1. Armstrong makes the case that systemic violence is the creation of the agrarian state. Explain her theory and then critique or support it. (Book by Karen Armstrong: Fields of Blood- Religion and the History of Violence)
According to Armstrong (2015), faith and religion have been highly associated with aggression, intolerance, and divisiveness that is impact the society today. The author has examined the impulse toward violence in each of the world’s great religions. Her view is different from previous observation and opinions in that goes beyond Jihad and the crusades and looks at religions like Christianity and Islamic and the way they are promoting war in the world. Other religions that she has examined include Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Daoism, and Judaism. She claims that almost all of the world's religions arose during the agrarian society and were highly motivated towards violence. The initial signs of violence were presented in the fact that landowners had to lord over peasants, and warfare was essential to increase one's holdings (Armstrong, 2015). Additionally, violence was the only real source of wealth before the great age of trade and commerce. The priestly class had the privilege to legitimate the actions of the state in this sense they would approve war and violence if they thought it would improve the society. However, this was a mistake because they tended to favor their leaders and societies they rarely considered the rights of the opponents. As priests progressed in promoting violence warfare and violence among states and empires, the martial ethos became more involved with the sacred setting. Subsequently, the faiths developed ideologies that ran counter to the warrior code; there was the development of sages, prophets, and mystics and in each tradition and society some communities represented a protest against the injustice and violence endemic to the agrarian revolutions.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
According to Armstrong (2015), the agrarian society made religion to be inherently violent and done in s systematic way that it is self-evident. It is apparent that there are cruelty and aggression in beliefs. Religion has been perceived to be the cause of all major wars in history.” the author remarks that it is a surprise that the the two world war was not fought on account of religion. The agrarian society advocated for war to as a mean to push for social, material and ideologies that made some communities and state superior to others. Communities are also reported to have engaged in war mainly because of the scarcity of resources. Political formations have relatively been blamed for violence and war, but religion is the major component why war is happening in the world. Religion has been participating and causing violence, but people have not been able to connect it more visibly. The major reason behind this is because there is no universal war to define religion. The west views religion as a coherent system of obligatory beliefs, institutions, and rituals centering on a supernatural God. in this society religion is private and sealed off from all secular activities. In other societies, religion is larger, vaguer and more encompassing.
The agrarian society was formed when people shifted from being primitive and begin to be more tribal. According to theologists, this is a phase that is described as archaic and leads to hominization. People began believing in some form of gods which appeared to be half human, half animal; there was also the aspect of people expressing themselves sin in archetypal fashion the social and ecological life they were living. According to Armstrong the emergence of complex chiefdoms and particular with the early state, an archaic religion that embraced violence and warfare came into being. Religion turned violent because it involved rituals and sacrifices, such as human sacrifices and the priests supervised this activity.
Armstrong reports that civilization started to gain pace during the era of Gilgamesh the ruler of Uruk. in this particular era, there was fortification that showed that warfare had become a fact of human life. People were shown to exist primarily because of war and violence. The men of the time were described as “strongest, huge radiant and perfect, acquired legendary aura(Armstrong, 2015). The ruler is described to have seen everything, traveled to the ends of the earth, visited the underworld and achieved great wisdom suggesting he was well suited for war and violence. In the archetypical tale, the poets began to report that there was discontent with the civilization. The poets told the tale of Gilgamesh and how he made the society to wrestle with structural violence of civilized life. His rule led to: oppression, improverization, making peoples live miserably and the people were forced to beg the gods to grant them relief from Gilgamesh’s tyranny (Armstrong, 2015).
In most communities, during the agrarian era strong leadership was highly regarded, but this had its negative impact on the society. For instance, Gilgamesh was first seen as the strongest man, most wise and perfect but by the end of his tenure, people were oppressed and almost treated as slaves. They had to pray to the gods to save them for this ruler. The states that rose during the agrarian period employed exploitation to push people to the limits. for instance, the youth were conscripted into the labor bands that rebuild the city wall. Majority of the population were exploited to push for the agendas of the ruler. In this regard, the states and empires formation marked the start of civilization but only made peasant masses to become more miserable and brought about intensive subjugation which led to oppression.
