Fraud in The Inferno

After completing this weeks reading, the main thing that stood out to me was the fact that those who had committed fraud seemed to have some of the worst punishments in hell. This included Pope Nicholas III, who had payed his way into his position in the church and as punishment had to lay headfirst in the ground with flames leaping up at his feet. This appears slightly odd (at least to me), since the sin of fraud is punished significantly more than murder itself. On top of this extremely harsh punishment, we find that this group of sinners is the only one in which Dante shows no sympathy for whatsoever. In fact, we see a rather fiery side of Dante when the pope tells him the reasons for his punishment. Sarcastically, Dante drills Nicholas with questions: "Please tell me, how much treasure did our Lord insist on from Saint Peter before He gave the keys into his keeping? Surely he asked no more than 'Follow me.'"Through this encounter we start to understand Dante's real opinions about how and why certain sins are worse than others. During his lifetime Dante undoubtedly saw several examples of fraud and hypocrisy in the Catholic church, and it is my belief that as a result of this he makes it so that these church-related crimes are most hated by God in The Inferno. Because of this situation, one must wonder if all the levels of hell that Dante creates in his poem are based simply on his own opinions as to which sins are worse than others. One instance that would seem to support this comes from one of the first levels where those who had committed lust were punished. As the history of Dante's actual life goes, it is clear that he dealt with lust; this may be why he made this sin to seem "not as much of a big deal." With this in mind, this helps make it clear of what Dante's opinions towards certain sins were during his lifetime.

Review: Unbroken

This past summer I had the privilege of reading Laura Hillenbrand's Unbroken, the story of Olympic gold medalist and WWII veteran Louis "Lou" Zamperini. For what it's worth, I can honestly say that this is the most inspiring book I have ever read, and I would recommend it to anyone looking for something worth reading.

For those who haven't heard of Lou, the Olympic athlete grew up in California where he quickly became  famous for his record-setting running on the college track. After being drafted into the military, Lou became a bombardier and flew several missions for the Air Force throughout the war. His final mission ending in his plane going down over Japanese waters, where only he and two others survived. Stranded in a 6' raft with two other men, Lou survived over 30 days at sea with no food or water while dodging enemy fire as well as sharks. He was then captured by the Japanese and kept in unbearable concentration camps where came close to death on a number of occasions. Miraculously, he and the others from the camp are eventually rescued and brought home, nearly 4 years after his plane had crashed.

I remember reading this book and thinking to myself, "There is absolutely no way any of this is true. It had to have been made up or exaggerated." The adversity that this man went through is unlike anything I have ever heard of, and the fact that he survived all of it makes it all the better. If you haven't read it already, I would highly recommend you put on your list of books to read. You won't regret it.

Rama: Should he feel cheated?

After completing our portion of the Ramayana, I could help but wonder a few things regarding Rama. After Rama kills Ravana and has been reunited with Sita, Dasaratha tells Rama that he finally realized that the purpose of his life was to put an end to Ravana for the gods. While this is a noble task that Rama has completed, I couldn't help but feel bad that Rama and Sita had to go through all of their adversity just to complete a favor for the gods. Personally, I would have been extremely upset at the thought of having my wife kidnapped by the king of all demons, just so that I would be provoked to fight. Not only did this situation cost him nearly two years of separation from Sita, but it also cost him the crown to his father's throne, as well as banishment from his own family's kingdom. I think the only thing keeping Rama from being upset at the fact that his whole life was manipulated by the gods was his commitment and dedication to his dharma. He believed in having purpose and duty in life, and in the end he was able to say that he fulfilled his dharma to the best of his ability.
Another thing that somewhat bothered me in the end of the story was Rama's accusation to Sita of her unfaithfulness to him during her time away. While I understand why Rama accused her (he didn't want people to think she was impure), I don't think it was right for Rama to do the accusing. In a practical relationship, causing someone to walk through fire to prove they had been faithful does not give off a sense of trust in the relationship. You would think that after all his time away from Sita would have caused Rama to want nothing more than to enjoy her company. Again, I think this all relates to his commitment to dharma, as he pushes his wife's trust aside in order to pay respect to his dharma.

Rama's Weakness?

