Sin

"'I don't need to punish people for sin. Sin is its own punishment, devouring you from the inside. It's not my purpose to punish it; it's my joy to cure it'"(122).

What Young is trying to explain here is that it is not necessary to repent for your sins. All people are born with a natural set of morals, giving them the ability to tell right from wrong. Someone who has sinned knows that their actions were wrong, but they chose to do them anyway. Those sins will follow them for the rest of their life, so their is no need for them to be given any extra punishment.

Guilt is its own punishment. Young's description of sin "devouring you from the inside" is quite accurate, but seems to apply more to the guilt that goes along with the sin. Guilt is something that a person can not let go of, and it is a very difficult thing to fix. Holding on to the knowledge that you have sinned or committed a crime will take over your life, and you will never be free of it. The reader does not know how the murderer dealt with his knowledge of his sins, but it is known that Mack becomes withdrawn as he struggles with the idea that he has sinned. He thinks that Missy's disappearance and death are a punishment for sins he committed against his father, not respecting him and not keeping a good relationship with him. Now, Mack knows that Missy's death was not a punishment and not his fault. His punishment was the fact that he spent years feeling guilty about the way he had treated his father and worried about the repercussions.

Guilt is a very interesting concept, and it often shows up in literature. The feelings of guilt seem to be stronger than any other feeling, which is why many writers focus on it. As the reader follows Mack through his journey, they can understand his pain as he feels guilt for his past actions; they can empathize with him because everyone has felt guilt at one point or another. Guilt is something that one cannot forget about. It cannot be wiped away and it is always present. This appears also in The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne as Dimmesdale is devoured by his guilt. He becomes weaker and weaker because he cannot live with the sin he has committed. This is what sin and the guilt of committing that sin does to a person; it ruins them. Therefore, there is no need for further punishment; their life is their punishment.

The Great Sadness

"Little distractions like the ice storm were a welcome although brief respite from the haunting presence of his constant companion: The Great Sadness, as he referred to it. Shortly after the summer that Missy vanished, The Great Sadness had draped itself around Mack's shoulders like some invisible but almost tangibly heavy quilt. The weight of its presence dulled his eyes and stooped his shoulders. Even his efforts to shake it off were exhausting, as if his arms were sewn into its bleak folds of despair and he had somehow become part of it. He ate, worked, loved, dreamed, and played in this garment of heaviness, weighed down as if he were wearing a leaden bathrobe - trudging daily through the murky despondency that sucked the color out of everything" (27).

Young does an extremely thorough job of describing the effects and the feelings of depression. It is an interesting effect on the story to have depression personified in this way. The reader immediately is drawn to this description because of the use of italics in The Great Sadness. This is seen instantaneously as an important part of Mack's life, and the reader wonders what importance this will have on the story. The question is, how and why did this "great sadness" come upon him, and what will it promote?

The Great Sadness came upon Mack shortly after the disappearance of his daughter, Missy. He was "draped" in this being because of the guilt he felt over his daughter's death. It is a horrible thing for a parent to lose a child because it goes against the laws of nature. Children are supposed to outlive their parents, and because Missy did not, this is already a huge blow of sadness to Mack. In addition, Mack blames himself. He believes it is his fault because he should not have left Missy alone when he went to save his other children, but at the time, he believed that what he was doing was best. The point where the sadness seems to leave him is when he explains to his other daughter that Missy's death was not her fault. The chain of events was unfortunate, but no one is to blame for Missy's death but her killer. At this moment, Mack also realizes that he is not to blame either.

Mack's depression was also helpful to him because it helped him to create a stronger, more lasting relationship with God. He had always marveled at the relationship his wife had, calling God "Papa" as if they were family, but he did not know how to have a relationship like that. After receiving the letter from "Papa," Mack is intrigued and happy to have a break from The Great Sadness. He hopes he can find what he needs to make things right at the shack. While at the shack, Mack meets "Papa," but he has trouble calling her that because he does not have that strong relationship with God that he craves. It is at this point, though, after all the years of his life, that he works to create that relationship. Why now? He is at his absolute lowest point and needs faith to cling to. By creating a relationship with God, he is taking a step to heal himself. After going through this period of enlightenment and learning how to relate to God, Mack is a much happier person. The Great Sadness has left him, and he has a greater understanding of the world and the things that occur around him.

