The Confucian virtue of Chun Tzu - Essay Example

?Journal #8 The Confucian virtue of Chun tzu is something that I feel would greatly enhance American society at this time. This virtue is associated with maturity and confidence. It is emblemized by the very best of relationships between people. It is actually a sort of civility that can only be expressed by a person that is comfortable with themselves and has the greatest desire to help others feel comfortable as well. One aspect in American society that I feel Chun tzu would work especially well is in our current politics. One might assume that Te, or power, would be most closely associated with politics and politicians, but I do not think this is the case in America. We seem to be in a state of perpetual bickering and insults between individual politicians and political parties. I cannot help but notice that all of these individuals seem to be extremely insecure, regardless of how they present themselves to the media and the American people. Chun tzu practiced by the politicians of the United States would change the whole nature of political discourse. Discussion would be elevated above the sniping remarks and one-line zingers that seem to dominate the day. Instead, discourse would focus on ideas, not put-downs. Chun tzu would encourage the mature tolerance of opposing ideas while at the same time inspiring one to present an opposing view in a way that is influential but not confrontation or demeaning. Like the consummate host or hostess, politicians would find plenty to perhaps disagree with, but would refrain from being disagreeable. Another aspect of American culture that would greatly benefit from the virtue of Chun tzu is the writing that drives the interactions between people in our movies and our television shows. So much of what is available seems to focus on making other people uncomfortable as a means of getting a laugh or building drama. After watching shows that are written this way, Americans are a little less sensitive to one another. Coarse language is easier to use and the feelings of others are less important, especially if it makes someone laugh. Chun tzu allows plenty of room for the writing of great dramas and comedies. It does not indicate that there is never conflict between individuals and institutions. It does imply that if there is conflict, however, resolving the conflict is best so relations can be mended. Much of the entertainment in America seems determined to create strife and division between individuals. Especially troubling for Americans at this time is the fact that immature comments are not confined to entertainment through the media. Knowing how to behave as a fan at a baseball game or how to enjoy a play without annoying those around you seems to be an art that is being lost. In politics, entertainment and society, a large dose of Chun tzu is necessary so that mature individuals and actions are not looked upon as outside the norm, but are actually the norm for us all. Journal #10 The Taoist term wu wei or water is one that I think could be easily misunderstood in the West. The idea of water does not exactly lend itself to thinking about something powerful in to people in the West. We are full of ideas about water as a natural resource, as a means of transportation. In some ways, Westerners may view water in slightly pejorative terms. Water follows the path of least resistance. Not exactly a show of strength or vigor. Wu wei is a show of force for the Taoist. Not this “Hey everybody, look at me!” type of force. It is more like a silent, flowing river. There are no rapids to suggest the immense power of erosion the river is exerting on the surface of the Earth. There is no indication of sediment load or chemical interaction with the surrounding bedrock. Yet all of this is happening right before our eyes in a seemingly effortless display of force. Key to this idea of wu wei is the fact that each river finds its own course. It is true that rivers do follow the path of least resistance. Far from making them lazy, this path which the lay of the land and the power of the earth directs the water enables the water to carve a deep channel, perhaps even a canyon. In this way, the Tao te Chin states that the Way as it is presented to us all is the most important factor in us being able to do our work in life. Following the Way is how we carve a clear, effective channel. Like a river that has flooded its banks, people that fail to follow the power that charts their life end up having their own personal power dissipated, like floodwaters outside of the channel. Also important in this idea of wu wei is the concept of suppleness. Water is surely the most supple of elements. It can fit into the tiniest crack and can fill the great oceans. The Tao te Ching stresses that we must be like water as we attempt to understand the power that guides our path. We must learn that resisting the path misdirect our true energy. We need to be supple like water so we can chart our course through life like water flowing downhill. This does not imply that we must always seek the easy way. Indeed, water sometimes encounters resistant bedrock that takes