Real and Ideal
Part of the Western tendency to romanticize Eastern traditions is that we see them only in terms of their ideal. Many Westerners think of Tibet or China or India as an idyllic land of sages, because they have studied some Asian philosophy and spirituality, and assume that the land and people which produced it actually lives up to the ideals it expresses.
In contrast, they see Christianity not in terms of its ideal form, but in terms of how it actually functions in the world, because we have much more actual exposure to it. So when these Westerners think of Buddhism, Hinduism, or Taoism, they think of enlightened beings, but when they think of Christianity, they think of boring church services, kooky televangelists, and pedophile priest scandals.
One wonders if Christian converts in Asia idealize Christianity in the same way that Westerners idealize Asian traditions.
The reality of one tradition can never compare to the ideal of another. All living traditions contain examples of human folly and imperfection, as well as examples of human greatness and transcendence. To focus on only one or the other is to have an incomplete view.
Instead, our approach to studying traditions should be neither the romanticism of the new age believer, nor the skepticism of the academic debunker, but should contain both the openness of the former, and the discernment of the latter.
To some extent, the belief that there must be somewhere where human beings do and are better than here is an expression of the intuition that the divine is real, and that we ourselves can be better. In the world of Tradition, this intuition and longing found expression in the idea of a better world in the ancient past, in the coming future, or in another realm. This conveyed the idea that in order to get to or restore that place, work is necessary. But in the modern world, many people cannot think outside of earthly geography, and so this longing is instead projected onto foreign lands, and people’s idea of working towards spiritual growth is saving for a plane ticket to India. The recent film The Darjeeling Limited portrayed several Americans who hold this delusional belief.
Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press
I do not think they romanticize anything–most people in our regions were converted to Christianity by force by Portugese, and later lured by money offered by missionaires, and stories of how they can attain heaven…I can’t speak for those who “convert” on their own, drawn to doctrines…Islam and Christianity have violent history in a non-proselytizing culture such as ours–they are agressive religions as opposed to the Eastern religions…which is why in our regions they are in constant quarrel with them: they are agressive and do not respect the non-proselytizing nature of the native tradition….
Comment by kadambari — 2010-07-24 @ 12:16
Also those who have become converted in our regions have complete amneisa of the land in which they were born and of their own traditions: Jerusalem and Mecca become of importance in terms of loyalty, not the native land. Which is why I am against conversion in principle–it destroys the historical memory of a peoples and destroys connection to the motherland…I don’t think Easterners have ever been opposed to benign Christians who mind their own business and do not want to convert the entire land into Christianity…It was India who gave a home to persecuted Christians and Jews and others throughout history…No people likes it when something is “imposed”…We tend to see converts as rootless and without “tradition”…but if someone is drawn to another religion by truth of principles and does not impose it upon others, no one has ever had a problem with that…India was always known for tolerance in religious matters…
Comment by kadambari — 2010-07-24 @ 12:23
Also Easterns have their own traditions which are entirely different from those of the Mid-East, there is no idealization…just conversions by missionaries of poor people. It is rare to find educated, people rooted in the native traditions idealizing Christianity…or Islam…
Comment by kadambari — 2010-07-24 @ 12:29
Among common folk in the East the attitude to Christianity is something like this: once when I was living in Boston with a Hindu family, there was a Christian sect that constantly came to the house to preach Christianity in an annoying way, talking the lady for stupid and misguided for not being Christian. The lady of the house was presented with a Bible. She took it with respect. It’s a holy book after all she said and put it on the bookshelf, although she herself had no desire in becoming Christian. This sums up the Eastern layman’s attitude towards that which other people hold sacred. Now this was not a highly educated lady by any means, but she was brought up well to understand what the “sacred” means and respected it…The problem in the East has always started because of agressive proselytizing…because Easterners do not have that concept. Strange sects like Hare Krishnas who try to proselytize are mostly made up of confused Westerners, who having been cut off from their own traditions, need to fill the void…
Comment by kadambari — 2010-07-24 @ 13:14
Alan Watts, in his biography, has a passage where he admits that all the aspect of Zen that charm him bore Japanese youth; the old temples, incense, etc. are all to them “kurai” which he glosses as “like an old abandoned graveyard;” creepy, in short.
On the other hand, in Beyond Theology, he writes of trying to “get into” the plainness and downright ugliness of Protestant culture, especially in America, and finds that he can — it has a strange charm. On my blog, I’ve speculated that this explains the strange appeal of the Dwight character on The US Office.
Comment by James O'Meara — 2010-07-24 @ 18:03
It would be helpful to have a link back to the original article.
Comment by Cologero — 2010-07-25 @ 15:54
[...] Also, with unrelated bonus quote: [...]
Pingback by On castes « Reditus: A Chronicle of Aesthetic Christianity — 2010-07-26 @ 21:06