THEO 1432: The Religious Quest
🎵 Recording ⌨ Space / ←→

Gītā 13-18

04/23/2026 · Tue/Thu 10:30-11:45 AM · Brad Bannon · Boston College

📄 Synopsis

The class session focused on the interpretation of the Aśvattha (cosmic tree) in Chapter 15 of the Bhagavad-Gītā, exploring the paradoxical command to cut down a tree with 'roots above and branches below.' Students debated whether this act signifies detachment from the material world, the transcendence of the ego, or a return to the divine source. Brad introduced the concept of scripture as 'inscrutable,' drawing on Wilfred Cantwell Smith’s work to argue that sacred texts are meant to be wrestled with rather than simply solved. The session concluded with the introduction of the final podcast assignment, which requires students to apply the comparative methodology of Francis Clooney to Bhagavad-Gītā 2:47 and Mark 10:45, focusing on themes of action and service.

⚡ Key Takeaways

  • The Aśvattha tree in the Bhagavad-Gītā is a 'cosmic tree' with roots in the heavens and branches reaching into the human world, symbolizing the immanence of the divine.
  • The command to 'cut down' the tree with the 'axe of detachment' suggests that liberation requires severing ties to the fruits of action and material existence.
  • Wilfred Cantwell Smith defines scripture as 'inscrutable,' meaning its value lies in the ongoing process of interpretation and dialogue rather than a fixed, literal definition.
  • The older meter (longer stanzas) in certain Gītā verses often signals more ancient content that the rest of the text may be commenting upon.
  • Bhagavad-Gītā 2:47 emphasizes that one has a right to action alone, never to its fruits, which is a core theme for the final podcast assignment.
  • Mark 10:45 introduces the theme of the Son of Man coming to serve and give his life, providing a Christian point of comparison for the Gītā's teachings on action.
  • Theological discourse is described as a process of reading texts in dialogue with others and wrestling with passages that resist easy interpretation.
  • Satkāryavāda is referenced as a theory of causality (using the milk and yogurt analogy) where the effect pre-exists in the cause.
  • The 'Primal Person' mentioned in the Gītā translations is a direct reference to the Puruṣa Sukta and the concept of creation through division.
  • The final podcast assignment (Podcast 5) asks students to demonstrate their understanding of core themes by comparing Mark 10:45 and Bhagavad-Gītā 2:47 using Clooney's methods.

🎤 Transcript Tap any timestamp to jump the audio player

Opening Transition and Breath Meditation

Student
Howdy.
Brad
Alright, let's take a moment and transition. Moment, just bring your mind and attention where your body is.
Student
Let's take a breath together. Breathe in and out.
Brad
Word? Word. 3 classes left, huh?
Student
Then you're rid of me.
1:25

Comparative Reading of Bhagavad-Gita Chapter 15

Brad
So every time I've taught this course, I always end with this passage from chapter 15 for various reasons. One, I've kind of, you know, I have a tendency— well, I'm not going to say too much. ⚠
Student
Let's just dive into it. Let's dive into it.
Brad
So I want to start by— focusing on Chapter 15 and hearing really from y'all. We're gonna just stay in this seating arrangement, which looks like a lecture, but it's not really, because I wanna go over some things with some visuals. But I wanna start and spend at least 15, 20 minutes hearing from you, talking about these verses from the Bhagavad Gita. Let's just start out by reading them, maybe. Yeah, you've got the text, right? We'll go screenless to start. Yeah, so we're just going to focus on the first 5 versus. Let's start with just reading them. Who wants to start? We can start with Eva or with Caroline, maybe. Eva, you want to start? Let's go. I don't know. Does anybody have a strong preference for— I mean, Barbara Stoller Miller is good here, I think. Yeah. All right. So we'll go with Barbara Stoller Miller seems to be a popular translation in the podcast, and for good reason. So yeah, so just want to read— we'll just read one verse and then go to Lauren next. ⚠
Student
Roots in the air, branches below, the tree of life is unchanging and set. Its leaves are palms, and he who knows it knows sleep no more. Its branches stretch along the dog its form is unknown here in the world, unknown by its kind, its beginning, its extent. Cut down this tree that has such deep roots with the sharp axe of detachment and search to find the realm that one enters without returning. ⚠
Student
I seek refuge in the original spirit of man's origin. Without pride or delusion, the fault of attachment overcome, intent on the self within, their desires extinguished, free from dualities, from joy and suffering, undeluded men reach that realm beyond change. ⚠
Brad
Great. Wait, is there more? Yeah.
Student
Wait.
Student
No, that's it, right?
Student
Hello.
Brad
Yeah, that's it. So we're just doing there. But let's keep going. Let's read Zaehner's version as well. Maybe we'll even do all three translations. So yeah, you want to start back with verse 1, Claire, and read Zaehner's version? ⚠
Student
The Blessed Lord said, with roots above and boughs beneath, they say the undying fig tree stands.
Student
Its leaves are the Vedic hymns.
Student
Who knows it knows the veda.
Student
Below, above, its branches struggle out, well nourished by the constituents, sense objects and its legs, below its roots, proliferate inseparably, linked with works in the world of men. No swan of it can here be comprehended, no end and no beginning, no sure abiding place. This fig tree with its roots so fatly nourished, take the stout axe of detachment and cut it down. And then search out that high state to which, when once men go, they come not back again. I fly for support to that from whom evil person, from whom flowed forth primordial creativity. Not proud, not fooled, all taint of attachment crushed, ever abiding in what appertains to self-desire suppressed, released from all dualities, made known in pleasure as in pain, the undiluted march ahead to that state which knows no change. ⚠
Brad
Okay, word. Yeah, I think we're gonna go ahead and read the other translation too, but already you can see some big some big distinctions in the translations, right? I mean, the fig tree is a little bit of an addition here, right? That's not in the original. Maybe something that Zehner's doing. Zehner's a Jesuit priest, Jesuit excellent scholar. I don't want to— I mean, as most Jesuits are. ⚠
Student
Oxford professor.
Brad
I mean, he's passed now.
Student
Where do we end off?
Brad
Logan, so will you read the— we'll go with the Gambhiranda version this time.
Student
The Blessed Lord says, with roots above and branches below, they say the Aśvattha tree is imperishable, whose leaves are Vedic hymns. He who knows it, he is the knower of the veda. ⚠
Student
Below and above its branches spread, nourished by qualities with the objects of the senses. As its root, as its shoots, and below its roots stretch forth, binding to action in the human world. ⚠
Student
Its form is neither perceived here in this way, neither its end, nor its beginning, nor its foundation. Having cut this Aśvattha— ⚠
Brad
I say Aśvattha, but yeah, it's— you can pronounce it however you want. I really don't care.
Student
With its firmly grown roots, with the strong weapon of non-attachment. Then that place is to be sought, having gone to which they do not return again. I seek refuge in that very primal person from whom the ancient creative energy streamed forth. Free from pride and delusion, having conquered the fault of attachment, constantly abiding in the supreme self with desires turned away, freed from the pairs of opposites known as happiness and sorrow, the unbewildered ones go to that imperishable place.
Brad
Right on. Okay, so let's, um, let's just start trying without bringing any commentaries or anything like that. Um, let's just start with the text itself. We've got 3 different translations. You can point out, um, anything that you want, um, and, you know, differences between the translations. Some things I think stand out really clearly in some of the translations but completely obscured in the others. Some, like I already pointed out, Zaehner's adding this fig tree, which I think, you know, we may have some insights as to why he's using that particular tree. And one thing I'll point out to get us started, do you notice anything just visually looking? And you can see this way better in Barberstohler-Müller version, but what do you notice visually from looking at these verses? ⚠
7:59

