Appropriation

In a previous entry I talked about the apropriation of religion/culture to form a new mode of thought. Before I go off to sleep tonight, I'd like to get some more ideas on this out.
The idea of this comes from an interview with Peter L. Wilson. What sparked my thought was the following quote:

"The first incursions of Zen into America were from Japanese of dubious orthodoxy and I would even included D.T. Suzuki in that category. Then you had a lot of Americans who 'didn't understand it,' and they made their own thing out of their fortuitous mistranslation. Something about Zen filled the bill. In terms of Japanese scholarship, they were wrong. But in terms of the spirit, it seems they were right.

"What was happening was precisely what Zen itself calls 'beginner's mind.' After centuries, something radically new was happening to Zen, and unfortunately Zen was not able to appreciate it, because Zen soon moved in the Roshis. 'Fine, fine, you're into Zen?  Here's the real Zen.' And the real Zen turned out to be just another fucking despotism. Even giving orthodoxy it's due, they shouldn't have stamped out those embers. Because it had that benefit of beginner's mind, that sweetheart situation, Beat Zen made Buddhism what it is today: the biggest Oriental religion in America. That's how you get things like the TV show Kung Fu. A lot of Oriental stuff seeped into that stupid show, and created a whole generation of people for whom it was part of their universe of discourse."

This is what I'm really getting at. It's not that I think orthodox ideas are not important. With out the original ideas to give context to the latter creations, the later creations are useless. Instead what I find myself moving towards is a form of thought that takes bits and pieces of various schools of thought and strings them together into something that more closely represents my own thoughts.

I was raised Irish Catholic, but I had a slightly different upbringing, that lead me into areas that one might not expect from such an upbringing. My mother is a very religious person, and has only gotten more so as she has aged. Early on though, she taught my brother's and I that the most important element of religion is the relationship between the individual and god. That nothing should stand in the way of this relationship. This obviously goes against traditional Catholic thought, which dictates that a member of the church must act as an intermediary between the individual and god. Needless to say, I prefer my mother's beliefs.

When I was 20 years old I found myself in a situation where it was neccisary to discover my "real" relationship with god. I went through a process where I examined my belief structure and did away with those things that did not seem neccisary to me. Instead concentrating on those things that I felt in my heart were true. During this process, I found it extremely helpful to view the question of god through the eyes of other belief structures. And so I started to integrate ideas from Taoism into my belief structure. Later, I introduced elements of Discordianism and Buddhism into the picture. I have a feeling in the near future I will start introducing elements of Sufism and Islam into that picture as well.

My relationship with god is just that, my relationship. I find it counter productive to view that relationship through a single narrow belief structure. It seems obvious to me that the entity that I am trying to make contact with is a complex entitiy, and it seems counter productive to me to limit my tool set in trying to make contact. Another way of saying it would be to say that it seems counter productive to me to try and understand how best I can become one with god, while using the narrow belief structure of a single religion. Instead, I rummage through the various belief structures, take the tools and ideas that I find and compare them to what I know. Or, more precisely, think I know. When these tools strike a chord in my heart, and ring true for me, I use them to try and further my understanding. When they don't, I make a mental note of them, in case I may find them useful later on in my travels, but ultimetly, discard them.

For me the search for god is an individual search. Groups can provide much needed help and support, but ultimetly, the trip must be made by the individual. Because the trip is an individual one, it does not make sense to me, to use a belief structure that is meant for group use. These belief structures can be a great help when discussing matters with other people. And knowing how to approach the subject of belief with other individuals. When I know the relgion(s) that an individual subscribes to, I know what matters I can discuss with that individual, and what matters are best left unsaid. I also know what vocabulary I should use when discussing certain topics. For the individual search though, I do not feel that a single belief structure is useful, in fact I believe that it is detrimenal to the sought after goal.

So, when I talk about appropriating other beliefs, with out bothering to make sure that you understand the authentic use of those beliefs, what I am advocating is the personalization of the belief structure. Making the belief structure your own and defining it on your terms. I am not advocating ignoring authentic teachings as useless. They may provide great insight that can be of great help, at the very least, they provide you with the vocabulary that you will need to approach someone who subscribes to that belief structure so that you can compare notes and glean knowledge from their own lessons learned.

I guess that about sums up what it was that I was trying to get at. At least in the realm of religion. There is a culture angle, which is similiar. This is also concerned with personalizing the culture to fit your own skin, instead of locking yourself into a group mind set that may ultimetly limit your growth as an individual. People must always be on the look out for the hive mind, which seeks to limit individualism. Just because a culture or religion is not mainstream, does not mean that it is immune to the hive mind set. Human beings are pack animals, and difference is suspect when running in packs.

Posted by Matt at April 21, 2003 01:43 AM