Tao is all about being simple minded and just letting things happen the way they are. For example, in one of my one of the poems in my Literature book, it said, (paraphrase) to leave the world as it should be. It's perfect the way it is and don't mess with it or it will get messed up.
I believe that the world is not perfect and we need to fix it up or make it a better world. Also if we let things happen and not do anything about it, then the world would be a whole bunch of chaos, and everything would be out of control or disordered. There are some good lines in the poem that talked about life. For example, there is a time to behind, a time to be a head, a time to be in danger, and other things(not in order), which are kind of true. Everything seems to evolve time and we need to make time if we want our plans to work.
Hinduism is kind of all about earning your way to the next life. People are born in different parts of the cast system. By doing good works, working hard, being the best person, or doing anything that is the opposite of being bad you can earn a good life in the next world.
I believe that there is a heaven a hell but to get to heaven, you don't earn your way there. God sent His son, Jesus Christ to save us all because we can never be good enough to go to heaven. So through Christ and accepting Him into our hearts, we will go to heaven. Some people think that's just too simple but being a Christian isn't easy. How do you depict about your god/gods? I think that it hard to be super good and try to make few mistakes as possible. It's alright to mistakes so we don't do it again. It is too hard to be perfect with the pressure about being good so you can have a good life in the next world. What do you think, how should a person get to Heaven?
Over all I learned some good things from both religions. I learned to take my time and to think things through. I also learned to do my best in everything but it's alright to make mistakes. To become wise, I must take my time to learn to gain knowledge and to learn from others.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Koran
The Koran taught me a little about their culture, how they live, and their spiritual rituals, of course, their religion. The Muslims do their best to convert others to their religion and they defend their religion as best as they can. They also don't really like Westerners and especially don't really like Christians. They think or believe that Christians disturb the peace in their country and maybe even through out the world. They relate them selves to Adam just like Christians do.
They also think that people who are unbelievers and choose not to believe are stupid. In the Koran, it says that Allah blinds their hearts so they cannot come back or follow him. My question is, if Allah blinds their hearts then how can non believers, if they want to, convert to Allah?
In the Koran it mentions a little bit about creation. It also has a few details about Moses and some of the miracles that he did just like in the Bible. The Koran points out Satan and how Satan is the devil. The Muslims think that Jesus was a great prophet but not the "Prophet"and that God or Allah meant Muhammad was the "Prophet." The Koran has some similarities like the Bible.
The women are treated kind of like property but the men don't abuse them. They women don't have much of say or don't have many rights as the men. The women take care of the household and children, but the men make all of the decisions. Tells them what they can or can't do. Also women aren't valued as equal to men, in other words, women are viewed as not equal to men.
In Christian homes, women have equal rights, they have freedom of speech, but in a way, kind of a little bit under the men. The Bible says, women to submit to their husbands and men to love their wives as the Jesus loved the church. The men have a big responsibility and have kind of the final say, but women are still in charge of themselves and make most of the decisions with out talking to their husbands.
The Koran and the Bible are both books to discuss about.
They also think that people who are unbelievers and choose not to believe are stupid. In the Koran, it says that Allah blinds their hearts so they cannot come back or follow him. My question is, if Allah blinds their hearts then how can non believers, if they want to, convert to Allah?
In the Koran it mentions a little bit about creation. It also has a few details about Moses and some of the miracles that he did just like in the Bible. The Koran points out Satan and how Satan is the devil. The Muslims think that Jesus was a great prophet but not the "Prophet"and that God or Allah meant Muhammad was the "Prophet." The Koran has some similarities like the Bible.
The women are treated kind of like property but the men don't abuse them. They women don't have much of say or don't have many rights as the men. The women take care of the household and children, but the men make all of the decisions. Tells them what they can or can't do. Also women aren't valued as equal to men, in other words, women are viewed as not equal to men.
In Christian homes, women have equal rights, they have freedom of speech, but in a way, kind of a little bit under the men. The Bible says, women to submit to their husbands and men to love their wives as the Jesus loved the church. The men have a big responsibility and have kind of the final say, but women are still in charge of themselves and make most of the decisions with out talking to their husbands.
The Koran and the Bible are both books to discuss about.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Camelot
So far the movie is alright. The movie showed how King Arthur felt like. For example, in the movie, King Arthur showed how he felt when he knew his bride was coming. He was nervous and maybe even scared. I liked how he didn't wear his crown in public. It's really funny to see the people's expressions when they soon realize that it's King Arthur that they're talking too. For example, when Genvieve was being taken to King Arthur to marry him, she "ran away" but not too far. She didn't realize that King Arthur was in the trees until he fell. She didn't recognize him as a king or Arthur himself because he wasn't wearing a crown and didn't tell her his real name. When Genvieve's party realized she was gone, they found her and Arthur and arrested Arthur but then they realized it was the king himself. Genvieve was astonished and probably felt embarrassed because of the things she said and asked Arthur to run away with her. When Sir Lancelot called the King a coward and knocked the king off his horse on a one on one match, he was shocked.
