It's the end of the journey I've gone down the rabbit hole And might have come back up even more confused However I did gain many new insights on the nature of the mystical as well as the different approaches in understanding mysticism Mysticism is still confusing and unclear, but when was it ever crystal clear anyways? Farewell!
I found the readings on women shamans very interesting to read. They gave me more insight on the world of shamans. I wasn't aware that there were two types of mudang (shaman) in Korea: the "family priestess whose role is inherited" (Harvey, 37) and the professional shaman who charged fees for her services. I also didn't know that the sinbyung (possession sickness)was a prerequisite to becomming a shaman. It was believed that sinbyung was sent from the divine and therefore its victims were not free to deny or reject it. If they tried, there was the belief that there would be supernatural retribution and their lives would be in danger. Hence it seems that most of the women who caught the sinbyung were forced one way or another to accept the shaman life.
Spirit possession in shamanistic rituals
Reading Harvey's account of women shamans and possession sickness in Korea, I can't help but feel sorry for these women that generally had no choice but to accept their role as a shaman. The mystical experience of sinbyung in effect forced them into further subordination, as if living in a patriarchal society wasn't bad enough. They were now socially ascribed as outcastes, falling victim to social isolation, stigma, and hostility. They were now subject to maltreatment because they were A)female and B)shamans. The persecution of shamans restricted their “ability to use their influence and economic power for personal or family social mobility” (Harvey, 38). On top of all that misery, woman shamans and their families constantly lived in fear of "supernatural retaliation" (Harvey, 43).
The only good aspect I can see coming out of sinbyung is the fact that because the woman shaman was now hosting divine spirits, she was able to move up the power ladder within the household. She gained more power within the family and as a result rearranged the roles in the family. The woman shaman was able to bargain "with her family from a position of strength based on her earning power, spiritual superiority, and recovered health and self-confidence" (Harvey, 43).
Even with the benefits, the negatives weigh much heavier. If the woman caught the sinbyung she had little choice but to accept her shaman role. If she accepted her calling and became a shaman, she would be declared an outcaste by society and would suffer from stigma, social isolation, and persecution. She could decide to deny or ignore the sinbyung altogether but then her mortal life would be in danger due to the belief in divine retaliation. What is a girl to do? All the options seem so promising. What would you choose?
I'd like to focus a little bit on the Bourguignon's article. Bourguignon presents a feminist approach to understanding mystical experiences by asserting that possession trance is a feminist response to women's social subordination and powerlessness. Acting through the spirit, women were able to "express unconscious, forbidden thoughts and feelings, particularly in situations of social subordination” (Bourguignon, 558). They were able to voice out their feelings on issues regarding social subordination and the injustices that women faced everyday but were not allowed to speak of. Although I don't doubt the possibility that for some women shamans, a possession trance may have been sort of a venting method. It gave them the ability to express forbidden and unconscious thoughts regarding women's social subordination. I do disagree with an overly feminist approach to understanding mystical experiences where you assume all shaman women were feminists of some sort, using the possession trance to express their feelings on the injustice of women's subordination in society. Many of these women may not have harbored feminist ideas such as the equality of men and women given that they were living entrenched in a patriarchal society. They may have accepted their subordinate role as natural.
Bourguignon, Erika. “Suffering and Healing, Subordination and Power: Women and Possession Trance.” Ethos 32, no. 4 (2004): 557-574.
Harvey, Youngsook Kim. “Possession Sickness and Women Shamans in Korea.” In Unspoken Worlds: Women’s Religious Lives, edited by Nancy A. Falk and Rita M. Gross, 37-44. Belmont: Wadsworth, 1989.
When you think of Buddhism, does the term moderm pop into your mind? Many English-language readers might (myself included before reading Ivy's article) find the pairing of Buddhism with modernity odd given that "for such readers, Buddhism evokes something that is essentially nonmodern and non-Western" (Ivy, 312).
Ivy's refreshing take on Buddhism as being modern due to its transhistorical and historical nature was very interesting to read. I was quite surprised that Buddhism and modernity, seemingly contradicting each other, could be tied together where modernity "is the very ground and possiblity for Buddhism itself" (Ivy, 312) and Buddhism is a component of modernity.
