Divergent Responses to the Human Predicament: a Case Study in New Comparativism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 1-1-2011 Divergent Responses to the Human Predicament: A Case Study in New Comparativism Mark Toole University of Denver Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd Part of the Buddhist Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Comparative Methodologies and Theories Commons Recommended Citation Toole, Mark, "Divergent Responses to the Human Predicament: A Case Study in New Comparativism" (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 654. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/654 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. DIVERGENT RESPONSES TO THE HUMAN PREDICAMENT: A CASE STUDY IN NEW COMPARATIVISM __________ A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the University of Denver and the Iliff School of Theology Joint PhD Program University of Denver __________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy __________ by Mark A. Toole August 2011 Advisor: Jacob N. Kinnard ©Copyright by Mark A. Toole 2011 All Rights Reserved Author: Mark A. Toole Title: DIVERGENT RESPONSES TO THE HUMAN PREDICAMENT: A CASE STUDY IN NEW COMPARATIVISM Advisor: Jacob N. Kinnard Degree Date: August 2011 ABSTRACT The enterprise of comparison has been regarded by some as one of the most vital characteristics of a healthy academic study of religion. However, the failed legacy of Eliadian Comparativism has caused others to suggest that the art of comparison has not yet lived up to its promise. This study brings together the best tools of what the author calls “Smithian New Comparativism.” In order to demonstrate concretely a rigorous and responsible critical comparative analysis, and to chart a course for academically beneficial future cross-cultural comparisons, this project presents a case study that compares two religious traditions’ doctrinal responses to a conceptually analogous ontological presupposition. Specifically, it comparatively analyzes the Reformed Christian doctrine of limited atonement and the J!do Shinsh" Buddhist doctrine of akunin sh!ki. The comparative examination of these teachings illuminates the respective traditions’ doctrinally divergent responses to a common understanding of the human predicament, reveals previously unseen structural and conceptual parallels between the traditions by examining deeply-rooted Western ideas through the lens of Buddhist theories, and suggests finally that despite the appearance of surface resemblances between Shin Buddhist and Reformed Christian thought the two religious paths lead ultimately to differing religious ends. ii Acknowledgements I am deeply indebted to Dr. Jacob N. Kinnard, Associate Professor of Comparative Religious Thought at Iliff School of Theology, who served as my advisor and offered his support and wisdom throughout my time in the Joint Ph.D. program. Two distinguished members of my committee, Dr. Ginny Ishimatsu and Dr. Gregory Robbins, were quick to help shape these pages and lend their vast expertise to this project. Many of the central ideas in this dissertation were first formulated with early dialogue partners Dr. William Dean and Dr. George Keyworth. I am equally grateful to Dr. Sheila Daveney for introducing me to the work of Jonathan Z. Smith. Special thanks go to mentor and friend Dr. Rodney Taylor, who gave me my first opportunity to teach comparative religious studies. My cohort in the Joint Doctoral Program—specifically Dr. Brett Opalinski, Dr. Terry Clark, and Dr. Jeff Scholes—challenged me as a scholar while providing perspective and good humor. I am indebted especially to Dr. Clint Corcoran, Chairperson of the Department of Religion and Philosophy at High Point University, for his support of the comparative endeavor. I also appreciate my current and past students who remind me every day why I love being in the classroom. Sara Miller and Julia Ridley Smith served as readers and helped shape this final product. Special thanks to everyone who ensured this project reached its conclusion, including: Patricia and Gary Toole; the Miller, Herbenick, Hunter and Henderson families; and friends in Chicago, Denver, Greensboro and elsewhere who have all shared in this process. Finally, much gratitude to my wife, Mary, who has walked with me every step of the way and to our daughters, Maura and Kara, who were overheard debating recently whether Daddy will be writing a dissertation every year. iii Table of Contents Chapter One: Introduction ...................................................................................................1 Comparison – “Surely It Is Possible” ......................................................................1 Brief Reflections on History of the Comparative Endeavor ...................................8 Chapter Two: From Poverty of Conception to “New Comparativism”.............................22 Prior Comparisons of Shin Buddhism & Reformed Christianity ..........................27 The Call for “New Comparativism” ......................................................................36 Meet the New Comparativists ...............................................................................42 Revisiting a Case Study Anew...............................................................................48 Alles’s Analogical Cart..........................................................................................56 Applying the Tools of New Comparativism .........................................................57 Rationale for Methodology ...................................................................................60 Chapter Three: Akunin Sh!ki Setsu .................................................................................62 Dharmalogical Influences on the Doctrine ............................................................74 Contextual Rationale for Development of Doctrine ..............................................95 Akunin Sh!ki Setsu According to the Tannish!....................................................99 Chapter Four: The Doctrine of Limited Atonement ........................................................112 Theological Influences on the Doctrine ..............................................................117 Contextual Rationale for Development of Doctrine ............................................151 Limited Atonement According to The Canons of Dort ......................................161 Chapter Five: Critical Cross-Cultural Comparison .........................................................174 Smells Like Christianity ......................................................................................174 Bridge Concepts...................................................................................................183 An Occasion for Comparative Thought...............................................................187 Disciplined Exaggeration in the Service of Knowledge .....................................215 Chapter Six: Conclusion and Comparative Implications.................................................219 Bibliography ....................................................................................................................226 Appendix .........................................................................................................................257 ! iv Chapter One: Introduction Each of the modes of comparison has been found problematic. Each new proposal has been a variant of an older mode . We know better how to evaluate comparisons, but we have gained little over our predecessors in either the method for making comparisons or the reasons for its practice.—Jonathan Z. Smith, Imagining Religion (1982)1 Comparison—“Surely It Is Possible” The enterprise of comparison has been called the “most central and distinguishing characteristic” of the modern academic study of religion.2 Some have suggested that cross-cultural and trans-historical comparisons are perhaps “our greatest claim[s] to originality as an independent academic discipline, distinguished from other disciplines like theology or anthropology.”3 Others have argued that critical comparative analysis is “intrinsic to the process through which we construct and apply” categories to interpret religious phenomena “such as symbol, myth, ritual, scripture, law, ethics, and mysticism.”4 One of the leading historians in the field of religious studies has even characterized the subdiscipline of comparative religious studies in this way: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1 Jonathan Z. Smith, Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982), 35. 2 Hugh B. Urban, “Making A Place To Stand: Jonathan Z. Smith and the Politics and Poetics of Comparison,” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 12, no. 1-3 (2000): 340. William E. Paden affirms this notion when he argues, “it is the comparative, cross-cultural nature of religious subject matter which constitutes and justifies religious studies as a secular field of knowledge.” See William E. Paden, “Elements of a New Comparativism,” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 8, no. 1 (1996): 5. 3 Urban, “Making A Place To Stand,” 340. 1 So compelling has comparative religion become that it now