Analysis of the Cosmic Tree and Vedic Meter

Student
Yeah, this is like one of the first instances where still are Miller's verses longer than 4 lines.
Brad
Yes, so most of the Gita, I mean, there's 700 verses in the Gita and probably, I don't know, 640, 650, maybe more are in Śloka verse, which is this 4-pada, 4-quarter, you know, very I mean, it's in this specific meter, right? And called Śloka metre. But just has 4 parts like dharmakṣetre kurukṣetre samavetā yuyutsavaḥ māmakāḥ pāṇḍavāścaiva kimakurvata sañjaya—that's verse one—so you can hear it's not just—it's four 4 quarters, 2 lines usually. So each line has, you know, 2 quarters. And then in a particular pattern of long syllables and short syllables, right? It's a song. But then you get some verses like these. So verses 2 through 5, where you can tell Barbara Stoller Miller is translating. I mean, it's much longer than 4. Padas, right? It's a different meter. And anybody remember what that signals? I mentioned this when we were back in chapter 2. What does that mean? What does that tell us? Um, so that, that tells us that these, uh, these verses are more ancient than the rest of the text, right? ⚠
Brad
So you've got an author— we have no idea who— but some author maybe a bunch of authors, but somebody is taking older verses like these 4 verses and then commenting around them, right?
Student
So a lot of the Gita is written around older verses.
Brad
So one of the things I told you in chapter 2 was when you see those longer stanzas, you know, the longer, the older meter, then look at the verses around them as sort of some sort of commentary on those older verses, right? An attempt to sort of interpret the verses or something like that. ⚠
Student
But super ancient.
Brad
Ancient is the point. All right, let's dive into them. What are some other things that you notice? Can you draw some connections to other things that we've read this semester or anything? Yeah, Lily, get us started.
10:55

