2021/08/05

Jakob Böhme - Wikipedia

Jakob Böhme - Wikipedia

Jakob Böhme

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Jakob Böhme
Jacob-Böhme.jpg
Jakob Böhme (anonymous portrait)
Born24 April 1575
Died17 November 1624
Other namesJacob Boehme, Jacob Behmen
(English spellings)
EraEarly modern philosophy
RegionWestern philosophy
SchoolChristian mysticism
Notable ideas
Boehmian theosophy
The mystical being of the deity as the Ungrund ("unground", the ground without a ground)[1]
Influences
Influenced

Jakob Böhme (/ˈbmə, ˈb-/;[2] German: [ˈbøːmə]; 24 April 1575 – 17 November 1624) was a German philosopher, Christian mystic, and Lutheran Protestant theologian. He was considered an original thinker by many of his contemporaries[3] within the Lutheran tradition, and his first book, commonly known as Aurora, caused a great scandal. In contemporary English, his name may be spelled Jacob Boehme; in seventeenth-century England it was also spelled Behmen, approximating the contemporary English pronunciation of the German Böhme.

Böhme had a profound influence on later philosophical movements such as German idealism and German Romanticism.[4] Hegel described Böhme as "the first German philosopher".

Biography[edit source]

Böhme was born on 24 April 1575[5][6] at Alt Seidenberg (now Stary ZawidówPoland), a village near Görlitz in Upper Lusatia, a territory of the Kingdom of Bohemia. His father, George Wissen, was Lutheran, reasonably wealthy, but a peasant nonetheless. Böhme was the fourth of five children. Böhme's first job was that of a herd boy. He was, however, deemed to be not strong enough for husbandry. When he was 14 years old, he was sent to Seidenberg, as an apprentice to become a shoemaker.[7] His apprenticeship for shoemaking was hard; he lived with a family who were not Christians, which exposed him to the controversies of the time. He regularly prayed and read the Bible as well as works by visionaries such as ParacelsusWeigel and Schwenckfeld, although he received no formal education.[8] After three years as an apprentice, Böhme left to travel. Although it is unknown just how far he went, he at least made it to Görlitz.[7] In 1592 Böhme returned from his journeyman years. By 1599, Böhme was master of his craft with his own premises in Görlitz. That same year he married Katharina, daughter of Hans Kuntzschmann, a butcher in Görlitz, and together he and Katharina had four sons and two daughters.[8][9]

Böhme's mentor was Abraham Behem who corresponded with Valentin Weigel. Böhme joined the "Conventicle of God's Real Servants" - a parochial study group organized by Martin Möller. Böhme had a number of mystical experiences throughout his youth, culminating in a vision in 1600 as one day he focused his attention onto the exquisite beauty of a beam of sunlight reflected in a pewter dish. He believed this vision revealed to him the spiritual structure of the world, as well as the relationship between God and man, and good and evil. At the time he chose not to speak of this experience openly, preferring instead to continue his work and raise a family.[citation needed]

In 1610 Böhme experienced another inner vision in which he further understood the unity of the cosmos and that he had received a special vocation from God.[citation needed]

The shop in Görlitz, which was sold in 1613, had allowed Böhme to buy a house in 1610 and to finish paying for it in 1618. Having given up shoemaking in 1613, Böhme sold woollen gloves for a while, which caused him to regularly visit Prague to sell his wares.[7]

Aurora and writings[edit source]

There are as many blasphemies in this shoemaker's book as there are lines; it smells of shoemaker's pitch and filthy blacking. May this insufferable stench be far from us. The Arian poison was not so deadly as this shoemaker's poison.
— Gregorius Richter following the publication of Aurora.[10]

Twelve years after the vision in 1600, Böhme began to write his first book, Die Morgenroete im Aufgang (The rising of Dawn). The book was given the name Aurora by a friend; however, Böhme originally wrote the book for himself and it was never completed.[11] A manuscript copy of the unfinished work was lent to Karl von Ender, a nobleman, who had copies made and began to circulate them. A copy fell into the hands of Gregorius Richter, the chief pastor of Görlitz, who considered it heretical and threatened Böhme with exile if he continued working on it. As a result, Böhme did not write anything for several years; however, at the insistence of friends who had read Aurora, he started writing again in 1618. In 1619 Böhme wrote "De Tribus Principiis" or "On the Three Principles of Divine Being". It took him two years to finish his second book, which was followed by many other treatises, all of which were copied by hand and circulated only among friends.[12] In 1620 Böhme wrote "The Threefold Life of Man", "Forty Questions on the Soul", "The Incarnation of Jesus Christ", "The Six Theosophical Points", "The Six Mystical Points". In 1621 Böhme wrote "De Signatura Rerum". In 1623 Böhme wrote "On Election to Grace", "On Christ's Testaments", "Mysterium Magnum", "Clavis" ("Key"). The year 1622 saw Böhme write some short works all of which were subsequently included in his first published book on New Year's Day 1624, under the title Weg zu Christo (The Way to Christ).[9][13]

The publication caused another scandal and following complaints by the clergy, Böhme was summoned to the Town Council on 26 March 1624. The report of the meeting was that:

"Jacob Boehme, the shoemaker and rabid enthusiast, declares that he has written his book To Eternal Life, but did not cause the same to be printed. A nobleman, Sigismund von Schweinitz, did that. The Council gave him warning to leave the town; otherwise the Prince Elector would be apprised of the facts. He thereupon promised that he would shortly take himself off."[14]

I must tell you, sir, that yesterday the pharisaical devil was let loose, cursed me and my little book, and condemned the book to the fire. He charged me with shocking vices; with being a scorner of both Church and Sacraments, and with getting drunk daily on brandy, wine, and beer; all of which is untrue; while he himself is a drunken man."
— Jacob Böhme writing about Gregorius Richter on 2 April 1624.[15]

Böhme left for Dresden on 8 or 9 May 1624, where he stayed with the court physician for two months. In Dresden he was accepted by the nobility and high clergy. His intellect was also recognized by the professors of Dresden, who in a hearing in May 1624, encouraged Böhme to go home to his family in Görlitz.[8] During Böhme's absence his family had suffered during the Thirty Years' War.[8]

Once home, Böhme accepted an invitation to stay with Herr von Schweinitz, who had a country-seat. While there Böhme began to write his last book, the 177 Theosophic Questions. However, he fell terminally ill with a bowel complaint forcing him to travel home on 7 November. Gregorius Richter, Böhme's adversary from Görlitz, had died in August 1624, while Böhme was away. The new clergy, still wary of Böhme, forced him to answer a long list of questions when he wanted to receive the sacrament. He died on 17 November 1624.[16]

In this short period, Böhme produced an enormous amount of writing, including his major works De Signatura Rerum (The Signature of All Things) and Mysterium Magnum. He also developed a following throughout Europe, where his followers were known as Behmenists.

