"Monday, November 6, 2017
NYT THE STONE BUDDHISM IS MORE WESTERN THAN YOU THINK
And the Chinese are more Western than you think, too, of course.
In fact, for the ideology of the NYT, and its affiliates in Britain, going back to 1919 or so, everyone is more Western than anything else.
If you believe that, then, of course, you will believe anything. But you have long been so trained."
In fact, for the ideology of the NYT, and its affiliates in Britain, going back to 1919 or so, everyone is more Western than anything else.
If you believe that, then, of course, you will believe anything. But you have long been so trained."
Randall Collins wrote a wonderful book, over a thousand pages, The Sociology of Philosophies.
In it, he compares, in an analogizing way, Buddhist philosophical traditions, Western ones, and others, which he does in a special and interesting way, yet making it out that they are all similar in the ways in which they are sophisticated elaborations of social and hierarchical relations and specific networks among key individuals and their protegees or later followers, the analogies holding across all societies.
Certainly, if you read Randall Collins, you will come away with a false sociological gloss of mistaken analogies between Western and buddhist philosophical traditions.
An additional point I should add. As Collins points out somewhere in this enormous tome, (Small fragile women and young children should not even try to lift and read it for extended periods. I debated ripping it in two at the spine to make it each piece easier to hold. At least Ferguson had the decency to cut The House of Rothschild up into 2 volumes for me!) Chinese Buddhism is basically a bastardized transplant of Indian Buddhism, to begin with.And it goes on and on from there. I am one of a very very few people who I can imagine have both read it and enjoyed it.
So, which Buddhism, Indian or Chinese, the original Indian or the bastard Chinese, is more Western than you think?
Take your pick!
One might as well suggest Putin is more Buddhist than you think.
Or the man in the moon is more Buddhist than you think!
An additional point I should add. As Collins points out somewhere in this enormous tome, (Small fragile women and young children should not even try to lift and read it for extended periods. I debated ripping it in two at the spine to make it each piece easier to hold. At least Ferguson had the decency to cut The House of Rothschild up into 2 volumes for me!) Chinese Buddhism is basically a bastardized transplant of Indian Buddhism, to begin with.And it goes on and on from there. I am one of a very very few people who I can imagine have both read it and enjoyed it.
So, which Buddhism, Indian or Chinese, the original Indian or the bastard Chinese, is more Western than you think?
Take your pick!
One might as well suggest Putin is more Buddhist than you think.
Or the man in the moon is more Buddhist than you think!
No comments:
Post a Comment