Discussion on Detachment, Samsara, and Eco-Ethics

Student
So too, when it says its branches reached below and above, nirvana's qualities, and then we showered into the world of men, like it's combining both human and nature. ⚠
Student
And I feel like that the tree kind of is representing almost the atman, like the self, but it's reaching down into like everyone.
Brad
Good. Yeah, right on. Yeah.
Student
Others? That was a great start.
Brad
Yeah, Sophia?
Student
Well, I feel like it's interesting that the roots are in the air because you would think that the roots would be more grounded within yourself versus like the physical qualities of the world, where instead the branches are what's below that are like digging into. ⚠
Brad
So this is usually called the cosmic tree, but it's clearly an upside-down tree. So the tree is upside down, right? So different than we would expect.
Student
Yeah, I think that speaks to the lack of importance of human consciousness and rather like human centrality is not a major theme in this text. Like instead it's like Brahman and like not seeing the object or being that seer instead of just being the self. Like it's not the human world that's important as everything else. ⚠
Brad
Okay. What I'm not arguing against you, but what Can you point to the text and say where you see the human world being not as important? ⚠
Student
Well, that was just me kind of drawing from the idea that the roots were in the air. Like, in my mind, if the roots were within the earth, it would kind of— like, the earth would kind of be central as everything goes towards it. But as soon as it points away, it's kind of like showing that divergence from the human world. OK.
Brad
Yeah. All right, fine. Or you could also look at verse 3, so the cutting down the tree, right? Something about being detached, which we would think it's probably more about being detached from the world.
Student
Yeah, that would be consistent.
Brad
Yeah, Colin?
Student
I was going to say, in all three commentaries too, it talks about like the action of cutting down the tree with the axe. So kind of like littering, you know, this talk about karma throughout, you know, you need that action to kind of reach those roots or that kind of greater sense and liberation. ⚠
Brad
So great. So connecting with a lot of themes that we've seen running throughout the Gita, like karma and detachment.
Student
Yeah, well, it's also like they were talking about like when you're using like the sword of detachment to cut down the tree, that then you're able to like reach the divine source and the roots.
Brad
So, um, so you want to get to the divine, to the divine source, of the divine, to the divine source, right? Something like, uh, yeah, I mean, you got the image, right? So the divine source is in the heavens And then, so cutting off, cutting down the tree, but does that mean cutting it off from the source? What do we mean? Yeah. ⚠
Student
I kind of take it, it's not like cutting it from the source, but kind of like making it into like reach, like making it accessible to you and to kind of understand that. So it's, I think it's less like detaching it from the tree in general, but kind of like almost like bringing it down to you where you can access it and find that divine kind of liberation.
Brad
So I'm going to play a little devil's advocate. I'm going to push back. I'm going to argue against everybody, so it's not just you, Colin. I'm going to argue against everybody. What I would love is for anybody in the room to give me an interpretation of these 5 verses that makes sense, that convinced me Yeah, they convinced me. I don't know. So what you just said— say what you just said again. It's more of like kind of changing, like making it more accessible to you. So, okay, yeah. So like to me, the whole idea of the tree is like, is making it more accessible, right? So like you've got the— the divine, right, or God, if you prefer. And so the roots, right, so this tree is kind of growing down in, you know, to the earth, right? And so that to me is making it more accessible, right? So take making the vine coming down to the, what we call the transcendent, right, becoming imminent. So, immanent meaning here and now in this world. So, isn't the tree itself making things accessible? So then, if that's the case, then why cut it down? ⚠
Brad
Yeah, Logan?
Student
I'm kind of interpreting like that the tree is almost like the source of like almost life or creation or some sort of metaphor along that line. Yeah. And like chopping it down, or maybe isn't necessarily like chopping down a whole tree, but maybe like chopping off a root of it and then planting the root. And it's saying like that it has a desire to seek refuge in the original spirit of man. ⚠
Student
Okay.
Student
It's like almost as like the vine wants to rest in us and like prosper with us, in us. ⚠
Brad
So we're trying to go up towards the divine, right? Climbing that tree. Still, I'm not sure why we'd want to cut it down. Yeah, Grace?
Student
This kind of reminds me of in the Bible, I don't think we've read this verse, but it's like the Tower of Babel. ⚠
Brad
Sure, yeah.
Student
The people are trying to reach the heavens, and that's not really the point of it, I guess. It's not like you are supposed to transcend, it's more about that knowledge. It kind of reminds me of that. It's like they aren't connected, you can't reach like the divine. ⚠
Brad
Once you've understood the lesson, cut your ties and do it. Yeah? Okay, word. I dig that. ⚠
Student
Yeah, I thought of it in a very similar way with liberation from samsara, like the cycle of life, where it's like you fully understand, or you know, you grew from the roots, you understand the divine, that's when you detach, and that's like the end of samsara. ⚠
Brad
Okay, so that's along the same lines. Yeah, I think though, and I totally get what both of you are saying, so then you want to cut the ties to that because you've understood the lesson. But doesn't it also say that the leaves are the flourishing? And isn't it almost like the— so I don't know, though. ⚠
Student
Let's look at again. Its branches stretch below and above, nourished by nature's qualities, budding with sense objects.
Brad
So I don't know, maybe it's just because I'm super into ecoethics and eco— ecology in general, and I just love nature. Like, that's so beautiful to me, right? This branch is stretched below and above, nourished by nature's quality. So it's almost like our actions in the world are the fruit of the divine, right? So the whole point of being in touch with the divine— so I totally get what you're saying, like, once you get that sense of what you're supposed to do, then you want to detach and just be. But that seems to me like, why do we have to cut down the tree? Let the tree flourish and blossom. Yeah, Kesley. ⚠
Student
I'm confused by the part in the third verse where it says its form is unknown here in the world, unknown on Earth's ends. Is that saying that the people who might be cutting down the tree do not know that it's as sacred as it is, or don't understand? Is that why they're cutting down the tree because they don't know, and then once they do that act, then it kind of reveals to them because then they go and replant the root. Like, is the cutting down part not as intentional? Like, I'm, I don't know, I'm just confused as to how it's working. ⚠
Brad
So, I mean, uh, fair. So, like, I mean, to really dig into it, we have to dig into the Sanskrit and that kind of stuff, right? But the way it's written in, in these, um, I mean, uh, Zaehner puts the word take in in brackets, right? So it doesn't actually say take, but I mean, it doesn't cut down. I mean, even Stoller Miller's is like cut down. So it's not that people who don't understand are cutting it down, but it's saying, you know, you're supposed to cut it down. It seems like it was a commandment, right? This is— you should do this. This is a good thing to cut it down. ⚠
Student
Yeah. It mentions that the tree is budding with sense objects, so We've kind of been learning throughout the semester that we should detach from these sense objects or just control them in some way. So if the tree is ever growing with these sort of sense objects into these actions that might be good, might not be good, in order to fully detach from this material world, you have to cut down the tree. ⚠
Student
OK. Where?
Student
Yeah, Brad? I mean, the way I see it is that if you cut down a tree, life doesn't end. Maybe the, like, physical tree isn't there, but it decomposes and creates other life. So this, like, tree of divine God is still in everything, it's just in a different form, which is exactly it. ⚠
Brad
Satkāryavāda, the, about the yogurt and milk and everything. So I dig that. Yeah, but also, like, I don't know, we have to cut down the whole tree. ⚠
Student
Well, the other part of that is that you have to detach from that physical tree of the divine God because we can't like see from the lens of God and have that same power. So then when it takes another form, that's like the form that we are capable of like understanding. And then there's that other part that is like still brahman and separate. ⚠
Brad
Okay, Sophia?
Student
Um, I was also thinking about it in the way that like if You're— if you are starting like with the branches in the ground essentially, then like that's where you're like rooted in, but you need to be completely detached from that and like only be left with what are like the roots in the heaven, or like in the divine source. ⚠
Brad
Okay, so if you're cutting down everything here, then you're left with the transcendence?
Student
Yeah, and like that's what you need to be able to be like rooted in the divine source, and then like with that you're detached from like the natural world. So like then you can experience with detached. ⚠
Brad
Totally buy that, but it also seems like I don't want to be detached from the natural world. I want to be one with Brahman, which is the natural world. So like, what is— yeah, Iyana, help me out.
Student
I feel like this sort of reminds me of what you were saying earlier about like the creation and like sort of like the analogy or like the metaphor about like the seed and how that like seed sort of has to like—
Student
so the seed has to die in order for the the tree to grow.
Student
I don't know if that could be something similar.
Brad
It could be, right? I mean, so maybe that's the connection that Zaehner's trying to make with the fig tree that's cursed. So could be. But I mean, seeds come from the tree. And so if you cut down the tree, no more seeds, right? Anybody have some commentaries you want to bring in? Going once, twice. OK. All right, anything else to add? All right. Well, let me show a little bit. My computer, come on. Cast a little bit more insight. Anybody look up Ashwatatri? I found so many images and they're all super low res, and I'm like, this really irritates me, but so this is a banyan tree or ashwatha tree, and this one is in Thailand. So one of the things about a banyan tree is it grows up, you know, and out like a normal tree, but then the branches themselves grow back down. So you've kind of got, you know, tree growing up, but then also growing back down. Some other images. I like this one too. So one of the things— this is— most of these are from banyan tree in Thailand, like I said. ⚠