Appearances only seem to be

"'Being always transcends appearance - that which only seems to be'" (114).

Although this quote seems cliche, I think that Young has put into words what many people do not know how to phrase. From childhood we are told not to judge by appearances and that it's what's on the inside that matters, but no one ever explains why. This idea that "being" is more important than any appearance gives a good perspective. You can look at a person and imagine what they might be like because of the way they look, but this is exactly what Young (and the character of God) are advising against. It is much more important to find out who a person is than what they look like. God explains to Mack that appearances will fade away once you start to understand a person. This is the idea that appearances mean nothing.

The most interesting part about this idea for me is that God tells make that appearances "only seem to be." No matter what a person or a thing looks like, it has very little to do with who or what they actually are. Someone could have the appearance of being nice, but upon starting a conversation with them it is made obvious that they are stuck up and condescending. On the other hand, someone who looks stuck up and outright mean could be the nicest person you have ever met, and maybe the reason for their appearance is that they are shy. Because of this, your "being", who you actually are is so much more important than what your appearance is. Appearances are not a reflection of your personality or your life, they just are. This is why they are classified as only seeming to be, demonstrating that appearances are an illusion that give us a different idea of who a person is.

Superational? or just true believers?

"Perhaps there is superationality: reason beyond the normal definitions of fact or data-based logic; something that makes sense only if you can see a bigger picture of reality. Maybe that is where faith fits in" (69).

Faith as a sort of "superationality" is an interesting concept Young brings up in his novel. This idea is that only some people are privileged enough to understand faith. He points out that there is a difference between people who understand knowledge and people who understand faith. The idea is that anyone can understand and learn definitions, facts, and logic based on specific pieces of data, but only some have the ability to view this "bigger picture of reality." These few have an understanding that the rest of the world has not yet grasped.

In Eat Pray Love, Gilbert wrote about how faith is a step away from the rational to the irrational. This is because faith is not something that can be supported by fact. It can only be backed up by beliefs and ideas. What is interesting about Young's idea is that he does not believe that faith is irrational as Gilbert does. On the contrary, he believes in this sort of "superationality." Only those people that have a profound ability to rationalize will be able to understand faith.

So we are left with the question, are believers full of some sort of super rationality, able to understand the most complex ideas, or do they know what they believe is irrational but they choose to believe it anyway?

Faith is flying

"Mack looked at the little bird, who amazingly was content to just sit there with them. The absurdity of it all gave Mack a chuckle...
'...Love is not the limitation. Love is the flying.'
...As if in response to her declaration, the timer dinged and the little bird took off and flew out the window. Watching the jay in flight took on a whole new level of delight" (103).

"Beginning flights were usually limited to a few inches, due mostly to fear or, more accurately, a dread of falling. Stretching his flights to a foot or two and eventually higher increased his confidence as did his discovery that crashing wasn't painful at all but only a slow-motion bounce. In time, he learned to ascend into the clouds, cover vast distances, and land gently" (118).

The image of learning to fly can be applied to many things, but faith seems to be the most fitting upon reading these passages. Faith is something that has to be learned. It is not something inherent in all people, proven by the fact that there are many different religions on this earth. Faith is scary at first. It is hard to believe in something you can't see or feel or touch, but eventually, most people do take that "leap of faith" and believe completely in their religion. Young describes the beginning flights of Mack's dreams which are small at first, "due mostly to fear or, more accurately, a dread of falling." I think this is true of many people, they are afraid to let themselves be totally encompassed by their religion, God, or their faith because they are afraid they might be let down. They are afraid of what might happen if this being they cannot see does not actually exist. What happens when you put all of your trust into something that doesn't exist? What happens if their trust means nothing but a loss of reason?