The son of Böhme's chief antagonist, the pastor primarius of Görlitz Gregorius Richter, edited a collection of extracts from his writings, which were afterwards published complete at Amsterdam with the help of Coenraad van Beuningen in the year 1682. Böhme's full works were first printed in 1730.

Theology[edit source]

Böhme's cosmogonyThe Philosophical Sphere or the Wonder Eye of Eternity (1620).

The chief concern of Böhme's writing was the nature of sinevil and redemption. Consistent with Lutheran theology, Böhme preached that humanity had fallen from a state of divine grace to a state of sin and suffering, that the forces of evil included fallen angels who had rebelled against God, and that God's goal was to restore the world to a state of grace.[citation needed]

There are some serious departures from accepted Lutheran theology, however, such as his rejection of sola fide, as in this passage from The Way to Christ:

For he that will say, I have a Will, and would willingly do Good, but the earthly Flesh which I carry about me, keepeth me back, so that I cannot; yet I shall be saved by Grace, for the Merits of Christ. I comfort myself with his Merit and Sufferings; who will receive me of mere Grace, without any Merits of my own, and forgive me my Sins. Such a one, I say, is like a Man that knoweth what Food is good for his Health, yet will not eat of it, but eateth Poison instead thereof, from whence Sickness and Death, will certainly follow.[17]

Another place where Böhme may depart from accepted theology (though this was open to question due to his somewhat obscure, oracular style) was in his description of the Fall as a necessary stage in the evolution of the Universe.[18] A difficulty with his theology is the fact that he had a mystical vision, which he reinterpreted and reformulated.[18] According to F. von Ingen, to Böhme, in order to reach God, man has to go through hell first. God exists without time or space, he regenerates himself through eternity. Böhme restates the trinity as truly existing but with a novel interpretation. God, the Father is fire, who gives birth to his son, whom Böhme calls light. The Holy Spirit is the living principle, or the divine life.[19]

However, it is clear that Böhme never claimed that God sees evil as desirable, necessary or as part of divine will to bring forth good. In his Threefold Life, Böhme states: "[I]n the order of nature, an evil thing cannot produce a good thing out of itself, but one evil thing generates another." Böhme did not believe that there is any "divine mandate or metaphysically inherent necessity for evil and its effects in the scheme of things."[20] Dr. John Pordage, a commentator on Böhme, wrote that Böhme "whensoever he attributes evil to eternal nature considers it in its fallen state, as it became infected by the fall of Lucifer... ."[20] Evil is seen as "the disorder, rebellion, perversion of making spirit nature's servant",[21] which is to say a perversion of initial Divine order.

Jakob Böhme's House in what was Görlitz but is now in a Polish town of Zgorzelec, where he lived from 1590 to 1610

Böhme's correspondences in "Aurora" of the seven qualities, planets and humoral-elemental associations:

  • 1. Dry - Saturn - melancholy, power of death;
  • 2. Sweet - Jupiter - sanguine, gentle source of life;
  • 3. Bitter - Mars - choleric, destructive source of life;
  • 4. Fire - Sun/Moon - night/day; evil/good; sin/virtue; Moon, later = phlegmatic, watery;
  • 5. Love - Venus - love of life, spiritual rebirth;
  • 6. Sound - Mercury - keen spirit, illumination, expression;
  • 7. Corpus - Earth - totality of forces awaiting rebirth.

In "De Tribus Principiis" or "On the Three Principles of Divine Being" Böhme subsumed the seven principles into the Trinity:

  • 1. The "dark world" of the Father (Qualities 1-2-3);
  • 2. The "light world" of the Holy Spirit (Qualities 5-6-7);
  • 3. "This world" of Satan and Christ (Quality 4).

Cosmology[edit source]

In one interpretation of Böhme's cosmology, it was necessary for humanity to return to God, and for all original unities to undergo differentiation, desire and conflict—as in the rebellion of Satan, the separation of Eve from Adam and their acquisition of the knowledge of good and evil—in order for creation to evolve to a new state of redeemed harmony that would be more perfect than the original state of innocence, allowing God to achieve a new self-awareness by interacting with a creation that was both part of, and distinct from, Himself. Free will becomes the most important gift God gives to humanity, allowing us to seek divine grace as a deliberate choice while still allowing us to remain individuals.[citation needed]

Marian views[edit source]

Böhme believed that the Son of God became human through the Virgin Mary. Before the birth of Christ, God recognized himself as a virgin. This virgin is therefore a mirror of God's wisdom and knowledge.[19] Böhme follows Luther in that he views Mary within the context of Christ. Unlike Luther, he does not address himself to dogmatic issues very much, but to the human side of Mary. Like all other women, she was human and therefore subject to sin. Only after God elected her with his grace to become the mother of his son, did she inherit the status of sinlessness.[19] Mary did not move the Word, the Word moved Mary, so Böhme, explaining that all her grace came from Christ. Mary is "blessed among women" but not because of her qualifications, but because of her humility. Mary is an instrument of God; an example of what God can do: It shall not be forgotten in all eternity, that God became human in her.[22]

Böhme, unlike Luther, did not believe that Mary was the Ever Virgin. Her virginity after the birth of Jesus is unrealistic to Böhme. The true salvation is Christ, not Mary. The importance of Mary, a human like every one of us, is that she gave birth to Jesus Christ as a human being. If Mary had not been human, according to Böhme, Christ would be a stranger and not our brother. Christ must grow in us as he did in Mary. She became blessed by accepting Christ. In a reborn Christian, as in Mary, all that is temporal disappears and only the heavenly part remains for all eternity. Böhme's peculiar theological language, involving firelight and spirit, which permeates his theology and Marian views, does not distract much from the fact that his basic positions are Lutheran.[22]

Influences[edit source]

Idealized portrait of Böhme from Theosophia Revelata (1730)

Böhme's writing shows the influence of Neoplatonist and alchemical[23] writers such as Paracelsus, while remaining firmly within a Christian tradition. He has in turn greatly influenced many anti-authoritarian and mystical movements, such as Radical Pietism[24][25][26][27][28][29] (including the Ephrata Cloister[30] and Society of the Woman in the Wilderness), the Religious Society of Friends, the Philadelphians, the Gichtelians, the Harmony Society, the Zoarite SeparatistsRosicrucianismMartinism and Christian theosophy. Böhme's disciple and mentor, the Liegnitz physician Balthasar Walther, who had travelled to the Holy Land in search of magical, kabbalistic and alchemical wisdom, also introduced kabbalistic ideas into Böhme's thought.[31] Böhme was also an important source of German Romantic philosophy, influencing Schelling in particular.[32] In Richard Bucke's 1901 treatise Cosmic Consciousness, special attention was given to the profundity of Böhme's spiritual enlightenment, which seemed to reveal to Böhme an ultimate nondifference, or nonduality, between human beings and God. Jakob Böhme's writings also had some influence on the modern theosophical movement of the Theosophical Society. Blavatsky and W.Q. Judge wrote about Jakob Böhme's philosophy.[33][34] Böhme was also an important influence on the ideas of Franz Hartmann, the founder in 1886 of the German branch of the Theosophical Society. Hartmann described the writings of Böhme as “the most valuable and useful treasure in spiritual literature.”[35]

Behmenism[edit source]

I do not write in the pagan manner, but in the theosophical.

