Thinking activity : The Da Vinci Code

The Bible did not arrive by fax from heaven. The Bible is the product of man, my dear. Not of God. The Bible did not fall magically from the clouds. Man created it as a historical record of tumultuous times, and it has evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book.

This is a quote by the sir leigh Teabing who is a character of the Novel Da Vinci Code by the  Dan Brown. Around this Novel there is lots of controversy we see the reason is that this novel talk about the blood line of Jesus.   When we look at the idea of Original sin  from Genesis we also see that there is also written that because God don't like that Adam and Eve eat the fruit of knowledge and they send them to Earth. And also church believe that we all born sinful. When. We look at the narrative of it we can say that if God don't want Adam and Eve to eat fruit then why he make that fruit. And also there is a question that if he is God then what he has a problem if we get the knowledge. Also we see that Bible also have some other narrative Problem like "is earth flat". Also when we look at the idea of Original sin then we can say that giving life can only do God then how we are result of sin.

When we look at the Genesis we see that there are some question remain answer. In Milton's paradise lost book 9 we find the same story told from Human perspective.  But there narrative we see that has Eve is shown responsible for everything. And we see that there is change in her character because she resist and argue against Satan. When we look from Genesis to Paradise Lost to Da Vinci Code we found that the main problem is not knowledge not even in resistance against god. The actual problem is fever between sex and spirituality.  When we look all this we see that they ( Christen ) won't see there God do humanly things. As they also see human as result of sin. 

When we look at all this narrative we found so many problem. But we should accept that if Christ has lived as human. So we should have problem with the fact that he may have blood line. 

As we know that now a day's all Literary text has its movie adoption. So when we look at the movie of Hamlet by Kenneth Branagh we see that character of Ophelia that time we see that though there is no need to show some intimate scene between her and Hamlet that are shown. That shows character of Ophelia is used to show the relation in negative way and she used as papet. She also objectified to satisfied male gaze.  Also when we look at this thing in character of Elizabeth in Marry Shelley's Frankenstein adopted by Kenneth Branagh. We see that the character of Elizabeth shown in the same way the character of Ophelia is shown. There are some sexual scene which are unnecessary and also that kind of character is not shown in the Novel by Marry Shelley. Here we see that is very unnecessarily shown. The same kind of potential we see the character of Hester Prynne by  Roland Joffé's The Scarlet Letter'.

 While when we look at the adoption of Da Vinci code by Ron Howard he doesn't show any unnecessary objectification of charachar of Sophie Neveu. Also we see that he was stick towards it's main theme of Sacred Feminine. 


When we talked about religion it is always based on the faith and metaphor and symbol. 

 Every faith in the world is based on fabrication. That is the definition of faith―acceptance of that which we imagine to be true, that which we cannot prove. Every religion describes God through metaphor, allegory, and exaggeration, from the early Egyptians through modern Sunday school. Metaphors are a way to help our minds process the unprocessible. The problems arise when we begin to believe literally in our own metaphors.
Should we wave a flag and tell the Buddhists that we have proof the Buddha did not come from a lotus blossom? Or that Jesus was not born of a literal virgin birth? Those who truly understand their faiths understand the stories are metaphorical.

When we read this thing we can also think in same way and also can do deconstructive reading of our Religion also. The very first question raised is about the Ram that was also in Debetable because of Ram mandir issue in india. We consider Ram as God but when look that thing we found that he was also motal human being. He has the life and death the way human has. Also we can say that because he has some good skill we start consider them as God. Here when we look at him we can say that there is no doubt that he was a prince of Ayodhya but then there is question of his being a god.

When we look at the Novle with traditional way we see that Robert Lagdone enrage as a protagonist but when have to do atheist reading of the Novel we can not consider him as a protagonist. Because when he comes to know about the Holy Grail and where it originally hide he didn't tell anyone. If he tall everything then there is chance that humanity can be free from this much big and effective Religion also there is a chance that he can allow humanity to think beyond Religion and work from human well fare. That thing we see in the Novel  sir Leigh Teabing wanted to do. So when we do atheist reading of the Novel he can be considered as a protagonist.

When we look at the Novel there is three layers of Knowability. In this Novel there is three layer of  knowledge.

1. Murder Mystery.
2. Identity of Sophie Nuvu.
3. Holy Grail.

The sophie Nuvu' s quest of identity can be compare with human beings quest of identity. To know yourself and to know the self.  Also we see that every layer of knowledge is for not Evey person. In this we see that only Robert Langdon can come to Know about the actual place of Holy Grail. That shows that some secret are revel to them only who has ability to kept that secret as secret.