Brad
And this particular tree is around 350 years old. It's one tree. It's not a forest. It's one tree. There's one, I think, in Florida also that's pretty sizable. And there's one— I mean, there's a bunch in India. One that covers like 120 acres or something like that.
Student
It's very, very large.
Brad
One, you know, one genetically identical. So one tree. But here's another one you can see. Here, I think you can see— ⚠
Student
I'm sorry the quality is so terrible.
Brad
But you can see sort of the central trunk and then the subsequent things that are kind of growing down. Yeah. Here a little bit more. So it seems like this is the trunk until you start to look at some of the other ones. And then you're like, wait, which one is the original trunk, right?
Student
And the answer is probably none of them.
Brad
So anyway, I don't know, does that give you another possible interpretation? Anybody want to— it's a little bit more complex than the amma jadra on the board, right? Definitely would lend support to the samskara interpretation. I don't know, any thoughts? Yeah, Andrew? ⚠
Student
I don't even know if this is related or not, but this, like, just looking at like this one specifically kind of reminds me of that like bed sheet analogy where you got the two planes, like different kind of like meeting points between spirit and the physical world. ⚠
Brad
Okay. Um, it's okay, I don't know if that's relevant, but that's just kind of what jumped out to me. Yeah, no, no, word, absolutely. So like if we were to interpret it from a yoga perspective, which is one of the six systems, then, you know, so then the divine is that realm and the earthly is this realm, the physical is this realm. And so recognizing that Andrew is that joining between the two, but totally agree with that, right? But then doesn't that still mean that cutting the thing means like no more Andrew? Like that's the whole point of Andrew is like to be that unique joining of those two, right? So again, I'm gonna argue against every interpretation. That's part of why I assigned this. ⚠
Student
Yeah. Like, it could be the idea that you have to grow up until you reach the max, and then all the branches kind of turn out and go down, like almost like a circle of life. Once you hit the top, you turn down and go back in. And then also the idea that there's one root for this entire tree, and the one to the max and like how it's just like there's still like pieces of you everywhere with like your branch, but like you go back down into the earth and then like something new comes up from your— ⚠
Brad
I mean, it's a beautiful interpretation, um, and very close, I think, to my own way of thinking about it, um, which is that, right, the whole point of studying theology or anchoring our discourse in a sacred text is to try and ascend to those meaning and purpose and the divine and goodness and justice and all those kind of things. That's the ascending, but then that's all pointless unless we kind of return to the ground, right? And so that descending back to the earth, and that's the flourishing and the fruit of those labors, is our actions of creating justice in the world, creating beauty in the world, all those kind of things. Right? ⚠
Student
So that's the circle that you just described.
Brad
Totally on board with all of it except the cut this tree down part. That part's like, what part am I cutting down? Am I cutting down the roots that are in the divine, or I'm cutting down my actions that are the fruits of those efforts? Again, I'm arguing against— I'm low-key arguing against that one part of the Passage. ⚠
Student
Yeah.
Student
Well, it also says, um, like each interpret— each like translation, they have different words for it, but like this idea that it's like imperishable, unchanging, or undying. So like maybe it's saying like even if you cut down like one root, like the tree is still there. Like it doesn't just die from like one hit that's just like a bump in the road. Like if you just cut down one of these roots, like you might have like missed like the the real true root, so you're just like, you're damaging it but you're not killing it, and the tree itself is like undying and can't be parrot— ⚠
Brad
can't be killed. Okay, all right, I'll take that. Others? Yeah, Caroline?
Student
Maybe kind of going off that, but like going in a different direction, maybe it has something to do with once you cut down the main tree, then the rest of the branches, like, they take all their— like, they come from the main tree, and like all their life comes from the main tree. So maybe it's something about cutting down that one main tree, and then by extension, like, the rest, like, all the other branches will die. ⚠
Brad
So almost like things get a little, uh, clogged, or like you gotta do some, some cleaning, like this just the source of truth, and then it kind of gets muddled with some non-truth along the way, and you got to kind of detach from that and go back to the main source. Could be. Yeah, Emma? ⚠
Student
I feel like it's kind of based off chapter 14 a little bit, but it could be like the tap— or like being attached to the roots, um, could be related to sattva and like attachment to join knowledge, which you're— ⚠
Student
it's easy to be attached to, but you shouldn't be.
Student
So that detachment is like the full liberation from what they call the three gunas.
Brad
Yeah, yeah. Good. I'm just going to push back again, but I love that interpretation. So then, like, sattva is just kind of being, right? It's almost like sattva, rajas, and tamas. Thomas is this— you've got sort of the ups and downs, right? It's rajas and tamas, sort of the ups and downs, the light and the dark and all that kind of stuff. Sattva is just like pure being, right? You kind of want to live in that pure being. So I can understand, understand like the ups and the downs of the tree kind of being the rajas and tamas, but this is the whole tree, sattva. So then like Why cut it down? I mean, all my problems are going to come down to that one thing, like why cut it down? Why get this beautiful image that we can interpret in lots of different ways and then tell us to cut the tree down? ⚠
Student
Yeah, I feel like a lot of it has to do with like the lack of the start and end that we talked a lot about. Like in the next passage, um, and that place is to be sought, um, having gone to which they did not return again. I seek refuge in that very primal person from whom the ancient creative energy steamed forth. And like, that's all it says in, uh, in brackets, but that's a reference for Urusa. And absolutely, cutting down that tree is that return, and that kind of like emphasizes the idea there's no start or end to the universe. Like, the tree will be cut down, but that's not the end, and it's also not the start. So it's just returning, and then maybe that means the another unfolding in the future. ⚠
Brad
Okay, good. I mean, 100% on the Purusha point. There's no doubt that that's a direct reference to the Purusha Sukta. And so the Purusha Sukta, I mean, it describes a dismembering, right? So the one becomes the many, and so it has to divide and become the many. I don't know, there's something there.
Student
So if that one, like let's say this, the Tree of Life is that one, and then I forget who said it, but like the branches coming back down and creating that more life, wouldn't that make sense? If you're cutting down that tree and then it falls down and it all comes back again, that's that further action of unfolding and creation of more. ⚠
Brad
Okay, so the dividing in order to multiply, dividing, yeah, dividing in order to multiply, literally. So Yeah, so kind of Iona's thing about the seeds, right? ⚠
Student
And that would give purpose to the detachment despite the beautiful image that we just talked about.
Brad
It's a pretty compelling interpretation. Yeah, Kayla?
Student
This is a bit more of an ecological interpretation of the cutting it down. But we've talked about it throughout the semester. Nothing is ever destroyed in nature fully. So the tree might get cut down, but everything in nature, it always exists. It just changes form. So like the leaves will decompose and get like eaten by like an animal or absorbed in the soil, and it just like— it still exists in like the overall nature and like the ecosystem. So yeah, it's never actually going away if you cut it down. ⚠
Brad
Yeah, okay. I mean, don't disagree with that, but still like, don't cut down the tree, man. Let it— I mean, it's still gonna happen, right? It's still gonna naturally die and decompose, right? Those cycles are still going to happen whether we hasten it along. ⚠
Student
Um, like, could cutting it down be a way of, like, in Chapter 13 it talks about, like, the difference between, like, the physical body and the eternal soul. So it could be a way of separating the physical body from the eternal soul. And, like, if you cut it down, like, separating the two and just letting the eternal soul rise up to the and the physical body decomposed down into the earth. ⚠
Brad
So that's a lot closer. That's very much on par with Andrew's yogic, dualist interpretation.
Student
Going off of what Anna said before too, with something being imperishable versus perishable, your body would be perishable versus your soul and your consciousness would be imperishable. So that's what would be left over. ⚠
Brad
So I'll buy that one, but the whole point of being Sophia Sofia is to be this version of the consciousness, right? So, like, the consciousness is one, but this consciousness became Sophia, this particular manifestation of the consciousness, for some reason and purpose, right? So again, it seems like I don't want to, you know, cut or detach that uniqueness of the particular. Wise Brad being a jerk. So my point is not to— I mean, I don't think there is a right answer here. I really, really don't. I mean, I don't feel like that way about a lot of passages. But this passage in particular, I feel that way about. I feel like the whole thing would be so much better if we could just delete that one line about cutting down the tree. We can't. That's part of the scripture, right? And so one of the points I want to make here is that scripture doesn't always say what we want it to say, right? It often says things that we don't want it to say. Even more frequently, it says things that we just can't understand, right? There's this kid I've mentioned to you before. ⚠
36:22