Soon, Mack starts to trust his flying more and more and takes higher and higher flights. This happens with faith as well. We dip our feet into the water at first, and soon we are up to our knees. As things happen that support our beliefs, we, in turn, believe more strongly. This is when we are able to take larger flights because we trust more in what we believe. Soon after, we learn that falling isn't a bad thing. Falling teaches us to learn from new experiences. It teaches us when to trust and when to get back up and keep trying. With faith, we also learn that God will help us back up when we do fall. This is the struggle that Mack is going through as he "learns" to fly. He is learning how to have faith in himself and in God.

The Shack

Heaven, hell, or both?

“Beautiful. Everything beautiful is there. Every person beautiful is there. Everything beautiful to eat is there. Everything is love there. Heaven is love” (261).

“‘You mean, you might as well spend your life going upward, through the happy places, since heaven and hell - the destinations - are the same thing anyway?’
‘Same in end, so better to be happy on journey’” (263).

Ketut’s views on heaven are very interesting ideas. It seems as though he is trying to say that heaven isn’t actually a place but an idea. His idea of heaven is interesting to me although difficult to comprehend. What’s most interesting about heaven being an idea is that it may be possible for people to come in contact with it during their lives as Ketut describes. I think his idea also takes God out of the equation, requiring people to rely on their own actions and their spirituality to get them to the “best” place.

The most difficult piece of this for me to understand is the idea that heaven and hell are the same place. I have always learned that “bad people” go to hell, and the good people go to heaven. To me, it is incomprehensible to think that all of these people could end up in the same place, but then, I start to think that maybe Ketut did not mean to be taken as literally as I am taking him. When he speaks of the destination being the same, he is talking about death. We will all end up dead at some point, but the way we choose to live our lives is what we leave behind us. Maybe the “destination” he is talking about is a grave, and nothing more. When I started to think this way, I went into a further examination of his ideas of heaven and hell. From this perspective, Ketut is saying that heaven and hell are places on earth. A person who commits horrible acts and runs a hurtful life will be miserable. This person will be in hell for their entire life because they will be filled with guilt, hatred, resentment, greed, and anger. A person who is selfless and kind to others will have a happy life. This person will be in heaven for their entire life because they will be filled with happiness, contentment, and joy. Even people who believe in God, heaven, and hell would do well to live by this idea and find their own heaven on earth by running a wholesome life.

Same-Same

"I think about religion, most of it is same-same...I have good idea, for if you meet some person from different religion and he want to make argument about God. My idea is, you listen to everything this man say about God. Never argue about God with him. Best thing to say is, 'I agree with you.' Then you go home, pray what you want" (241).

Upon coming across this idea of Ketut's, I thought about what spirituality really is and how it CAN be the same for different people, even of different religions. So with this thought, I went in search of a definition for spirituality, and what I found was that it is a "sense of interconnectedness with all living creatures" and a "way to find meaning, hope, comfort, and inner peace." The characteristics of a spiritual person include compassion, selflessness, altruism, and experience of inner peace. The most interesting idea to me was that spirituality can occur outside of religion.

When I look at it from this perspective, I think Ketut was right in describing all religion as "same-same." People have religions because they want answers, and they want to have those spiritual experiences. Others don't experience religion, but they still have beliefs. They still have the ability to be spiritual and reap the benefits of spirituality. People come across religion to explain the unexplainable. They want to have a connection with the universe and they want to feel some sort of enlightenment.

Most of Ketut's ideas make perfect sense to me, and I completely agree with his philosophy. As he continues to talk to Liz, he tells her that she should always just listen when someone wants to talk or argue about God, and maybe they are even trying to "prove" they are right. He tells her not to argue with them, which I think is excellent. Neither one of these people has the ability to prove that what they believe is true. As mentioned earlier, faith is belief in something irrational and unknown. There is no point to arguing about God or religion because nothing positive can come out of it. All that it can produce is unhappy, angry people. It could even destroy friendships. There is also a definite benefit to listening to the ideas of someone else with open ears. One can learn much about the world from the beliefs of one person. I think we all differ slightly in our beliefs, even if we are part of the same religious sect. Because of this, my interest never wanes when listening to how others think about the universe and God. Disagreement is natural and reasonable, but it should be left within your own person, and not argued upon. Religion and belief is something to be shared, not argued and proved.

