Happy Pirate wrote:puredingo wrote:Steve, I don't think there is question that the man Jesus did exist the speculation is did he in fact turn water into wine, feed the masses, rise from the grave and biggest the mystery of all....was he for a short time an active member of the PeoplesFront of Judeah!?
As for Mccandles, I can only go off the movie and some reports I've read...seems like a selfish, spoilt brat to me. Reminds me of a converstaion i had with my dad when I was a young lad. "Dad, why wer'nt you a hippy during the 60's" he replied," I couldn't afford to be one".
Actually there is some serious(?) theological dispute over the
actual existence of Christ. I have little time for the rest of the mythos except as an analysis of human belief systems and spirituality (as opposed to religion).
The point about McCandles is that he DID what some of us dream of doing but are too scared to (and just replicate as a pale shadow through solo hiking or hitchhiking) and many don't even consider. Not so much in Alaska where I think he failed badly and stupidly but before that in the more urbanised framework of the U.S.
Basically he stepped out of the accepted social framework and redefined it to suit himself. He abandoned
everything and let the world he encountered redefine him (rather than the other way around as most of us do). He didn't completely succeed and eventually he completely failed but I admire him for trying because I too once riled against the gulf between human conformity and genuine living but was too scared to take the leap. As most of us are.
The point about where he intersects with spirituality is that every prophet in history is depicted as stepping out of the world to confront a greater truth that cannot be faced within a social-human paradigm and this single first step is a massive one that most of us will never take (except just once, forcibly, right at the end). It is the voluntary annihilation of the 'self'.
This is definitely NOT the same as the hippy framework where people were jumping from one predefined paradigm into another and supported each other in the transition (I guess the first person blazed a new trail) . And seriously; most 'hippies' weren't challenging themselves or anything else; they were just 'wearing the T-Shirt'.
Many of the stories of religious prophets (which McCandels was NOT and shouldn't be treated as) talk of venturing out into the world with nothing and relying on chance/charity/divine grace (should probably add pity too) to save them. And then venturing into the wilderness with nothing and risking their life to achieve revelation.
McCandels successfully ventured into the world with nothing and survived and in that initial, terrible leap I admire him utterly. In his subsequent naive and badly under-prepared journey to Alaska I think he was a fool.
I too only base my ideas on a single book so really, what do I know? (and I'm sorry that this is becoming a wine-fueled rant, but some ideas are never expressed otherwise)
I've always been both tempted and fascinated by the idea of "stepping off of the world". That with a single brave step you could walk away from the world you know. Not just physically away but completely: culturally, emotionally, intellectually, mentally.
And this is the main thing; that any serious bushwalker who reflects on their relationship with nature KNOWS that they live within a contrived relationship with nature; treating 'the bush' as merely a recreational/ecological pursuit that leaves us distant and separate from nature (not feeding directly from it or affecting it or even really
living in it, except as a guest). And that most in our western 'civilisation' are even more distant than us.
If you've got this far, thanks for indulging me. Some of my thinks are thunks that thankfully have thisszlled!
Steve