Theology as Inscrutable Discourse and Faith Seeking Understanding

Brad
He's in the textbook. Wilfred Cantwell Smith. And he wrote a book on scripture, sacred texts, asking like, what does it mean to call something scripture, right? So on the one hand, scripture means something that's sacred to me, right? But things that are sacred to me aren't sacred to someone else. Something, you know, like the Quran, it may be sacred to some and not to others, right? So then what do we mean when we use the word scripture in general, right? How can it have a general meaning? You know what I'm saying? So this was a problem that Smith was quite devoted to and trying to come up with some— I don't know— some descriptions really of what scripture is. And how scripture is different from other kinds of texts. And one of the things, maybe surprisingly, that he said is that scripture as scripture is inscrutable. My favorite thing about the word inscrutable is that it's inscrutable, right? It's pretty funny. Why do I say inscrutable is inscrutable? Anybody know what it means? Inscrutable means you don't know what it means. So scripture is inscrutable, meaning you don't know what it means. ⚠
Brad
So the word inscrutable is inscrutable because most people don't know what it means. Got the joke? Super funny, like most of my jokes. They're funny after I explained them. Anyway, so scripture is inscrutable, unlike, say, a geology textbook or a chemistry textbook or a calculus textbook or something. I mean, calculus textbook is going to be inscrutable for me. But the idea is that once you learn it, kind of like what Anna was saying, once you learn it, you're done with it. You learn it, you understand it, move on. Whereas, as Smith points out, scripture is inscrutable. And he was a Christian, ordained Christian minister. And so part of this, part of his proof text for this is the parables, that Jesus speaks in parables so that people won't understand. And the whole idea of a parable is it's parabolic. Right? So it goes around the issue and it's somewhat inscrutable. The whole point is to be inscrutable. Why would that be a benefit of scripture? Why would that be an attribute or quality of scripture? Yeah, Lily. ⚠
Student
Because like if someone just says the definition of it, there's no time of thinking about it or actually trying to understand it. ⚠
Student
It just kind of flies over your head and you're told what it means.
Brad
Yeah, word. Absolutely. Yeah.
Student
Kyle? I also think that if there's not like an exact definition too. It can be like experienced differently through different people, so everyone can have their own translation of what it actually means to them, and therefore it means like more to them personally. Word, absolutely. ⚠
Brad
Great. Other things to say, other things to add? Those are 100% on point.
Student
Yeah, kind of similar, but it's adaptable where like we're talking about texts that were written thousands thousands of years ago. So if you say something exact 1,000 years ago, it's not going to apply today. But you can apply a parable to your own life no matter what time period. Okay, good. ⚠
Brad
So if I were to say the sentence, it is raining. Simple sentence, right? Straightforward.
Student
Is it true or not true?
Brad
Depends on the day. Depends on the day. Depends on where you are, right? So right now here, it's not raining. But the same statement could be true tomorrow or something like that. But the idea is that scripture is supposed to convey truth. And truth is always true. So, it needs to convey— so, it's raining, that's not always true. Sometimes it's true, sometimes it's not. But truth is something that can stay speak to different times and different moments to different people in different ways, maybe even to the same person at different times in their lives, right? And so, yeah, so being in dialogue with the text and being in dialogue with others, right, being in discourse with one another is kind of the whole point, right? So the way to do theology isn't to read the book and then understand it and and move on with your life. ⚠
Student
The point of theology is to read the text in dialogue with others, wrestle with the text.
Brad
Maybe there's something about this passage that's why I always end on it is because I feel like it resists maybe every interpretation, but it resists most interpretations, right? It doesn't let you come off easy and just say, oh, it means this. Move on, right? Something that maybe even could mean different things to you based on different things that are going on in your life, right? ⚠
Student
Yeah. So would this be adjacent to faith seeking understanding?
Brad
Beautiful. Yeah. Yeah. It would be another way of saying it, right? Yeah, definitely at least superconnected. Yep. Great. ⚠
Student
All right.
Brad
So I want to shift gears a little bit. As much as I would love to talk about 1866, did anybody have anything that they were eager to say about any other verses in this clump, like 1866 or anything else? Okay, that's fine. Unfortunately, it's the nature of the course and the nature of everything, we don't always have time, or we don't have time to go through everything in the Gita. Here's another image I found this morning as I was searching. This is obviously a shaiva interpretation. But, uh, so you've got shiva up there, and, um, right, so the tree is growing down, and you've got, um, I don't know, or maybe it's even vishnu, I don't know, but, uh, maybe that's Arjuna cutting the ties, the attachment. But again, it still seems like the whole point of the tree is the flourishing, which is our karma or action in the world. So maybe it's Don't be attached to the world, be attached to that, but still let your actions flourish or something. I don't know. Anyway, food for thought, I suppose. ⚠
43:32