I concur with Armstrong (2015) that the idea of civilization that rose around the agrarian revolution made life more miserable. The agrarian revolution is the season that saw people shift from hunting and gathering and started settling down in some more coordinated farming and business. In this context, the farming and systemic structure promoted oppression and slavery; for instance, in Sumerian civilization made the state consider improving Tigris and Euphrates in 5000 BCE. The land was too dry for farming as it was located in the desert. The community designed an irrigation system that demanded a lot of manpower. it involved planning, designing, and maintaining canal and ditches that would supply water for irrigation to the farms. This simply means the rulers implemented slavery and oppression in designing a maintaining this irrigation system. After harvest, the state took all the produce and gave the plant only a fraction of it. The rest was stored in temples for future use; though they had the intention of ensuring equality through agriculture and promoting food security, the led to a system of structural violence that prevailed in this states (Armstrong, 2015). It is claimed that without the complex social setting and cultural arrangements that was apparently promoted by violence it would not be possible to develop art s ad sciences that made progress a possibility. However, this is a mistaken observation as there is no development that can serve as a substitute for human life. Any progress that is promoted by deaths, options and making people slaves is evil and not meant for the good. There are other means that could have been used to promote community development and progress rather than cruelty, violence, and oppression. Therefore, Armstrong's opinion that art and science developed because of violence is wrong and misplaced. For instance, Jesus Christ rarely used violence in promoting the kingdom of God on earth and yet he was very effective. Therefore violence is not the only way to establish and maintain leadership and empires or states (Armstrong, 2015).
2. Please compare and contrast the arguments in favor of religious violence offered by Faraj and Kahane (Chapters 10 and 11). How does each support his conclusion through reference to his own religious tradition? Is either one successful? Explain.(Book by Mark Jurgensmeyer and Margo Kitts: Princeton Readings in Religion and Violence)
Jurgensmeyer and Margo Kitts (2011) start off by saying that God is a warrior who commands his people to engage in warfare. In exodus, there is an implication that warfare is a divine act and God is the commander behind it. God is shown to have overseen wars by smashing the pharaoh's chariots and drowned Egyptian leader’s hand-picked commanders. God is reported to be the greatest commander of warfare in the sense that through his right-hand and shattered all the enemies (Jurgensmeyer & Kitts, 2011). In this regard, people who believe in Christianity and the supernatural God have the divine mandate to participate in violence. However, some theologists have been in disagreement that religion cannot be used to merit violence acts whatsoever.
According to (Jurgensmeyer & Kitts) 2011, Faraj is in support of religious violence in the sense that he has been lobbying for the influential argument in which he approves waging war against those he imagines to be the political enemies of Islam. He is reported to be in apparent support and justification of radical Muslim acts. The ideas were disregarded as extremism rampaging by some leaders of the Muslim community while a fraction of the population readily accepted his ideology. It served as a theological justification for violent acts instigated by Muslim believers.
Faraj argued that Quran and Hadith the major reference books used by Muslims are fundamentally teaching about warfare. In this sense, the Holy War which can be traced in this two books I s suggested that it should be taken more physically rather that allegorically. it is not symbol or illustration but rather it is a duty and should be delivered by all available means. He points out that he targets for Jihad should be any person who deviates from the requirements of the Islamic law.
Kahane like Faraj, was in support of religious violence and promoted violence through the founding of the Israel’s right Wing Kach (Thus). He was of the ideology that there was a religious need to expand Israeli authority over the area held by Palestinian Arabs. Similar to Faraj, some members of the community were against religious violence and they regarded the ideas as invalid and extremist. However there are people who support his ideas more easily. The ideas by Kahane are what led to violence in Israel and Palestine. the ideas was expounded by Yigal Amir who assassinated the Israeli prime minister and Dr. Baruch Goldstein who attacked and killed dozens of Muslims as they were worshiping at a mosque in city of Hebron.