Like modernity, Buddhism can be viewed as both historical and transhistorical. Buddhism is historical and modern in "its forms of social effectivity" (Ivy, 327). It was crucial in the process of establishing "nation-statehood and unified populations, and within the process of asthetic and philosophical modernity," (Ivy, 321) with Japan being the prime example. Buddhism helped shape Japan's national identity, became the "essential religious core of Japanese culture," (Ivy, 323) and assisted Japan in becomming the first non-Western nation to achieve the status of modernity.
However also like modernity, Buddhism can be seen as transhistorical, temporal and free from chronological, cultural, and historical boundaries. As a large part of Buddhism is made up of techniques to quiet the mind and achieving liberation, "it would seem to be all the more mobile and fluid, ready for transport to the global markets of the enlightenment" (Ivy, 313). Buddhism continues to reinvent itself, take new forms, and fit in with the changing times.
I found this video of another branch of Buddhism, the Agon Shu School of Buddhism in Japan that seems to relate to this topic of a modern Buddhism. The modernity of the Agon Shu School of Buddhism is clearly illusrated. Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Buddhism continues to take on new forms and reinvent itself but it still draws back to its old traditional essence. Buddhism is like a huge tree with a myriad of roots and branches that take different forms and sprout out different ways but still draws itself from the traditional essence of Buddhism.
Ivy, Marilyn. “Modernity.” In Critical Terms for Buddhist Studies, edited by Donald S. Lopez Jr., 311-331. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005.
Don’t search for the Buddha, it’s already in front of you. Your mind is the true Buddha. Not trying to become a Buddha will make you a Buddha. You are the seated Buddha and therefore you are already naturally enlightened. Sitting meditation is the seated Buddha.
These are the ideas I've discovered in the writings of Dogen, Chinul, and the Shobogenzo. Am I the only one finding these doctrines really interesting?
The twofold approach of 'sudden awakening and gradual awakening' presented by Chinul as “an initial awakening and its subsequent cultivation” (Buswell, 101) is brilliant. The idea that your search for the Truth, the Buddha, Enlightenment, is right in front of you. It is you. The only thing to do is awaken this inherent Buddha in you. Once it is awakened, cultivate the Buddha, cultivate your mind. At the end is your realization or reclaiming of the Buddha that was already in you from the beginning. In this way you prove your existence as the Buddha.
These ideas remind me of Prof. Ahn's reference to The Beauty and The Beast, the hero, and greek myths that we discussed in class. The idea that the Beast in order to become human which he already was to begin with, cultivates his inherent humanity by overcoming obstacles, and ends up proving what was his from the beginning.
This also reminded me of Po's quest to become the Dragon Master and gain superpowers in the animated movie Kung Fu Panda. Po the Panda is unexpectedly chosen to fulfill an ancient prophecy. He is chosen as the Dragon Master who is to fight the evil Tai Lung and protect the village. He is given the dragon scroll which is said to unleash the dragon warrior's superpowers. However when he opens it, the scroll like a mirror, only shows his own reflection.
*watch it from 0:37-1:17 and then from 8:21 to 9:01*
Po is disappointed and decides to give up. He then has a conversation with his father in which his father reveals to him the secret ingredient of his famous soup:
Dad: the secret ingredient is...nothing! Po: huh? Dad: you heard me, nothing. there is no secret ingredient. Po: wait wait its just plain old noodle soup? you don't add some kind of special sauce or something? Dad: don't have to. to make something special you just have to believe its special *Po takes out the scroll peers at it. like a mirror, he sees his own reflection and amazement and realization dawns on his face* Po: there is no secret ingredient...
Final Battle Scene with the evil Tai Lung Tai Lung: finally the power of the dragon scroll is mine! Tai Lung: ....its nothing!! Po: it's okay I didn't get it the first time either Tai Lung: what? Po: there is no secret ingredient. It's just you.
There is no secret ingredient. It's just you. Po did not need to search for the power because he is the power, the dragon master from the very beginning. The power is inherent in him. Hence through Po we can re-discover these enlightening doctrines: Don't search for the Buddha, it's already in front of you. It is you. Your mind is the true Buddha.
Who knew animated cartoons could be so deep?
Bielefeldt, Carl. “Dogen’s Lancet of Seated Meditation.” In Religions of Japan in Practice, edited by George Tanabe, 220-234. Princeto: Princeton University Press, 1999.
Buswell, Robert E., Jr. “Secrets on Cultivating the Mind.” In Tracing Back the Radiance: The Korean Way of Zen, 98-117. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, 1991.
