YOU ARE TOO STUPID FOR TAOISM, YOU CAN ALWAYS TRY CONFUCIANISMevidence pro or con is lost in time, it's a matter of faith whether one wants to trust modern scholars or Herodotus & co. For my part, when the choice is between the joyless ghosts of academia and the tellers of a good sex story … well, do I even have to finish this sentence?
The two main religions born in China, Taoism and Confucianism, couldn't be more at odds with each other. Confucianism is super conservative, frowns on innovation, and emphasizes the need to follow strict traditions. Taoism is often extremely anti-authoritarian, and mocks any tradition that's not able to constantly reinvent itself. Confucianism loves a nerdy approach to life based on accumulation of knowledge and memorization. Taoism despises the accumulation of knowledge for knowledge's sake as an obstacle to spontaneity, and is only interested in what can be transformed in embodied wisdom. Confucianism worships order and conforming to an exacting social etiquette. Taoism invites us to free ourselves from any petty human construct in order to flow in harmony with the cosmos. Confucianism tries to convince all people to live according to its dictates. Taoism couldn't care less to make converts. Confucianism is very concerned with regulating human society. Taoism focuses on nature. Confucianism is hyper-moralistic and preaches
obedience to a myriad of rules and regulations. Taoism's idea of morality is extremely flexible, for Taoists believe that what we need is the talent to navigate through a constantly transforming world—not laws.
obedience to a myriad of rules and regulations. Taoism's idea of morality is extremely flexible, for Taoists believe that what we need is the talent to navigate through a constantly transforming world—not laws.
And yet, despite being polar opposites, Confucianism and Taoism have been often practiced together … Consider this: in much of the world followers of different religions are competing with each other trying to recruit people to their cause. Many Taoists, on the other hand, discourage prospective converts and urge them to join their rivals instead. In order to grasp Taoism—they argue—you need great awareness, an uncommon taste for paradox, and amazing insight. Since most people are too stupid to develop such talents, they are better off following Confucianism with its simplistic moral rules that would prevent idiots from doing too much damage to themselves and others. Elitist? Just a tad.
Now, imagine people in the West deciding to be Muslim and Christian at the same time. Christianity and Islam, after all, are much more similar to each other than Confucianism and Taoism. But whereas an exclusive sense of “owning” the one and only truth prevents Western religions from going hand in hand, the prevailing Chinese mentality has historically encouraged the mixing of religions. If one religion is a good thing—they reasoned—then two, three or four are even better. We'll just take the best from each and mix them together to our liking.
And so, it has been far from unusual for the same individuals to follow Taoism, Confucianism and even Buddhism at the same time.
It is worth noting that perhaps this sympathy for syncretism has been facilitated by a couple of facts. Unlike what happened in the West, Chinese religions don't claim to be absolute truths revealed by a single God. Rather, they began as philosophies of life and only later morphed into full-fledged religions. Taoist and Confucian philosophies, in fact, eventually mixed with the animistic rituals that characterize Chinese folk religion. But even after this happened, none of them believed that one God had entrusted them with the absolute truth. What they offered, instead, were just ceremonies and guidelines to make life easier. Nothing more and nothing less. The result is that whereas in the West mixing religions is pure heresy, in China it has been pretty much the norm.
46 JOHN LOCKE AND THE LIMITS OF TOLERANCEWhen I think of John Locke, the first image that comes to mind is a bald dude who roams the island with an enigmatic smile, slaughters wild boars with a hunting knife and yells at people, “Don't tell me what I can't do!” (In case you have never checked out
Lost
, go repent immediately by racing to
get all six seasons and watching them back-to-back.)
Lost
, go repent immediately by racing to
get all six seasons and watching them back-to-back.)
But this is not the John Locke we will be playing with today. The John Locke we are concerned with here is the 17th century English philosopher considered by most to be one of the giants of the Enlightenment, a key inspirational figure for the American Revolution, and a paladin of freedom.
