\ Finding Valhalland //

Once upon a time … there was a time

There was time

When there was no time

When time was not yet

(Willem B. Dress in Creation: From Nothing Until Now)

Gholshani, in his article, “Creation in the Islamic Outlook and in Modern Cosmology” stated that both the atheists and the theists argued and discussed about creation. By bringing up the arguments from Moslem Theologians, Moslem Philosophers, Moslem Mystic and Mulla Shadra, he tried to explain that the problem of creation is not a matter of physic, but also theological and philosophical.[1] He also mentioned about, “the use of Big Bang cosmology for the affirmation or denial of temporal createdness is a clear misunderstanding of both cosmology and creation (as understood in theology and philosophy).”[2] Big Bang is only a change, not a creation; the universe may be able to be described scientifically by its physical aspect, but the grand explanation – the macro creation is only provided by God.[3] And obviously the atheist will disagree with him (and Haught too) because they have system of belief as the theist had where they have sort of obligation to defend it. While scientist has nature’s interpretation, the theologian has sacred text and both of them have their own philosophy.

Furthermore, Haught tried to show that the atheists and agnostics consider their belief system or science is an ‘ultimate concern’ or in our ‘language’, it can be call as ‘religion.’ When science met religion, it is a meeting between two belief systems where they questioned the same things about the mystery of this universe. And they emphasized the importance to use both science and religion to explore the evolving universe. Science cannot stand alone without philosophical thought from the religion. Religion is very old, and this living tradition has lived with human long time ago and with the coming of science, it was really helpful to solve the puzzle we face in life. This has proven that science did support the belief in God, because, for example, the creation of the universe. If we said that Big Bang is the exact theory about creation, then religion will started to ask, ‘what’s in it before Big Bang and who did it?’, or perhaps question about, is it really a chance and necessity?’ The question about intelligent design will came up when we discuss things between science and religion. And we can set up a smooth dialogue to decrease the conflict, maybe with the critical realism method.

Bibliography

Gholshani, Mehdi. “Creation in Islamic Outlook and Modern Cosmology”. God,Life, and the Cosmos (ed. Peters, Iqbal, and Haq). (

England

: Ashgate Publishing, 2002)

Haught, John F. “Does Science Rule out a Personal God?”, in Haught, Science and Religion: From Conflict to Conversation” (New York: Paulist Press, 1995).

Is it an Intelligent or an Idiot Design?

Both Dawkins and Weinberg seems agree that our present scientific knowledge about nature shows that the idea of the existence of God is not tenable. From the monotheistic religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism), again, they also agree that the existence of evil is a proof of the non-existence of God. These arguments are not connected one each other. The first reason is scientific and the other is based on moral ethics. According to John F. Haught, in an evolving universe lied two forms of evil, the evil of disorder and evil of monotony. The first one, consist of suffering, war, famine, and death, and the second, means “clinging to trivial forms of order, refusing to open up to what is fresh and renewing even when it is relevant to do so.”[1] Based on these arguments, I can say that science can prove the existence of God.

Between the two arguments, there is no the stronger one. The first argument was talking about how God’s existence depends on science. And the second one is how God’s existence depends of the existence of goodness things. It can be said that there are two windows to reality. Science makes claim about how the universe begin, while religion makes claim about creation. And the further question is: how do the claims of these different things relate? Sometime there are conflicts, but sometime they are support each other. It depends on the perspectives, nevertheless sometime they don’t relate at all.

