Disparate Persuasions?

All religions seem to be concerned with what we call “the sacred” and “the holy.” Most contain an imagery of transcendence or “the beyond”; it seems that the goal of immemorial religious practice is to strive after what is “above”, leaving behind what is “below.” For instance, Vedantic Hinduism states that all things of the world below are “maya” or illusion. The religious quest necessitates rising above “maya” to the pure consciousness or Brahman. The Jaina strives to rise above the effects of “karma”, eventually reaching the pinnacle of purity and sublime detachment. For Buddhism the world of “samsara” or endless rebirth driven by ignorance is overcome by the cessation of desire (“tangha”) leading to “nirvana.” Within the Confucian tradition, the human person is said to balance out heaven and earth. Confucius  (551-479 B.C.) advocated the attitude of human-heartedness (“ren”), and that a strict hierarchy of persons be established; for example, the obedience of children, wives, servants, etc.. Self-regulation holds the key to harmony, a process that requires careful attention and effort. Each person is expected to play his/her part in maintaining and enhancing the social order. For the Taoist, the “way” is found in the balance of the above and below, the “yin” and the “yan”. Rather than striving to be virtuous, Lao Tzu advocated doing nothing at all (“wu wei”), letting things follow their own course, non-interference like the “Great Feminine”, water, the valley, the infant, and the uncarved block. For Lao Tzu, the weak ultimately prevail. In both Confucian and Taoist traditions the intent is to enter into the way or Tao, a place for harmony that for Confucius is obtained through rigour. For Taoists this harmony is always present, though persons generally fail to avail themselves of it precisely because of their activity. By establishing oneself in harmony through either approach one becomes a sage, worthy of veneration and a source of inspiration to others. Each of these persuasioins speak to us in their own way.                                                                                  

                                                                            

The Vedic dream to fulfil one’s desires has virtually universal appeal, as does the urgency of the Upanishads for one to abandon concern with ephemerals and marshal his faculties for seeking out one’s true self. Jainism’s definition of life challenges us more acutely to consider the impact and implications of our daily actions upon other life forms. The Buddhist emphasis of the transitory nature of what meets the eye serves as a reminder to all people not to search for absolutes in the realm of change. The Confucian quest for propriety holds an undeniable appeal, particularly for societies rocked by uncertainties and upheaval. And the Taoist abandonment of ambition and self-concern seem like good medicine, especially with those obsessed with activity aimed at their self-image and aggrandizement.

            Looking at these religious systems and ways of thought, one is tempted to exclaim, “How very Christian!” and he would not be entirely wrong, since one cannot help arriving at the conclusion that every religious persuasion calls for the minimizing of arrogance or “hubris” in order that a higher value can emerge to which one can attach oneself, and which guarantees stability, permanence, and harmony. And this is precisely the imperative of Christianity.

In the Paschal Mystery of Jesus one can discern the self-emptying of the Incarnate Son as the basis of the virtues of all the religions and the indispensable condition of acceptance by God who takes over our life to make it into something beautiful. Surrender to God through self-divestiture is the key, and this was achieved pre-eminently by Jesus Christ “who, being in the form of God…emptied (“kenosis”) himself” (Phil 2, 6-7).