And So the Prajña Eye Sees a Wide, Impregnable Country: Communal Spirituality in Meister Eckhart, Thomas Merton, Margaret Farley, and Mahayana Buddhism
Analyzing the writings of German Dominican Meister Eckhart (1260-1328), American Trappist Thomas Merton (1915-1968), and American Catholic ethicist Margaret Farley (b. 1935), this essay argues that they provide an elucidating optic for the significance of communal spirituality and compassionate love...
| Published in: | Buddhist Christian studies |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
University of Hawaii Press
[2018]
|
| In: |
Buddhist Christian studies
|
| Further subjects: | B
Spirituality
B Mysticism B Margaret Farley B Individualism B No-self B Relationality B Thomas Merton B Self B Mahayana Buddhism B Meister Eckhart B Buddhism B Love B Compassion B Autonomy B Community |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | Analyzing the writings of German Dominican Meister Eckhart (1260-1328), American Trappist Thomas Merton (1915-1968), and American Catholic ethicist Margaret Farley (b. 1935), this essay argues that they provide an elucidating optic for the significance of communal spirituality and compassionate love. Transgressive of dualistic worldviews and shaped by their sociohistorical contexts, their thought is rooted in their respective understandings of the self and its relationship to God and the broader world. Eckhart, Merton, and Farley contend that spirituality is intrinsically relational and communal as they express reservations about dichotomies and atomistic individualism, inviting discourse with Buddhist thought. Living in a pre-Cartesian, yet bourgeoning capitalist and industrialized society, Eckhart wrestles with the illusion of a self. Eckhart nullifies the concept of a reified, substantial self-identity and uncovers the kinship potential of a relational understanding of no-self. Eckhart's God exists and lives in and through a kenotic, relational movement that resounds with Merton's and Farley's thought and creates an opening in our dialogue with Buddhism. Fueled by deep commitments to inter-religious dialogue, civil rights, and the peace movement, Merton focuses his critique on dogmatic individualism at the expense of the communal. His conversations with Buddhist thought renders lucid for him the necessity for compassion, which can only be experienced in relationship and community with others. Similar to Eckhart, Merton, and Buddhist thought, Farley dismantles dualisms since dualisms beget hierarchies and polarities, which, in turn, undercut the possibility for compassion. Developing an anthropology rooted in autonomy and relationality as well as an embodied spirituality, she argues that we need to promote compassionate respect and just love. While Farley shares Merton's concerns about individualism, shethrough a feminist lenssees the danger of the erosion of autonomy. For Farley, [End Page 231] autonomy is grounded in relationality and relationality in autonomy. Thinking comparatively, Farley's integrated autonomy and relationality and notion of compassionate respect and just love reflect the freedom of ego-less Buddha-nature. The dialogue between Eckhart, Merton, Farley, and Mahayana Buddhism voices the possibilities of widening our life- and thought-worlds by risking a kenosis of individualism and venturing on a journey of accompaniment. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1527-9472 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Buddhist Christian studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1353/bcs.2018.0021 |