Sometimes I read something simply because of the person who
wrote the piece. It is typical for
humans to have their preferences. Some
people like specific musical groups.
Others are drawn to particular artists.
I am a person who likes specific authors. In fact, I have a number of favorite
authors. There are the obvious favorites
like the late monk, Thomas Merton. He is
pretty famous, which means many people know him. Another favorite of mine is Paul
Knitter. Knitter has just retired from
Union Theological Seminary in New York City.
He is a long-time professor and scholar who is not as famous as folks
like Merton. But he has had a long, distinguished
career shaping the ways young folks
think about life and their world.
Knitter was one of the earlier people involved in the
ecumenical and interfaith conversations.
When I say ecumenical, primarily I mean the interaction and dialogue
among different Christian traditions.
When I am involved ecumenically, it means I take my own Quaker
perspective into conversation with Catholics, Southern Baptists---liberals and
evangelicals. The ecumenical dialogue
recognizes that we are all in the Christian camp, but also recognize it is a
pretty diverse camp.
When I talk about interfaith, I am referring to the
interaction and conversations among adherents of the major faith traditions of
the world. It may be a dialogue of
Christians, Jews, and Buddhists. Or it
may involve Hindus and Muslims. We can
think of the Jains or Sikhs and, then, get into even lesser known religious
traditions. Obviously, the interfaith
interaction can be even more complicated than ecumenical dialogues.
Paul Knitter has been a key player in this interfaith world
because he is so clear about his own Christian heritage. But he is also radically open and
irenic---that is, he very much wants to hear and understand the other’s
perspective and to deal with that (often different) perspective in a gentle and
peaceful manner. He brings respect and
dignity to the conversation.
So it was that I was drawn to a piece he wrote that was
entitled, “Are Buddhism and Science Incompatible?” (It would be easy to ask the same question
about Christianity, Judaism or any other religious tradition.) I will say upfront that Knitter does believe
they are compatible. But I am not really
interested in that argument. I am more
interested in a portion of his writing where he is talking about interconnectivity. Interconnectivity is an idea from Buddhism
that I really like.
Essentially, interconnectivity is the idea that basically
all of life is connected. On the
surface, it looks like you are an individual and so am I. And of course, on the surface that is
true. But at a much deeper level we are
ultimately one---unity is the fundamental essence of the world. This unity becomes, then, the goal of
life---the end of the world. Buddhism
offers a roadmap, as it were, to travel this path to interconnectivity. I think Christianity has its own version, but
that is a story for another day.
Let’s listen as Knitter talks about this. He says, “Buddha in his wisdom calls us to realize that our deepest
happiness consists not in living as individuals but as co-participants in a
pervasive, ever-changing interconnectedness.”
That is a pregnant statement that I find powerfully promising. Who does not want to opt for “our deepest
happiness?” Knitter says it is realized
by becoming a “co-participant in a pervasive, ever-changing
interconnectedness.” In street language
I think we say, “we’re in this together!”
The
spiritual journey is the journey together.
I have my own spiritual work to do---growth and development---and you
do, too. But we’re in it together. This leads to the next piece from
Knitter. “To really live
interconnectedly would mean “the eradication of the selfish gene.” That is powerful. Probably most of us are not going around
thinking about our selfish gene. But I
know too much of my action betrays the fact that I do have this selfish
gene. Spiritual growth and development
in the interconnectivity direction will eradicate this gene. Good riddance!
I
complete my quoting of Knitter with these encouraging spiritual words. He says, “It would tell us, as many
contemporary evolutionary biologists are now arguing, that the “fittest” who
survive are not the most selfish but the most cooperative. The compassionate
gene can replace the selfish gene.” I am
relieved that the spiritual blueprint of the universe may not ultimately be
“the survival of the fittest.” I am
delighted that cooperation may be the bottom line instead of competition.
The
thought of my selfish gene being replaced with a compassionate gene is
thrilling. If that happens for me, it
happens for you, too. Clearly, we are
not there yet. The world experiences too
much conflict to say compassion has the upper hand. That is the spiritual development we all need
to engage and execute. But it is
exciting to see what is possible. I find
the case for interconnectivity compelling.
Now on to the work!
Comments
Post a Comment