Gudo Wafu Nishijima and Chodo Cross trans. Shobogenzo: The True Dharma-Eye Treasury, Volume I. Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2007. http://www.numatacenter.com /default.aspx?MPID=81 (accessed January, 5 2008).
In "The Power of Definitions" Richard King focuses on the genealogy of mysticism where its definition is formed by the various sociopolitical changes and circumstances in history. Mysticism as King states cannot "be completely divorced from the historical remains of past definitions of the term" (King, 9).
What I find particularly interesting is the idea of mysticism as a social construction, where it's definition "has been constructed in different ways at different times" (King, 9) in history, according to sociopolitical circumstances. Furthermore, the characterization of mysticism reflects the power relations in society throughout history. Defining mysticism in effect defines power, as the way mysticism is characterized reflects the establishment of power and authority as well as the "historical struggle for power and authority" (King, 9).
As a sociology student, I can't help but agree with King's view of mysticism as being socially constructed in the sense that its defintion changes and will continue to change according to the various sociopolitical changes in society. Equally convincing is the theory of mysticism as a social construct, like any social construction, reveals power relations within society, where "the way one defines 'the mystical' relates to ways of establishing and defining authority" (King, 9).
During the early Christian tradition, mysticism became to be defined as "that phenomenon or aspect of the Christian tradition that was understood to emphasize religious knowledge gained by means of an extraordinary experience or revelation of the divine" (King, 7). The Church at this time in Western Europe held great political and social authority in society. As the mediator between God (the divine/spiritual) and humans, the church played a very much public role in society. Many of what is now considered concerns of the state were governed by the Church. The Church had power over the legislation and jurisdiction of laws, held its own courts which had jurisdiction over marriage, collected taxes. Simply put, the Church held power over the state as well as the citizens in society.
In the post-Reformation period "Western science established its own distinctiveness - its cultural and political identity" (King, 16). As a result, the growing secular power, not wanting the Church to interfere with the state, split the society into two realms: the mystical and the scientific, the private and public. Thus established the privatization of mysticism. Mysticism came to be located in "the psychological realm of personal experiences" (King, 21) which served to "exclude it from political issues such as social justice" (21). Mysticism came to be defined as something private, personal, irrational, etc.
Using King's method to view mysticism as a geneaology, it's easy to see how its definition has changed throughout the changing sociopolitical dynamics in society and how its characterization reflects "the historical struggle for power and authority" (King, 9).
I think King is absolutely right when he insists that before one examines contemporary characterization of mysticism, "one first needs to understand something about the history of the term 'mystical' and the sociocultural transformations that have led to its particular connotations and denotations in modern Western culture" (King, 8).
The one major problem is the fact that this 'genealogical' view on the definition of mysticism is within a Western context. King, although writing about Orientialism and Religion, uses Western ideologies (the Christian tradition) to discuss East Asian mysticism. Is King's notion of the social construction of mysticism applicable to East Asian mysticism? How has mysticism been defined in East Asia and is it linked to changing sociopolitical circumstances or power relations in society? Can mysticism be even defined as mysticism in East Asia since the term is clearly a Western invention?
I don't know whether East Asian mysticism is defined by sociopolitical changes, or whether its linked to power relations in the East, or even what mysticism means to East Asia. Therefore, it is hard to view King's 'genealogy' of a socially constructed mysticism as being universally applicable. I think if King had done a cross-cultural (providing both a Western and East Asian context) study of the genealogy of mysticism, his discussion would have been more fruitful.
King, Richard. "The Power of Definitions." In Orientialism and Religion: Post Colonial Theory, India and 'The Mystic East,' 7-34. New York: Routledge, 1999.
This is an interview with Ruth-Inge Heinze (the founder of the Annual International Confederence on the Study of Shamanism and Alternative Modes of Healing) and her experiences in researching shamans in East Asia. She states in the interview that she had a mystical experience when she was in pre-school and that was what led to her interest in exploring shamanism. She mentions that your mind "being in the here and now" and being fully present in the moment is very important. I found the interview very interesting, I hope that you get something out of it.
Hello fellow EAS324 bloggers! I know your thinking what is up with this late start on the blogging?! Well there goes the saying, better late than never! All my future postings (they'll be coming very soon) will be reflections on some of the assigned readings on mysticism throughout the course that I found memorable, interesting, worthy of discussion. I'll also attempt to provide information on the topic of mysticism in East Asia. This is my first time even making a blog so excuse the lack of fancy decorating!