From the start of beginning of The Ramayana, Rama is portrayed as the ideal epic hero for a story. He is obedient, kindhearted, respectful, and he is fully devoted to Dharma. As seen in during the beginning of his banishment, he also cares immensely for his wife, Sita. When she requests to go live with Rama in the forest, he tells her that she must stay in the city where she will be safe. While on the surface this may sound like a good idea, it becomes clear that Rama has in fact contradicted himself in relation to what he told his mother (who had also requested to leave the city to be with Rama in exile). Rama had told her that it was her duty through Dharma that she should not leave her husband. Why then would he tell Sita she had to remain in the city if her Dharma called for her to always be with her husband? The answer is that Rama was madly in love with her, so much that her wellbeing and safety took priority to everything else in his life (including Dharma). It is only when she threatens to kill herself does Rama allow her to come with him into the forest. While girls (and guys) dream about having someone so madly in love with them, this "honorable" trait that Rama displays proves to (in my opinion) be his ultimate weakness. It is not until Rama, Sita, and Laksmana are in the forest that this weakness becomes unmistakeable. This occurs when Sita sees Marica disguised as a beautiful, playful deer and decides that she wants it as her own. While Laksmana correctly predicts that it is in fact a demon, Rama refuses to heed his brother's warning and risks all of their safety in order to get a deer's hide for his wife's enjoyment. As predicted by Laksmana, Sita is lured into a trap and kidnapped by Ravana, and if it weren't for the ridiculous, unrealistic outcome of events that unfold later, she would never have been rescued by her lover. All this to say, Rama's judgement is hindered by his uncontrollable love for Sita. The question remains: is this a weakness or a strength?

Antigone

One issue that came to mind after reading this story was whether or not Creon should be considered a good leader. Obviously, he gives off the impression that he means business when it comes to being loyal to Thebes. His first action we see deals with the punishment of Polynices after his death while fighting his brother for the throne. Instead of allowing him a proper burial, Creon declares that Polynices is not to be touched and his body must lie in the sun and rot. While this may not seem like a huge deal to us (although it still is a disturbing situation), not having a funeral for a deceased family member was one of the worst punishments imaginable considering the fact that an individuals future in the afterlife depended on the quality of his burial. While it may seem cruel of Creon to issue such a punishment, I think it in fact shows a sense of patriotism for his country. Before engaging his brother in combat, Polynices had gathered foreigners to help him take the throne, an act that condemned him a traitor in Creon's eyes. The next thing Creon does is declare that anyone who takes part in burying Polynices is to be killed as well. When Antigone, his son's future bride, attempts to bury her brother, Creon makes no exception to this rule, and at hearing the story declares that she must die. Don't get me wrong here: I think it's a little extreme that Creon is wanting his future daughter-in-law dead just because she tried to give her brother a proper funeral. Whatever weakness this shows in him (his uncontrollable anger), Creon's commitment to his country is only made greater. All this to say, it's hard to say whether or not Creon is the kind of ruler i would like to live under...While he is committed to doing what's best for his country, i'm not so sure he knows how to do what's best for his people. What do you guys think??

Applications from The Epic of Gilgamesh

After finishing The Epic of Gilgamesh, a few things stood out to me that I think can be related to our time...The first deals with the transformation that took place within Gilgamesh after Enkidu's death. As we saw in the forest prior to his friend's death, Gilgamesh's view on life was that it should be lived to the absolute fullest. Instead of just sitting back and living in fear of death, he wanted to go out and make a name for himself by doing heroic deeds (such as killing Humbaba, slaying the Bull of Heaven, etc.). Before he and Enkidu face Humbaba, Gilgamesh even states that to die doing something courageous is better than living without taking chances...However, once Enkidu bites the dust, Gilgamesh suddenly becomes terrified at the thought of death and does everything he can to prevent his own. When you think about it, there's plenty of people who can relate to such a situation. In current times, when people lose someone close to them (especially a best friend), it really can affect what they believe and how willing they are to take chances.

I think the other relation to our society from this story also deals with Gilgamesh after Enkidu's death. I feel like many of us spend our time wishing we could be something that we're not. This "something" could be a number of things (a pro football player, an astronaut, America's next top model, etc.), but in Gilgamesh's situation it was an immortal being. Instead of wishing to be something we're not, I feel that we should make the most of what we have in accordance with what we're "called" to do...Siduri offers the same type of advice to Gilgamesh saying that instead of looking for something he could never find, he should spend more time focusing on the good things in life that he can enjoy. Don't get me wrong: it's great to set goals and to "aim high" in life, but at the same time I think we should know our limits and live within them...