|
Post by jessicapollard on Oct 4, 2013 5:41:05 GMT
I learned a lot from most of the discussions, like 'favorite passage' table where I was able to rant about my dislike of most passages, the Emily Dickinson table where I was got to alleviate some of the hatred after taking a moment to explore the symbolism in the book and the 'what should we talk about?" table where classmates and I expressed our confusion together.My most poignant moment happened at the "Om." table when lovely Ruby pointed out the quote "your soul is the whole world"(7), which I haven't been able to get out of my head since. The frustrating simplicity of those words sort of just makes me want to cry. FEELINGS UGH.
|
|
|
Post by shannonfender on Oct 4, 2013 6:01:13 GMT
My favorite discussion from last class was at the "Om" table. In that group, we discussed whether Siddhartha truly experiences Nirvana and what that would mean. It is apparent that Siddhartha undergoes some form of enlightenment, but his journey to self-discovery, as a whole, felt very odd and inapplicable to the real world.
Nirvana is loosely defined as a transcendent and other-worldly experience that I couldn't take much meaning from. The whole idea of a "state in which there is neither suffering, desire, nor sense of self, and the subject is released from the effects of karma and the cycle of death and rebirth"** is a nice thought, but nonetheless a little hard to understand or believe.
So what we ended up discussing is how Siddhartha's Nirvana was in realizing that pure, unadulterated nirvana does not exist at all. Siddhartha describes this discovery when he says,
Nirvana is not absolute, and I believe that Siddhartha's discovery of this can be interpreted as "nirvana" in its own sense. Our earth exists in duality (which is Om), not in dichotomies. This conversation with my group was very interesting to me, and I learned a lot from our discussion.
**(Oxford American College Dictionary)
|
|
|
Post by fionabyrne on Oct 4, 2013 6:06:10 GMT
I got so much out of a conversation about Emily Dickinson's poem. My plan going into the test was to listen. I went in planning on a 80-20 ratio between listening and talking because I already know what I think, I don't need to hear myself talk more and I wanted to hear perspectives I had never considered. The Dickinson poem presented a new idea I hadn't considered, and I needed to talk it out. I love talking about concepts and ideas and finding words to describe abstract ideas. Emily Dickinson does this in a beautiful, clean fashion, and I needed to pull it apart. When I began to understand the metaphor, Hannah and Mr. Parris stretched it further, and I just hung on for the ride. They took my basic understanding, that the jug holds the life and keeps it safe but the life is not really lived unless on the lips, to a whole new level. Mr. Parris, as is his m.o., asked a series of provocative questions about why exactly he drank his water, what effect the cup had on the contents, and if he could really understand water through the bias of the glass. I do not have a scientific mind. This conversation, however, led me to a conceptual formula of sorts. Life must be taken in forms both controlled and wild. Certain things are clear when all is calm and focused, but a person need also understand the value in a storm, where nothing is or needs to be controlled. Young Siddhartha may not have thought he gained anything from teachers but after he finds OM he thinks, "I have learned nothing" (95), reinforcing the idea that the more you know, the more you know you don't know. I believe you learn from every experience, so maybe the teachers were the vessel of controlled water when Siddhartha wanted a thunderstorm. Lessons are learned all ways, and I enjoyed the opportunity to have my ideas stretched to encompass a greater world view.
