Everyday Practice, Buddhist and Christian

·期刊原文
The Ground We Share: Everyday Practice, Buddhist and Christian
Reviewed by Scott Whitney
Parabola
Vol.20 No.1 (Spring 1995)
pp.110-111
COPYRIGHT Society for the Study of Myth and Tradition 1995

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TWO SPIRITUAL TEACHERS, one a respected American Zen Master, the
other a Benedictine hermit, secluded themselves for a week in a
cabin in the famous Waipi'o Valley on the island of Hawai'i. The
results of their week-long dialogue, taped and later edited by
California writer Nelson Foster, have become the text of The Ground
We Share. It is predictable that the two, who obviously respect and
listen closely to each other, find some basic commonalities in the
contemplative practices and insights which their two spiritual
traditions share. Yet what is more fascinating is how two honest men
handle the gaps, even the chasms, that separate their world views.
Amid the politeness and respect, there is some admirable butting of
heads in their spiritual duet. For instance, Aitken Roshi says at
one point, "Christians, I think, tend to take metaphysics seriously.
In other words, a Christian can never say that there's no such thing
as Christ." Some things, it seems, are non-negotiable. Perhaps in an
attempt to be broad-minded or accommodating, Brother David makes
some extraordinary and questionable claims, like: "The Western
tradition is not dualistic fundamentally or inherently." What about
body and soul, heaven and hell, good and evil, Christian and pagan,
divine and human, word and silence? The traditions of all the
"people of the book" are, by definition, dualistic. But the
Benedictine brother is also capable of sharp honesty about the
limitations of his church's institutions. They have a tendency to be
self-perpetuating and, often despite the best intentions, serve
themselves rather than the life they were created to serve. This
book is important, not because it advances any broad ecumenical
agendas, but because Buddhism has become an important element in the
American intellectual landscape and most "New World" Buddhist
practitioners have their roots in either the Jewish or the Christian
traditions. For committed Christians, the book's importance might be
found in the question: How can Buddhist meditative techniques--honed
to a diamond point by centuries of transmitted practice--be
incorporated into the body of Western spirituality? It is not just a
matter of Buddhism meeting the Judeo-Christian tradition in
America--this very meeting is changing both in the process. As the
two traditions meet and teach and change each other, their followers
need to discover what is essential, and what is mere cultural
artifact. Untangling these roots from the cultural media in which
they developed is one of the dicier tasks of any contemporary
student of religion--and one of the focal points of this dialogue.
Aitken Roshi addresses this cultural-his-torical problem in a
fascinating way when he says: The Buddha grew up in an environment
that was not monotheistic and in which the idea of vast, cyclical
world systems--huge cycles of time and being--was commonplace; ... I
suspect similar cultural factors help explain why the Buddha's
experience led to an emphasis upon enlightenment, whereas the life
of Christ led to an emphasis on salvation. Not presuming on the
expertise of the reader, editor Nelson Foster has provided a
graceful introduction to the histories of both men, and to the
occasion of their dialogue. His use of unobtrusive footnotes
throughout the main text also facilitates an easy read. Through the
course of the book, one gets a sense of both men reaching for the
limits of their understanding and experience. There is a sense in
which their week-long conversations were both ordinary and historic.
For American Buddhists trying to figure out their Christian origins,
or for Christians trying to renew their faith community, The Ground
We Share is valuable proof that equanimity and honesty must form the
common ground of dialogue.