Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:14:22 -0600
From: Anthony Bryant <
ajbryant@...>
Subject: Re: Swords and spirits: a few new thoughts, and a little theology
Silk Road School wrote:
> As to the subject as a whole... gentlemen, I find it hard to believe
that
> in a forum for the discussion of samurai history, you both regard it as
> inappropriate to address their beliefs. ...At least their religious
> beliefs: bushido (and its modern offshoots and parallels) are appropriate
> but Shinto (and its) are not?
I have no problem talking about *their* beliefs. What I have problems with
is
modern metaphysical claptrap.
Tony
G: This is the worst-aimed thrust I've ever seen out of you, Tony, so I
almost have to assume that certain prejudices (prejudices which crop up
fairly routinely, alas, among many members of your mystery cult) have dimmed
the usual clarity of your thinking. The principles of Shinto, even in the
speculative form discussed by me on this forum, are scarcely modern. Now as
it happens (though it may come as something of a surprise to you), I never
wanted to see this list become a comparative theology forum, and (though it
may come as another surprise) I am as heartily tired of this subject as you
appear to be.
But insulting somebody's faith isn't the way to put an end to
such a discussion. Consider how you'd react if I described your church as
modern metaphysical claptrap: Eastern Orthodox, I believe you said (and you
brought it up in a context far more distantly related to the list's topic, I
might add, than was mine when I brought it up). Now I could certainly make
a case for any Christian sect falling into the category of modern
metaphysics, while as to claptrap... well, only if I chose to be so rude.
Because after all, one man's metaphysics is another man's theology: and
which one is which, of course, is entirely a matter of belief and
perspective.
Please recall that I only entered this discussion, Tony, when
someone ridiculed a principle of my beliefs, to wit the old idea that swords
may have spirits. So in the process of discussing that point, some
explication of those beliefs became necessary (as it seemed to me) in order
for my points to be clearer... and also to promote the sort of dialogue that
can take place among folks who're capable of civil disagreement on matters
of faith. I think this intellectual community should be capable of that
courtesy. This is particularly important, as I see it, given the
theological diversity that can be seen across the span of samurai history.
(You should be more aware of that than I.) It seems to me it would promote
healthier dialogues if, for example, the role of Christianity among the
samurai (a subject of some interest to me, in fact) could be brought up
without Christians on the list feeling that their faith is going to be
subjected to insults by those who hold with other, in some cases older,
religions.
Because ideas relating to Shinto traditions, and even the idea of
comparing these traditions to other world religious traditions, or for that
matter to personal experiences, is only modern metaphysical claptrap if the
original traditions are metaphysical claptrap. And of course, that can be
said about any man's religion.
Tony, I think you are capable of criticising my views more
rationally, more politely, and more effectively than this. And if what you
really want is an end to this subject, you can be certain you'll achieve
that goal more effectively through courtesy or silence than through a petty,
ill-calculated insult like this one. I deeply resent needing to defend my
beliefs - whatever you may think of them - against such an insult:
especially in what is supposed to be civilised company, and most especially
from the most rarified intellectual stratum of the group. It's unworthy of
you. If you can offer some kind of rational support for your disagreements,
and can manage to be polite about it, that's another matter. Then we can
discuss theology (off-list, for the gods' sake!) as long as you please. But
you've crossed a boundary here that no one on the list should have to take.
In honour,
Gereg