— Jacob Boehme[36]

18th-century illustration by Dionysius Andreas Freher for the book The Works of Jacob Behmen

Behmenism, also Behemenism or Boehmenism, is the English-language designation for a 17th-century European Christian movement based on the teachings of German mystic and theosopher Jakob Böhme (1575-1624). The term was not usually applied by followers of Böhme's theosophy to themselves, but rather was used by some opponents of Böhme's thought as a polemical term. The origins of the term date back to the German literature of the 1620s, when opponents of Böhme's thought, such as the Thuringian antinomian Esajas Stiefel, the Lutheran theologian Peter Widmann and others denounced the writings of Böhme and the Böhmisten. When his writings began to appear in England in the 1640s, Böhme's surname was irretrievably corrupted to the form "Behmen" or "Behemen", whence the term "Behmenism" developed.[37] A follower of Böhme's theosophy is a "Behmenist".

Behmenism does not describe the beliefs of any single formal religious sect, but instead designates a more general description of Böhme's interpretation of Christianity, when used as a source of devotional inspiration by a variety of groups. Böhme's views greatly influenced many anti-authoritarian and Christian mystical movements, such as the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), the Philadelphians,[38] the Gichtelians, the Society of the Woman in the Wilderness (led by Johannes Kelpius), the Ephrata Cloister, the Harmony SocietyMartinism, and Christian theosophy. Böhme was also an important source of German Romantic philosophy, influencing Schelling and Franz von Baader in particular.[32] In Richard Bucke's 1901 treatise Cosmic Consciousness, special attention was given to the profundity of Böhme's spiritual enlightenment, which seemed to reveal to Böhme an ultimate nondifference, or nonduality, between human beings and God. Böhme is also an important influence on the ideas of the English Romantic poet, artist and mystic William Blake. After having seen the William Law edition of the works of Jakob Böhme, published between 1764–1781, in which some illustrations had been included by the German early Böhme exegetist Dionysius Andreas Freher (1649–1728), William Blake said during a dinner party in 1825 “Michel Angelo could not have surpassed them”.[39]

Despite being based on a corrupted form of Böhme's surname, the term Behmenism has retained a certain utility in modern English-language historiography, where it is still occasionally employed, although often to designate specifically English followers of Böhme's theosophy.[40] Given the transnational nature of Böhme's influence, however, the term at least implies manifold international connections between Behmenists.[41] In any case, the term is preferred to clumsier variants such as "Böhmeianism" or "Böhmism", although these may also be encountered.

Reaction[edit source]

In addition to the scientific revolution, the 17th century was a time of mystical revolution in Catholicism, Protestantism and Judaism. The Protestant revolution developed from Böhme and some medieval mystics. Böhme became important in intellectual circles in Protestant Europe, following from the publication of his books in England, Holland and Germany in the 1640s and 1650s.[42] Böhme was especially important for the Millenarians and was taken seriously by the Cambridge Platonists and Dutch CollegiantsHenry More was critical of Böhme and claimed he was not a real prophet, and had no exceptional insight into metaphysical questions. Overall, although his writings did not influence political or religious debates in England, his influence can be seen in more esoteric forms such as on alchemical experimentation, metaphysical speculation and spiritual contemplation, as well as utopian literature and the development of neologisms.[43] More, for example, dismissed Opera Posthuma by Spinoza as a return to Behmenism.[44]

While Böhme was famous in Holland, England, France, Denmark and America during the 17th century, he became less influential during the 18th century. A revival, however, occurred late in that century with interest from German Romantics, who considered Böhme a forerunner to the movement. Poets such as John MiltonLudwig TieckNovalisWilliam Blake[45] and W. B. Yeats[46] found inspiration in Böhme's writings. Coleridge, in his Biographia Literaria, speaks of Böhme with admiration. Böhme was highly thought of by the German philosophers BaaderSchelling and SchopenhauerHegel went as far as to say that Böhme was "the first German philosopher".[47] Danish Bishop Hans Lassen Martensen published a book about Böhme.[48]

Several authors have found Boehme's description of the three original Principles and the seven Spirits to be similar to the Law of Three and the Law of Seven described in the works of Boris Mouravieff and George Gurdjieff.[49][50]

Works[edit source]

  • Aurora: Die Morgenröte im Aufgang (unfinished) (1612)
  • De Tribus Principiis (The Three Principles of the Divine Essence, 1618–1619)
  • The Threefold Life of Man (1620)
  • Answers to Forty Questions Concerning the Soul (1620)
  • The Treatise of the Incarnations: (1620)
    • I. Of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ
    • II. Of the Suffering, Dying, Death and Resurrection of Christ
    • III. Of the Tree of Faith
  • The Great Six Points (1620)
  • Of the Earthly and of the Heavenly Mystery (1620)
  • Of the Last Times (1620)
  • De Signatura Rerum (The Signature of All Things, 1621)
  • The Four Complexions (1621)
  • Of True Repentance (1622)
  • Of True Resignation (1622)
  • Of Regeneration (1622)
  • Of Predestination (1623)
  • A Short Compendium of Repentance (1623)
  • The Mysterium Magnum (1623)
  • A Table of the Divine Manifestation, or an Exposition of the Threefold World (1623)
  • The Supersensual Life (1624)
  • Of Divine Contemplation or Vision (unfinished) (1624)
  • Of Christ's Testaments (1624)
    • I. Baptism
    • II. The Supper
  • Of Illumination (1624)
  • 177 Theosophic Questions, with Answers to Thirteen of Them (unfinished) (1624)
  • An Epitome of the Mysterium Magnum (1624)
  • The Holy Week or a Prayer Book (unfinished) (1624)
  • A Table of the Three Principles (1624)
  • Of the Last Judgement (lost) (1624)
  • The Clavis (1624)
  • Sixty-two Theosophic Epistles (1618–1624)

Books in print[edit source]

  • The Way to Christ (inc. True Repentance, True Resignation, Regeneration or the New Birth, The Supersensual Life, Of Heaven & Hell, The Way from Darkness to True Illumination) edited by William Law, Diggory Press ISBN 978-1-84685-791-1
  • Of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, translated from the German by John Rolleston Earle, London, Constable and Company LTD, 1934.

