Hinduism and Buddhism, An Historical Sketch, Vol. 3Eliot, Charles
Religion
Hinduism and Buddhism, An Historical Sketch, Vol. 3
Eliot, Charles
Asia -- Religion; Buddhism; Hinduism
If it is difficult to say how far the Buddhism of China is a religion,
it is equally difficult to define its relation to the State. Students
well acquainted with the literature as well as with the actual
condition of China have expressed diametrically opposite views as to
the religious attitude of the Imperial Government[571], one stating
roundly that it was "the most intolerant, the most persecuting of all
earthly Governments," and another that it "at no period refused
hospitality and consideration to any religion recommended as
such[572]."
In considering such questions I would again emphasize the fact that
Chinese terms have often not the same extension as their apparent
synonyms in European languages, which, of course, means that the
provinces of human life and thought have also different boundaries.
For most countries the word clergy has a definite meaning and, in
spite of great diversities, may be applied to Christian clerics,
Mollahs and Brahmans without serious error. It means a class of men
who are the superintendents of religion, but also more. On the one
side, though they may have serious political differences with the
Government, they are usually in touch with it: on the other, though
they may dislike reformers and movements from below, they patronize
and minister to popular sentiment. They are closely connected with
education and learning and sometimes with the law. But in China there
is no class which unites all these features. Learning, law and
education are represented by the Confucian scholars or literati.
Though no one would think of calling them priests, yet they may offer
official sacrifices, like Roman magistrates. Though they are
contemptuous of popular superstition, yet they embody the popular
ideal. It is the pride of a village to produce a scholar. But the
scholarship of the literati is purely Confucian: Buddhist and Taoist
learning have no part in it.
The priest, whether Buddhist or Taoist, is not in the mind of the
people the repository of learning and law. He is not in religious
matters the counterpart of the secular arm, but rather a private
practitioner, duly licensed but of no particular standing. But he is
skilful in his own profession: he has access to the powers who help,
pity and console, and even the sceptic seeks his assistance when
confronted with the dangers of this world and the next.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account