Point to think over the texts Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown

1.                  Brown’s statement on his websites about the book that this book is not anti-Christian, yes obviously it is not, but for those who read or watch, and do not understand properly what it wanted to convey will see it as anti-Christian text. Infect it is rational text on what we perceive as religion, which is not more than faulty institutionalization throughout the history. The book points out the faults lying within the Christianity, where the god is not problems but the problem is the institutions, its rituals, group formation, laws which is also men made to control other human being for interest of some people, and which is problematic.

Yes I agree with his view that the book is constant spiritual journey, an entertaining story that `promotes spiritual discussion and debate. Even he suggests that the book can be used as positive catalyst for exploration and introspection of our faith. Nothing is offensive which book presents, and yes we use it as catalyst for exploration and introspection of our faith, we must ask our self,

What is that I called religion? Is it material thing or the spiritual?

What is basement of my faith? God itself or any sect or group of religion?

On whom I’m putting faith is it on God or the religious guru-priest- or saint ?

What is the truth of my religion? is it merely stories told to have control over others?

Isn’t people in temple taking advantage of my religiosity?

The character like Bezu Fache can only come out of the illusions and trap of religion, who one’s realized that he is being used by his sect of religion. He readily accepts the truth, and changes himself. The same should happen with everybody this is what the real message of the book.

  

2.                  I partly agree with the observation made by Norris J. Lacy, I agree that “screenwriter Akiva Goldsman has retained the novel’s core, the grail-related material; the sacred feminine, Marry Magdalene’s marriage, the priory of Sion, certain aspects of Leonardo’s art”

I do not agree with the statement that “Brown presented in his novel as absolutely true and accurate is neither of those, some of the material is of course essential to the intrigue” Brown has written the work of art-the fictional one and not the history, he just made use of the available knowledge, he never say that it is absolute truth, it is speculative novel and not the documentation of the history. He had taken some liberty to write work of art.   

3.

There is nothing like chamatkar or the way bible tells the story of the creation, that on the first day god made this on second this and so on.. and in this way the world is created by the god; this is what Geneses speaks about. Paradise lost is newer version of that story in which it said that god made a man and from man’s rib god made Eve. These two are rather seems fanciful story to the young mind in today’s world. Now days the science has grown very much than our imagination and so the young generation they have very well knowledge of Genetic science and biology. They will not easily believe in what perhaps Genesis or Paradise lost speaks about. But the world which Dan Brown has presented is more real and more convincing than the above two, it clearly point out that the world is made up of both the male and the female and that is how the new creation happens. The book tries to give justification to the lady who has always been looked as prostitute, who really is Jesus’s wife-(if there is blood line of the Jesus).  

4.

Biblical story and the paradise lost were the truth of their own days, but they could not pass the test of time.

In Bible human rarely get chance to speak, it harmed world by dividing world in two opposite binary good-bad, Male-female and so on. Bible blames woman for the sufferings of the world. It incepted the thought and thinking to see women as reason of pain, suffering, agony, and discomfort this harm done by biblical stories.

Paradise lost by Milton tells the same story but in revised version where human get more importance, at least Adam and Eve get voice in it. What harm it has done to human society is that, it formed role of man and women in society- this role played by man, and that of by woman. Other harm it had done is that women is always argumentative, you cannot win over her in that. Adam was two times convinced by Eve by strong arguments, first to work separately and second time to eat apple. And this argumentative nature of women will always win over you but if you follow her it will obviously bring evil, bad end, and it will always lead to fall of the man. It suggests one to think in this way is very harmful for the harmony in society.

where as the text by Dan Brown does harm to humanity by spreading idea to keep secrete as secrete.

5.

Yes, this novel lead me into critical thinking about my religion, the question which I raised in first answer are the result of the critical thinking motivated by this novel.

Yes we can think of the hindu religious symbol, e.g. the SHIVLING, which symbolize the phallus of man and women. The top of the Ling symbolize man phallus, whereas the bottom part symbolize woman’s phallus. It symbolizes the combination of the man and woman is necessary for the regeneration and this is what nature made up of.

Another symbol is of same HINDU god SHIVA which is called ARDHNARESHVAR(it consist half body of male and half of female ), which again lead to think in positive way, it symbolizes equality among male and female, both has equal right and role in nature. In deconstruction reading it can be read as the intercourse between man and woman and which would probably the hidden meaning of the symbol. It is the nature and it can’t be avoided in any of the way. One can be spiritual even though one is with woman there is no need to be abstain from women.

6.

If we do traditional reading of the novel Da Vinci Code than Langdon would be the protagonist of the novel, but when we change our way of reading and do atheist reading of the text our protagonist will be changed, and once who is protagonist in traditional reading become villain here.

With this glasses Leigh Teabing becomes our protagonist, he is an anthropologist and British historian. Until the end he played various roles, but the end part of the novel and movie reveal his real identity, he always behind the search of the secret of the holy grail throughout his life. He wanted to know the Secrete to reveal it to the world thus everybody men and women can live freely without fear of any kind. He tells Langdon “Let them Live with life, make them free”. He really wanted to liberate people and humanity in general by telling the truth of the Holy Grail, it’s the way to make them free. Being an atheist he wanted to make world and humanity free from religion.

In this way of reading Langdon becomes villain, his life story become like a pilgrimage where he is in search of The holy grail and at the end find out it, he climb and he bow down to the destination when he reached there. The problem atheist would find in that is the novel identified god’s presence; which probably most problematic for an atheist (because they did not believe in existence of God), the more grave concern is that the Langdon knowing the truth/secrete and yet kept it as secret this is what harmful for society. Had it been Leigh Teabing he would have opened up the secret.