|
|
|
Post by patricktbutenhoff on Oct 4, 2013 6:27:11 GMT
The best conversation I had yesterday was in response to the bull prompt. I'd have to say that one of the major reasons for this was that it didn't directly correspond with the book; in other words, it wasn't just a rehashing of the discussions we had had previously on Siddhartha. Our initial reaction was to stack the pictures on top of each other, progressing from most complex to simplest (this was probably affected by the fact that I had seen information about these bulls before). The idea was that the most complex picture was just a picture of a cow, but the simplest one truly captured the essence of the bull. After that, though, we came to the realization that the detailed bull had merits just like the simple one. There was intrinsic value in the hairs on the animal's tail, just as there was intrinsic value in the essence of the bull. One can start with framework drawings and flesh them out, or one can start with a complete drawing and erase away until only the essence is left. Each was an equally valid method of discovery. Therefore, we arranged our bull pictures in a circle. We felt that this reflected Siddhartha's goal of finding everything in life; each of the drawings or ways of life is unique, yet they are all a picture of the same thing: a bull, in Picasso's case, or Om in Siddhartha's. One can progress from one to any of the others in any order, just as Siddhartha went down the seemingly patternless path of brahmin, ascetic, rich man, ferryman. If you go through the entire process of bulls, you end up where you started, but you'll see your initial drawing in a completely different light due to the experience you have accumulated. Siddhartha is the same way. This is most strongly shown in the scene where he goes to the river in his rich man's clothes, childlike, with neither learning from his time as a Samara or money from his time as a businessman. Siddhartha is back to the beginning of the circle, but this time he is more enlightened from his past experiences. Arranging the bulls in a circle also reinforced the unity and cyclical nature of life as depicted in Siddhartha. All the bulls were, in the end, equally good, just as sin as well as virtue is represented in Om. I believe that this discussion was the most important to me because it felt like everyone had something to say, that we were actually conducting an original inquiry. We got to explore new ideas to some extent: arranging the bulls in a line, in a stack, in a circle, holding the stack up to the light to look for shared lines, talking about the especially humanoid characteristics of one of the bulls and how it related to how we see humanity in everything. It felt like we weren't just saying things to receive a good grade; we were actually discussing because we wanted to learn, and that was especially effective.
|
|
|
Post by billfeng on Oct 4, 2013 6:28:25 GMT
Emily Dickinson’s Poem - Claire, Morgan, Lacey, Jessica
At first, our table was absolutely befuddled by Emily Dickinson’s “Between the form of Life and Life” poem. After several more readings, Morgan posited that the liquor at the lip, the only bit the drinker is capable of tasting, could be compared to how Siddhartha tasted the different aspects of life. Cue collective “Ohh”. Claire and Jessica further explored the liquor by implying that the tasters of the liquor at the lip were followers of teachings for Enlightenment, such as Govinda and the Samanas. They also believed that the tasters of the entire jug of wine were people who actually experienced enlightenment, such as Gotama and Siddhartha. When Siddhartha reunites with Govinda at the end of the story arc, he says, “Wisdom is not communicable. The wisdom which a wise man tries to communicate always sounds foolish” (142). Just like in Emily Dickinson’s poem, the book tries to show that it is impossible to capture the true essence of an experience by simply living vicariously from “Life” to another “Life”.
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Oct 4, 2013 6:41:08 GMT
I especially appreciated a conversation I had with Rishi and Yong. We took a brief interlude in our rigorous discussion of the text to speculate as to how Mr. Parris was grading us. We soon concluded that Kelly, the DA who had quietly been sitting at one table the entire class, was secretly grading our discussions. We enjoyed a hearty laugh. With grins on our faces and laughter in our ears, we returned to the analysis of Siddartha, more excited than ever to delve into such a fascinating piece of literature.
But that has nothing to do with Siddartha.
I also enjoyed a conversation I had with Hannah, Bill, and Ana. We were discussing the progression of the bull images. The conversation stands out in my mind because it was not as much a discussion as it was an exercise. We would order the bulls a certain way and then do our best to connect that illustration to the themes of Siddartha. We would then order the bulls a different way and repeat the process of making connections. Analyzing a number of different bull-orders encouraged me to consider several different interpretations of Siddartha. I left that table knowing I had a firm grasp on the concepts of the novel, or at least I had improved my ability to BS (no pun intended) my way through making connections to the text.
