Brahman

A Comparative Theology

Michael Myers

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9781138964969
• eBook ISBN: 9781136835728
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Ethnic Studies
• Index: Social Sciences

This book is a critique of western systematic theology. It borrows insights from India and other traditions; it is not a synthesis of religious traditions. The book includes two parts, method and systematics. It examines the traditional topics of systematic theology '- topics such as the existence and nature of God, revelation and reason, religious ethics and human practice, the relation of God to the world, Christology, and eschatology - and allows these topics to grow in conversation with India and to change according to dialogical insights. The book is prompted by a perceived need to cross the boundaries between western and Indian worldviews in a systematic and comprehensive way. The purpose of the book is to enable scholars worldwide to extend their theological resources and to look anew at the problems and prospects of a comparative, systematic theology.

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction

Brahman: A Comparative Theology is a critique of systematic theology from the comparative perspective. The book is intended to fulfill the need for a wider theology than the traditional systematic, a theology unafraid to engage in constructive dialogue across religious boundaries. Constructive dialogue occurs every day, of course, but the approach adopted here displays a fundamental shift across the whole of systematic theology. The genre of systematic theology is chosen because its choice and treatment of topics afford the greatest return on cross-cultural inquiry. Systematic theology is historically a Christian genre and is for that reason a comfortable and natural starting point of inquiry for a Westerner. It is the task of the book to show that systematic theology is highly adaptable to cross-cultural criticism. Systematic theology has much to offer in its favor by its comprehensive and orderly treatment of topics. But systematic theology grows and is transformed in response to fresh insights from the Indian tradition and others. Thus, in a series of dialectical moves, systematic theology undergoes critique as the “wisdom of the East” is applied to each of its topics in turn.

The book takes the broad form of a conversation. It relies not on dialogue but rather on a dialogical model. The argument of the book is that reality is manifested in the relationships of persons. It is an argument which attempts to reduce the dualism of subject and object, of individual and world, to a more fundamental reality. In India, the term brahman has long signified such a reality. Thus, although the book looks to the examples of the great systematic treatments of theological topics such as are found in St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologiae or Paul Tillich's Systematic Theology, the Indian insights into reality in the form of Brahman set the tone for a distinctive “theology” from the beginning. The word ‘theology’ is retained, not because God is theos (masculine) rather than theas (feminine) or because it is assumed that God is Brahman or Brahman is God (which we shall see is a central point of discussion), but because the world of discourse known as theology is provisionally accepted as the locus and starting-place for our conversation. Theology remains an important partner in the conversation.

1. Definitions of Brahman

The term brahman is derived from the Sanskrit root √bṛh or √bṛṇh, third person singular present bṛṇhati, “to grow or increase.” Brahman represents the power of prayer and the power of the one who prays in the ancient Indian sacred text, the Ṛgveda. In the less ancient texts called the Brāhmaṇas, brahman represents the power and any member of the priestly caste or varṇa. Of course, the term retains these meanings to the present day. Brahman becomes the most important word for the school of Vedānta, and was systematically investigated by Bādarāyaṇa in the Brahmasūtras in the first or second centuries of the Common Era.¹ The Brahmasūtras are short, telegram-like statements which are easily memorized but difficult to understand without some commentary. The rise of the great commentators — Śaṇkara, Rāmānuja, Madhva, and many others — signals the rise of Vedānta as a great school. The philosophical-cum-theological exposition of Brahman as the ultimate ground of reality or “that by which the cosmos is created, sustained and comes to an end” (Brahmasūtra I.1.2) is lived in practical religious life by the worship of Brahmā as the creator God. Brahmā becomes a member of the Hindu triad alongside Viṣṇu and Śiva, although his cult remains relatively undeveloped. Finally, the term brahman is applied to a breed of cattle developed from the Zebu (Bos indicus) of India. The cow, as the most useful of the domesticated animals, symbolizes all that is good for the Indian, and the brahman cattle show marked resistance to the injurious effects of heat and insect attacks.

It can be seen that the term brahman ranges from the most mundane and everyday meanings to the abstract and cosmic. Its range gives the theologian the opportunity to develop comprehensive and systematic concepts. Its range allows development along lines different from the development of the concept of God in the historical West. For example, brahman as prayer, prayer, and the object of prayer lends a distinctive coloring or tone to Indian tradition. The precise nature of this coloring is an item of debate within the Vedāntic tradition itself, but in every case there is no conflict seen between religious worship and piety, on the one hand, and theological and philosophical exposition on the other. In Advaita Vedānta, the first great school of Vedānta and the one named “nondualist” (advaita), the rule of worship is not violently overthrown in favor of purely abstract philosophizing. This point is sometimes missed in the appropriation of Advaitic ideas by Western thinkers. It is true that the world of creator and creature is finally “sublated” by Advaita experience, but the language of creator and creature is provisionally acceptable even to Advaitins. It is acceptable in the same provisional sense that “talk of God” is acceptable to theology. In both traditions, Advaitic and Western theological, fallibilism is accepted in face of great mystery. The fallibilism of theology does not mean that one is unconcerned about theology's correctness, nor does it mean that one is relativistic about truth claims. But theologians admit their capability of making mistakes and their liability to be erroneous.² In this, theologians follow in the footsteps of Advaita. Advaita distinguishes between (1) the customary world of everyday, which includes the truth of words and the language of creator and creature, and (2) the ineffable reality, Brahman, that is bliss and fulfillment, freedom and release. If one rather naturally and properly finds fault in the language of theology to express adequately the nature of God, one understands something of the Advaita critique. But if one rejects Advaita as lifeless and abstract “monism,” one misses the middle path Advaitins tread in search of adequate expression of the process of freedom and release. Brahman is a signpost to that middle path.

