"Every religion in Earth's past, no matter how exclusive in theory, had had influential thinkers who were willing to borrow ideas from contemporary rivals."
-Poul Anderson, "The Three-Cornered Wheel" IN Anderson, The Van Rijn Method (Riverdale, NY, 2009), pp. 199-261 AT VI, p. 251.
Mani claimed to synthesize three traditions. See here.
The Fourth Evangelist borrowed the Logos from Greek philosophy.
Zen synthesizes Buddhism and Taoism.
Ideas also proliferate. See Enforced Uniformity Or Continued Diversity for arguments that 1+1=3 or even that 1+1=7.
Like the Jesuit in Anderson's "The Word to Space," Martin Schuster in "The Three-Cornered Wheel" aims to subvert a theocracy by inciting:
reinterpretations;
reformations;
counterreformations;
revelations;
new doctrines;
fundamentalist reactions;
etc.
Aycharaych also aimed to build such divisions into a new jihad.
I think that the heirs of any tradition can:
conserve their idea of the tradition but in a changing context, thus changing the tradition without realizing it;
reinterpret the tradition which means rejecting conservative interpretations and even sometimes the essence of the tradition;
reject the tradition although they remain influenced by whatever they reject.
In all cases, continuity and change are combined.
There is continuity of monarchy in "The King is dead; long live the King" and continuity of ordered society in "The office of King is abolished; long live the Republic."
9 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I agree St. John took over some terms from Greek philosophy for his Gospel. But that was not the first or earliest work of Scripture to show such an influence. There was also the Book of Wisdom, even if most Protestants deny it belongs in the canon.
Well, even the US has something like "the King is dead; long live the King!" Presidents have died in office and been succeeded by their Vice Presidents. And the US has an elaborately worked out order of succession to the presidency, in case of need.
Sean
Post-Babylonian Judaism was heavily influenced by Zoroastrian forms of Persian religion; so was Christianity, both directly and via its derivation from Judaism. The Sikh faith was partly founded by and heavily influenced by Islam; and Buddhism is historically incomprehensible if you don't know how it emerged from the Hindu world of its day.
Mr Stirling,
I knew of the Zoroastrian influence on post-Exilic Judaism and early Christianity, partly from reading Poul Anderson. I just didn't want to go into all that again this time - but thanks for adding it!
Not only Hinduism: I look on Buddhism as a reformed Jainism just as I regard Sikhism as a reformed Islam.
Paul.
Well, most Hindus regard Sikhs as Hindus. I'd say Buddhists and Jains are both offshoots of Hinduism, but Hinduism is so polymorphous that just about anything can be.
Eg., Western esotericism since the 19th century has been thoroughly permeated by Indian (both Hindu and Buddhist) concepts; Gardnerian neopaganism is, for instance, both through the Theosophists and the associated Golden Dawn and Rosicrucian groups, and directly -- Gardner spent a lot of time in Ceylon and elsewhere in South Asia and was interested in local practices.
The theology is very strongly Hindu-flavored, with some terminological changes; the attitude to the afterlife is very similar, and the concept of multiple phases of divinity that allows for both monotheistic and polytheistic approaches to coexist.
(Hindus tended to regard Madam Blavatsky very favorably, possibly because at the time it was still rare for Westerners to vocally admire their religion; she was also involved with the Indian National Congress in its early phases, and with various Hindu reformist movements.)
Mr Stirling,
The Aryans brought Vedism which the Upanishads transformed into Hinduism.
I think that there was also an ancient Indian ascetic tradition which:
in its most conservative form, died out because its few practitioners starved themselves to death;
in its most conservative surviving form, is Jainism;
is reformed as Buddhism;
is incorporated into Hinduism as Yoga.
Paul.
Paul: the tradition is that the Buddha's parents were orthodox caste Hindus, isn't it?
Dear Mr. Stirling,
Many thanks for your interesting comments. Yes, I agree Exilic and Post-Exilic Judaism (and from there to Christianity) took up some ideas from Zoroastrianism, esp. about, I think, the angels. Altho, since I believe the angels are real beings, that gives me no trouble.
Paul, everything I know about the Sikh religion does not convince me it's a kind of reformed Islam. I think it's easier to think of the Sikhs as a monotheistic development from Hinduism, rejecting its polytheism.
Sean
Mr Stirling,
Oh, yes. I base my remarks on comparing Buddhism and Jainism. Gautama, the Founder of Buddhism, lived in the same "axial period" as Mahavira, regarded as a reformer of Jainism. Jains are soul pluralists and reincarnationists. The Buddha analyzed the concept of "soul," taught "no soul" and replaced reincarnation with "rebirth." Jains are ascetics whereas Gautama practiced asceticism, rejected it and taught a Middle Way between asceticism and hedonism.
Jainism is older. Buddhism refines it.
Paul.
Gautama would have been fetched up conventionally but he was not satisfied with that and went out to seek truth among the mendicants and the unorthodox.
Post a Comment