NationStates Jolt Archive

First of all, let me say that this thread is meant to be more about doctorines and philosophies than just religion.
I basically would like people's opinions (no matter religious or not) concerning the way eastern and western doctorines are compared.
For example, we have judaism, christianity and islam on the west side, and buddahism (mahayana and theravada), confucism, shinto, taoism and so on.

What do you think about the way the two geographical side precieve the world?
From my knowledge, it is clear to see the western philosophies tend to be more dogmatic in nature, and usually when there's a change it comes with a price (shall we say the great east-west schism, or the suuni-shiite one)
White in the east it looks more like that the way of thinking adapts and change without much of a fight, for example the chinese version of buddahism or the coexisting and fusion of shinto, buddahism, taoism in japan.

What I would like to know on your behalf, is that such differences originate from the core difference between east and west?

The religions of the east (you forgot Hindi!) tend to be able to mix beliefs into one much more successfully than western religions.

I am very surprised you chose to include Islam in the list of 'Western doctrines'. Very, very surprised.

I am very surprised you chose to include Islam in the list of 'Western doctrines'. Very, very surprised.

Why? It's rather Western, all things considered. After all, it is an Abrahamic religion, descended from Christianity and Judaism. It's practiced in countries that can be considered part of the west for the most part--though in eastern countries too, but that's true of all religions these days. No one religion is confined to east or west anymore.

I am very surprised you chose to include Islam in the list of 'Western doctrines'. Very, very surprised.
Judaeism, Christianity, and Islam are all closely related, and originate in a relatively small area. We should probably also include Zoroastrianism in the Western count.

Then there are other systems of thought that really aren't related to either the Asian paradigm or the Middle Eastern paradigm, both of which have plenty of related traditions.

I should clarify. Shamanism, Hindu, and Confucianism are quite unrelated, for example, but them and their kin have influenced each other. Sort of an "in-law" relationship.

In that sense, it does seem like Eastern traditions "get along" better, but that - in no small part - has to do with the geopolitical scenario. China, India, and Japan all have significant geographic barriers between each other, while the Middle East, Europe, and Northern Africa have been frequently conquering each other from the dawn times onward.

It took the Mongolians to even briefly put the originating lands of different schools of Eastern thought under the same political heads. That was duplicated later by the British for a slightly longer time, but all of the significant forms of religion had developed well before problems arose.

Another crimp in the theory that Eastern traditions "get along" better is the case of Japan, where Christianity coexists and melds with Shinto and Buddhism - for the most part as nicely as any Eastern tradition.

I am very surprised you chose to include Islam in the list of 'Western doctrines'. Very, very surprised.
It most certainly is Western.

Another crimp in the theory that Eastern traditions "get along" better is the case of Japan, where Christianity coexists and melds with Shinto and Buddhism - for the most part as nicely as any Eastern tradition.

Actually, Christianity had a problem upon arriving to japan, in the late 16th century, it was perceived that Christianity doesn't fit due to the fact that it forbids other teaching such as Buddhism and Shinto (while those two melded quite nicely, and in a funky way)
So Christianity was banned in japan for about 200 years, and among those years there was the Shimabara massacre in which a great deal of Christians were slaughters, but all the mistrust of Christianity was due to the fact that Portuguese and Spanish people who came usually were missionary, and Japanese don't like people dictating them how to believe in things, they like taking what they want from any given belief, such as they took from Buddhism, taoism, and 5 phases cosmology.

It is most important to say that there's also difference in the preception of divinities, for example, while in the abrahamic religions there is a clear cut for what god is (of course, in folk beliefs such as the catholic saints, it's a tad different) in the eastern religions it's not exactly so, for example, there is no god in buddhism, although the mahayana buddhism have the assorted lot of buddhisatvas such as Kannon (Guan Yin in chinese), which each on is treated according to his or her respective traits. And not to mention shinto which is a shamanistic belief who holds that in every things there's a kami which isn't a god (it is translated in many cases to gods, but that's because there lack of words), but an animistic life force that can become all sort of things and exist in all. and Don't let me start on Taoism who believes in the persue of immortality (some cases physical, most spiritual) and have in their folklore the great immortals.

Actually, Christianity had a problem upon arriving to japan, in the late 16th century, it was perceived that Christianity doesn't fit due to the fact that it forbids other teaching such as Buddhism and Shinto (while those two melded quite nicely, and in a funky way)
So Christianity was banned in japan for about 200 years, and among those years there was the Shimabara massacre in which a great deal of Christians were slaughters, but all the mistrust of Christianity was due to the fact that Portuguese and Spanish people who came usually were missionary, and Japanese don't like people dictating them how to believe in things, they like taking what they want from any given belief, such as they took from Buddhism, taoism, and 5 phases cosmology.
Eh, political considerations. Those have caused problems for "Eastern" religions before as well, and for Japan's particular position, political considerations have often been very important regarding Christianity.

By now, of course, the Japanese seem to have made Christianity their own and now freely borrow from it.
It is most important to say that there's also difference in the preception of divinities, for example, while in the abrahamic religions there is a clear cut for what god is (of course, in folk beliefs such as the catholic saints, it's a tad different) in the eastern religions it's not exactly so, for example, there is no god in buddhism, although the mahayana buddhism have the assorted lot of buddhisatvas such as Kannon (Guan Yin in chinese), which each on is treated according to his or her respective traits. And not to mention shinto which is a shamanistic belief who holds that in every things there's a kami which isn't a god (it is translated in many cases to gods, but that's because there lack of words), but an animistic life force that can become all sort of things and exist in all. and Don't let me start on Taoism who believes in the persue of immortality (some cases physical, most spiritual) and have in their folklore the great immortals.
I wouldn't describe Shinto as shamanistic, really. Animistic, perhaps, but shamanism proper is a very distinct thing, centered inevitably on the shaman.

The "great" world religions often have some flexibility of theology and practice. Christianity can seem monotheistic or polytheistic depending upon local ritual, and Buddhism can seem easily nontheistic, monotheistic, or polytheistic, again depending on local flavor. Islam is generally viewed as one of the less flexible, but in some cases it can be the easiest to adapt the framework of pre-existing "indigenous" beliefs into.

There are also a few rather Abrahamic-style faiths in northeastern Africa...

West coast is far better. Dre, Snoop, the Game? What more need be said?

First of all, let me say that this thread is meant to be more about doctorines and philosophies than just religion.
I basically would like people's opinions (no matter religious or not) concerning the way eastern and western doctorines are compared.
For example, we have judaism, christianity and islam on the west side, and buddahism (mahayana and theravada), confucism, shinto, taoism and so on.

What do you think about the way the two geographical side precieve the world?
From my knowledge, it is clear to see the western philosophies tend to be more dogmatic in nature, and usually when there's a change it comes with a price (shall we say the great east-west schism, or the suuni-shiite one)
White in the east it looks more like that the way of thinking adapts and change without much of a fight, for example the chinese version of buddahism or the coexisting and fusion of shinto, buddahism, taoism in japan.

What I would like to know on your behalf, is that such differences originate from the core difference between east and west?

Who gives a shit?

Can't we all just get along?

That's all I have to say.

That's all I have to say.

You don't have to post if you don't want to, this thread is about talking, you don't care, than don't participate.

Some Eastern philosophies are good to apply to one’s personal life, but they make terrible models of society. Vice Versa for the West.