Divine Emptiness and Historical Fullness

·期刊原文

Divine Emptiness and Historical Fullness:
A Buddhist-Jewish-Christian Conversation with Masao Abe

Reviewed by Harold Kasimow

Journal of Ecumenical Studies

Vol.34 No.4 (Fall 1997) Pp.579

COPYRIGHT 1997 Journal of Ecumenical Studies

The focus of this book is the essay "Kenotic God and Dynamic
Sunyata" by Masao Abe, one of the most creative and influential
Buddhist philosophers of our time. Eight scholars respond to Abe's
important essay, followed by Abe's rejoinder. The book also includes
a very helpful introduction by David W. Chappell. This volume is a
follow-up to The Emptying God (Orbis, 1990), which includes the same
Abe essay with responses by one Jewish and six Christian
theologians.

Abe is deeply committed to Buddhist-Christian dialogue and is a
pioneer in Buddhist-Jewish dialogue. He argues that such dialogue
will transform and enrich these religious traditions and will help
them face the dangers confronting all religions today from various
antireligious ideologies, including scientism, Marxism, Freudian
psychoanalytic thought, Nietzschean nihilism, and atheistic
existentialism. Abe writes that "the most crucial task of any
religion in our time is to respond to these antireligious forces by
elucidating the authentic meaning of religious faith" (pp. 25-26).
In order to discover the deepest core of the Christian message, Abe
turns to Phil. 2:5-8, which deals with the kenosis of Christ. In
Abe's original and challenging interpretation of this passage, the
kenosis -- the self-emptying of Jesus Christ by the crucifixion --
is the emptying of God the Father. Abe states: "Without the self
emptying of God `the Father', the self-emptying of the Son of God is
inconceivable" (p. 37). Abe's interpretation of God as completely
self-negating blurs the distinction between Christian and Buddhist
ultimate reality. Ultimate reality is no longer the personal God of
the Bible but the Buddhist concept of sunyata. Abe explains that
"the notion of the kenotic God opens up for Christianity a common
ground with Buddhism by overcoming Christianity's monotheistic
character, the absolute oneness of God, and by sharing with Buddhism
the realization of absolute nothingness as the essential basis for
the ultimate" (pp. 39-40).

In their responses, the Christian and Jewish theologians recognize
Abe's deep knowledge of the Christian tradition and his strong
commitment to interfaith dialogue, which he approaches with a
generous spirit. Yet, most find his interpretation problematic. Hans
Kung argues that the Philippian hymn speaks only of a kenosis of
Jesus Christ, not of God the Father. He states that "God the Father
(ho theos) does not die upon the cross, but the man, Jesus of
Nazareth, the Son of God" (p. 214). In his rejoinder to Kung and
other critics, Abe admits that his interpretation is inspired by
Buddhism, but he claims that it is in accord with Christian
spirituality.

From my own Jewish perspective, I find his interpretation of kenosis
problematic. It is a radical break with the vision of the Hebrew
Bible. In Abe's interpretation of Christianity, the God of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob, of Amos and Isaiah has vanished. Jewish readers
will be especially challenged by Abe's treatment of the Holocaust
and interested in the perceptive Jewish responses by Richard L.
Rubenstein and Sandra B. Lubarsky. Abe argues that the Holocaust can
best be understood by the Buddhist idea of the fundamental ignorance
inherent in human beings (avidya) and the Buddhist doctrine of
karma. I think that most Jews will be very dubious about such
claims.

Nevertheless, I feel that this encounter with Abe is creative and
philosophically sophisticated and one that can help us see some of
the real problems and possibilities of interfaith dialogue.