|
|
|
Post by yongkim on Oct 4, 2013 7:40:00 GMT
My favorite discussion of the day was about the mathematical equation that relates to both Nirvana and Samsara. While we were thinking of a function that could represent the two, Chris Beltrone suggested f(x)=sinx/x. Here is what the graph of the function looks like: If we were able to look at the graph as the x value approaches infinity, we would notice that the graph never actually touches 0 but continually oscillates around it and gets closer to the value of 0. Nirvana is the end of suffering and desire or the end of individual consciousness (it can be achieved), while Samsara means "wandering on" or continuation. With his friend Govinda, Siddhartha leaves his father in order to find a path toward enlightment with the Semanas. As Siddhartha further progresses through his life, he comes closer and closer to Nirvana similar to how the graph of sinx/x approaches 0 as the x-values increase. The idea of Samsara is illustrated by this function because it continually oscillates around 0... the x-values are infinite. In the book, it seems as if life always continues because history repeats itself (the fact that Siddhartha's son abandons him just like Siddhartha left his own father). I just love having the opportunity to connect mathematics with literature because it gives me a distinct perspective on certain concepts or situations, in this case with Siddhartha and the concepts of Nirvana and Samsara.
|
|
|
Post by keelycorrigan on Oct 4, 2013 13:01:58 GMT
My favorite conversation about this novel occurred at the “Om” table because of our conversation’s scope. We discussed what “Om” is in many different contexts, including within the texts of “Siddhartha” and within each of our own lives. This is what I appreciate most about this particular discussion—our own internalizations and understanding of the ideas presented in Herman Hesse’s novel and how those internationalizations are habituating in our lives. We came to the conclusion that “Om” is infinity, everything and anything yet it is also a simple and tangible acceptance of the world around us. “Om” is the moment in which you as a human being are entirely contextualized within the world that is all around you—accepting everything. Siddhartha could not find “Om” until he stopped pushing natural parts of life away from himself. As an ascetic, he pushed away the worldly pleasures to focus on the mental and emotional search for enlightenment. As a rich man, he pushed away his intellectual search for “Om” in order to embrace the worldly, fleeting pleasures around him. Both left him empty and unsatisfied because they were both incomplete understandings of the world. Only when he can see and accept all aspects—even the most painful event of his life, when his son leaves him—can he achieve enlightenment. The acceptance of all in order to find peace is such a vital skill in today’s fast-paced, competitive world and I thought our own internationalizations of that idea were invaluable aspects of our conversation.
|
|
|
Post by Anna M. on Oct 4, 2013 17:46:42 GMT
I got a lot out of the mathematical equation prompt. It required us to think about a relationship that I hadn't thought about before and in this way I learned a lot from what Robert, Danny, and Naomi had to say. I think the fact their was a lot of "dancing" during this conversation came from the different understandings of what Samsara and Nirvana are. There was a time when someone was arguing that Samsara and Nirvana are mutually exclusive and that one can't exist while the other exists. I think this conclusion came from the definition of Samsara which according to one of us meant "suffering" while Nirvana is the lack of suffering. We first came up with a limit equation, Lim as samsara approaches x = nirvana. The equation samsara DOES NOT = nirvana was also proposed because we were discussing that the two couldn't exist together. I kind of disagree with the not-equal equation because i do think that Samsara and Nirvana are related to one another. We discussed that even though someone can't experience Samsara and Nirvana at the same time, they still can be connected. I thought our conversation explored a lot of possibilities and that's why it was my favorite. As a group we never reached a final conclusion but thats okay because the best conversations never end.
|
|
|
Post by travistoal on Oct 4, 2013 18:27:18 GMT
The best conversation I had was at the table with the question, "What should we talk about?" Even though we probably reached the least fruitful conclusion at that table, it still instigated some heartfelt discussion. Many points were brought up, and we went from super duper #deep "We must talk about 'what should we talk about'" conversations to the idea that we shouldn't talk about anything at all. There is a circular discussion when people talk about whether or not talking is helpful; Siddhartha says it leads wisdom cannot be communicated, but that is wisdom, so since it is communicated wisdom can be communicated, etc. It was interesting to hear peoples' ideas on what we should talk about. The importance of om, the meaning of om. For such a simple word, such a simple noise, people cannot agree on what is concretely means. Some argue that om is the beauty of suffering and pain, and how the two are therefore necessary for happiness. Others talk of om as the absence of suffering, pure ecstasy and nirvana. We talked about the meaning of life, what life really is. If a rock was once life and once will be life, should we treat it as so? If we treat a rock as a person, and there are people who condemn abortion, should those people also condemn breaking rocks? In any case, it was funny to think of hippies crying over broken rocks.