            Scientist – chemists, biologists, feel that life which consists of H + O + C + N – and combination of these molecules should be possible to create within Lab. “Creation requires a creator, but nature requires no creator. A creator might exist but one need not exist for the world to be nature. So, nature is what the world would be if there were no God.”[2] If we use Big Bang as reason to prove the non-existence of God, then what happen next is adding more questions: who set the Big Bang? How it happen? How is it before the Big Bang? It is like when the atheist questioning about, “How can be still evil happen if the good God exist?” This question also arise in Weinberg’s writing, when he questioned about the hidden well of God’s sign.[3]

            Weinberg stated that religion did not make any difference since it was more support in evil things than in opposition to it. He gave many examples from war, disease, violence which happened under the name of religion. And Dawkins also talked the same thing with Weinberg: there is evil in religion, and history has recorded them so many. And there is no need to believe in certain religion to do good deeds. Believe in god and religions for both of them is only wasting time, or “a cosmically jokes if it weren’t a tragic action”. Dawkins emphasized that the ‘appearance of design’ will arise naturally within the evolutionary process. That is why he proposed his book title with “The Blind Watchmaker”; blind because of creation happen with ‘chance and necessity’ – it has no consequence, no purpose, and no plan. But in contrary, this live is a masterpiece like it all did by a Master Watchmaker with all of the magnificent designs. But Dawkins did not see this as a big problem – since I guess he is the follower of Occam’s razor – where the simple reason is the truth. And God is too complex to be understood. So, is it the intelligent or idiot design which lies in the bridge between science and religion?

Bibliography

Dawkins, Richard, “The Improbability of God”, Free Inquiry Magazine, vol. 18, Number 3 (http://www.secularhumanism.org/fi/)

Dembski, William A. Intelligent Design: The Bridge between Science and Theology. (Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press, 1999)

Haught, John F. Responses to 101 Questions on God and Evolution. (

New York

: Paulist Press, 2001).

Weinberg, Steven. Facing Up. (2002)

A small point of return

I am no longer separated from my spiritual life in the way I used to be, but I’m separated from almost everything else. I don’t even look the same to myself. My face is pretty familiar, but there’s an expression in it I don’t recognize. I try to ask that person, “What is going on, Ai?” she’s only shrugs her shoulders. She doesn’t know either. Friends call me on the phone: I don’t know what to say. When I try to call them: I suddenly speechless like I’ve been married to silence. Last night, like any other night I’ve been thru: I feel more alone than ever. Like, nobody knows me. For God sake I don’t even know me. (Laugh Out Loud) I don’t know exactly what I want. I’m a person who doesn’t know what I want in this life …

But when I call my Mum … things is getting better and better …

It’s a small point of return …

Valhalland, February 28^th, 2007

Friends: >>

Milo

Location: >> my room <<

A must to do: >> in the middle of writing for small research <<

Mimpiku tentang Ayah

Aku bawa mobil hitam, berjalan di belakang mobil merah BMW yang dikendarai oleh seorang sopir pria. Sepertinya dia sopir pribadiku. Mama yang duduk di sebelahku berkata bahwa mobil di depan jalannya tidak benar. Ternyata benar, ban mobil melindas kaleng soda dan merusak karet ban. Mobil merah itu menepi, aku pun mengikuti. Sang sopir keluar, tapi bukannya mengecek ban, ia malah membuka mesin dan mencabut kabel-kabel yang ada. Mengangkat aki dan mengosonginya, lalu aku pun keluar dari mobil dan menghampiri sang sopir. Kutanya, apa yang rusak, dan dia bilang, “Saya minta satu juta untuk memperbaiki ini.” Aku marah bukan main. Ngomel tidak karuan, dan di situ – berdekatan dengan sang sopir, berdiri seorang pria yang juga peduli dengan rusaknya mobil. Pria itu masih kelihatan muda. Sepertinya, dalam mimpiku, dia adalah ayahku.

Aku yang masih marah-marah berjalan menuju sebuah toko milik ayahku atau mungkin toko itu adalah langganan ayahku. Aku masuk toko dan langsung teriak pada sopirku, “You are fired!” (dalam mimpi itu aku juga menggunakan bahasa inggris). Beberapa orang laki-laki yang berada di toko itu keberatan dengan keputusanku dan bahkan menyalahkan mamaku untuk itu. Aku semakin kalap. “Fuck you all! You dont know my mom. So dont speak anything about my mom!” Dua kali kalimat itu kuucapkan.