Kahane was such an extremist that his statements about Arabs were compared with those of Hitler about the Jews. Though Kahane was an influential leader and activist in Israel his party was banned in Israel for being racist and standing in Undemocratic positions. Kahane is said to have been motivated by catastrophic messianic in his leadership roles and activism. this is a destructive ideology that claims that the messiah will come in a time of great conflict in which Jews triumph and praise God through their success- Kahane was shown to be of the believe that this would bring sanctification of God. In this sense anything that hindered Jews from succeeding could not be tolerated. Humiliation to the Jews was regarded as an embarrassment and hindered the world from salvation.
Faraj was so much focused in Muslim believers engaging in warfare that he thinks that fighting should involve confrontation and blood. He argues that Jihad should be used meteorically or for defense purposes only. He shows extremism and support of radical acts in that he argues against the common Muslim beige that the violent passages in the Quran are superseded by the requirement for forgiveness and mercy. He doesn’t recognize the passages where Mecca was seen to advocate more peaceful relations.
In bid to promote radical acts and extremism he teaches of near and far enemies. The rulers in Egypt are considered to be near enemies while the US is considered a far enemy. Faraj was pushed the ideology that the near enemy should be first dealt with first before attacking the far enemy. Similarly Kahane promoted violence and warfare that led to the assassination of local leaders and killing of the residents. Therefore religious violence starts from the local community through extremist activism and this can lead to massive deaths as more people are convinced into joining it. The local leaders who fail to give into the ideas or religious violence often became target of such groups and is assassinated.
From the two authors, peace is not a priority in region but violence is a dive duty. There is indication that was should be given priority and be well planned. Timely was a Mitzvah, a duty, a kindness and everlasting act of righteousness (Juergensmeyer, & Kitts, 2011). Kindness and truth work together and this cannot be accomplished without waging war. Both Muslim and Jewish teaching show God as a master of war despite him being kind and merciful. the is indication that the believers who devote themselves to God’s battle and taking Gods revenge will eventually get everlasting peace. These are some of the reasons s why the believers have positively implemented the activism that Faraj and Kahane have been participating in.
Each of these authors seems to justify the violence originating from their region and tradition, for instance, Kahane claims that humiliation of the Jews is intolerable and is a source of embarrassment. For this reason, the community should engage in warfare to stop this kind of treatment. Simply Faraj advocated for religious violence in that God promised victory for the Muslims and believers should participate in the war to protect their regions. This is the major reasons Jihad and violence against Arabs and Palestinians have dramatically prevailed (Juergensmeyer, & Kitts, 2011).. Jews are called to participate in a war in the sense that they must do all it takes to save fellow Jews from danger, to eradicate every danger and mishap and to defeat every foe who imperils he Jewish people before he can harm them.
3. In our readings regarding sacrifice, many theorists make a case for a dualistic view of reality and demonstrate how sacrifice may function to bridge two life-worlds. Demonstrate this by reference to two exemplary authors and tell me whether such dualism is needed in order to justify the existence of sacrifice. In other words, if we embrace a monistic rather than dualistic worldview would sacrifice be needed? Please explain and support your conclusion thoroughly. (Pick two authors contained in the Princeton Readings Book)
The aspect of ritual and sacrifices has been seeing to promote violence’s in the community; through rituals, images of and acts of violence have been transposed into religion. The activists who undershoot and respected these rituals were transformed by engaging in violent acts with religious purposes. Historically the Greeks and other biblical communities were involved in ritualized violence through religious sacrifices. There had been a debate on the morality of the blood sacrifices some author’s questions what was his motivation of sacrificing animals to the gods and some prophets approving human sacrifices. In a world view this sis wrong and cannot be tolerated because it goes against all human rights. In the bible some communities were deliberately offered as sacrificed to God. This has been question by modern communities who believe in protection of human life.
