Beginning with the "Mormon spring" of the 1970s, an ever-increasing number of books has examined the orthodox version of the history of the Church of Beginning with the "Mormon spring" of the 1970s, an ever-increasing number of books has examined the orthodox version of the history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and found it wanting. This 2002 book by then-Mormon scholar Grant W. Palmer (who taught my wife social studies at the Church College of New Zealand when she was growing up) is not the longest or most footnoted or most detailed of the lot, but it is one of the most accessible, although some familiarity with the doctrine and official history of the Church would help most readers. Despite being disfellowshipped (but not excommunicated) in 2004, Palmer remained positive toward as many aspects of the Church as he could but was then put into an untenable situation in 2010 and ended up resigning his membership (see the Wikipedia article on Grant H. Palmer). The story of Palmer's relationship with the Church cries out for a separate telling, but this book is not that telling. It is, instead, a convincing marshaling of current historical evidence that Joseph Smith, for whatever reasons (reacting to Church crises being among them), seriously embellished the accounts of his personal experiences and that events such as his First Vision, his production of the Book of Mormon, and his claims to priesthood authority were presented differently at the beginning and were interpreted through nineteenth-century sensibilities. He makes a reasoned and ultimately convincing case, one well worth reading. I have read much about early Mormonism, and most of what I've read has been valuable, but if I had to choose just one book to summarize in fewer than 300 pages the important developments in history as applied to the Church, this would probably be it. Highly recommended!...more
What a great hook in a title! Who wouldn't want to know more about whether and how the Binding was actually murder, or at least a completed sacrifice?What a great hook in a title! Who wouldn't want to know more about whether and how the Binding was actually murder, or at least a completed sacrifice? Author Tzemah Yoreh doesn't disappoint here. His retelling of the early Biblical narrative purports to expose the earliest narrative bones of the Bible in accordance with the so-called supplementary hypothesis, a successor to the earlier documentary hypothesis regarding the textual origins of the Pentateuch. There are actually additional explanations, including the fragmentary hypothesis; and it seems to me that Yoreh would be supportive of Konrad Schmidt's dual-origins hypothesis (at, for example, ). (For a really fun introduction to these theories, see .) Although the original documentary hypothesis still has its supporters, the general consensus of most serious Bible scholars has moved on to the supplementary hypothesis. The irony here is that Richard Elliott Friedman's "Who Wrote the Bible," even though it's staunchly supportive of the documentary hypothesis, is still my favorite because of its clear and careful exposition. Yoreh scatters throughout the text hints about how he came to his conclusions, but they're for the most part just that--hints--rather than a careful foundation; and even though he tells us to trust him when he gives us what he considers to be the original story, I wanted more Friedman-like evidence. "Who Wrote the Bible?" and "Why Abraham Murdered Isaac" were both meant for a wide readership, but I came away from the latter feeling dissatisfied and wanting more explanation even as I enjoyed the fresh perspective on the foundational stories of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. There's also the issue of tone. Friedman manages to be captivatingly readable while remaining sober and respectful. Yoreh aims for a lighter tone but came across to me as unnecessarily irreverent and even flippant in places. This book gets 3.5 stars from me, but it's such a relatively quick and easy read (and sufficiently whets the appetite for more) that I think that four stars will work here....more
I read this book right after having reread "Winnie-the-Pooh" and "The House at Pooh Corner," and the author's device of quoting from these texts and aI read this book right after having reread "Winnie-the-Pooh" and "The House at Pooh Corner," and the author's device of quoting from these texts and also interacting with their characters was lovely. Nevertheless, by the time that he brought up the Vinegar Tasters I was already feeling uneasy. The depiction of the Buddha as perceiving only the bitterness of life is more than an oversimplification; it's a serious mischaracterization (see, for example, ). And although there's merit in the simplification associated with Tao philosophy, Hoff seemed to me to have an underlying sympathy for anti-intellectualism despite his repeated assurances that having Brain is useful for certain things. Taoism, like Buddhism (with which it is more closely allied in several points than Hoff implies), has gathered accoutrements over time, and Hoff may be trying, as Stephen Batchelor has done with his books on Buddhism, to try to get back to the basics, which in the case of Taoism are hard to separate from early Chinese folk religion. But in the process he seems to me to try to squeeze the Pooh books into molds for which they were not designed. Nobusuke Tagomi in Philip K. Dick's "The Man in the High Castle" fits the molds of p'u (pu) and wu wei just as well or better, and an even better fictional fit is George Orr from Ursula K. Le Guin's "The Lathe of Heaven," even though Taoism is not mentioned at all in the latter book. (I can even imagine J.R.R. Tolkien's Pippin as a model--"The Tao of Took"!) "The Tao of Pooh" is worth reading, but I would be wary of accepting all of its ideas whole cloth....more
It was the best of books, it was the worst of books . . .
