Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Syncretism, Activism, and the Force
In the class World Religions today, we got to the topic of syncretism. In other words the blending of different traditions, beliefs, or practices for personal or religious use. We were told that in the end, syncretism really doesn't hold up. And a religion or philosophy developed over generations rather than at once is a much firmer ground for a foundation. Agree?
Also, we were contrasting the basic differences between Eastern and Western theology. In the west, God is considered very personal and imminent. In the theistic tradtions of the East, however, deities are far more impersonal and distant. Our teacher, no expert on religions, briefly mentioned Buddhism as being unique of not having a particular god but rather having a kind of universal force. Hmmm. Don't recall ever reading that.:hrm: Karma perhaps he was referring to???
And lastly, more for opinons here, activism. Activism has always been stressed in the West. Conquerors, imperialists, all trying to bring civilization to the uncivilized. Not always a bad thing. I mean toilets beat buckets any day. This could be part of the reason why the Western Hemisphere has essentially dominated the world. But the East is slightly different. Perhaps egotism plays a part in this too. Fierce individuality and big egos caused Westerners to spread across the world to impose their religion and society on others.
But let's look at the good kind of activism. The humanitarian, selfless kind, not the greedy capitalistic, imperial kind. Do you think Buddhism does a good job on it?
Being as organized as it is, the Catholic Church, and Christianity as a whole participates much more in global humanitarian efforts than just about any other religion. Sometimes I feel in a way Buddhism does not engage enough in society. Like others have said on this site, the modern Buddhism can no longer be a way to escape society through monasticism, but rather must actively confront the political, social, and economic issues of the world head on.
I think Thich Naht Hanh is the the perfect model for an engaged Buddhist. Like he said, "A monk cannot sit and meditate in the temple as bombs are dropped in his country. A bomb may drop right through his temple."
This is probably one of the primary ideas I held onto from Christianity into Buddhism. The desire for social justice.
(Sorry I bunched and rambled so much. Didn't feel like making 3 separate posts)
Also, we were contrasting the basic differences between Eastern and Western theology. In the west, God is considered very personal and imminent. In the theistic tradtions of the East, however, deities are far more impersonal and distant. Our teacher, no expert on religions, briefly mentioned Buddhism as being unique of not having a particular god but rather having a kind of universal force. Hmmm. Don't recall ever reading that.:hrm: Karma perhaps he was referring to???
And lastly, more for opinons here, activism. Activism has always been stressed in the West. Conquerors, imperialists, all trying to bring civilization to the uncivilized. Not always a bad thing. I mean toilets beat buckets any day. This could be part of the reason why the Western Hemisphere has essentially dominated the world. But the East is slightly different. Perhaps egotism plays a part in this too. Fierce individuality and big egos caused Westerners to spread across the world to impose their religion and society on others.
But let's look at the good kind of activism. The humanitarian, selfless kind, not the greedy capitalistic, imperial kind. Do you think Buddhism does a good job on it?
Being as organized as it is, the Catholic Church, and Christianity as a whole participates much more in global humanitarian efforts than just about any other religion. Sometimes I feel in a way Buddhism does not engage enough in society. Like others have said on this site, the modern Buddhism can no longer be a way to escape society through monasticism, but rather must actively confront the political, social, and economic issues of the world head on.
I think Thich Naht Hanh is the the perfect model for an engaged Buddhist. Like he said, "A monk cannot sit and meditate in the temple as bombs are dropped in his country. A bomb may drop right through his temple."
This is probably one of the primary ideas I held onto from Christianity into Buddhism. The desire for social justice.
(Sorry I bunched and rambled so much. Didn't feel like making 3 separate posts)
0
Comments
Syncretism gets a bad name in RE classes and among theo-historians with short historical sight. It does, however, need to be understood across a broad sweep of time. The Romans, for example, used a syncretic method to integrate local religious practice into an overall structure which, itself, is a syncretic mix of Greek and Etruscan. Here, in the UK, we have a perfect example at the city of Bath, where the goddess Sulis becomes Minerva (Athena) Sulis.
The Egyptian pantheon, whiere power shifted across the centuries between Horus, Ra, Amun and Ptah, imported many 'foreign' ideas as well.
Some commentators (David Rohl, for example) maintain that the Yhwh god that Moses introduced into Israelite religion was adopted from the more anciet Sumerian supreme deity whose name, in Western Semitic, is Eyah, which sounds like "I am" in Hebrew!
Buddhism, in its spread outwards from Northern India, appears to have accomodated very easily to any religious system with which it came into contact. In Tibet, for example, although Bon precedes Buddhism, it is now seen by some writers as the source of that which is now called Dzogchen, with which it happily co-exists. HHDL is also a Bon initiate, for example.
This ability to adapt and live together used to be part of the Christian approach, particularly in the non-Roman, Celtic churches (which were here in Britain long before the "Italian Mission" of Augustine of Canterbury). Evidence of this continued until the 17th century when the rise of proto-evangelical iconoclasm filled in holy wells, pulled down stone circles and tried to forget. Folk memory, however, is not short and, in Cornwall and Ireland for example, you will find brand new 'Celtic' crosses which are pre-Christian in origin.
Buddhist-Christian Parallels and History
Comparative Sayings of the Buddha and Jesus
From: The Original Jesus: The Buddhist Sources of Christianity
by Elmar R. Gruber & Holger Kersten
Comparative Sayings - Buddha and Christ