See also[edit source]

Notes[edit source]

  1. ^ Mills 2002, p. 16
  2. ^ "Böhme"Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.
  3. ^ Sar Perserverando, Grand Master (2015). An anthology for Martinists. The Hermetic Order of Martinists. p. 3.
  4. ^ Encyclopædia Britannica - Jakob Böhme
  5. ^ Jaqua, Mark (1984). "The Illumination of Jacob Boehme" (PDF)TAT Journal. TAT Foundation. 13. HTML version
  6. ^ Jacob Böhme: The Teutonic Philosopher. 24th Convocation of Ontario College Monday April 5, 2004. 2004.
  7. Jump up to:a b c Deussen 1910, p. xxxviii
  8. Jump up to:a b c d Public Domain Debelius, F.W. (1908). "Boehme, Jakob". In Jackson, Samuel Macauley (ed.). New Schaff–Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge2 (third ed.). London and New York: Funk and Wagnalls. pp. 209–211.
  9. Jump up to:a b Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Boehme, Jakob" Encyclopædia Britannica4 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 114.
  10. ^ Martensen 1885, p. 13
  11. ^ Deussen 1910, pp. xli-xlii
  12. ^ Weeks 1991, p. 2
  13. ^ https://jesus.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/the-way-to-christ.pdf
  14. ^ Deussen 1910, p. xlviii
  15. ^ Deussen 1910, pp. xlviii-xlix
  16. ^ Deussen 1910, pp. xlix-l
  17. ^ "The Way to Christ". Pass the Word Services.
  18. Jump up to:a b von Ingen 1988, p. 517.
  19. Jump up to:a b c von Ingen 1988, p. 518.
  20. Jump up to:a b Musès, Charles A. Illumination on Jakob Böhme. New York: King's Crown Press, 1951
  21. ^ Stoudt, John Joseph. Jakob Böhme: His Life and Thought. New York: The Seabury Press, 1968
  22. Jump up to:a b von Ingen 1988, p. 519.
  23. ^ In several works he used alchemical principles and symbols without hesitation to demonstrate theological realities. Borrowing alchemical terminology in order to explain religious and mystical frameworks, Böhme assumed that alchemical language is not only a metaphor for laboratory research. Alchemy is a metaphysical science because he understood that matter is contaminated with spirit. Calian 2010, p.184.
  24. ^ Brown 1996.
  25. ^ Durnbaugh 2001.
  26. ^ Ensign 1955.
  27. ^ Hirsch 1951.
  28. ^ Stoeffler 1965.
  29. ^ Stoeffler 1973.
  30. ^ Brumbaugh 1899, p. 443.
  31. ^ See Leigh T.I. Penman, ‘A Second Christian Rosencreuz? Jacob Boehme's Disciple Balthasar Walther (1558-c.1630) and the Kabbalah. With a Bibliography of Walther's Printed Works.’ Western Esotericism. Selected Papers Read at the Symposium on Western Esotericism held at Åbo, Finland, on 15–17 August 2007. (Scripta instituti donneriani Aboensis, XX). T. Ahlbäck, ed. Åbo, Finland: Donner Institute, 2008: 154-172.
  32. Jump up to:a b See Schopenhauer's On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient ReasonCh II, 8
  33. ^ Theosophy, Imagination, Tradition: Studies in Western Esotericism by A. Faivre. 28.
  34. ^ “Theosophical Articles”, William Q. Judge, Theosophy Co., Los Angeles, 1980, volume I, p. 271. The title of the article is “Jacob Boehme and the Secret Doctrine”.
  35. ^ A. Versluis, Magic and Mysticism, 2007.
  36. ^ Faivre 2000, p. 13.
  37. ^ An early English language example is provided in Anderdon, John. "One blow at Babel, in those of the People called Behmenites, Whose foundation is...upon their own cardinal conception, begotten in their imaginations upon Jacob Behmen's writings." London: 1662.
  38. ^ Hutin, Serge. "The Behmenists and the Philadelphian Society". The Jacob Boehme Society Quarterly 1:5 (Autumn 1953): 5-11.
  39. ^ The Spiritual Side of Samuel Richardson, Mysticism, Behmenism and Millenarianism in an Eighteenth-Century English Novelist, Gerda J. Joling-van der Sar, 2003, p. 140.[1]
  40. ^ See for example B. J. Gibbons, Gender in mystical and occult thought: Behmenism and its development in England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
  41. ^ Thune, Nils. The Behemenists and the Philadelphians: A contribution to the study of English mysticism in the 17th and 18th centuries. Uppsala: Almquist and Wiksells, 1948.
  42. ^ Popkin 1998, pp. 401-402
  43. ^ All of Böhme’s treatises and most of his letters were translated into English (as well as two pamphlets that were translated into Welsh by the Parliamentarian evangelist Morgan Llwyd) between 1645 and 1662.
    Hessayon, Ariel (2013). Jacob Boehme’s writings during the English Revolution and afterwards: their publication, dissemination and influence in An Introduction to Jacob Boehme: Four Centuries of Thought and Reception, Routledge, Eds Hessayon, Ariel and Apetrei, Sarah. pp.77–97.
  44. ^ Popkin 1998, p. 402
  45. ^ The influence of Jacob Boehme on the work of William Blake
  46. ^ Affinities between William Butler Yeats and Jacob Boehme.
  47. ^ Weeks 1991, pp. 2–3
  48. ^ Jacob Boehme: his life and teaching. Or Studies in theosophy
  49. ^ Nicolescu 1998, p. 47.
  50. ^ Bourgeault 2013.

References[edit source]

External links[edit source]

“일본불교 별 니시다와 스즈키, 제국주의 미화했다”

“일본불교 별 니시다와 스즈키, 제국주의 미화했다”

“일본불교 별 니시다와 스즈키, 제국주의 미화했다”
입력2021.08.04. 
조현 기자

‘불교평론’ 일본불교 실상 고발
니시다 기타로·스즈키 다이세쓰
20세기 세계적 불교학자 흔적 추적
원본보기2020 도쿄올림픽을 닷새 앞둔 7월18일 도쿄 하루미 지역 올림픽선수촌 인근 도로에서 극우단체가 차량을 이용해 확성기 시위를 하고 있다. 도쿄/올림픽사진공동취재단

2020 도쿄올림픽 조직위원회가 성화봉송로 지도에 독도를 일본 땅처럼 표기해 ‘평화의 제전’ 올림픽에서마저 제국주의적 마성을 드러내고 있다는 비판이 제기되고 있다. 이런 가운데 불교계 대표적인 계간지 <불교평론>이 20세기를 대표하는 일본의 세계적인 불교학자들이 제국주의 이론 정립에 앞장섰다고 고발했다.