Next, Ketut tells Liz to tell this other person that she agrees with him. I do not think that this is a positive thing to do because it may not be the truth. It would be better to tell that person that you are interested in learning about their beliefs without saying you agree or disagree with them. It is important to understand religions other than our own to understand the world we live in and the people around us. What I thought was most important about Ketut's idea, though, was that he told Liz to go home and "pray what [she wants]." I think this is an extremely important aspect of his belief because he did not say to pray her own religion, but to pray what she wants. When a person hears new ideas about religion from someone else, she can choose to discount them or to think about them and add them into her own life. If someone says something profound about their own religion that you would like to have in yours, add it. Prayer belongs to the person doing the praying, and that person only. That person can pray whatever he or she wants, and it is not required to go along with any certain "defined" religion.

Unity

“Yoga is to find union - between mind and body, between the individual and her God, between the thoughts and the source of our thoughts, between teacher and student...” (121).

While Liz is in the ashram, she reflects back on her yoga training from home, producing her own definition for the importance of yoga. This idea can be looked at a few ways, which seem to differ vastly, but on second glance, maybe they are the same. First is the idea that one can find peace with herself upon retreating into herself. In this place, she may find union between herself and all of the outside sources Liz mentions. This is again, a link to transcendentalism, relying on ourselves to make peace and be happy. If someone can discover that everything she needs to be happy already exists within her, she has the ability to achieve ultimate peace and happiness with herself and the world.

This can also be looked at as the idea that God exists within all of us. Some believe that the holy spirit is a part of all of us, which would produce a sort of union between human beings and God. When looking at the pairs Liz provided, it seems that they all fit together. They seem to evolve into bigger ideas as one reads farther into the sentence, but I think it is possible that Gilbert was referring to the same thing when she made all of the pairs. She starts off with the union of mind and body, which is a union that is often discussed, a union that many people seek. The next step is between the individual and her God. What I liked most about this pair was the use of the phrase “her God.” This emphasizes the fact that not everyone believes or should believe in the same God. When compared to the first pair, we can think of this pair as a match, where the individual is the mind, in control of your will, and God is the body, residing in a piece of everyone, guiding them on their journey. The next two pairs also seemed extremely alike and they seem to go along with the first idea. Not many people ever really consider where the source of their thoughts is, but this is an important union to examine. The union between teacher and student is also interesting because it goes hand in hand with our thoughts. Some would argue that a teacher is the source of our thoughts. We all have the ability to think whatever we choose to think, but isn’t it a teacher that sparks our thinking first? Wouldn’t also be correct to assume then that a student sparks a teacher’s thinking as they uncover or bring up something the teacher overlooked? Looking back on the God and individual pair, it is unclear which person in the pair would be the teacher and which would be the student, but maybe each can be both, as in tangible life. Focusing on just our own thoughts, I think we can say that many of the more profound thoughts to come from God, or a religious figure. Others come from our peers, which if we follow this idea, have a piece of God within them. So then according to this, don’t all of our thoughts have a source with God?

Finally, as we look back on the literal idea of union between these pairs, it may all be the same thing. When one finds peace with herself, maybe that is because she has found peace with God. This is definitely an idea that makes one wonder and question everything that has always seemed so certain in life.

Faith

“...because the decision to consent to any notion of divinity is a mighty jump from the rational over to the unknowable, and I don’t care how diligently scholars of every religion will try to sit you down with their stacks of books and prove to you through scripture that their faith is indeed rational; it isn’t...Faith is belief in what you cannot see or prove or touch” (175).