Podcast 5 Instructions and Comparative Methods

Brad
So what I wanted to do is shift gears and talk a little bit about, or talk a lot about Podcast 5. So Podcast 5 is worth 15%. Of your final grade. So the podcast's total is 40%, but this one is weighted more heavily. So it's 15 of those 40 points. And along those lines, I'd like you to spend, you know, a little bit more time on it, both a little bit more time preparing and also a little bit more time in the podcast itself. So, you know, let's say maybe like a 30-minute minimum. Kind of thing and try to keep it to less than 45. You know, not going to be like policing it. If, as my guru used to say, it can— he used to give a minimum and a maximum and say, shorter if it's really good and longer if it's really interesting. Right? So like, but aim for 30 to 45. So I try, I spent, I'm not even kidding, I spent like the last 10 days pretty much obsessively working on this prompt. And I really wanted to get it to one sentence. So, and it's definitely a Brad sentence. ⚠
Brad
So grammatically correct but super complicated.
Student
So here's the prompt. So let's just start with that. So for Podcast 5, demonstrate—
Brad
demonstrate is key verb there—
Student
demonstrate your understanding of the core themes and methods that I've emphasized consistently, and sometimes repeatedly, and sometimes parenthetically throughout my lectures, my writings, and the specific texts that I curated for you this semester.
Brad
Right, so that's the task, and here's the how: by applying the comparative methods of the comparative theology methods of Francis Clooney, SJ, who I hear rumored is returning to Boston College next fall, as taught by me in this course in Unit 1 and Unit 4, to to— so applying those to Mark 10:45 and Bhagavad Gita 2:47. I did— I noticed that a lot of folks engaged with 2:47 in your last podcast, which was totally appropriate because it's a super important verse, and I emphasized it then as well. So even regardless of whether you did or didn't, I still like you to to return to it here. You know, if you did already, then you can maybe talk about— I don't know. Whatever you do is going to be fine. So that's the prompt. Let me just read it one more time because I feel like every word here is doing a little bit of work. For Podcast 5, demonstrate your understanding of the core themes and methods that I've emphasized consistently and sometimes repeatedly throughout my lectures. ⚠
Brad
My writings, and the specific texts that I curated for you this semester by applying the comparative theology methods of Francis Clooney, SJ, as taught by me in this course in Unit 1 and Unit 4 to Mark 10:45 and Bhagavad Gita 2:47. So what I did—
Student
first of all, any questions?
Brad
Yeah, Anna?
Student
I know we're like supposed to focus on Mark 10:45 and the Hebrews 2:47, but like, are we allowed to— ⚠
Brad
like, should we bring in other verses? 100%, yes, absolutely. Yeah, so what I did, what I did over the past few days, like I said, just kind of been obsessively, yeah, working on this because I'm like, I'm low-key proud of this course. ⚠
Student
I've been I spent a lot of years working on this course, and every time I teach the course, it's a bit different.
Brad
And I feel like everything this semester came together, like, in terms of the texts and the content of the course. Pedagogy, I'm, you know, still improving, but in terms of the lectures and the written content, I'm pretty proud of. So I thought, I don't know, maybe I just, um, overly optimistic about what one prompt and one podcast can do, but, um, nevertheless, here we go. Um, so I gave you the, the two verses here, both in Sanskrit and then, uh, and in translation. Um, so karmā��i eda adhikāra��te mā phala��u kadācana ma karma phala hetu bhur, ma tesango svadharma ni. So that's another— it's in the Śloka verse, Śloka meter. ⚠
Student
And then so those four, those four padas, pramana, eva, adhikāra, ste. You only have adhikāra to karma. ⚠
Brad
You're right here Yeah, I mean, you kind of got to dig in a little bit, I think, to the grammar and the vocabulary. But your right is to action alone, never to its fruits, never to the fruits of those actions. Let not the fruits of action be your motive, nor let your attachment be to inaction, or akarma. And Mark 10. For the Son of Man— interesting title— ⚠
Student
came not to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom—
Brad
key term there— for many. So as I mentioned a couple of times in the readings and in class, this is a pretty key verse here. So as I said, I spent the past week working on this little document here, going through so many different versions and including a lot of updates even this morning. But it's definitely a collaborative effort between me and Claude Sonnet 4.6 Adaptive, the newest model that came out in the last 10 days. And so we— I'll say we—
Student
worked on coming up with 10 different Margas or 10 different paths.
Brad
So the idea here is I wanted to give you the prompt, right? And my expectations, but also kind of see like what can AI do, right? So I mean, I feel like you are not competing against each other. That's just not my pedagogy. That's not how I view the world. I know CSAM's a bit different. ⚠
Student
That's not how I view things.
Brad
But you are low-key, I mean, not, you are high-key? I never really know how to use high-key. But you are, you are for real competing against artificial intelligence. That is going to be the, you know, the next rest of your life, I think. So, so it's good to at least know what, what a good AI model can do with a prompt like this. AI had no involvement in the prompt. Every time I gave it to the, the AI, it was like wanting to change it. I finally was like, bro, my prompt is fucking perfect. ⚠
Student
Don't mess with that shit.
Brad
Right? See what you can do with it. But the prompt is perfect. It's like, it's really, yeah. It's not gonna change. But the idea was to try and really do the methods, right? So following the methods from, you know, especially March 17th. By the way, I gave you links here. I will post this. I'll post this for you. It's not posted yet. ⚠
Student
But there's links to the course reader.
Brad
So you can just click and open and, you know, search for things in there. Obviously, the transcripts. So if you weren't super clear on the Clooney method, then you could go into here. March 17th, and there's— this is what looked—
Student
what the board looked like that day, right?
Brad
So the idea of comparative theology—
Student
theology is a philosophical investigation of first principles anchored in a canon of texts, including, you know, commentaries to enlighten your understanding of those texts.
Brad
And the whole goal is to really anchor your discourse in the text, try and see it from a variety of perspectives. Right? And then anchor your discourse in a different text, and then, you know, maybe see if the journey, the journey and the sojourn, you know, leads you to new understandings of the original text, which may or may not be sacred to you. And then of course the study tool is there too. So I want to, uh, I want to take a little bit of time, um, and, and just read a couple of these to you. Um, these are all— I have, I've read all of them like 4 or 5 times and gone through a few different drafts. I'm pretty happy with them. Um, but I don't know, anybody want to pick one? So the idea, right, is that you are supposed to Anchor your discourse in 2:47. That could be something that's common to everybody in the podcast, right? So everybody on your team will engage with that one, but as Anna's saying, like, everybody on your team will harmonize, right? ⚠
Brad
That your upasamhara and samanbhaya, so coordinating that text with other passages from the Gita, other passages from the Course, like the Purusha Sukta, Right, and, or Naciketas, and any of them, right? So you can coordinate and harmonize the various texts, the mahavakyas and things, with that one verse. So you're interpreting this verse, but you're using that as an anchor to bring in others and coordinate and harmonize. And then do something similar with the Gospel of Mark, right? You could bring in Any other verse, multiple verses from the Gospel of Mark? You don't even have to focus like all— ⚠
Student
you don't have to spend a lot of time on the core verse, right? I mean, you got to talk about it, but you get the idea.
Brad
And then, yeah, let's just look at one. Any of these stand out?
54:47

