World History chapters 9, 11, 12

After last week’s readings on Christianity, it was interesting reading about Islam for this week and seeing the parallels between the two religions and the actions and ideas of the people who practiced them. Two points struck me the most. One was the division or schisms that occurred in both the Christian and Islamic worlds that were based on how worship should be carried out. For instance, the major division of Catholicism in Europe into Orthodox Catholics and Roman Catholics. Both sides saw the other’s views on theology and church practice as heretical, and their leaders even excommunicated each other. In the Islamic world, a rift emerged as well, forming two sides, the Sunni and the Shia (375). For the most part, the differences of all of these groups under the umbrella of the same faith have yet to be reconciliated. It makes one think, why did these serious rifts happen in exclusively monotheistic religions that have periodically led to conflict? In Buddhism, where some have come to worship the Buddha and others have only seen it as a way of living and thought, has there been such hostility or barriers between the two? Is there something within the ideology and exclusivity of these monotheistic religions that invites “black and white”, or, “one or the other” thinking/way of viewing the world? Does this fit into the paradigm of thought that that there must be one way of doing things? And does this contribute to the history of hostility between Islam and Christianity who themselves supposedly worship the same God?

The second thing to strike me was that not only were ideas about gender inequality, more specifically the subordination of women, not specifically cited in either the Bible of Quran, (and even in cases in the Bible where it might have been, most or all of these writings were not written by Jesus himself), but were written by later scholars of the faiths. For Muslims, these were mostly written in the Hadiths. For example, I had to give a sigh as I read about the gradual changing of the story of Adam and Eve in Islamic culture. It was like, here we go again, blame Eve why don’t you? I guess everyone needs a scapegoat?

I found reading about the “unlikely” empire of the Mongols, known for their brutality and physical and psychological warfare, refreshing because it is not something I remember really studying in depth about before. It was fascinating how Chinggis Khan was able to not only organize and mobilize warring tribes, but how he did so (469-472), especially within his army. I also realized that, had it not been for the plague, that empire could have lasted much longer. How different would things be now had it turned out that way?

I always wondered what the ideology behind the bloody sacrifices of the Aztec’s was, and so the section in chapter 12 that goes over it: (525) “Civilizations of the Fifteenth Century: The Americas: The Aztec Empire", was interesting to me. Apparently, it was this prominent official called Tlacaelel that solidified the ideology (525). Basically, the Gods, specifically the sun (called Huitzilopochtle- try saying that five times fast) needed the power of human blood to continue on its “constant battle against the encroaching darkness (525). Such a human thing to fear, the darkness. If I were someone living in that time, would I do all I could to keep the light from receding as well? It’s hard to think about, what with all of my modern sensibilities and my feeling queasy at the thought of sacrificing and blood-letting. I don’t even like vampires and can’t look when my blood gets drawn at the hospital…but I digress.

I barely got through this week’s readings, but I hope it is helpful in the long run.