His freedom-loving attitude wasn't only applied to politics but also extended to religion. Back in his day, when Catholics and Protestants disagreed (that is to say, always), they didn't do so by engaging in sophisticated discussions but by bashing each other's heads with axes. Writing on the heels of the religious wars that drowned Europe in bloodshed, Locke penned
A Letter Concerning Toleration
, a seminal essay about the novel idea that perhaps allowing multiple religious viewpoints to exist was a healthy thing to do: a true foundational stone on which the idea of religious toleration was built.
A Letter Concerning Toleration
, a seminal essay about the novel idea that perhaps allowing multiple religious viewpoints to exist was a healthy thing to do: a true foundational stone on which the idea of religious toleration was built.
Considering his devotion to freedom in general, and religious freedom in particular, it is perhaps interesting to notice that Locke placed some very clear limits on it. Among those he was suspicious of were atheists for he believed that, by not recognizing any superior authority, they could not be trusted to keep oaths and promises. Later in life, however, Locke began to doubt his initial position and wondered if atheists couldn't also be tolerated after all.
But there were others that Locke just couldn't bring himself to stomach. “Papists—he wrote—are not to enjoy the benefit of toleration, because, where they have power, they think themselves bound to deny it to others. For it is unreasonable that any should have free benefit of their religion who do not acknowledge it as a principle of theirs that nobody ought to persecute or molest another because he dissents from him in religion.”
Here is Locke's paradox. Precisely because he cherished freedom, he refused to extend it to anyone looking for an opportunity to oppress others. To those who complained that freedom should be given to all, Locke replied that Catholics didn't deserve this privilege because of the “cruelty of their own principles and practices.” These were the days when Catholicism was still powerful enough that popes regularly tried to enforce their own ideology as law in all countries under the authority of Catholic rulers. And in Locke's
mind, this kind of totalitarian, proto-fascist mentality marked Catholicism as an enemy of freedom. Only those religions that accepted to tolerate other viewpoints were in turn worthy of being tolerated.
mind, this kind of totalitarian, proto-fascist mentality marked Catholicism as an enemy of freedom. Only those religions that accepted to tolerate other viewpoints were in turn worthy of being tolerated.
Without a doubt, then, Locke would be quite disturbed by the modern policies enacted by many Western European countries that, in the name of multiculturalism and good liberal values, have allowed in their midst the growth of forms of fundamentalism yearning for their destruction. All these people who are supposedly the champions of individual freedoms and minority rights, but who somehow manage to be relatively silent about religious ideologies hating both, would puzzle Locke. Is choosing to tolerate religious ideologies that are intolerant at heart the epitome of open-mindedness or just plain stupid? Guessing correctly Locke's answer to this question isn't exactly complicated.
47 GOD WEARS DRAGON ROBES AND WANTS YOU TO KICK CONFUCIUS’S ASSMy theory that monotheistic religions are responsible for the bloodiest religiously motivated wars in history seems to have run into a stumbling block, since Confucian/Taoist/Buddhist China is home to a religious war that caused the death of over 20 million people. The Taiping Rebellion (1850–1864), in
fact, is hands-down one of the goriest conflicts in modern history. 20 million dead are a bit too much to dismiss simply as a minor exception to the rule, so it seems that I may have to revise my theory after all.
fact, is hands-down one of the goriest conflicts in modern history. 20 million dead are a bit too much to dismiss simply as a minor exception to the rule, so it seems that I may have to revise my theory after all.
Other books
Joshua's Folly by Dean, Taylor
The White Mists of Power by Kristine Kathryn Rusch
Beloved Wolf by Kasey Michaels
FoM02 Trammel by Anah Crow, Dianne Fox
The Cowboy Lassos a Bride (Cowboys of Chance Creek) by Cora Seton
Kiss of a Traitor by Cat Lindler
Fable: Edge of the World by Christie Golden
Blood Red by Quintin Jardine
A Chosen Destiny (The Samantha Project Series #3) by Karpinske, Stephanie
Maid of Murder by Amanda Flower