Durkheim is an author defies the dualistic view of reality and claims that the religious excitement is what leads to violent acts and practices. he believes at violence is deeply planted in religion because the images, the ritual and the other acts that it command all lead and cultivate on violence. From the religious groups the teaching plant a motivation to violence but to the outside world this is felt through destruction and suffering Durkheim is of the opinion that duality cannot be used to solve religious violence. The author claims that social experience is not an individual choice but is an important element that would be used solves religious violence.
There is duality in that the religious forces that appeared in history were physical as well as human amoral and material. Morally they made impression as superiors beings and but they did translate how their actions impacted the society (Juergensmeyer, & Kitts, 2011).
Hubert and Mass observed that religious rituals could engage in conciliating powers that are felt to be dangerous and destructive. Duality in this idea is shown when the authors as about why the role of the sacrificial victim is to die. it makes the audience to thinks of the sacrifice as immoral and inhuman. Sacrifices should not be looked at as a divine duty but human rights should be taken into consideration. Divinity should be treated as the vary sauce of life and not as the means to is end. Therefore sacrifices that lead to confect and war in the community should be dropped. The community can exist more harmoniously if the sacrifices are dropped.
4. In Fields of Blood, Armstrong claims that while empires and states regularly implicate religion and employ it in the practice of violence, religion is not the cross-temporal or cultural cause of violence. Are you convinced by her argument? Please employ at least THREE examples from different traditions to support your agreement or disagreement with the statement “Religion is not inherently violent”. (Fields of Blood book by Karen Armstrong)
According to Armstrong (2015) religion is not the only cause of violence in the world. For instance the Sumerian community was not using religions to advice civilization that led to the oppression of its people. As long as the leaders were in charge of the temples and had the role of ensuring there was equal distribution of resources they were not using religion to do it. They were using their political powers to accomplish this purpose. The Sumerians believed in false celestial gods who they imagined were involved in town planning, irrigation, and government. In this regard they were suffering because they were following false believe that advocated for war and oppression (Armstrong, 2015).
The ancient Indian communities engaged in rituals and methodologies that glorified organized theft and violence. In this community cattle rustling, forcible seizures and raiding were common occurrence and were done to promote the community, they used it to expand and obtain resources. Violence was done for economic and political purposes; for instance they used t establish kingdoms in Doab.
Chinese is the other community that shows that violence was not associated with religions. This community used war to solve social and political dilemmas. Civilization was mostly achieved through violence in this community. War and violence was cultural in the sense that they could refer to history to find direction on how to fight and confront their enemies. Agriculture was also promoted by warfare and violence- armies of animals- such as bears, wolves and tigers were used to fight enemies and acquire land. Therefore it is not only religion that pushed for war but political needs made ancient communities to go to war (Armstrong, 2015).
5 . Certain segments of American society insist that the behavior of groups like Isis be named fundamentalist Islamic terrorism? According to Karen Armstrong, would this be accurate? Why/why not? (Fields of Blood)
According to Armstrong (2014) naming of behaviors by groups such as ISIS as fundamentalist Islamic terrorist would be accurate. As most of the aspects were obtained through violence it would be correct to say the Muslim today use radical acts and extremism to return to their initial purpose and objectives (Armstrong, 2015). The ancient Muslim community had been involved in war since conception. Muslims have been fighting to gain freedom and expand their religions to different parts of the world. Though this is not terrorism, it utilizes violence and cruelty that resulting in killing of masses. Therefore the modern day Muslims are on the same trend of using violence and terrorism to promote their religions. In the Quran the more aggressive verses are ashen to be more prevailing that those that call for peace. The Quran directs ‘when the forbidden months are over wherever you encounter idolaters, kill them seize them, besiege them, and wait for them look-out post” (Armstrong, 2015). additionally the believers are repeatedly commended to fight until there is no more sedition and religion becomes Gods therefore it would be right to name Islamic groups as fundamentalist Islamic terrorism (Armstrong, 2015).
References
Armstrong, K. (2015). Fields of blood: Religion and the history of violence . Random House.
Juergensmeyer, M., & Kitts, M. (Eds.). (2011). Princeton Readings in Religion and Violence . Princeton University Press.
