(no subject)
I have so many things on my mind - no idea where to start! All I know is that I have a couple papers and a lot of sight-seeing and shopping and going out to do in the next week and a half, so I better limit myself right now to 20 minutes of LJ-ing...tough.
We had a guest lecturer today in our Islam and the West class to discuss women and Islam. There's a lot to be said on the topic, and I'm sure most of you have heard many of the basic issues, but actually it wasn't so much the whole topic of women, or of Islam for that matter, that really got me thinking. There was a mini-debate that ensued in the middle of the class about interpretting the Quran - basically, one girl argued that if this is the literal word of God, how can there be interpretations? I mean, yes, there is the whole translating it from old Arabic and things can be interpreted differently in that sense, but when there are passages with very explicit meaning, how can they be up for debate or interpretation? (The passages in question were (1) the one that basically calls wives the property of their husbands, (2) the verse that says a man can have up to four wives if he can treat them equally, and (3) a later verse that a man cannot treat multiple wives the same so in that case, he shouldn't take more than one wife.) The argument was made that having multiple wives was something necessary in a time of war, in a time where there were more women than men - and since women could not work and provide for themselves, this was just ensuring their security and well-being...but that in this day and age when women can make it on their own, it wouldn't really be sanctioned by the Quran to take multiple wives. (That makes a lot of sense - I mean, as misogynistic as polygamy sounds at first, that's a valid point - made me think that of how that sounds a lot better to me than the practice of sati in India, or burning a widow upon her husband's funeral pyre.)
Anyway, a little while after that, we were still talking about "interpreting" religion, and the prof made a comment that is making me question everything right now - she said that the entire idea of people or groups of people interpreting religions is very much a Western Enlightenment idea - rationalizing and defining religion on the basis of what current needs are. Its really amazing to think about how one's upbringing changes their view of religion - how for example, I complain that my cousins in India take religion to a much more literal extent than I do. But now when I heard the prof - I mean, I'd known that the whole interpretation business was more a Western idea, but I'd never thought about it that way. I mean, what do I really believe? Am I just brain-washed by the liberal thinking taught by US educators then? What would I think if I had been schooled differently? Am I really as independent and free-thinking as I like to think I am? (The answer to that last one is pretty plain and clear: no. LOL.) I was almost angry at myself for some time there for giving in to Western liberal ideas over what my parents teach me. Actually I still am half angry/half amused about that. But I guess there is time for me to rethink stuff. I realized I *really* need to start reading books by Eastern scholars and philosophers because our entire education system is full of Western, but very few good Eastern, books. The only times we touch Eastern authors' works in classes is when we take a class specifically about an Eastern country or their religion. There's definitely a problem with that - we're not getting a world view at all. And not only that, but in my limited experience, a lot of professors often use works by Eastern authors who cater to Western ideas of orientalism and really are not the views of the people of those countries at all. (I'm definitely thinking specifically of R. K. Narayan's version of the Ramayana that I read for a class freshman year. I hated it with a passion, but I think its important to read books like that - not to understand the Ramayana, but to understand how it appeals to Westerners and often the lower classes of India, but generally not to the upper classes. I really hated that we read it for that class though, because I didn't want non-Hindus to walk away with an incorrect and orientalist understanding of Hinduism.)
OK enough of my questioning/ranting! The last few days - some ping-pong, trying new foods, going places by myself more often, haggling (its SO easy when I'm not with Americans haha...I kinda feel bad, but like...they really hinder by ability to haggle/pass myself off as actually being from Bombay) and buying some nice stuff. :) Oh and I went to a soccer game yesterday! It was AWESOME. I have some little video clips on my camera so I'll show anyone who is interested when I get home. But yeah, definitely a great experience - trying to learn the cheers, the whole vibe of a European soccer match, wearing a Besiktas jersey that I bought at the bazaar hahaha...just a great time all around. What else - a couple nights ago a few of us were walking around after dinner and came across a guy with rabbits who told your fortune by picking it out of a bunch of little pieces of paper - pretty lame for 2 lira, but we had a great conversation with the guy - which included one of my friends saying he'd work with the guy and get the people who spoke English...and then later the guy said something about being asexual (the context: my friend told the rabbit dude that his fortune would be to get a better job and marry a beautiful girl)...and then we left. Hahahaha...but I got some great pictures! LOL. Good times.
Anyway, i'm at like 27 minutes right now when I said I'd only write for 20, so I guess I'd better get back to doing some real work. Boo.
This trip is amazing. I'm going to be so sad when its over. I wish we could just start it all up again. There are obviously some things that aren't so fun (like paper writing for instance) and just other random stuff, but overall...I can't even express how awesome this trip is. I mean, I want to come home, see you guys/my family and all that..but like, for a 2 week break, and then come back here! Haha. :)
We had a guest lecturer today in our Islam and the West class to discuss women and Islam. There's a lot to be said on the topic, and I'm sure most of you have heard many of the basic issues, but actually it wasn't so much the whole topic of women, or of Islam for that matter, that really got me thinking. There was a mini-debate that ensued in the middle of the class about interpretting the Quran - basically, one girl argued that if this is the literal word of God, how can there be interpretations? I mean, yes, there is the whole translating it from old Arabic and things can be interpreted differently in that sense, but when there are passages with very explicit meaning, how can they be up for debate or interpretation? (The passages in question were (1) the one that basically calls wives the property of their husbands, (2) the verse that says a man can have up to four wives if he can treat them equally, and (3) a later verse that a man cannot treat multiple wives the same so in that case, he shouldn't take more than one wife.) The argument was made that having multiple wives was something necessary in a time of war, in a time where there were more women than men - and since women could not work and provide for themselves, this was just ensuring their security and well-being...but that in this day and age when women can make it on their own, it wouldn't really be sanctioned by the Quran to take multiple wives. (That makes a lot of sense - I mean, as misogynistic as polygamy sounds at first, that's a valid point - made me think that of how that sounds a lot better to me than the practice of sati in India, or burning a widow upon her husband's funeral pyre.)
Anyway, a little while after that, we were still talking about "interpreting" religion, and the prof made a comment that is making me question everything right now - she said that the entire idea of people or groups of people interpreting religions is very much a Western Enlightenment idea - rationalizing and defining religion on the basis of what current needs are. Its really amazing to think about how one's upbringing changes their view of religion - how for example, I complain that my cousins in India take religion to a much more literal extent than I do. But now when I heard the prof - I mean, I'd known that the whole interpretation business was more a Western idea, but I'd never thought about it that way. I mean, what do I really believe? Am I just brain-washed by the liberal thinking taught by US educators then? What would I think if I had been schooled differently? Am I really as independent and free-thinking as I like to think I am? (The answer to that last one is pretty plain and clear: no. LOL.) I was almost angry at myself for some time there for giving in to Western liberal ideas over what my parents teach me. Actually I still am half angry/half amused about that. But I guess there is time for me to rethink stuff. I realized I *really* need to start reading books by Eastern scholars and philosophers because our entire education system is full of Western, but very few good Eastern, books. The only times we touch Eastern authors' works in classes is when we take a class specifically about an Eastern country or their religion. There's definitely a problem with that - we're not getting a world view at all. And not only that, but in my limited experience, a lot of professors often use works by Eastern authors who cater to Western ideas of orientalism and really are not the views of the people of those countries at all. (I'm definitely thinking specifically of R. K. Narayan's version of the Ramayana that I read for a class freshman year. I hated it with a passion, but I think its important to read books like that - not to understand the Ramayana, but to understand how it appeals to Westerners and often the lower classes of India, but generally not to the upper classes. I really hated that we read it for that class though, because I didn't want non-Hindus to walk away with an incorrect and orientalist understanding of Hinduism.)
OK enough of my questioning/ranting! The last few days - some ping-pong, trying new foods, going places by myself more often, haggling (its SO easy when I'm not with Americans haha...I kinda feel bad, but like...they really hinder by ability to haggle/pass myself off as actually being from Bombay) and buying some nice stuff. :) Oh and I went to a soccer game yesterday! It was AWESOME. I have some little video clips on my camera so I'll show anyone who is interested when I get home. But yeah, definitely a great experience - trying to learn the cheers, the whole vibe of a European soccer match, wearing a Besiktas jersey that I bought at the bazaar hahaha...just a great time all around. What else - a couple nights ago a few of us were walking around after dinner and came across a guy with rabbits who told your fortune by picking it out of a bunch of little pieces of paper - pretty lame for 2 lira, but we had a great conversation with the guy - which included one of my friends saying he'd work with the guy and get the people who spoke English...and then later the guy said something about being asexual (the context: my friend told the rabbit dude that his fortune would be to get a better job and marry a beautiful girl)...and then we left. Hahahaha...but I got some great pictures! LOL. Good times.
Anyway, i'm at like 27 minutes right now when I said I'd only write for 20, so I guess I'd better get back to doing some real work. Boo.
This trip is amazing. I'm going to be so sad when its over. I wish we could just start it all up again. There are obviously some things that aren't so fun (like paper writing for instance) and just other random stuff, but overall...I can't even express how awesome this trip is. I mean, I want to come home, see you guys/my family and all that..but like, for a 2 week break, and then come back here! Haha. :)