<불교평론>은 최근 펴낸 여름호 커버스토리 특집 ‘일본 불교의 특성과 실상’에서 니시다 기타로(1870~1945)와 스즈키 다이세쓰(1870~1966)의 친제국주의적 사상과 행보를 파헤치는 글을 게재했다. 이 특집에서 2차 세계대전 당시 일본의 주류 종교인 불교가 어떻게 제국주의 전쟁을 돕고 참여했는지 구체적인 자료들을 적시했다.


원본보기니시다 기타로. <한겨레> 자료사진

일제의 총동원령에 따라 우리나라 불교, 가톨릭, 개신교, 유교 등도 강압적 혹은 자발적으로 전쟁물자를 지원했으니, 일본 내 종교들이 애국이란 이름으로 전쟁에 동원된 것은 별 신기할 게 없다. 그러나 니시다 기타로와 스즈키 다이세쓰의 경우라면 이야기가 다르다. 출가하지는 않았지만 치열한 선수행을 통해 깨달음을 인가받고 이를 이론화해 서양에 전한 동갑내기 둘은 서양에서 20세기를 대표하는 불교인을 꼽을 때 1·2위를 다툴 만한 인물들이다.

니시다 기타로는 일본의 독자적인 철학을 형성한 대표적 사상가로, 교토학파의 개조(한 종파의 원조가 되는 이)다. 스즈키 다이세쓰는 19세기 후반부터 미국에 건너가 선불교를 서양인들에게 전한 서양 불교의 태두다. 그는 인류문명이 위기에 처하게 된 원인을 서양의 합리주의에 두고, 동양적인 직관, 곧 선 사상의 중요성을 알려 서구 지식인 사회에 큰 영향을 미쳤다. 서양인들이 선(禪)이 아니라 일본어인 젠(zen)으로 표기한 것도 그로 인해서다.


원본보기교토학파의 아버지인 니시다 기타로가 고뇌하며 걷던 ‘철학의 길’이 시작되는 일본 교토의 은각사 전경. 조현 기자

가톨릭과 개신교 선교사들이 제국주의가 약소국들을 침략하는 데 있어 전위대 구실을 한 데 반해, 불교는 ‘비폭력 평화의 종교’로 자리해왔음을 불교계는 자부해왔다. 하지만 이번 특집을 통해 불자도 언제든 제국주의와 폭력에 동원될 수 있음을 경고하고 나선 셈이다.

허우성 경희대 명예교수는 “니시다 기타로는 1944년 ‘일본의 국체가 바로 대승불교 참정신의 재현’이라고 주장했다”며 “니시다가 영국과 미국으로 대표되는 서양 제국주의에 대항하기 위해 윌슨의 민족자결주의를 반대하고, 동양공영권의 기치를 높이 들고 일왕 중심으로 동아시아 각국이 단결해야 한다고 썼을 때, 그는 유사제국주의자가 되었다”고 주장했다.


니시다 기타로. <한겨레> 자료사진


일본에서 발행된 니시다 기타로 기념우표.

최용운 서강대 연구교수는 “니시다는 1943년 5월 일본 군부로부터 대동아공영권의 지침에 대한 글을 요구받고 <세계 신질서의 원리>를 집필했다”며 “당시 도조 내각이 이를 수용해 중국, 만주, 필리핀, 타이, 미얀마 등의 대표가 참가한 ‘대동아의회’에서 채택한 ‘대동아공동선언’에 상당 부분 반영했다”고 지적했다. 최 교수는 “대동아공영권의 이론 자체가 니시다에 의해 최초로 정립된 것은 아니지만, 근대 세계 역사를 서양 제국주의의 역사라고 비판했던 그가 피지배국의 입장을 조금도 고려치 않은 채 자국의 제국주의적 야욕에 편승했던 행적은 그의 학문적 위업의 빛을 감쇄케 한다”고 덧붙였다.

최 교수는 니시다와 함께 교토학파 1세대를 대표하는 인물인 다나베 하지메(1885~1962)가 니시다와 달리 참회의 양심선언을 했다는 사실도 소개했다. 다나베는 1946년 저서 <참회도로서의 철학>을 통해 전쟁 기간에 국가의 실책에 대해 어떤 반대 의견도 제시하지 않았던 자신의 태도를 뉘우치며 철학자로서의 무력함으로 고뇌하던 중 불현듯 찾아온 참회를 통한 새로운 의식의 전환을 고백했다는 것이다.


스즈키 다이세쓰. <한겨레> 자료사진

종교학자인 이찬수 보훈교육연구원장은 선을 ‘전투 정신’으로 결부시킨 스즈키 다이세쓰를 비판했다. 스즈키는 저서에 “단순하고 직접적이고 극기적인 선 수업의 계율적인 경향은 전투 정신과 일치한다. 전투하는 이는 언제나 싸움의 대상에 마음을 오롯이 쏟으며, 곁눈질해서는 안 되고 적을 부수기 위해 똑바로 나아가는 것”이라고 썼다. 이 원장은 “일제가 1937년 중일전쟁을 일으킨 뒤인 1938년 일본의 대륙 침략이 한창이던 때 스즈키가 이 글을 썼다”고 지적했다. 이 원장은 또 “태평양전쟁 패전 후 스즈키는 일본이 사태를 잘못 파악해 큰 혼란으로 들어갔다는 문제의식을 갖기는 했고, 쇼와 일왕 부부에게 화엄사상을 가르치며 ‘다른 사물이 상처를 입으면 자신도 상처를 입는다’고 했다”며 “그러나 그 상처 속에 조선인의 상처와 무고한 죽음들이 포함돼 있는지 의심스럽다”고 주장했다.


원본보기1946년 도쿄 전범재판석에 앉은 도조 히데키(맨 왼쪽) 등 일본군 전범들. 수많은 부하들과 민간인을 죽음으로 몰아넣은 그들 중 다수가 아무 책임도 지지 않고 다시 출셋길을 걸었다. <한겨레> 자료사진

그는 “니시다와 스즈키는 깨닫지 못한 이들에 의한 역사적 현실을 깨달음의 논리로 너무 쉽게 긍정했다”며 “그러다 보니 전쟁의 희생자, 아수라장, 거짓과 폭력 같은 구조적 폭력과 민중의 고통을 마치 가상세계 대하듯 간과해 마침내 침략도, 전쟁도, 죽임도 무화시킨 채 결국 천황제와 군국주의도 긍정했다”고 비판했다.




