Corpus-Paul

["John Brand" <jbrand AT gvsd.mb.ca>]

From:                   "Tony Buglass" <tonybuglass AT fish.co.uk>
To:                     "Corpus-Paul" <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject:                Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?

> Atman has already been defined for us as the "life-principle", and so
> it functions in various branches of Hinduism.  Referring to John's
> second paragraph in my extract from his post, a manifestation is
> usually rendered by the Sanskrit word "avatar" - thus Krishna is
> described in certain Hindu traditions as an avatar of Vishnu.  It is a
> temptation for Christians therefore to use the idea of avatar to
> explain to Hindus their understanding of the significance of Christ,
> thus falling into the trap of "faux amis". "Incarnation" and "avatar"
> are superficially similar, in that they both concern a god who becomes
> flesh.  They are different in that the philosophical frameworks giving
> rise to each are very different.

John responds:
I agree with your caution. We should note the differences as well as
the similarities. And the terms/concepts being compared develop in
different cultures. The Longman/Hallo school of thought recognizes
the similarities as developing from common roots of culture which
have different developments.

The ethnographer Adolf Bastian has noted "elementary ideas common to
all individuals. He believed that Völkergedanken (folk ideas) develop
differently among societies due to different physical surroundings
and historical events, he says that there are only a small number of
elementary ideas, or Elementargedanken, that result in the different
folk ideas. The elementary ideas are uniform to all people. In order
to prove his belief in Psychic unity, he collected data on the
resemblances of artifacts and of behavior."

http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/information/biography/abcde/bastian_adolf.
html

Does this help in addressing your caveats, Tony?

Tony also wrote:
> I would personally be very cautious therefore about making firm
> connections between atman, avatar, and Greek or Hebrew ideas of any
> sort.  I suggest that the Hebrew mashiach is so specific to Hebrew
> thought that the nearest we would find in Zoroastrianism is a similar
> idea: a chosen or dedicated one; "Maitreya" as defined doesn't seem to
> meet the case.

John writes:
I agree that mashiach is specific to Hebrew thought and although my
specific point appears to have failed, the more general affinities
among the quest of cultures is widely recognized. It is not uncommon
to meet with the resistance apparent in the responses on this list.
Oddly, the similarities I am suggesting are used by other schools of
thought to posit a Hellenized Christianity which adapted itself to
the Greco-Roman culture inorder for it to gain power.

Regards,

John