> It seems to me that religions shape history more than history shapes religion.
Religion does shape history. But only the "true believers" think history does not shape religion. To succeed, no religion can be too much at odds with the basic culture of its birth place. If it does, nobody will believe it. After the initial embryonic stage, all religions have to deal with the greater political environment surrounding them. This interaction too effects them. The origin of most Kosher laws, I am told, goes back to an effort to preserve the Jewish culture and the "distinctiveness" of Jews. I doubt such a need would have been so pronounced if the Jews had had a land of their own and did not feel so threatened.
BTW, history has had a great effect on Islam too. Perhaps you care to elaborate on that. In the early days of Islam, it seems that Mohammed did not care much for establishing an Islamic state, let alone converting people by force. But perhaps his exile into the baren desert and boycott of the Muslims put him on a different path. Once Islam spread, the various branches in Islam fell neatly into the ethno-clutural lines of the middle east. The persona of "Imam" in Shia is identical to that of "King" in Persia (especially during Achamedians". Even the Sunnis, if I am not mistaken, do not consider peacock meat kosher. This is not in accordance of Islamic kosher laws, but the Persians do have a great love and respect all things beautiful and so looked at eating peacocks with disdain...anyway, I live it at that for now...feel free to contribute. |
