JAH - ? - View Messages

is it a form of vanity to place one's actions over someone else's?

i ask this after reading a few threads on tatoos, dreadlocks and wearing of rasta colors. if one is to look down on another because they do the opposite of what we ourselves would do, have we not in a way expressed a level of vanity towards our actions?

for the non-tatoo people don't you think that as they criticize the person with a tatoo they feel proud of their no tatoo body?

doesn't the dread lock rasta probably in some form of another appreciate or like his or her locks just as the person shaving is thinking the same of themselves.

isn't it possible that when a non-wearer of rasta garment sees a wearer of rasta colors they place their action above the other and vise versa.

(of course all of these above senarios only refer to one that feels it is their judgement that matters)

my concern when i meet others (rasta or no rasta) is how they treat others and what they wear or how they do their hair or how they decorate their body is of no importance.

respect

Messenger: Ten

Sent: 8/8/2007 6:50:27 AM

I'm wondering the same thing too I, just what do we mean by vanity?

Messenger: Ras KebreAB

Sent: 8/8/2007 7:52:19 AM

Let I ask the I this sistren

when a person gets dressed and goes to the mirror and says "how do i look?" , do you think they are in reality thinking "how do i look?" or are they really thinking " how do i look to other people"

you ever see how in Jewish households, anytime they are mourning a death in the house, every mirror in the house is covered with a cloth?
ever wonder why?

Messenger: still looking

Sent: 8/8/2007 10:19:23 AM

a question i often ask my students is "would you act(dress/talk/music choices) different if you were on a desert island" now i know that would never happen (hopefully), but what i want them to think about (and myself as well) is how much are you influenced by the people around you? do you make your decisions based on what you feel in your heart or is it what you think those around you want or expect.

does vainity just speak to looks or can it also be linked to actions?

i ask because i went through some self-righteousness (is that a form of vainity?) years ago when i became vegetarian. I started to get an "oh, aren't i special type of feel" and when i realized that i could not rid myself of it i went back to meat for a while. i remember thinking that, that was the best way to put me in my place so to speak. i have since returned to that diet, but i can honestly say it really does not mean much to me. it is just what it is and i really only see myself as a vegetarian for the meal i'm eating. i kind of take it like AA --one day at a time.

respect

Messenger: Ten

Sent: 8/8/2007 11:53:32 AM

In a religious context when people reject God for their own inner images then it is considered vainity, right? Because we regard God as that Supreme Force in whose likeness we are made and the material desires of people come to nothing against God. But as people it is our nature to take on a God complex and see ourselves as having greater power than our human limitation. The Jews cover mirrors as an act of humility and deference as people not concerned with the physical image of self during a time of grief. But my thing is when religious practices are then twisted to mean other things - I cover my locks because I am not vain. As if a covering shields conceit in their hearts. And still people can be just as in love with their own image with or without a covering. I think vainity is a dangerous term to use because people have also mutilated their bodies in the most painful ways to show that they are not vain because they say its sinful to be vain - one of the many reasonings behind the shaving of lips in Uganda, FGM as well.
Aya you made the claim that those that shave are vain - is shaving not an everyday practicality of modern cultures? To label it vain is a judgement without consideration of what images have become the cultural norm. If its accepted in a society so be it, whether its for self pleasure or not depends on circumstance, you need to see deeper than the surface - many a dread also love their locks and the appeal they have.

Messenger: Ras KebreAB

Sent: 8/8/2007 12:15:07 PM

im losing the i here i sistren

Messenger: Ras KebreAB

Sent: 8/8/2007 12:20:49 PM

" To label it vain is a judgement without consideration of what images have become the cultural norm"

Is it hard to the I to sight that what i am saying is that it is the particularly vain images that have become the cultural norms in the world today ?

Messenger: Ten

Sent: 8/8/2007 12:23:01 PM

What I'm saying I is that over time people have done and said things against vainity because it is considered sinful right? So some mutilate their bodies, others wear locks, some cover their heads - I'm saying that covering your locks or wearing a beard does not make you any less vain that another who shaves or wears their hair in other ways. People can be just as vain in their hijabs, turbans and beards. Its the nature of the spirit that dwells within. Hope that clarifies one aspect of what I mean.

Messenger: prophecy

Sent: 8/8/2007 12:57:51 PM

this i kinda off the subject or maybe not, but in response to the part when u talk bout rasta garments...

it doesn't matter how much colors(which is such a fashion now), turban, robe,tams, patches, etc. ones and ones wear if ur heart and hands are not clean then the colors become colorless.

ones and ones think flashing the colors makes them rasta or listening to reggae music, but that doesn't bring u to salvation if ur heart and hands are not clean.

In regards to " concern when i meet others (rasta or no rasta) is how they treat others and what they wear or how they do their hair or how they decorate their body is of no importance."

Well, rastas and non-rastas obviously have different values, but doesn't mean I n I don't love each other same way. I think it is different for a rasta to say something to a rasta, because a non rasta does not have the same values as a rasta. What is comes down to is I-spect for others way of life.

Well it may not be important how ones dress, but to many rasta how u dress is important, which is taken from the bible. I know not all see this, but some mansions do or rastas. For example, I personally feel that and empress should dress non-revealing. If I see an empress who wears jeans and I don't, that I don't have the right to say she is not a rasta (for all u know she could be more righteous then I). I can reason with her with love, but if she feels she wants to wear jeans then she gonna wear jeans. But, some places u cannot enter if ur not dressed royal. When I say royal I mean u dress covered up. It goes to belief, but I n I must show each other love same way.

U cannot go to a sabbath service with earrings and a miniskirt. So, it is important to different ppl., but doesn't mean u have to burn the person who doesn't believe wat u believe. I don't see how it is vanity.
As I mentioned, some think dressing royal makes them rastafari, but it doesn't if u act like a heathen. But I can tellu this, a rasta does not serve two masters, so if u love jah and hate ur neighbor ur a lier and u love 2 masters. So, I n I must love each other.
Give thanx for the reasonment.

Messenger: still looking

Sent: 8/8/2007 2:09:22 PM

ten -- is "vanity" only an issue to the religious and am i then considered vain because I personally say there is no god? because to i the issue of vanity or being vain has nothing to do with having or not having a god image.

covering your locks has always been of interest to me. i always wondered that if one is to grow out their hair in rejection of babylon (which is part of the reason) then why would one cover it when out in public.

i was not saying that i think shaving is vain -- i was saying that it might be seen as vain to one that does not shave ---but it couold also go the other way.

respect

1 - 10

Return to Reasoning List