Faith is something people turn to in order to explain the unknown. The whole basis for it is that there isn’t anything to back it up. Having some kind of faith or religion helps people to cope with the changes that are going on all around them. It makes them feel secure because they know where they are going to end up in the end. Whether that is in heaven, hell, or in some reincarnated form, again, no one can be certain. Despite this, we still believe. We still hold on to our faith and try to teach others that what we believe is right. What makes people so steadfast in a belief that they cannot be shaken from it?

The most interesting part of this quote for me is when Gilbert highlights the fact that there is no way to prove that any religion is rational. We all have our beliefs for particular reasons and sometimes maybe because that religion was there when we needed something to believe in. Faith, itself, is a “belief in what you cannot see or prove or touch.” So why do some people think they are more correct in their faith than others? There is no way to prove who is right and who is wrong, but yet there are still self-righteous people in this world.

Even farther into my train of thought, I began to question why there are so many different religions. People want religion to explain the unknown and give them something to look forward to and believe in. All religions originated for the same purpose, but there are still so many different forms of faith and religion. I think this further supports my idea of the webbed religions because they did all start out the same and to fulfill the same purpose. I think if one looks deep enough, similarities can be found in all religions. They are wildly different now in general, but they came about for the same purposes.

that quote was wrong...it's supposed to be "someone else's life with perfection"

Self-Reliance

In Eat Pray Love, Gilbert quotes a section of the Bhagavad Gita as she tries to understand herself and how to liver her life, "...it is better to live your own destiny imperfectly than to live an imitation of somebody else's life with imperfection" (95).

This stuck out to me immediately, making me think of the thoughts and ideas of Emerson. What most stuck in my mind was the idea of his that "imitation is suicide." This idea from the Bhagavad Gita seemed very similar to me, and I started to wonder how similar religions and philosophies can be. Both of these philosophies or faiths, whatever it is they can be classified as, express the idea that to imitate someone else is to lose a piece of yourself. Upon making this discovery, I started to think that many religions have some of the same basic ideas, and maybe they're not all as different as we view them. There are thin strands connecting different people's beliefs together, and it seems that they all may be part of one huge web. The middle is the spot where all of the basic ideas are the same, and as it branches out in different directions, the ideas get farther and farther apart. Maybe religions are all different because of the people that designed them, but the basis and the reason we came upon them are all the same.

I then began to analyze some of Liz's journey from the transcendentalist point of view. I viewed her as very self-reliant, setting out into the world on her own to make discoveries about herself and her faith. I found extreme strength in her to be able to leave her life behind and focus solely on herself. She plans to do exactly what she loves for one year. Her plan is to first travel to Italy where she will learn a language that is beautiful but that she has no practical use for. She vows to eat everything appealing to her, and not to worry about her appearance or weight gain. She wants to learn to enjoy life for herself without thinking about how other people view her. Next, she will travel to India to stay in an Ashram and discover her faith. She will spend time praying with herself and with God. Whether she is really having a conversation with God is unknown; she may be getting all of her discoveries purely from within herself. Finally, she will travel to Bali, where her plan is to learn spirituality from a medicine man named Ketut. She will explore new ideas and learn more about herself than she ever thought possible.

Just now, I was also reminded of The Awakening, which I had really disliked. I thought that the main character was selfish because she was giving up on her family and her life. In the end, she committed suicide because she could not face the decision of whether to stay with her family or to pursue her art. I found this to be an extremely weak action, but I do think that it is completely different from the actions of Liz in Eat Pray Love. The similarities are obvious. These women set out to find themselves by leaving everything they know behind them. The difference is that Edna, the protagonist of The Awakening, cannot make a decision while Liz is steadfast in what she desires to do. Liz knows the consequences of her decision and the people that she is hurting, but she knows that it is more important for her to find herself before she can focus on other people. Others know her plan, and she does not string anyone along as she travels on her path to self discovery. Because of this, I connect much more with the journey of Liz than of Edna. I think that Liz's journey was a very positive journey and she made a lot of important discoveries about herself and her faith.