2. The Method of Borrowing Insights from Other Traditions

The method of borrowing insights from other traditions is not an example of religious or cultural imperialism, for when we borrow we also give back. The exchange of ideas is useful for growth on both sides. India has an especially rich religious heritage. Its system of Vedānta has occupied Western interest for about 200 years. But Vedānta is not the only system germane to a comparative theology, even though it does look toward Brahman and hence is appropriate to study in a book entitled Brahman. Many other systems and traditions present themselves with rich and exciting ideas for theology, and we shall borrow from them, too.

Buddhism, for example, grew in a climate of critique and debate with Vedānta. Its ideas cannot be ignored for both historical and philosophical reasons when studying Vedānta. Buddhism can also be positively embraced by theologians, however. Its critique of the idea of self or soul (ātman) is highly insightful when theology turns to discuss the human being. Its largely nontheistic worldview is important to the discussion of God in systematic theology. Additionally, Mahāyāna Buddhism's ideal of the bodhisattva or “buddha-to-be” has christological significance. It can be seen that Buddhist ideas enrich systematic theology at each step.

The religion of China — including strands of Confucianism, Daoism and Buddhism — is eminently useful to consider in theological reflection. “Nondualism” takes on new meaning and subtle insight in the yin-yang correlative thinking of China. Yin-yang thinking brings the depth relations of polar opposites to light in our worldviews. Yin-yang is ancient instruction in “both/and” correlation rather than “either/or” reduction. Analysis of Chinese correlative thinking is a lesson in method for theologians. It brings to mind possible comparisons with Paul Tillich's correlative method in theology. We shall see that the correlative method can be combined with structuralism to affect profoundly the theories of evil, christology and eschatology. Correlative thinking enables one to accept the co-relatedness of good and evil, to embrace the historical/form critics' divergent views of Christ in the gospel accounts, and to look toward a personalist eschatology. In eschatology, the language of Confucian family relations and the Daoist path or way (dao) point us toward a search for happiness on the journey as well as at a future destination.

Judaism has long provided the narrative content and much of the vocabulary of Christian theology. The stories of creation and covenant, the vocabulary of Messiah and morality, are the stuff from which worship springs and to which theology responds. Jewish thinking imbues theology with the spirit of conversation and provides a model of interpersonal relationship. Jewish scripture lends itself to interpretation and properly grounds systematic theology in narrative and story. We shall borrow Jewish scripture and interpretation for comparative theology.

Islam, too, can be brought to the discussion table in order to enlarge theological resources. For example, the discussion of evil found in this book relies on Jewish scripture (the book of Job), Christian theology (St. Augustine and John Hick), and Islamic narrative. The story of Job is amplified in the Swahili tale Utendi wa Ayubu. The Qur'an also refers to evil as part of the Job complex (in Suras 21 and 38). Of course, the story of Job just touches the surface of Islamic resources for theology, but at least it brings recognition to a great tradition.

Thus, the present project of a comparative theology begins to take form. The starting-point and genre are explicitly and self-consciously Christian theology. But the theme of Brahman is Hindu and specifically Vedāntic. The Indian tradition, including Buddhism and its transformation in the East Asian synthesis, provide the major well from which we draw. The Jewish and Islamic traditions constitute important worldviews borrowed as needs arise.

3. Scholarly Resources for the Comparative Theologian

This book attempts to construct a comparative theology using the best scholarly resources available to date. We rely primarily on scripture or sacred texts from the world's great religious traditions. The “Index of Scriptural References” found at the back of the book can give the reader a good idea of the primary sources used here. We also rely on secondary sources. The “constructive theology” of Gordon D. Kaufman is important both in Part I, “Method,” and Part II, “Systematics.”³ Kaufman provides a decision procedure of “small steps” of accession of Christian belief within a triangular model of God, humanity and world. Kaufman's theology is reconstructive in the sense that he reverses the traditional order of topics (God, world, humanity) in favor of a revised order (humanity, world, God). The point of the revision is to provide a more common and acceptable starting-point for the secular world of today. The traditional order is retained below (with arguments given in its favor), but both Kaufman's method and the content of his theology are instructive and will be discussed in some detail. Detailed citations and bibliographical information are given as appropriate to the discussion. The reader can find a discussion of Kaufman's method in Chapter 2, “Theological Worldviews: One-Dimensional, Two-Dimensional, or Holistic?”

There are many secondary scholarly resources from India. Of great importance for this project is the thinker G. C. Pande. Pande is a trained historian but a philosopher, poet and linguist by inclination. He published a seminal work on Buddhism, but favors the Śaṅkara school of Advaita Vedānta.⁴ He characterizes his tradition as a “unitive vision” and “spiritual praxis.” This characterization provides the opportunity to test the holistic method of theology against Indian tradition in a comparative way. This test provides the substance of Chapter 3, “Vedic Holism and Theology.” Yet Pande's insights are borrowed in the systematic section of Part II as well.

We rely on Anantanand Rambachan and K. S. Murty for the Indian arguments in Chapter 4, “Śruti: Revelation Through Sacred Text.” These two thinkers argue that the traditional categories of reason and revelation and the traditional tools of hermeneutics are of value for theology yet today.⁵ Murty and Pande remain important in Chapter 5, “Is Brahman God?” Here, they represent the Advaita (Nondualist) Vedānta perspective on Brahman. For the Dvaita (Dualist) perspective, the argument looks to B. N. ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Preface
• 1 Introduction
• I Method
• Systematics
• Index of Scriptural References
• Index of Names and Subjects