First, the worst. Please, Mr. Murphy, get an effective editor, for heaven's sake! How a messaIt was the best of books, it was the worst of books . . .
First, the worst. Please, Mr. Murphy, get an effective editor, for heaven's sake! How a message is delivered affects the message itself and how clearly it's received. To write that those who have read manuscripts of this book were so busy reacting to the concepts that they couldn't pay sufficient attention to grammar and style is not an acceptable excuse. Editors are hired to look at both, and as a matter of fact the best ones have to look at both at the same time. There are far too many typographical errors and block duplications and deletions and grammatical faux pas here. They more than distract from the message; they obscure it. Seriously. In far too many places, the text is simply unintelligible. It's said that any work is a self-portrait of the one who produces it (and who is ultimately responsible for it); I don't think that you want easily corrected errors to smudge the picture that readers get of you.
I understand the care that the author is trying to take to address concerns from those on different spots along the spectrum of theistic probability and from those of different backgrounds and perspectives, but sometimes he comes across as a little too defensive. He also seems to be scanning, often not quite successfully, for the appropriate tone.
But I still recommend this book. I recommend it because despite its manifold irritations it presents a good synthesis, with references, of structures and pathways in the brain and of how they might relate to spiritual experiences. In general, Murphy is pretty good about stating when he's speculating and when he's not, and the references help. I don't mind seemingly far-fetched hypotheses; in fact, I love expanding my mind with them, even when I'm not fully convinced. I confess that I'm less convinced by the Darwinian explanation put forth for reincarnation than I am for the idea that spiritual experiences are recastings of near-death experiences, but as Murphy himself emphasizes, eventually there either will or won't be sufficient data to buttress any given idea. In the meantime, I found it exhilarating to encounter Murphy's ideas.
So despite its serious flaws, I still consider this a useful book, one that I'm glad to have read. But please, please, Mr. Murphy, think about your tone and style for the next edition of this book (and for the next volume or volumes), rewrite carefully, and hire a good editor!
P.S. Murphy also mostly follows the common practice of speaking of meditation as if it were one monolithic process. In terms of brainwave generation, one can speak now of not two but three meditation types, each with its own characteristic brainwave pattern: a) focused attention, b) open monitoring, and c) automatic self-transcending. See . I think that the next revision would benefit from considering the three types separately rather than lumping them together. For example, Murphy associates meditation with theta waves, which are indeed seen with open-monitoring meditations such as Vipassana (mindfulness) meditation but which are not the prominent waves seen with the other two types....more
What a dense but well-written book! Flanagan compares and contrasts various aspects of the "manifest image" (the traditional view of the world, the soWhat a dense but well-written book! Flanagan compares and contrasts various aspects of the "manifest image" (the traditional view of the world, the soul, immortality, and ethics as exemplified by traditional Western religion and by the "perennial philosophy") with the scientific image in a balanced and respectful way. He comes down on the side of the scientific image and argues that the fears of losing cherished ideas about the soul and about morals are in many ways misplaced. The arguments are deep and well-reasoned, and whether you agree with his thesis or not, this is a challenging and stimulating book that more than recompenses the time and effort needed to think carefully and critically about his positions. Not that it's not fun to read--his writing, dense at times when he delves deeply into philosophical premises, is also at times delightfully limpid. Some have criticized Flanagan for appearing to favor Buddhism over Western religion, but I for one do not find that attitude borne out by the book. I highly recommend not only the text of the book but also the bibliographic-essay section at the end of the book; this section is a great springboard for further reading even as it is daunting in its reach!...more
Even before the revelation in 2014 by Marion Zimmer Bradley’s daughter Moira of more details of the horrendous physical and sexual abuse that MZB and Even before the revelation in 2014 by Marion Zimmer Bradley’s daughter Moira of more details of the horrendous physical and sexual abuse that MZB and her husband Walter H. Breen perpetrated on a long list of underage victims, reactions to “The Mists of Avalon� were all over the map. All that you have to do is to look at the ŷ reviews from that time; some loved the book, whereas others absolutely could not stand it. But after Moira’s revelations, leading authors and many readers immediately distanced themselves from her actions and, just as importantly, from her books. After all, the reasoning went, how can we support the work of such an odious human being? And how could the evil of such a person not seep into her novels?