many thousands of years and great effort to carve down through this difficult rock. The lay of the land, the Way directs the supple water in the best way to do this work. According to the Tao te Ching, if we are following the Way, we will be able to overcome great difficulties if they present themselves. But because we are following the way, our efforts to overcome them will be like water on granite, appearing to flow effortlessly while doing much effective work. Water, suppleness and the Way all suggest a life that requires confidence, quiet certainty and introspection to guide all of our decisions. This is very difficult for those in the West to understand who are obsessed with obvious displays of power and dominion. Journal #12 Deuteronomy 19:16 states “Do not deal basely with your countrymen. Do not profit by the blood of you fellow: I am the Lord.” The law is stating that we are not to take advantage of other people when they are in danger or when they are at a disadvantage. A modern saying might be, “Don’t kick a good man when he is down.” I think this is a law that is applied exactly the same why in the ancient world as it is in the modern world. It is actually a question of morality. Taking advantage of the weak or vulnerable has always been morally wrong. Exodus 22:20 states “You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.” The law is saying that people of other cultures should be respected. You should not abuse people simply because they are different than you. In today’s society, this law is saying that discrimination or bigotry of any sort is not moral. Differences must be respected and tolerance is key to living peacefully in a multicultural society. This is a moral statement because it encourages respect for all people. Leviticus 25:14 states “When you sell property to your neighbor, or buy any from your neighbor, you shall not wrong one another.” This is a very broad statement that can be interpreted to mean any business transaction that causes undue disadvantage to either party is not moral. In the current economic climate, it is clear that if this was followed much hardship could have been avoided. Shady lending practices by financial institutions and banks is at the heart of our current calamity. This is a moral statement because it doesn’t specifically speak about one type of transaction, it speaks of all business. Deuteronomy 13:15 says “…you shall inquire and investigate and interrogate thoroughly. If it is true, the fact is established, and the abhorrent thing was perpetrated in your midst…” This law is saying that there should never be a “kangaroo court” when someone is accused of breaking the law. In modern terms, we would say that everyone has a right to due process. This is a legal statement, because it is outlining procedures for court, but it could just as easily be considered a moral statement. Deuteronomy 7:3 says “You shall not intermarry with them: do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons.” This is talking about marrying outside of the covenant. It is a restriction given to limit the amount of ethnic mixing available to the Hebrews. In modern times, many religions intermarry. I think the real division among modern people is the idea of marrying outside of your socio-economic cohort. It is not viewed as wise for a rich person to marry a poor person or for an educated person to marry an uneducated person. I know it sounds romantic when it happens, but the prince usually doesn't usually marry a commoner unless she is loaded with cash. This is a statement of religion. Journal #15 The level of violence in Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ was not appropriate for the telling of the story of Christ’s final twelve hours. I felt that at its best, it played fast and loose with the account as recorded in the Bible and at its worst was little more than exploitation by Mel Gibson. The use of violence to impact the story was less than effective. Sure, it was shocking to see the things that were done to Jesus. The physical brutality of His tormentors is recorded adequately in the Bible. But the close-up and profusion of blood did little more than take away from the fact that Christians look to the miracle of the resurrection more than they focus on the hours leading up to Christ’s death on the cross. It is true that this is of monumental importance, but the focus on physical violence made The Passion of the Christ feel like an exploitation flick, not an acknowledgement of what is sacred. That is why I felt as though Mr. Gibson made the movie to cash in, not to promote faith or spread the Gospel to viewers, as he so often has asserted. One problem I have with the amount of violence is some of the things that were depicted as happening to Jesus were not faithful recorded in the Bible. I understand that other historical documents were consulted to get as complete a picture as possible. That that just proves my point. Why scour history to fine every physical blow Jesus received or may have received in the final hours of his life? The obsession with violence does more to raise troubling questions about what lies in the heart of Mel Gibson than