조현(cho@hani.co.kr)

Living Earth Community - 9. Confucian Cosmology and Ecological Ethics

Living Earth Community - 9. Confucian Cosmology and Ecological Ethics



9. Confucian Cosmology and Ecological Ethics: Qi, Li, and the Role of the Human

Mary Evelyn Tucker


© Mary Evelyn Tucker, CC BY 4.0 https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0186.09

In our search for more comprehensive and global ethics to meet the critical challenges of our contemporary situation, the world’s religions are emerging as major reservoirs of depth and insight, particularly with regard to the pressing environmental crises of our times.1 While the scale and scope of the crises are being debated, few people would deny the seriousness of what we are facing as a planetary community immersed in unsustainable practices of production, consumption, and development. Clearly the world’s religions have some important correctives to offer in this respect.

There is a growing realization that attitudinal changes toward nature will be essential for creating sustainable societies, in addition to new scientific, technological, and economic approaches to our environmental problems. Humans will not preserve what they do not respect. What is currently lacking is a moral basis for changing our exploitative attitudes toward nature. We have laws against homicide, but not against ecocide or biocide. Thus, we are without a sufficiently broad environmental ethics to alter our consciousness about the Earth and our life on it. Consequently, what should concern us is this: to what extent can the religious traditions of the world provide us with ethical resources and cosmological perspectives that can help us redefine mutually-enhancing human-Earth relations?

The dynamic and holistic perspective of the Confucian worldview may offer significant contributions in this regard, enlarging our sense of the ethical terrain and moral concerns, and providing a rich source for rethinking our own relationship with nature. Confucianism’s organic holisms can give us a special appreciation for the interconnectedness of all life forms and renew our sense of the sacredness of this intricate web of life. Moreover, the Confucian understanding of the dynamic vitalism underlying cosmic processes offers us a basis for reverencing nature. From a Confucian perspective, nature cannot be thought of as simply composed of inert, dead matter. Rather, all life forms share the element of qi or material force. This shared psycho-physical entity becomes the basis for establishing a reciprocity between the human and nonhuman worlds.

In this same vein, in terms of self-cultivation and the nurturing of virtue, the Confucian tradition provides a broad framework for harmonizing human life with the natural world. An example of this is the Confucian view of the human as a child born out of the Universe and the Earth, and thus owing filial respect and reciprocity to the Earth community. Another example is the Confucian understanding of virtues as having both a cosmological and a personal component, so that love is a generative force expressed by humans, but is also seen as comparable to the original generative forces in the universe. Thus, nature and virtue, cosmology and ethics, knowledge and action are intimately linked for the Confucians in China, Korea, and Japan. This chapter will concentrate on three major themes and their implications for ecological ethics: qi, li, and the role of the human.

We are aware that, like all spiritual traditions, there is always a gap between aspiration and realization of these practices. Despite the narrow, ideological views of Confucianism, China is not a model of an ecologically realized society, historically or at present. However, aspects of this worldview are worth retrieving in order that we may break out of the constraining perspective of a modern reductionistic worldview.
Qi

The Chinese have a term to describe the vibrancy and aliveness of the universe. This is qi or ch’i, which is translated in a variety of ways in the classical Confucian tradition as spirit, air, or breath, and later in the Neo-Confucian tradition as material force, matter energy, vital force. It describes the realization that the universe is alive with vitality and resonates with life. What is especially remarkable about this ancient and enduring realization of the Chinese people is that qi is a unified field embracing both matter and energy. It is thus a matrix containing both material and spiritual life from the smallest particle to the largest visible reality. Qi moves through the universe from the constituent particles of matter to mountains and rocks, plants and trees, animals, and birds, fish and insects. All the elements — air, earth, fire, and water — are composed of qi. We humans, too, are alive with qi. It makes up our body and spirit as one integrated whole, and it activates our mind-and-heart, which is a single unified reality in Chinese thought.

In other words, qi courses though nature, fills the elements of reality, and dynamizes our human body-mind. It is the single unifying force of all that is. It does not posit a dichotomy between nature and spirit, body and mind, matter and energy. Qi is one united, dynamic whole — the vital reality of the entire universe.

The implications of this unified view of reality become apparent to us rather quickly. One wants to know and experience this qi more fully. This is why most of the martial arts and exercises like taiqi aim to cultivate and deepen qi. Humans, for all their obliviousness, are intelligent enough to want to taste and savor this marvelous aliveness of the universe. They want to harmonize their most basic physical processes with qi — thus the dynamic coordination of breath and movement is at the heart of the Chinese physical arts. And arts they are indeed — this is not just a physical toning of the body or building up of muscles. This is a spiritual exercise filled with potency for health of mind and body — a coordinated and aesthetically pleasing dance of the human system in and through the sea of qi.

One way to visualize qi is as a vast ocean of energy, an infinite source of vibrant potency, a resonating field of dynamic power that is in matter itself, not separate from it. For qi is matter-energy, material force. This is the important contribution of Chinese thought to world philosophy. It is an insight and realization of particular significance for our contemporary world, which has been broken apart by our Enlightenment separation of matter and spirit, of body and soul, of nature and life.2

From the perspective of qi the world is alive with a depth of mystery, complexity, and vibrancy that we can only begin to taste and never fully exhaust. The sensual world is the spiritual world from the perspective of qi. The dynamism of each particular reality begins to present itself to us — the oak tree in the forest radiates an untold energy, the snow-covered mountains in the distance are redolent with silent qi, the rivers coursing to the ocean are filled with the buoyancy of qi.

One of the earliest Confucian writers, Mencius, speaks of the great flood-like qi. This is what I am evoking here. We are flooded, surrounded, inundated by qi. We walk around completely unconscious most of the time that this ocean of energy is here — sustaining us, nourishing us, and enlivening us. Qi is the gift of the universe — the endlessly fecund life source unfolding before us and around us in a daily miracle of hidden joy. It is the restorative laughter of the universe inviting us into its endless mystery.

As we return to the Chinese sources to sift through the texts and commentaries, what becomes apparent is that the notion of qi is not constant, but evolving. Nor is it unified and consistent. It is rather a multivalent idea that begins to reveal something of its shape and function only when seen from a variety of perspectives and texts.

In the classical Confucian tradition, qi tends to refer more generally to the spirit which animates the universe, the breath which enlivens humans, and the air that connects all things. Even from its earliest articulation, however, qi was never seen as an entity apart from matter. Rather, it is embedded in the natural and the human world. It animates and nourishes nature and humans. Indeed, the very Chinese character itself is said to represent the steam rising from rice, suggesting the nourishing and transforming power of qi. Like food, qi maintains life and human energy. Benjamin Schwartz observes, ‘The image of food even suggests the interchange of energy and substance between humans and their surrounding environment’.3 The idea of qi as having the properties of condensation and rarefaction like steam suggests the same.