Aku sambil menangis berkata lirih, tapi cukup bisa didengar, “forgodsake! She just divorced!”

Kemudian ku lihat ayahku – dengan gambaran seorang laki-laki goodlooking dan masih tampak muda (at least I thought that he was my dad), berdiri di depanku seperti sedang membayar sesuatu di kasir. Aku melihatnya, dia melihatku pula. Aku langsung menjabat tangannya, mengucapkan terima kasih, “Thank you for everything …” dan aku menangis, dan ayahku itu langsung memelukkku, memegang wajahku yang sudah berlinang air mata, dan kutetap berkata, “Thank you for the wonderful birthday party. It was so beautiful.” Dia pun menangis, dan aku histeris.

Kemudian ku terbangun, dengan wajahku yang basah linangan air mata. Ternyata aku sudah lama nangis nya Aku bangun dan menyelesaikan tangisanku, trus lihat jam yang menunjukkan pukul 4.35, trus ambil pen ama kertas, nulis ni mimpi, trus masuk kamar mandi.

Valhalland, 27 February 2007

Only For Your Information: Ayahku mengirim sebuah SMS, bahwa kakak iparnya di Magelang meninggal tanggal 28 Februari 2007, pukul 3:32 PM.

Clandestine

Sacred secret lies under other name: white lie. I’ve done this secretive meeting with someone, and somehow I feel terribly bad. But white lie must go on to aim a good deed later on. I’m in an effort to make two people to be friend again. Well, not so many people know exactly what am I going to talk about here, but few of them will understand. But the last time I try to make things better, I blew it up. I messed up and things went upside down: they become hating each other more than before.

I just want to say, that there is no way we can avoid hurting others or being hurt by others, because this is exactly the nature of our imperfection. The secretive meeting happened because of one’s withdrawal. If I design another Celestine Meet-Up to make things better, I’m so afraid that I will make another mistake – like the McD tragedy.

Life is too short to love, why we hate each other? Why withdraw from our new chavruse? I want us to be together again. I don’t need forgiveness from you … but do not punish me with your ignorance … the tense in the group is one I cannot stand. Group, can we be friend again? We just have a nice start …

Valhalland, February 27^th 2007.

To be or not to be married

Pak Bernie, my lecturer, asked us to write about an ethical dilemma which we faced in life. Then my thoughts came up with an idea to put my friend’s ethical dilemma which she often to discuss with me, whether marriage is an option or an obligation. Below is my writing to the class, and secretly, Pak Bernie discussed it without telling to the class whose the writing. Thank you so, Pak Bernie. I feel glad that you love my tiny writing.

“Being single is fun for fearless females. But avoiding marriage for them is a dangerous choice. Both religion and social culture had involved deeply in women’s marriage life and choices. For several women, marriage is a matter of an option rather than an obligation. When women choose not to marry, (suddenly) society had its right to judge that the women had neglected their destiny. Being virgin is such a shameful thing to do – and merely a sin. Deep inside every woman’s heart lied their need to be loved and free at the same time. And marriage had often not become the solution for these, but it always consider as it by society. Is ‘marriage’ an obligation or an option for women? Who decide that ‘married women’ is better than ‘single women whom delay their marriage’ or women who did not (choose not) to marry?”

