CONVERGING ON “KENOSIS”
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 systems speaks to us in its 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.
During
the season of Lent our focus is on the Paschal Mystery of Jesus. 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).
Let
this Lent be a period of steady assault on the prideful self.
No comments:
Post a Comment