Review of the 10 Paths (Margas) and Metaphysical Themes

Student
Let's do the father-son. Father-son sacrifice symphony, Margatu. This is the ear training path, the one that I've been building since January. You listen for a theme that recurs across both canons, hear how it escalates, use upasamhara and samanvaya to let them speak in harmony without flattening the differences, right? ⚠
Brad
The thing that I wrote about in You know, in here.
Student
Reader Chapter 7 in February 5th class.
Brad
So you could always, you know, go back and review some of this. First movement. So you can go in any order too, right? The only requirement is that you're kind of like touching on these two verses. So Sunahsepa, the father sells the son for 100 cows.
Student
The son is bound at the altar with no adhikara and no advocate. He prays, working through the Vedic pantheon, until Aruna releases him. The instrument of liberation is vach, speech.
Brad
He acts without attachment to outcome.
Student
He lives he becomes a seer and is adopted by Vishwamitra as a spiritual son, right?
Brad
So biological fatherhood has failed, but wisdom fatherhood, a spiritual fatherhood, spiritual family, steps in and becomes more important. Second movement, so following this sort of musical theme, Naciketas in the Katha Upanishads, chapter 8, in February 10th class. ⚠
Student
So the father and anchor gives the son to death. The son goes willingly, waits 3 days at death's door, and refuses every gift that Yama offers, all preyas dressed up as prizes.
Brad
He insists on shreyas, right, the third, the third boon, what happens after death, only, the only answer that cannot be taken away. He does not grasp the fruit.
Student
He asked for understanding and receives it.
Brad
He was never really bound. And then coordinating this now, shifting from the Hindu material over to the Christian material. So the akedah in Genesis 22 that we read in chapter 9 in February, the father nearly sacrifices the son. ⚠
Student
Divine intervention provides a substitute, the ram. The logic of substitution enters the Hebrew canon. Abraham's adhikara is the act of obedience. He does not claim authorship of the covenant that follows. And then harmonize this samanvaya with the Passover and the suffering servant, right?
Brad
The ram becomes the lamb. The firstborn becomes the suffering servant. The substitution escalates.
Student
Isaiah 53, he poured out his soul to death.
Brad
He does not claim the outcome. The many receive what he does not retain. And then the final movement connecting finally 10:45 through Gita 2:47.
Student
The Son of Man, elthain, he came.
Brad
Here digging into the commentaries on that particular verb, right? So not an incarnation but a descent really. He came, not incarnate. ⚠
Student
We don't have a virgin birth here, right?
Brad
His psuche, his psyche Is a litron, the sacrifice or the ransom. ⚠
Student
He carries every earlier movement, Sunahsepa's ransom, Naciketas' willing surrender, Isaac's near loss, the lamb, the servant, but now the son structures the act himself.
Brad
He chose it, adhikāra, over the action alone, not the cause of the fruit. The many are unnamed. So these are some passages there. Let's see. The AI was super impressed with the Logan.
Student
So we'll bring in— you interested in that one?
Brad
No, no. No, he's like, no, I don't want to know the Logan, right? OK, all right. ⚠
Student
I don't know what it's saying, but I'm kind of scared.
Brad
I don't know. Alright, so let's see. It's from a comment that Logan said on March 26th. Both points relate back to separating the action from the fruits of action.
Student
Like, you have to go with— you have to go through the suffering not knowing the end goal.
Brad
It matters what your heart—
Student
matters what your heart is within those actions and what you're doing with those actions rather than just purely trying to attain eternal life for yourself. Does that sound like you?
Brad
Take credit for it? All right. Um, okay, so Marga 4, ho odos, right? ⚠
Student
The path and the great reversal. This path is built largely out of what we discussed in class on March 26th. It shows you that you were in the room and followed one of the connections through, uh, on your own.
Brad
So beginning with Mark 10:45 and its context, so James and John have just asked for the two two best seats in the coming kingdom.
Student
The other 10 are furious, not because the request was wrong, but because they wanted those seats.
Brad
The entire room is grasping at fruit, right, meaning the disciples.
Student
Jesus reframes the structure of ambition. Greatness equals servanthood. Power equals self-giving. First becomes last. The lytron, the ransom, is the cost of taking that logic all the way. A question Brad Bannon raised in class: if you want to be first, so you try to be last, is the end still being first? If so, you've only changed the means. What the verse demands is not a different strategy for the same goal. It demands the abandonment of the goal as category. Mā phale��u kadācana. Don't let the fruits be your motive. ⚠
Brad
March 26th: in the early church before Constantine, before Christianity was legal, The movement was called "ho'odos." That's something I've emphasized a few times. On the way, on the road. ⚠
Student
Mark's Gospel is literally structured as a road, as a journey. Discipleship doesn't mean that you understand, as I was emphasizing today's class. It means that you follow, right? And following is emphatically not inaction.
Brad
"Ma theisango swa karmene." Don't be attached to inaction. Quietism, passive, you know, being passive on the sidelines while those around you are suffering. Clause of 247 is built into the grammar of discipleship. You walk. ⚠
Student
Logan's move. Logan made this connection unprompted. Action without attachment to fruit is not a strategy for eventually getting the fruit. The abandonment of the fruit as a category concern. ⚠
Brad
The motivation becomes the action itself.
Student
The great reversal— first will be last—
Brad
and the nishkama karma, action without desire for the fruits, are structurally identical moves in different idioms. And the second half of 247 closes the loop.
Student
Don't be attached, or don't think that you're the cause of the fruits of your actions.
Brad
You're not even the author of what follows. Follows. The reversal happens. Your job is to walk. And that walking always leads to, right, death on the cross. ⚠
Student
Hold the contrast—
Brad
fides quaerens intellectum. So connecting us back to Unit 1 and Anselm, right?
Student
A student observed in class, in the Gita, the horizon is ultimately epistemological. Jnana leads to moksha. Knowledge of what was already true. The disciples in Mark never arrive at that understanding, not even at the end. The messianic secret is never resolved. Anselm's fides quaerens intellectum names Mark's epistemology. Faith is the starting point, not the terminus. Both verses reject grasping.
Brad
They arrive at different places. Um, so both verses reflect, reject fruit grasping.
Student
But the Gita's horizon is epistemological.
Brad
You could also, of course, bring in the Nasadiya Sukta, right, that began and that ends in maybe the gods don't even know, right? So ends in that humility, right? Sort of Socrates, right? I know that I— And I know my own ignorance. There's one more thing up here. I didn't— I should read this. So a little bit of what I'm looking for, right? So the prompt is simple on purpose. ⚠
Student
The simple instruction in a single sentence demands that you make the hermeneutic decisions. So the danger here of giving you all of these 10 paths is that you just follow one of the—
Brad
don't do that, right? But I would encourage you to maybe look over a few of them. As we're doing now, just to kind of—
Student
to get a vibe.
Brad
But you make the decisions. That's the point. You've spent a semester learning the methods and reading the texts, and we've done a lot of this work together in class.