As the later Han and Neo-Confucians began to articulate their cosmological understandings, the unity of qi as matter-energy became more evident. Dong Zhongshu (170–104 BCE), the leading Han Confucian, described qi as a ‘limpid colorless substance’ which fills the universe, ‘surrounds man as water surrounds a fish’, and unites all creation.4 The Neo-Confucians, however, developed the notion of qi to refer to the substance and essence of all life. It pervades and animates the universe as both matter and energy.

For the Neo-Confucian, Zhang Zai (1020–77 CE), the vibrancy of material force originates in the Great Vacuity (taixu) which contains the primal, undifferentiated material force. As it integrates and disintegrates it participates in the Great Harmony (taihe) of activity and tranquillity. This perspective affirms the unified and real processes of change, not seeing them as illusory, as the Buddhists might, nor as a product of a dichotomy between non-being and being, as the Daoists would. There is, instead, a dynamic unity of qi as seen in its operations as both substance (emerging in the Great Vacuity), and function (operating in the Great Harmony).
Li

Li is the inner ordering principle of reality that is embedded in the heart of qi. The Chinese character for li suggests working on the geological veins found in the mineral jade, which must first be discovered, and then carved adeptly. Li is comparable to the principle of logos, whereby all of reality is imprinted with structure and intelligibility. It is both pattern and potential pattern, and thus gives reality its intricacy of design as well as its thrust toward directionality and purpose. It is a revealing and concealing sensibility for human consciousness. We seek to find its imprint in the flow of the natural world around us, as well as in the unfolding of our lives. As Thomas Berry often said, we have lost the ability to perceive this vast intelligibility of the universe and thus have become ungrounded and rudderless, locked in our own self-referential mindsets.

It is, however, the universe which is calling to be read and to be heard in the deep patterning of its particularities. The beauty of li is that it brings us into contact with the myriad forms of life, the ‘ten thousand things’ (wanwu) as the Chinese say, with a penetrating clarity. This is because li is both normative principle and intelligible pattern. As pattern, it gives us entry into understanding nature and its complex workings. As principle, it gives us a grounding for a morality that arises from the very structure of life itself. The moral dimensions of the universe are found in the depths of matter revealing itself to us as li.

Li is principle and pattern — both a moral and a natural entity bringing together our profound embeddedness in a universe of meaning and mystery. The allure of the universe lies in seeing and experiencing that meaning and mystery before us, behind us, and all around us. We are drawn forth into a sense of the breadth and depth of li as manifest in the phenomenal world in great diversity and particularity. All of this breadth and depth of inner ordering is gathered up in the Great Ultimate (taiji) — that which contains and shapes and generates all principles and patterns in the universe.

As one of the principal Neo-Confucian thinkers, Zhu Xi (1130–1200) says, ‘The Supreme Ultimate is merely the principle of Heaven-and-Earth, and the myriad things’.5 According to another leading Neo-Confucian, Cheng Yi (1033–1107), ‘Principle is one (in the Great Ultimate); its manifestations are many (in the world)’.6 To illustrate this, both use an analogy involving the moon shining in the water in the irrigated rice fields on a terraced mountain side. There are many moons which are reflected, but only one full moon in the sky. Taiji is like this full moon. It is translated as the Great Ultimate or the Supreme Ultimate, while the term itself refers to a pole star — guiding, illuminating, and alluring. For Cheng Yi, and his brother Cheng Hao (1032–85), li was like a genetic coding, and was thus identified with the creative life principle (shengsheng).7

The creative dynamics of this great container of principles are cosmological, namely there is an interaction of non-being and being or the unmanifest and the manifest. This is seen in the interaction of the wuji (Non-ultimate) and the taiji (Great Ultimate). Some of the most interesting arguments and discussions in Chinese thought have arisen among thinkers who are commenting on this complex interaction.

Some would say that the Daoists want to maintain a dichotomy between non-being and being, emphasizing the dynamic creativity of non-being as the source of all life. Others would say the Buddhists want to maintain the ultimate emptiness of non-being and the illusory quality of being. The Neo-Confucians struggled to assert the importance of the dynamic continuity between these two forces (non-being and being). Indeed, they would maintain that the very creativity of the universe is revealed in this dialectical interaction. The complementarity of these creative forces is at the heart of all cosmological processes for the Confucians. The vast changes and transformations of nature in the endless flow of qi become clear in this interaction. That is because all reality, namely all qi, is imprinted with li. Discovering this patterning in the fluid material force of the universe is the challenge for humans.

As li is unveiled, humans can discern the appropriate patterning for both their individual and their collective lives. The universe unfolds according to these patterns of deep structure embedded in reality. Social systems are established according to these patterns, agriculture is conducted in harmony with these patterns, politics functions in relation to these patterns, and individuals cultivate themselves in response to these patterns.
The Role of the Human

In the Neo-Confucian understanding, humans receive li from heaven. Their heavenly endowed nature is thus linked to the patterning throughout the universe. By the same token, humans are composed of qi, the same dynamic substance that makes up the universe.

Humans are thus imprinted with unique and differentiated li embedded in qi, the material force of their own body-mind. Li guarantees the special and different qualities of each human being, while qi establishes the material and spiritual grounds for subjectivity, thus uniting humans with one another and with the vast world of nature. In other words, qi as vital force is the interiority of matter, providing the matrix for communion and exchange of energy between all life forms.

Humans, then, are given a heavenly endowed nature which joins them to the great triad of Cosmos, Earth, and other humans. While this heavenly endowed nature is a gift of the universe from birth, it is understood as something to be realized over a lifetime. This realization of one’s full nature occurs through the process of self-cultivation, which is at the heart of Confucian moral and spiritual practice. This process of actualization is not abstract or otherworldly, but rather concerned with the process of becoming more fully human. In doing so, one penetrates principle and perceives pattern amidst the flux of material force in ourselves and in the universe at large. The goal of our cultivation is to actualize and recognize the profound identity of ourselves with heaven, Earth, and the myriad forms of life.

Because the qi that we are each given may vary in its purity or turbidity, cultivation is needed. Evil, imperfection, loss, and suffering are thus part of the human condition. The Confucians, however, believe one’s heavenly endowed human nature is essentially good and thus perfectible. To illustrate this, Mencius uses the example of a child about to fall into a well (Mencius II A 6). The instinct of any person is to save the child from harm, not for any exterior reasons but due to a naturally compassionate heart. The key to the goodness of human nature is a profound sympathy or empathy which all humans have. Indeed, affectivity is what distinguishes humans in the Confucian worldview. As Mencius says, ‘No one is devoid of a heart sensitive to the suffering of others’ (Mencius II A 6). Because of this basic sympathy, Confucians affirm that at the level of our primary instincts we will tend toward the good. Mencius uses wonderfully evocative images from nature to illustrate this, like water flowing naturally downhill (Mencius VI A 2). Like wind blowing over grasses, people are inclined toward the good and respond to the good because they are imprinted with the good.