Answer that, ladies … gentlemen …

I have mine, tied me so tight in my finger

Valhalland, 26-February-2007

I Know Why Caged ‘lil Girl Sings

“But a caged bird stands on a grave of dream

His shadow shouts on a nightmare scream

His wings are clipped and his feet are tied

So he opens his throat to sing”

(Maya Angelou, in I know why caged bird sings)

Once, I ever wrote a novel. Once, I wrote diaries everyday. Once, I always writing something. Anything. Anything. My childhood … everything. I consider the book is full of song lyrics – could be the sad one, but sometime full of joy. Maya Angelou reminded me again about how precious the songs that I’ve written are. It’s a writing of a caged little girl which now gain her freedom – though bit by bit life is not getting easy. And since it is difficult to fly, I choose to sing and write down my song lyrics. I let people hear my song and sometime asking them to sing with me. And yes, it is so dreadfully beautiful how Maya Angelou can take her specific struggle as a black woman in

America

and write something universal. [ ]

:: A Girl by The Window ::

Malam itu dia dan aku berjalan cukup panjang. Dari kota A ke kota B. Pembicaraan yang terjadi seputar banyak hal, seperti coklat, kopi, muffin, donut, dan nasi liwet. Kadang kita juga berbicara hal-hal berat seputar sushupti, ajna, anapanasati. Sesekali kita membuat iri tukang sate atau pejalan kaki yang lain karena riuhnya obrolan. Dan semuanya berhenti ketika,

“Hi … aku Frankie”
“Hi … aku Johny”

Sayangnya, aku bukan Frankie. Aku wanita di balik jendela yang cuma bisa menatap, mengagumi, dan memiliki Johny dari kejauhan. Sama seperti ku menyaksikan pertemuan anomali Frankie & Johny; yang cuma sekedar, ‘hi frankie, hi johny’ …
: kemudian, seperti apa rasanya berkenalan kembali dengannya?

Mungkin seperti ini:

“Hi … Vyasa di sini”

Dan tanpa Frankie, Johny berada di sampingku dan kita berjalan lagi cukup panjang. Dari kota B ke kota A. Pembicaraan yang terjadi pun sudah seputar svadhistana.

“Dan aku Johny …”

15 februari 2007, Valhalland.

Kemarin di lempuyangan, aku ngebayangin betapa asyiknya jika aku ketemu ma Ayu (anak Anand Ashram). Satu hal pengin kubagi ama dia adalah, rasa kangennya ama meditasi bareng di Ashram. Tak lama, sebelum kereta berangkat, aku lihat seorang wanita lari-lari beli tiket. Gilaaa!! Itu Ayu. Wah Duh! Ngepas banget yah. Kado yang indah di Val-day. TerimakasihTuhan. Kamu tahu yang kumau.

Di kereta, kita yang sudah 2 tahun nggak ketemuan … berpeluk rindu ngobrol terus hingga di berhenti di Purwosari dan aku terus ke Balapan.

See you soon, Yu’!

Heal The World[1]

I feel it with my body, with my blood, feeling all these trees, all this country … if you feel sore … headache, sore body; that mean somebody killing tree or grass. You feel because your body in that tree or earth … you might feel it for two or three years. You get weak … little bit … little bit … because going bit by bit … dying.[2]

Earth is a living thing. If mankind understands about this essential thing, none of disasters alleged as strangeness. The strange weather we had nowadays is an accumulation of the Earth’s pain. In 1969, James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis developed Gaia theory (Gaia Hypothesis). The hypothesis proposes that living organisms and inorganic material are part of a dynamic system that shapes the Earth’s biosphere. Earth itself is viewed as an organism. If we hurt the Earth, the hurt will bounce back on us. The only solution: living politely with no pollution – which is I think it’s very a utopian solution.

For people whom involve in such movement like Reiki, Shamballa, or even Sahaja Yoga, they know method to heal the world. The spiritual practices such us meditation and grounding can heal the sick Earth by transferring our positive energy to the Earth. The method is very simple. All we have to do is sit in the position like people doing yoga or meditation, and then pray for the Great Power, God, Great Spirit, and touch the ground with your hand and the energy is transferred. You don’t need to join spiritual movement to do this, you don’t need magic or supernatural power to heal the world. One you should have is good will, positive thinking and love for humanity, earth and God. Once you had that kind of Love, you can heal the world. And imagine if all the people doing the same good things we do. [ ]