I recall J.R.R. Tolkien’s take on this kind of reasoning:
“I do not like giving ‘facts� about myself other than ‘dry� ones (which anyway are quite as relevant to my book as any other more juicy details). Not simply for personal reasons; but also because I object to the contemporary trend in criticism, with its excessive interest in the details of the lives of authors and artists. They only distract attention from an author’s works (if the works are in fact worthy of attention), and end, as one now sees, in becoming the main interest. But only one’s guardian Angel, or indeed God Himself, could unravel the real relationship between personal facts and an author’s works. . . .
“But of course, there is a scale of significance in ‘facts� of this sort. There are insignificant facts (those particularly dear to analysts and writers about writers): such as drunkenness, wife-beating, and suchlike disorders. I do not happen to be guilty of these particular sins. But if I were, I should not suppose that artistic work proceeded from the weaknesses that produced them, but from other and still uncorrupted regions of my being. Modern ‘researchers� inform me that Beethoven cheated his publishers, and abominably ill-treated his nephew; but I do not believe that has anything to do with his music.�
One can argue that incest and pedophilia are far from “insignificant� facts, but the question remains: To what extent did these evils seep into “The Mists of Avalon�? There are definitely scenes (although they are few) that in retrospect seem to reflect MZB’s personal life; or do they? More importantly, was the novel condoning incest or other sexual taboos by the appearance of these scenes? Few people make this accusation against, say, George R.R. Martin, mainly, I think, because his personal life hasn’t come under fire. Unless something truly scandalous comes to the fore, most people don't care. That’s precisely Tolkien’s point; the work should be judged independently of the details of the author’s life. As much as I deplore what Breen and MZB did in their personal lives, I just don’t think that “The Mists of Avalon� condones or promotes sexual predation. It indeed is Not Suitable for Children. But now that I’ve read it, I think that those who attack it for a variety of reasons are missing the point and that many of their reviews reveal more about the reviewers than about the book reviewed. Sure, there’s sex, plenty of it, and not just between Lancelet and Gwynhwyfar. Certainly “Mists� reflects a post-1950s perspective on sexual mores and feminism and religion. To what extent it is feminist can be debated. And although MZB did her homework concerning the historical and religious settings, there’s actually very little known with certainty about pre-Roman Celtic religion in Britain. It may also be that the tension between the Druidic and the Christian perspectives did not become so pronounced until hundreds of years later, if at all. But this is after all a retelling of the Arthurian legends, which themselves have the most tenuous connection with history! Caveat lector; don’t take as history everything that you read! Morgaine herself warns in the prologue that “there is no such thing as a true tale. Truth has many faces and is like to the old road to Avalon; it depends on your own will, and your own thoughts, whither the road will take you . . .� The real truth of this or any other tale is in the insight that it gives into the human condition, cognitively and emotionally. On both counts, this novel connected with me. Morgaine, Igraine, Viviane, Morgause, Gwynhwyfar, Raven, Nimue, Niniane—all came alive, and in rich detail, externally and internally, for me. So did the men—Arthur, his knights, Taliesin and Kevin (the successive Merlins of Britain), and the priests. And I for one thought that the tension between paganism and Christianity was always portrayed in "Mists" as an inability to see “sub specie aeternatis”—from the perspective of eternity. This story is more meaningful the more that you know about the many versions of the Arthurian legends, but it can also reward the novice reader. It succeeds for many of the same reasons that the original story did: It addresses universal concerns. And this particular version provides the heretofore unspoken voices of women. They are powerful and touching voices.
I can ask no more of a book than for it to absorb me into its pages and to engage me and to make me sorry to reach its end. “The Mists of Avalon� did all this and more for me. Even knowing what I now know about MZB (I discovered it after finishing Book One of the novel) didn’t diminish my involvement in the tale. I encourage any potential reader to set aside all of your just ire about her personal life and concentrate on the beauty of her language and character development and exposition. This is a moving story, one that deserves continued exposure to as wide of a reading audience as possible. ...more
Just as I had had high hopes for the movie What the Bleep? and was disappointed, I was also disappointed and appalled by the pseudoscience of this booJust as I had had high hopes for the movie What the Bleep? and was disappointed, I was also disappointed and appalled by the pseudoscience of this book. Happily, I didn't waste money on it--I just read much of it at bookstores! By all means, read this book if you want and decide for yourself; but be very, very careful!...more
An interesting account by someone who also appears to have a personal ax to grind. And now it appears that Rampa made this all up: An interesting account by someone who also appears to have a personal ax to grind. And now it appears that Rampa made this all up: ....more
Excellent for its window into Tibetan Buddhism and for its relationship (the nature of which can be endlessly debated) with current reports of near-deExcellent for its window into Tibetan Buddhism and for its relationship (the nature of which can be endlessly debated) with current reports of near-death experiences....more
Loading...
