Tim Romano wrote:
<<Pound throughout
his mid-life believed that those religions which teach renunciation and are
eschatological in orientation undermine individual and collective human
achievement in this world. One may disagree with him. But I believe that to
be a fair and accurate condensation of the essence of his views on
renuciation and asceticism.>>
If Pound were only against "renunciation and asceticism" there would be
little need to discuss this issue.
Pound read the detailed "Histoire de la Chine", which served as the basis of
the China Cantos. He should have known better. I am sure you know that it
is ridiculous to characterize any religion with a several thousand year
tradition as a religion of "aceticism and renunciation". Christ preached
the ACTIVE resistance of evil through the performance of acts of Good. St.
Francis and Joan of Arc were hardly passive, nor was Mother Teresa, in her
attempts to help people and relieve poverty. The Histoire de la Chine gives
ample evidence to show that Confucians did not oppose and try to destroy
Taoists and Buddhists because they preached passivity. On the contrary, it
was because they ACTIVELY tried to alter the system. During the Tang
dynasty, the Buddhists were partly successful in inaugurating a more
tolerant regime. The Tang dynasty Buddhist rulers ACTIVELY worked to change
the laws so that non-Confucians and other practitioners could enjoy
religious freedom. The Taoists throughout Chinese history inspired numerous
ACTIVIST peasant rebellions against Confucian autocracy.
They actively sought to change the social order for a more just
redistribution of wealth.
They were inspired by the egalitarian notions contained in this verse from
the Tao te ching:
"The Tao of heaven is like the bending of a bow.
The high is lowered, and the low is raised.
If the string is too long, it is shortened;
If there is not enough, it is made longer.
The Tao of heaven is to take from those who
have too much and give to those who do not have enough.
Man's way is different.
He takes from those who do not have enough
and gives to those who already have too much.
What man has more than enough and gives it to the world?
Only the man of Tao. "
Taoism encourages active giving. Just acts of redistribution. I suggest
that Pound's aversion to Taoism and Protestant Christianity--- WHILE
JUSTIFIED on occasion by reference to alleged overemphasis on
"renunciation"--- really stems from his elitism, his anti-democratic, and
anti-egalitarian tendencies. If Taoists appear to preach renunciation, it
is because Lao Tzu admonished his readers to renounce greed, renounce power,
renounce status, renounce excessive wealth. But he does not ask his readers
to renounce responsibilty. Many, many verses in the Tao te Ching are about
the proper way to rule, and are addressed leaders who wish to eliminate
poverty and prevent war. Pound ignores this. He prefers hierarchies.
<<Pound's reaction to these religions is not
unlike that of the pagan norsemen in europe's the early middle ages when
missionaries brought them news of the Christ. They wanted nothing of this
religion for weaklings and quitters.>>
The Norse "quit" their religion not long after exposure to Christianity. I
don't think this was because the Christians they encountered were
"weaklings". What I find fascinating in this connection is Pound's
rejection of his Quaker heritage. Historically, the Quakers were among the
most committed social activists in the history of Christianity. They
combined a contemplative religious service (which knows no ministers or
priestly hierarchy) with activism against social injustice and progressive
politics. Of course they don't worship artists (or even produce great art),
and they are among the most democratically organized Christian denominations
in England and the US. So two strikes against them, I suppose.
Regards,
Wei
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
|