it does to cast light on the suffering of Christ during the Passion. After watching Mel Gibson’s the Passion of the Christ, the level and types of violence seemed to have a secondary purpose. I believe the first purpose was to shock and get a reaction from the audience. The secondary reason seemed to be to make the Jewish tormentors appear to be almost inhuman. The biblical accounts of violence done to Jesus clearly indicate who his tormentors were and also give some fleeting account of what their motivation was. The fact that they were Jews and Roman officials can not really be disputed if the biblical account is to be believed. But the level of violence seemed to make a statement about the Jewish leadership. Their apparent delight at the tormenting of Jesus, the hatred and tumult that surrounded coupled with the graphic nature of the violence could easily be viewed as anti-Semitic. The fact that Jesus went through a terrible ordeal before his ultimate death upon the cross is not something a Christian will deny. But the depiction of violence in Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ is so overdone; the movie appears to be little more than anti-Semitic and exploitative. Journal #18 One of the temptations that Jesus and Buddha both endured was the temptation to satiate the needs and desires of the flesh. In the case of Jesus, he was tempted to use his divinity as the Son of God to create bread from stones. This surely was a sore temptation considering he had just returned from the wilderness and a forty-day fast. The Buddha was not tempted by food to satiate his hunger, but by three beautiful women. All three were paraded before him, enticing him to satisfy the desires of his flesh any way he saw fit. While the means of temptation were different, the actual temptation was the same. Both were tempted to give into a physical longing or hunger at the expense of spiritual understanding and enlightenment. Jesus’ response of, “It is written that man shall not live by bread alone,” is especially fitting for this circumstance. The second temptation of both Jesus and Buddha involved death, but they were actually very different temptations. Buddha was tempted to fear his own death. This would have indicated that he had not truly emptied himself of his finite self. Buddha withstood the gales, hurricane and torrential rain that Mara sent his way. He did not fear, nor did he tremble because he truly no longer cared for his own life. Jesus was tempted to bring about a potential deadly circumstance to test the love that his Heavenly Father had for him. He was tempted to use his special position as God’s Son to do a bit of showing off, to show that because he was special he could get away with things that other people could not do. He resisted the temptation to test God’s love for him and Satan was thwarted a second time. The final temptations for Jesus and Buddha were each very different. The Buddha’s authority to do what he was doing was challenged. He was, after all, not of the Braham caste and had nothing but a calling to find truth from within his heart. He overcame the temptation to doubt his own mission by appealing to the knowledge within the earth. Testimony was given by thousands upon thousands of voices proclaiming Buddha on the path to enlightenment. For Jesus, his final temptation was the temptation to turn away from his spiritual mission in exchange for worldly power and dominion. All he had to do to obtain this was to worship Satan. Jesus declined, losing his chance to indulge in a major power trip, but gaining the ability to qualify as Savior. Jesus’ temptations could be called: The Temptation of Culinary Delights The Temptation to Abuse Position The Temptation to Exert Dominion Buddha’s temptations could be called: The Temptation of Fleshy Pleasures The Temptation to Fear Death The Temptation to Doubt the Devine I find it interesting that each of these temptations, while so similar, is still interpreted in uniquely Christian and Buddhist ways. The answers of Christ will be understood so clearly by Christians, but may not make as much sense to a Buddhist. The converse is also true. What is clear for both religions however is the need for self control and the ability to withstand temptation. Journal #19 Hinduism and the idea of Karma is very interesting to me. I feel this way because the inherent fairness of good being rewarded for good and evil being punished just feels so right. This is especially true in a world where it so often, at least on the outside, appears to happen contrary to this thought. I examine my own life and hope that if Karma is going to indeed be a reality in my new religion, I would hope that I would be one of the individuals that would benefit from such a universally just distribution of blessing and punishments. If I were going to adopt one of the concepts from Buddhism, it would be a portion of the 8-fold Path. I would adopt the concept of Right Livelihood as a central tenet of my religion. As I see it, this one idea would prevent much of the hardship and calamity that we currently are experiencing all over the world. The root cause of our current economic woes is