CHINESE RELIGION REDISCUSSED
153
have formulated his scope differently: focussing his attention on the folk religion of Taiwan, he might have tried to define its nature (in contrast to the other traditional systems), its characteristics, its expressions in cult and ritual. Now he leaves the ambiguity of his scope bothering the reader throughout the whole work.
To say that the old method of classifying Chinese religion does not work, does not solve the problem. Before abandoning the old way, one could try to revitalize it with some modifications, and it would probably work. Indeed, one cannot deny that in China (and in Taiwan) there are historically and at the present time — at least three distinct religio-philosophical (and literary-cultural traditions, which have in different ways influenced Chinese culture on all levels of society from the higher levels of the literati and rulers down to the common people. Not all levels have been affected in the same way or by the same traditions equally, or in the same period of time. There has been interaction between the traditions and between the various social groups: thought-patterns and practices of the literati-scholars and rulers have affected the common people and vice versa. The three systems, called Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism, again are not to be considered as clearly defined categories: they are rather each a collection of somehow similar but often dissimilar systems with a universal common denominator (Taoism is a classical example of this phenomenon).
The first question arising is whether the three traditional systems even if we recognize their internal divisions — have any distinct consistency. The second question follows: is the religious system of the people (presuming that there is such a reality) identical with any of these three or with all of them or is it a separate entity? In that case: how does it relate to the three systems?
My answer would be: to question 1: Yes, both historically in the whole of China, and at the present time in Taiwan and other places; to question 2: No: the popular religion cannot be identified with any of the three systems, nor with the three together. It is a distinctly separate system, with various degrees of assimilation or absorption from the three (this phenomenon of mutual assimilation also exists in the three systems). The system of popular religion is characterized by its own world view, by its own functionalism, and by its own forms of expression in cult, worship, etc. Some of its characteristics are identical with the set of criteria (or ‘parameters')
Page 180
Page 181
CHINESE RELIGION REDISCUSSED
153
have formulated his scope differently: focussing his attention on the folk religion of Taiwan, he might have tried to define its nature (in contrast to the other traditional systems), its characteristics, its expressions in cult and ritual. Now he leaves the ambiguity of his scope bothering the reader throughout the whole work.
To say that the old method of classifying Chinese religion does not work, does not solve the problem. Before abandoning the old way, one could try to revitalize it with some modifications, and it would probably work. Indeed, one cannot deny that in China (and in Taiwan) there are historically and at the present time — at least three distinct religio-philosophical (and literary-cultural tradi- tions, which have in different ways influenced Chinese culture on all levels of society from the higher levels of the literati and rulers down to the common people. Not all levels have been affected in the same way or by the same traditions equally, or in the same period of time. There has been interaction between the traditions and between the various social groups: thought-patterns and prac- tices of the literati-scholars and rulers have affected the common people and viceversa. The three systems, called Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism, again are not to be considered as clearly defined categories: they are rather each a collection of somehow similar but often dissimilar systems with a universal common deno- minator (Taoism is a classical example of this phenomenon).
The first question arising is whether the three traditional systems even if we recognize their internal divisions — have any distinct consistency. The second question follows: is the religious system of the people (presuming that there is such a reality) identical with any of these three or with all of them or is it a separate entity? In that case: how does it relate to the three systems?
My answer would be: to question 1: Yes, both historically in the whole of China, and at the present time in Taiwan and other places; to question 2: No: the popular religion cannot be identified with any of the three systems, nor with the three together. It is a distinctly separate system, with various degrees of assimilation or absorption from the three (this phenomenon of mutual assimilation also exists in the three systems). The system of popular religion is characterized by its own world view, by its own functionalism, and by its own forms of expression in cult, worship, etc. Some of its characteristics are identical with the set of criteria (or ‘parameters')
Page 180Page 181
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.