Student
Podcast 5 is your chance to show me what you actually heard.
Brad
Shruti. What follows is not a checklist.
Student
Not a checklist. It's a demonstration.
Brad
10 examples of the kind of moves that I'm looking for.
Student
After much prompting and context engineering, Claude Sonnet 4.6 Adaptive and I created these 10 possible paths together. What Claude cannot do, and what you can, is engage in genuine honest discourse with your teammates, make sincere eye contact, and actually see one another through the text, as I emphasize in Chapter 1. If your motive is your grade rather than a genuine desire to learn from your neighbor, that is always audible in the recording. So act without that particular attachment to the fruits. The text may be taken in any order. There's no requirement to begin or end with either verse. What matters is that both 247 and 1045 are part of the journey, and the journey uses the methods of this course. ⚠
Brad
Um, and do the play, Owen. Let's do Plato. So this path started in January and ran all the way through April. It's not just a classroom activity. ⚠
Student
It's a central metaphysical argument of the course.
Brad
Plato is doing serious work.
Student
Satkariyavada, the effect pre-exists in the cause.
Brad
So the Unit 1, January 27th.
Student
Gosh, that was so long ago, wasn't it? The effect pre—
Brad
I heard a portfolio manager the other day on the radio said something that was like, so this is for the finance people in the class, but said something that just, man, I'd never heard something so true ever. He was like, January sounds like it just happened, but July seems like an eternity away. It's like, uh, it's so true. Anyway, way back in January 27th, ancient history, not like July, which is— ⚠
Student
anyway, the effect pre-exists in the cause. I am the cause of the future. You didn't create the Play-Doh from nothing, you transformed what was already there.
Brad
The pot is already in some sense in the clay.
Student
This is Vedanta's answer to creatio ex nihilo. There is no creation from nothing. There's only transformation.
Brad
Right? First rule of thermodynamics. You are already what you will become. The question is what you shape. The question is what shape you are willing to be transformed into and what you transform yourself into. So connecting that to that theme or that— yeah, thing. Concept of sattva, rajas, sattva, or the yogurt curd, different version of the same thing. ⚠
Student
Connecting it to Chandogya 6, right, Uddalaka's teaching to Svetaketu, all clay pots partake of the nature of clay. They have a different name and form, but the same underlying substance. You are brahman taking on a particular shape. The problem isn't your shape, the problem is mistaking your shape for your essence. And holding that shape rigid while the situation calls for you to be remade. In class I gave an example of svadharma that like I'm not— ⚠
Brad
I don't have particular gifts or talents for nursing. I don't like sick people or old people or bodily fluids or smell. So much about nursing I don't like.
Student
Nursing is great though. We need nurses, right?
Brad
Go do nursing. But it's not my svadharma, right? But if I'm walking down the street and nobody's around and there's somebody who's like, you know, injured and in need and needs medical attention right there and right then, I'm gonna get over myself and help them, right? And provide that nursing care in that moment is the point. So I have to be malleable.
Student
By the end of last semester, as I said, Plato had gotten all dry and crusty, right?
Brad
More like a grad student. It is a joke. Come on, man. It is a joke. It's just more than a joke.
Student
The mind that calcified into its categories cannot receive the teaching.
Brad
The student who approaches these texts already knowing what they mean will mess—
Student
miss what they say. Malleability is a prerequisite for transformation. February 26th, there's a reason I give it, that I bring it every day, the Plato.
Brad
Didn't bring it today, almost did. There's probably some highly significant aspects that no one's brought up in class yet. Sounds like me.
Student
Right, the verse tells Arjuna to act without grasping the fruit, but it also tells him something deeper. You are not the ultimate author of what you do. Karma phala. Pala hetubhur. You're not the cause of the fruits of your actions. ⚠
Brad
You are clay in the hands of dharma, of svadharma, of Krishna.
Student
Your adhikara is to participate fully in the shaping, to entirely, to be entirely present to the action without pretending you control the outcome. The sculptor is the one who insists on a particular shape, will crack the clay. The sculptor who listens to the clay discovers the form already latent within it.
Brad
Leela and Mark 10:45 as Avatar descent.
Student
Krishna's primary attribute is leela, divine play. His creative and incarnate actions are effortless, playful, not burdensome. The universe is not God's labor, it's God's play. As I said on March 31st, playing with Plato is an act of recreation or recreation that is also an act of recreating creation. In Mark 10:45, the Son of Man, Althein, that descended. ⚠
Brad
The grammar—
Student
this is the grammar of an avatar, right? God takes a form, acts within the constraints of that form for the sake of harmony.
Brad
Um, you could also connect that to Om, uh, and to the— get the idea? Yeah. Um, so I'll, I'll provide this to you and make this available to you. I also have like a little bit of rubric because, I don't know. So yeah, what I'm looking for, the difference between outstanding work, the rare few that stand out, excellent work, adequate, all that kind of stuff. I also need to say one thing about the, your final reflection paper. So I haven't given you a prompt prompts and I spent obsessive amount of time on this, so I didn't actually write a prompt. So let me just make one up off the spot here, opposite of all the time that I spent on this one, which is for your final reflection paper, it should be a minimum of 3 pages and a maximum of 3 pages. So somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 pages. Double spaced, normal, all that kind of stuff, right? It's a reflection paper. It should definitely be personal. Definitely be personal. And I think something— I don't want to give you too many constraints, right? Kind of the opposite of this assignment. ⚠
Brad
I want to leave it open. But what I'm looking for is something about theology, something about theology speaking to the present moment. So how is this course— how does theology and sacred texts How does it speak to you as an individual? How does it shape how you understand your own self and your relationship to the world, your own career, profession, especially for those of you that are seniors that are about to graduate, right? Connect it to what you're doing in life in some way. And maybe a tiny bit, a little bit about the value of comparison. Like, what did you learn from Dhu? We could have spent all this time just in the Hindu material. We could have spent all this time just in the Christian material. So basically, theology, right? Theology should speak to the present moment. Theology should be anchored in a text, that whole North Star thing that I opened the semester with. And then something about the comparison. So however you take that, it's up to you. Definitely be personal. Definitely use I. Definitely don't use AI for this. For that one, at least not in the writing. ⚠
1:12:40

Closing and Final Deadlines

Brad
You can use it for the analyzing or whatever. That's fine. Have a good weekend. Your podcast is due Tuesday, but I'm pretty flexible with that. So if you need extra time, it's all good. Just send me an email, let me know if it's going to be Thursday. ⚠
Student
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE] Paper's due Thursday.

THEO 1432: The Religious Quest · Brad Bannon · Boston College

Generated by Mitra