|
|
|
Post by carolinedorman on Oct 4, 2013 18:51:00 GMT
The best conversation I had stemmed out of the prompt: talk about anything. My table group and I delved into what we liked/dislike about the novel which proved to be much deeper than I would have anticipated. We discussed some of the thought-provoking statements that Siddartha states in the novel and the validity of such statements. All of us were able to reach the conclusion that Hesse was not just trying to get a rise out of his audience. I personally, however, did not like Siddartha's tendencies to make, in my opinion, over simplified statements. We discussed how Siddartha states that time doesn't exist. This was extremely interesting because it is hard to quantify and give an absolute statement about the nature of time. I thought the discussion relating Slaughterhouse 5 and the Tralfamadorians also provided depth to our conversations and a new angle to looking at Siddartha.
|
|
shanejohnson
New Member
"Kindness is the only investment that never fails." - Thoreau
Posts: 15
|
Post by shanejohnson on Oct 6, 2013 6:59:16 GMT
I would say that there were two interesting discussions I had on Wednesday, and I can’t really decide between the two so I’ll “cop out” (heh) and discuss both. The first discussion I found noteworthy was at the first table in my personal rotation, with Rishi, Chris and Mitra. We were presented with the time prompt, which was an interesting place to start for the day. Chris made a much appreciated reference to Slaughterhouse 5, using the Tralfamadorians as a polar example to humanity’s strict measurement of time. As a collective, we seemed to “agree” (with whatever meager certainty we can have about somethings as metaphysical as time) that time doesn’t exist as a fundamental, measurable component of the universe. However, we did discuss the existence of time as a “perception” of people, relating this to the perceived order of Siddhartha’s journey. The other discussion I found interesting was an intimate one-on-one discussion with Rishi about the Dickinson poem. With just the two of us, we had a chance to dive pretty deep into the poem’s connection to the ideas within Siddhartha and debate our interpretations. Ultimately, we both found much value in the correlation between liquor in the jug & at the lip, and, respectively, nirvana & elements contained within life and the path to it. This was a very interesting discussion format, and I wish we had had more time to discuss.
|
|
|
Post by cassiecumberland on Oct 8, 2013 2:08:35 GMT
I loved all my conversations BUT I think my favorite was at the "time" table. We talked about the concept of Time in Siddhartha.. "there is no time" or something like that and we all pondered that wonderous and darkly confusing idea! Us as humans love to compartmentalize things. WE NEED time to function. Siddhartha, however, distinguished life in "day and night" (quote from table discussion). We found it interesting how the author, Hesse, didn't distinguish time and, "it felt like he travelled everywhere yet he went nowhere" (conversation). One chapter Siddhartha was on the journey, the next sentence was 40 years passed! We discussed the quote from Vesudeva along the lines of "the past Siddhartha, future Siddhartha, and the Siddhartha now are all the same". We wondered if we really are the same as we were in the past or are going to be in the future. We discussed eighth grade and how it was such a miserable time for everyone. We rejected eighth grade, BUT is our SELF from eighth grade still among us? We agreed on the idea that the journey is more important than the "englightenment' and how that is generally true in life (see "THE CLIMB" by Hannah Montana/ Miley Cyrus).
We noticed that at the beginning of the book "NOT ONE WORD HAS BEEN OMITTED" which is CRAZY and awesome by Hesse. It was a very deep, intellectual, and insightful talk that I did not sum up well. It meant something in my heart though and that counts.
|
|