The lotus is a superbly beautiful flower that grows out of muck and slime. No symbol could better represent the rise of the soul from the material, the victory of enlightenment over ignorance, desire, and attachment. For 2,000 years, Buddhist artists have used the lotus to convey these messages in countless paintings and sculptures. The Christian cross, meanwhile, teaches a comparable lesson, of divine victory over sin and injustice, of the defeat of the world.The word in question, of course, being the bolded word above. Was anyone else struck by how completely incomparable these two symbols are in this context?
(re: previous post by Adunare)
3 comments:
I'm a big Jenkins fan though, I just don't think that bit works.
The lesson is comparable: both are triumphs of the divine rising out of something terrible/repugnant.
Of course - in my mind - it ends there. The cross is not really a symbol of divine victory to raise us beyond the material life - in that rather important sense, it seems incomparable.
This is a very interesting piece by Jenkins, whom I also hold in high esteem. Until I actually noticed he was the author I thought it was written by an angry liberal cosmopolitan. Maybe I should just judge less quickly ;)
You're right, of course, but that's not what he said.
In any case, we could all judge a bit less quickly. I made the same assumption you did.
Post a Comment