wanting and greed. This is a personal attribute that must be overcome by individuals. But the explosive and global nature of the economic meltdown comes from those individuals whose livelihood is to prey on the weakness and greed of others. The idea I would adopt from the Hebrew religion is the story of Creation as explained in the Hebrew Bible. There is something so inspiring about the mysticism in this story. It does not explain how, it simply tells. And in the telling, so many questions remain unanswered, but for me that is the beauty. If defies current scientific understanding. It should have been discarded by scientifically minded individuals by now, but the fact is it remains. It cohabitates the scientific and spiritual person in current society. For beauty, mysticism and sheer staying power, the story of Creation from the Hebrews must be adopted. From Taoism, I would keep the idea of a force that supercedes rules and laws that guides the individual through life. The thought of a society not built upon law, but upon adherence to a power that guides individuals into spontaneous harmony with one another sounds like a wonderful version of paradise. Like millions of rivulets of water flowing to the sea, humanity would be guided harmoniously downhill, ultimately to rest in the peaceful confines of the sea if all adopted this teaching of Taoism. The Sermon on the Mount would be included in my religion as well. The beatitudes and the wisdom contained therein complements any life where goodness is the ultimate goal. Any individual striving to live these teachings will find themselves acceptable across cultures and throughout time because they are indeed ageless. From Islam, the one practice I would adopt is the idea of prayer and personal communication with Deity. I am not sure how I feel about the proscribed five times each day, but the concept is very appealing. The power that is to guide, bless and sustain surely needs a means of communication. Prayer and meditation are an important part of this necessary communication. Journal #20 I watched the lecture presented by Carole Walker Bynum given a USC in 2009. The topic of the lecture was miracles, specifically transformation miracles where matter was changed in some way. These miracles involve changes in matter, such as communion wafers turning into blood or changes in state, such as inanimate objects suddenly springing to life. The lecture emphasizes the importance of miracles to the early Christians. The miracles were held to be evidence of the power and reality of God. Miracles of healing were the most common while Jesus dwelt on Earth, but by the 14th and 15th century, transformation miracles became much more common. Material objects during this period became incredibly important to the worship of every-day Christians. Remnants of the cross or even artwork depicting sacred emblems became as important as the veneration of the saints associated with the material items. As some of these items would wane in popularity or importance, a miracle would sometimes occur that would raise their stature by making them a center worthy of pilgrimage and veneration. Tied to the nature of these miracles were the various ideas about what exactly made up matter. Very few theologians and scientists in the Late Middle Ages understood matter at the atomic or molecular level. Their ideas about matter were closely intertwined with their understanding of how God worked his miracles. Like many thinkers of this age, theologians looked to God’s power as an entranceway into understanding the workings of the physical world. In other words, theologians of this time believed that if they could truly understand God, then they would understand the nature of matter as well. A good quote from the lecture that sums this up is, “When it comes to understanding the transformation miracles of the Late Middle Ages; matter matters.” I found the lecture absolutely fascinating. I tried to imagine myself as a believer and theologian living in the Late Middle Ages, without a knowledge that modern science has provided. I tried to imagine how I would have viewed the world without the knowledge I have of matter that I have today. I found it a difficult task. I realized during this pondering, however, that my knowledge of science doesn’t really matter when considering these past miracles. I realize that a miracle occurs any time something happens that is against nature, as we understand it. I am not a person that dismisses science quickly or easily, but more than once over the course of this lecture, I found myself wondering to myself, “What it we have it wrong?” What if there are assumptions about matter and nature that we smugly assume are correct, but are actually only partial knowledge? What if we are in just as incomplete a state of knowing as they were in the Late Middle Ages, and we don’t realize it simple because we have labeled ourselves modern? The lecture was obviously thought provoking. It is exciting to think that in some ways we are wrong about our basic assumptions. In my mind, this simply means that humanity has plenty of room for growth in knowledge, both spiritual and material. Read More