It also shows that Arthur isn't just a king and all serious, but he's smart, he works things through, very thorough, he likes to have fun, goes out side of his castle's walls, instead of lounging all day in his castle.
When Genvieve first saw Sir Lancelot, she despised him. She wanted him dead. She bribed men to challenge Sir Lancelot in a tournament, and she put the men she bribed in danger and one of them could have died. Soon she started to appreciate him, then soon enough, fall in love with him. I''m glad that the movie showed how Genvieve first felt about Sir Lancelot because it first showed that she didn't like him. It took time for her to realize that she loved him. It showed her feelings and expressions towards Sir Lancelot.
At first, in my opinion, King Arthur kind of appreciated almost everything he received. He was glad that Genvieve came into his life, Sir Lancelot, and the round table. Soon everything started to fall out of place and showed how he dealt with it. He would call out to Merlin. In my opinion, Merlin kind of represents the Holy Spirit. Merlin was probably like second father or an adviser to King Arthur. Arthur would go to Merlin when ever he was in trouble or didn't know what to do in situations. Merlin would guide Arthur back on to the road.
When Arthur recognized that Sir Lancelot and his wife are in love, Arthur kind of looked over it, but still kept it in mind. The queen and Sir Lancelot were not only being unfaithful to the king but also to the people. They're supposed to be good examples about how a queen should act and knight should act like. Anyways, Arthur isn't quite sure what to do. It showed that he loved his wife dearly and he doesn't want to kill her either. Before Sir Lancelot came along, everything was fine. They would work together as a team but now they're both splitting apart. I'm sure Arthur would be willing to forgive his wife if she comes back to him.
So far the movie shows what to the King's marriage, the King's plans, and when he trusts the wrong person. In other words, Arthur is trying to keep his marriage from falling apart even though it's too late and his own kingdom being corrupted from within.
It also shows that Arthur isn't just a king and all serious, but he's smart, he works things through, very thorough, he likes to have fun, goes out side of his castle's walls, instead of lounging all day in his castle.
When Genvieve first saw Sir Lancelot, she despised him. She wanted him dead. She bribed men to challenge Sir Lancelot in a tournament, and she put the men she bribed in danger and one of them could have died. Soon she started to appreciate him, then soon enough, fall in love with him. I''m glad that the movie showed how Genvieve first felt about Sir Lancelot because it first showed that she didn't like him. It took time for her to realize that she loved him. It showed her feelings and expressions towards Sir Lancelot.
At first, in my opinion, King Arthur kind of appreciated almost everything he received. He was glad that Genvieve came into his life, Sir Lancelot, and the round table. Soon everything started to fall out of place and showed how he dealt with it. He would call out to Merlin. In my opinion, Merlin kind of represents the Holy Spirit. Merlin was probably like second father or an adviser to King Arthur. Arthur would go to Merlin when ever he was in trouble or didn't know what to do in situations. Merlin would guide Arthur back on to the road.
When Arthur recognized that Sir Lancelot and his wife are in love, Arthur kind of looked over it, but still kept it in mind. The queen and Sir Lancelot were not only being unfaithful to the king but also to the people. They're supposed to be good examples about how a queen should act and knight should act like. Anyways, Arthur isn't quite sure what to do. It showed that he loved his wife dearly and he doesn't want to kill her either. Before Sir Lancelot came along, everything was fine. They would work together as a team but now they're both splitting apart. I'm sure Arthur would be willing to forgive his wife if she comes back to him.
So far the movie shows what to the King's marriage, the King's plans, and when he trusts the wrong person. In other words, Arthur is trying to keep his marriage from falling apart even though it's too late and his own kingdom being corrupted from within.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Troy vs. the Iliad
The producer of the movie Troy, did a very good job of making it similar to the book the Iliad. But there were some differences in it, as well.
The gods played a role in the book and they determined who was going to live or die or which side was going to win or lose. In the movie it would've been hard to have gods in the movie so that's probably why they left the gods out.
In the movie they had a girl play Briseis and Chriseis in one person. They girls name was Briseis but was also a priestess. Agamemnon took the priestess away from Achilles; Achilles became depressed. In the book, however, Agamemnon takes Chriseis, the daughter of a priest, and Achilles' girl, Briseis. Agamemnon took Achilles' girl because Achilles made rude remarks such as, "your a sack of wine," and would not fight for him as well.
The movie and the book both displayed the main theme which was Achilles' anger and it also showed how he let out his anger. For example, Achilles' cousin was killed by Hector and he stormed over to the wall of Troy and challenged Hector. In the movie Achilles went to the wall and called out Hector's name until he came out. They fought a really realistic one on one scene. That was really cool how they did that in the movie. Hector died and was tied to Achilles' chariot and dragged in the dirt into the enemy's camp. In the book, Achilles was chasing Hector as if it were a wild goose chase. And the gods interfered so they would battle each other. Hector died and Achilles pierced Hector's tendons (soon became known as the achilles tendons) to his chariot and dragged him back to his camp.
Also, the movie kept the book real. They kept most of the important scenes. For example, Priam went into Achilles' tent to get his son back. Priam kissed Achilles hands showing that he recognized the killer of his son. He talked to Achilles about him losing his son and how he felt. And it would be the same if his father lost him. This made Achilles cry and in the book and movie it showed that Achilles isn't all just about violence and anger but also an emotional person.
Another cool part that they put in the movie was the Trojan horse. It's amazing how they built an actually horse and put people in there like the book says.
In the movie they added a myth or legend. In the movie Paris handed the Sword of Troy to a boy and his grandfather and told them to keep it. Mrs. Kirk said that those two escaped the burning of Troy and possibly found Rome. The movie added that Paris killed Achilles by shooting an arrow through his ankle. That is also what the book says too, that Paris kills Achilles by shooting an arrow through his ankle.
Even though I haven't read the whole book before nor seen the whole movie of Troy, they both seem pretty good to read and see. And in my opinion they did a very decent job of making the movie (parts of the movie that I saw) similar to the book.
Here is some things to think about. If the Iliad is true and the whole battle of Troy (I know they found Troy and it was burned), then who was the one who spoke to Achilles about not fighting Agamemnon? We know there aren't such things as gods but there is a God. Could God have spoken to Achilles? Who let Priam enter the enemies gates to get his son's dead body? Was Achilles just really good at fighting and untouchable in battle or did God let him be invincible? Or was this whole thing about the Iliad just a story for entertainment? I don't know. If you know something that I probably don't know please comment.
The gods played a role in the book and they determined who was going to live or die or which side was going to win or lose. In the movie it would've been hard to have gods in the movie so that's probably why they left the gods out.
In the movie they had a girl play Briseis and Chriseis in one person. They girls name was Briseis but was also a priestess. Agamemnon took the priestess away from Achilles; Achilles became depressed. In the book, however, Agamemnon takes Chriseis, the daughter of a priest, and Achilles' girl, Briseis. Agamemnon took Achilles' girl because Achilles made rude remarks such as, "your a sack of wine," and would not fight for him as well.
The movie and the book both displayed the main theme which was Achilles' anger and it also showed how he let out his anger. For example, Achilles' cousin was killed by Hector and he stormed over to the wall of Troy and challenged Hector. In the movie Achilles went to the wall and called out Hector's name until he came out. They fought a really realistic one on one scene. That was really cool how they did that in the movie. Hector died and was tied to Achilles' chariot and dragged in the dirt into the enemy's camp. In the book, Achilles was chasing Hector as if it were a wild goose chase. And the gods interfered so they would battle each other. Hector died and Achilles pierced Hector's tendons (soon became known as the achilles tendons) to his chariot and dragged him back to his camp.
Also, the movie kept the book real. They kept most of the important scenes. For example, Priam went into Achilles' tent to get his son back. Priam kissed Achilles hands showing that he recognized the killer of his son. He talked to Achilles about him losing his son and how he felt. And it would be the same if his father lost him. This made Achilles cry and in the book and movie it showed that Achilles isn't all just about violence and anger but also an emotional person.
Another cool part that they put in the movie was the Trojan horse. It's amazing how they built an actually horse and put people in there like the book says.
In the movie they added a myth or legend. In the movie Paris handed the Sword of Troy to a boy and his grandfather and told them to keep it. Mrs. Kirk said that those two escaped the burning of Troy and possibly found Rome. The movie added that Paris killed Achilles by shooting an arrow through his ankle. That is also what the book says too, that Paris kills Achilles by shooting an arrow through his ankle.
Even though I haven't read the whole book before nor seen the whole movie of Troy, they both seem pretty good to read and see. And in my opinion they did a very decent job of making the movie (parts of the movie that I saw) similar to the book.
Here is some things to think about. If the Iliad is true and the whole battle of Troy (I know they found Troy and it was burned), then who was the one who spoke to Achilles about not fighting Agamemnon? We know there aren't such things as gods but there is a God. Could God have spoken to Achilles? Who let Priam enter the enemies gates to get his son's dead body? Was Achilles just really good at fighting and untouchable in battle or did God let him be invincible? Or was this whole thing about the Iliad just a story for entertainment? I don't know. If you know something that I probably don't know please comment.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Startegy and Succes Blog
What I like about the class is the writing. I like writing free verse essays then structure essays. I also like the open discussion on Gilgamesh. It was a lot fun and to hear other class mates' opinions and their way of point of view at things in ways we might not see it. I also like it being read to. My period is a little bit rambunctious and wild but that's what makes this class or subject interesting.
I would have to say, one of my disappointments so far is my first essay. I love writing, but it was disappointing to see that grade affect my entire grade.
The way I study for vocabulary is by going over the first word and its definition then I go to the next one. After I go the second one, I go back to the first vocabulary word. Then I go through the second one and go onto the third one and work back to the first one. I keep doing that until I gone through all of the words. I don't know the time lengths but it depends on how many and how long the definition or definitions are. Sometimes the stories are not that interesting and hard to follow or sometimes hard to picture in my mind. Or sometimes the words are hard to understand.
Yes, I'm more of a visual person than hearing or the other things that were listed. For example, I don't know if I pronounce the vocabulary words correctly so there fore if you say a vocabulary word out loud, I might not know the definition because of they way I practiced saying it.
I would have to say, one of my disappointments so far is my first essay. I love writing, but it was disappointing to see that grade affect my entire grade.
The way I study for vocabulary is by going over the first word and its definition then I go to the next one. After I go the second one, I go back to the first vocabulary word. Then I go through the second one and go onto the third one and work back to the first one. I keep doing that until I gone through all of the words. I don't know the time lengths but it depends on how many and how long the definition or definitions are. Sometimes the stories are not that interesting and hard to follow or sometimes hard to picture in my mind. Or sometimes the words are hard to understand.
Yes, I'm more of a visual person than hearing or the other things that were listed. For example, I don't know if I pronounce the vocabulary words correctly so there fore if you say a vocabulary word out loud, I might not know the definition because of they way I practiced saying it.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
My Heroes Forever
Showing posts with label World Lit. Show all posts
Thursday, September 4, 2008
My Heroes Forever
I have two favorite heroes. God and my family. If God didn’t have love in His heart, mercy in His eyes, compassion as He spoke to create the world or a plan, then I probably wouldn’t be here. My sister and I were both adopted from different parts of
My family is spectacular. My mom and dad try their best to provide for us. My brother is encouraging as well as the rest of my family. My sister cheers me up and is very outgoing, so that helps me just to shake off whatever is bothering me and move on. My family is everything to me and so is God. I wouldn’t change a thing about my family and I’m glad that God is God and I am not.
The Pigeon and the Crow (Indian folktale)
Sunday, September 28, 2008
The Pigeon and the Crow (Indian folktale)
One upon a time was a Pigeon, and it lived in a basket which a a rich man's cook had hung up in th kitchen. One day a Crow was hungry and wanted some food. So he decided to befriend the Pigeon to get some food. The Pigeon shared his food with the Crow. Crows and pigeons in general eat differently. Crows are more of meat eaters and pigeons eat worms and insects. The cook noticed this and strung up another basket for the Crow. The Crow was getting sick and tired of eating the same food as the Pigeon and saw the cook bring in some fish. The Crow waited for the perfect time to snatch a little bit of fish. The Pigeon asked the Crow why he didn't eat his meal. The Crow replied he has indigestion(from eating the same thing as the Pigeon). The Pigeon warned the Crow not to steal any food from the cook but the Crow did not listen. He persevered in stealing a little bit of fish but in the process he got caught. The cook plucked all the feathers out of his head except one tuft; he powdered ginger and cumin, mixed it up with butter-milk, and rubbed all over the bird's body. Then the cook threw the Crow into his own basket. The Pigeon came and repeated a verse of poetry. The Crow replied and the Pigeon replied with the third and last verse. The Pigeon could not stand the Crow and left. The Crow lay there till died.
The Crow represents a trickster, troubled maker, and a thief. The Pigeon on the other hand represents more of a friend. The cook, in my opinion, is like a shadow because you don't know if he is good or bad, in this case he's kind of both. He cares for the birds and if they do something bad, he punishes them (punishes the Crow). The Crow only befriended the Pigeon just to get food. He wasn't satisfied with his food and decided to steal some food. The Pigeon warned him not too but the Crow stole some food anyways and got punished for that. I think the point of this folktale is not to steal and not to covet what others have. Be happy and thankful for what you have and praise the provider. Our provider is God and in the folktale the provider is the cook.
The Crow represents a trickster, troubled maker, and a thief. The Pigeon on the other hand represents more of a friend. The cook, in my opinion, is like a shadow because you don't know if he is good or bad, in this case he's kind of both. He cares for the birds and if they do something bad, he punishes them (punishes the Crow). The Crow only befriended the Pigeon just to get food. He wasn't satisfied with his food and decided to steal some food. The Pigeon warned him not too but the Crow stole some food anyways and got punished for that. I think the point of this folktale is not to steal and not to covet what others have. Be happy and thankful for what you have and praise the provider. Our provider is God and in the folktale the provider is the cook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)