From these examples, Mencius goes on to describe the basic seeds implanted in human nature which, when cultivated, become the key virtues for living a fully humane life. The seeds are compassion, shame, courtesy, and modesty, and a sense of right and wrong (Mencius II A 6, Mencius VI A 6). These seeds need to be watered and tended so that they grow and flourish into the primary Confucian virtues of humaneness, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom. The images used to describe the growth and cultivation of virtue are derived from the agricultural patterns and seasonal cycles of humans dependent on nature. Consequently, I am inclined to use the metaphor of ‘botanical cultivation’ when speaking of Confucian moral and spiritual practice.

The aim of such practice is to allow the seeds or tendencies of our deepest human spontaneities to be nourished and to flourish. Mencius suggests that this should be as clear as tending trees in one’s garden: ‘Even with a tong or a zi tree one or two spans thick, anyone wishing to keep it alive will know how it should be tended, yet when it comes to one’s own person, one does not know how to tend it. Surely one does not love one’s person any less than the tong or the zi’ (Mencius VI A 13). In this same spirit, there should develop a naturalness to our actions based on the rhythms of the cosmos itself. From seeds in the soil to seasons and their cycles, to the flow of rivers and the thrust of mountains, we are part of the rhythms of the universe and need to nourish our original nature.

If one develops these seeds, it is like ‘a fire starting up or a spring coming through’. The moral power that results from this cultivation of virtue is boundless: ‘When these (seeds) are fully developed, one can take under one’s protection the whole realm within the Four Seas, but if one fails to develop them, they will not be able even to serve one’s parents’ (Mencius II A 6).

The key is to tend, to activate, and to align our deepest spontaneities with the dynamic patterns of change and continuity in nature. Thus, self-cultivation needs to be an organic process. As Mencius suggests, we need to nourish our flood-like qi with integrity (Mencius II A 2) and recover our original mind-and-heart (Mencius VI A 11). However, this cannot be a forced or artificial process. Mencius uses the example of the man from Sung who planted rice seedlings. In his desire to see them grow quickly, he pulled at them too soon, and they withered. As Mencius observes, ‘There are few people in the world who can resist the urge to help their rice plants grow’ (Mencius II A 2). Others leave them unattended or do not bother to weed. How to nurture and nourish is the art of cultivation in both nature and in humans.

Mencius also uses the example of Ox Mountain, where, due to deforestation and overgrazing, the mountain becomes denuded (Mencius VI A 8). Erosion sets in, and the ecosystem is destroyed. People are inclined to think this has always been the nature of the mountain. Improper cultivation of ourselves and of the land results in waste and loss. As Mencius says, if one is not restored by the natural rhythms of the day and night, but rather dissipates one’s energies and becomes dissolute, people will think that dissolution is one’s essential nature. However, he insists that nourishment is the key: ‘Given the right nourishment there is nothing that will not grow, and deprived of it there is nothing that will not wither away’ (Mencius VI A 8).

These examples are so simple, clear, and timeless. They are as appropriate for our day as for Mencius’, as their natural imagery restores us to the deeper rhythms of our being in the universe. For, in this context, self-cultivation does not lead toward transcendent bliss or otherworldly salvation or even personal enlightenment. Rather, the goal is to move toward participation in the social, political, and cosmological order of things. The continuity of self, society, and cosmos is paramount in the Confucian worldview.

Thus, self-cultivation is always aimed at preparing the individual to contribute more fully to the needs of the contemporary world. For the Confucians, this implies a primacy of continual study and learning. From this perspective, education is at the heart of self-cultivation. This is not simply book learning or scholarship for the sake of careerism. It is rather education — leading oneself out of oneself into the world at large. More than anything, then, the role of the human is to discover one’s place in the larger community of life. And this community is one of ever expanding and intricately connected concentric circles of family, school, society, politics, nature, and the universe. We are embedded in a web of relationships and one fulfills one’s role by cultivating one’s inner spontaneities so that one can be more responsive to each of these layers of commitments.

For the Confucians this is all set within the context of an organic, dynamic, holistic universe that is alive with qi and imprinted with li. Thus, finding one’s role is realizing how one completes the great triad of heaven and Earth. As we rediscover our cosmological being in the macrocosm of things, our role in the microcosm of our daily lives will become more fulfilling, more joyful, more spontaneous. The pace and rhythm of our lives will be responsive to the rhythms of the day, the changes of the seasons, and the movements of the stars. The great continuity of our being with the being of the universe will enliven and enrich our activities. By attuning ourselves to the patterns of change and continuity in the natural world, we find our niche.

We thus take our place in the enormous expanse of the universe. We complete the great triad of heaven and Earth and participate in the transforming and nourishing powers of all things. In so doing, we will cultivate the land appropriately, nurture life forms for sustainability, regulate social relations adeptly and fairly, honor political commitments for the common good, and thus participate in the great transformation of things. This will be manifest as our own inner authenticity resonates with the authenticity of the universe itself.

This holistic and dynamic understanding of the world and the role of humans, found in Confucianism, could bring us far in the revisioning that is needed for us to deal effectively with our current ecological crisis. In turn, it is but one example of the potential benefit of tapping the resources of the world religions in our endeavor to formulate a more comprehensive and global ethics.
Bibliography

de Bary, Wm. Theodore, Sources of Chinese Tradition (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1960).

de Bary, Wm. Theodore, and Irene Bloom, eds, Sources of Chinese Tradition (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1999).

Grim, John, and Mary Evelyn Tucker, Ecology and Religion (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2014).

Lau, D. C., trans., Mencius (New York, NY: Penguin Books, 1970).

Schwartz, Benjamin, The World of Thought in Ancient China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985).

Tucker, Mary Evelyn, and John Berthrong, eds, Confucianism and Ecology: The Interrelation of Heaven, Earth, and Humans (Cambridge, MA: 1998).


1 This was one of the main objectives of the Harvard conference series and edited volumes on Religions of the World and Ecology (http://fore.yale.edu/religions-of-the-world-and-ecology-archive-of-conference-materials/). From that series, see Mary Evelyn Tucker and John Berthrong, eds, Confucianism and Ecology (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998); and John Grim and Mary Evelyn Tucker, Ecology and Religion (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2014).


2 On the Enlightenment legacy, see also ‘Introduction: Ways of Knowing, Ways of Valuing Nature’ in this volume.


3 Benjamin Schwartz, The World of Thought in Ancient China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985), p. 180.


4 Wm. Theodore de Bary, ed., Sources of Chinese Tradition (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1960), p. 466.


5 Ibid., pp. 701–02.


6 Wm. Theodore de Bary and Irene Bloom, eds, Sources of Chinese Tradition (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1999), p. 700.


7 Ibid., p. 689.
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter