laedain (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} laedain) wrote,@ 2009-02-05 17:55:00 |
|
Meditation on scripture as metaphor part 4
So, did Jesus sin in his anger?
Lets look at another part of the same sermon: (Still working with the Jerusalem translation of Matthew)
If your right eye should be your downfall, tear it out and throw it away; for it will do you less harm to lose one part of yourself than to have your whole body thrown into hell.
And if your right hand should be your downfall, cut it off and throw it away; for it will do you less harm to lose one part of yourself than to have your whole body go to hell.
One's hand, one's eye can not be the cause of sin. They are not the cause of anyone's downfall. And Jesus was perfectly aware of this. He is prone to hyperbole, as were all the Jews of his epoch. His audience would have understood all of this which we miss because we don't think in the metaphor of a first century Jew. Nor can we, though I've tried to use hyperbole in the same way Jesus did in the third part of this meditation.
Metaphor - he's not instructing us to mutilate ourselves, he's instructing us to cast off our reactions, discard our reflexes, which are an intrinsic part of us. He's asking us to make certain that when we act, we act rightly.
Look at the stanza that precedes this:
'You have heard how it was said, You shall not commit adultery.
But I say this to you, if a man looks at a woman lustfully, he has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
It is impossible for any heterosexual man to look at a woman without looking at her lustfully without a lot of self discipline. (the grammar of that sentence is weird, but I think it is the best way to phrase that thought) Same can be said for a hetrosexual woman looking at a handsome man, etc. And even then, there are times when self discipline fails you. We're called to cast off those thoughts instead of savoring them. This is the eye to cut out.
So going back to anger: anger at a person is murder, cast if off as if were poison.
What about anger at an action? Is it possible to be angry at an action without being angry at the person?
Yes, but it is hard.
Going all the way back to the first part of this meditation, it all comes down to motive. That is something for which we as creatures are often unaware.
In order to act properly and without sin, it is therefor necessary to be self aware. For then you can see the beauty of woman (or man) without desire, you can see the despicable act without becoming angry at the person, just the deed.
The entire sermon on the mount comes down to this: be aware of your thoughts and reactions and discard those that lead you to wrong doings. Make every act an act of worship, and when you make a mistake, ask for forgiveness from those whom you wronged.
The fun part is that if he'd spoken those words to an audience of first century Jews, they wouldn't have paid him any attention. He had to couch it in their shared metaphor. Back then you made things clear by not speaking plainly.
The most interesting scripture I've ever read that concerns itself with the issue of how to act so that every action is an act of devotion is the Bhagavadgîtâ, specifically chapter 3. In my next part of this meditation, I'll be looking at the metaphor within the Bhagavadgîtâ.
So, did Jesus sin in his anger?
Lets look at another part of the same sermon: (Still working with the Jerusalem translation of Matthew)
If your right eye should be your downfall, tear it out and throw it away; for it will do you less harm to lose one part of yourself than to have your whole body thrown into hell.
And if your right hand should be your downfall, cut it off and throw it away; for it will do you less harm to lose one part of yourself than to have your whole body go to hell.
One's hand, one's eye can not be the cause of sin. They are not the cause of anyone's downfall. And Jesus was perfectly aware of this. He is prone to hyperbole, as were all the Jews of his epoch. His audience would have understood all of this which we miss because we don't think in the metaphor of a first century Jew. Nor can we, though I've tried to use hyperbole in the same way Jesus did in the third part of this meditation.
Metaphor - he's not instructing us to mutilate ourselves, he's instructing us to cast off our reactions, discard our reflexes, which are an intrinsic part of us. He's asking us to make certain that when we act, we act rightly.
Look at the stanza that precedes this:
'You have heard how it was said, You shall not commit adultery.
But I say this to you, if a man looks at a woman lustfully, he has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
It is impossible for any heterosexual man to look at a woman without looking at her lustfully without a lot of self discipline. (the grammar of that sentence is weird, but I think it is the best way to phrase that thought) Same can be said for a hetrosexual woman looking at a handsome man, etc. And even then, there are times when self discipline fails you. We're called to cast off those thoughts instead of savoring them. This is the eye to cut out.
So going back to anger: anger at a person is murder, cast if off as if were poison.
What about anger at an action? Is it possible to be angry at an action without being angry at the person?
Yes, but it is hard.
Going all the way back to the first part of this meditation, it all comes down to motive. That is something for which we as creatures are often unaware.
In order to act properly and without sin, it is therefor necessary to be self aware. For then you can see the beauty of woman (or man) without desire, you can see the despicable act without becoming angry at the person, just the deed.
The entire sermon on the mount comes down to this: be aware of your thoughts and reactions and discard those that lead you to wrong doings. Make every act an act of worship, and when you make a mistake, ask for forgiveness from those whom you wronged.
The fun part is that if he'd spoken those words to an audience of first century Jews, they wouldn't have paid him any attention. He had to couch it in their shared metaphor. Back then you made things clear by not speaking plainly.
The most interesting scripture I've ever read that concerns itself with the issue of how to act so that every action is an act of devotion is the Bhagavadgîtâ, specifically chapter 3. In my next part of this meditation, I'll be looking at the metaphor within the Bhagavadgîtâ.
