Tolkien spiritualty... A hint of Buddhism?

[Child of the 7th Age]

Son of Numenor -

I am wholly unqualified to evaluate the ideas regarding reincarnation that The Ka has brought forward on this thread. I simply do not know enough about Buddhist thought to be able to judge her suggestion one way or another. What I am concerned about is that such questioning should not necessarily be dismissed out of hand.

Taking away Buddhist ideas from The Lord of the Rings may be relevant to the reader's spiritual life, but it is certainly not relevant to share such ideas in this forum.

I would respectfully disagree. It's not a question of religious belief but of the diverse thoughts and ideals that various human beings bring to the text as we read. Because we bring different backgrounds, we may see different things in the story. That raises another critical question. Just where do we draw the line in saying one idea merits consideration and another does not? Let me cite a few examples to illustrate my point.

Many, many Christian authors have written evaluations of LotR in recent years. A few of these critics, such as Joseph Pearce, are Catholic. Many more, however, are not. Professor Ralph Wood, for example, professor of theology at Baptist Baylor, explicitly acknowledges that he often approaches the text from a biblical vantage far different from Tolkien's. Another example is Robert Ellwood, professor emeritus of religion at the University of Southern California, who wrote Frodo's Quest from a theosophical viewpoint. Both of these men hold personal beliefs quite different from Tolkien (and from my own). It is their ideas that interest me.

We don't have to limit ourselves to questions of religion. There are many other examples of readers bringing ideas to the text that were different than Tolkien's own. Patrick Curry, for example, was a Greenpeace supporter in the 1980s. These ideas heavily influenced his own assessment of the environmental themes in Tolkien ( Defending Middle-earth: Tolkien - Myth and Modernity ). This viewpoint influenced the questions he raised and the ideas he put forward. While Tolkien was a "lover of trees", he was not involved with an organized ecological movement and his own views were expressed in a very different way. Just look at all the academic philosophers in Lord of the Rings and Philosophy who found reflections of many different individuals and schools in LotR ranging from Aristotle and Plato to the existentialists or Nietzsche.

It's interesting to note that the best studies not only suggest how certain ideas that interest a critic may be reflected in LotR, but also point out major differences as well. If I have a reservation about this thread, it is a practical one: I don't think we have any current Books posters who have enough background in eastern thought to speak knowledgeably to this question. (I could be mistaken here and, if so, I apologize for my own lack of knowledge.) And I would never claim that a topic such as this should take center stage in our discussions. But I don't see such questions as irrelevent.

It's possible we hold different views on this and may have to acknowledge that with a polite nod.

****************

Whoops! Where is Fordim or Bb when I need them? This is what happens when you listen to English professors and get curious enough to read modern criticism. (I spent a chunk of the afternoon reading Barthes.)

[Son of Númenor]

I think there should be some implication underlying any viewpoint expressed here on the Downs. There is no underlying implication that I can see in The Ka's post: is it that LotR has influenced, or was influenced by, Buddhism? Is it that Buddhists can find spiritual guidance in LotR?

This viewpoint influenced the questions he raised and the ideas he put forward. While Tolkien was a "lover of trees", he was not involved with an organized ecomogical movement and his own views were expressed in a very different way.

But Tolkien's views on the subject were expressed nonetheless -- unlike whatever views he may have had on Buddhism. Curry's book seems to have been written with a clear agenda of promoting ecological awareness. That is very different from merely stating similarities between The Lord of the Rings and a religion when the similarity is obviously coincidental, and when there is no supportable assertion or hypothesis drawn from the revelation of the similarities. A post about Tolkien's views about the environment, supported with evidence, from an environmentalist's point of view, might add to my understanding of Middle-earth (which is, I think we can all agree, the purpose of the Downs). I fail to see how a post about rough similarities between Buddhism and the 'mythological structures' of Middle-earth can do that.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Perhaps, then, this thread should be shifted to Novices and Newcomers where people have more freedom to discuss how they view these books that were written for our pleasure and personal insight, as opposed to how the books "should" be viewed. I believe there is currently a comparison there between Lord of the Rings and Peter Pan, although I don't remember Peter ever flying through Middle Earth.

I rather think this to be an interesting topic to look into, and an enlightening one at that, and I only regret that I am not knowledgable enough on the subject to add more.

Fea

[THE Ka]

Originally Posted by Feanor of the Peredhil

Perhaps, then, this thread should be shifted to Novices and Newcomers where people have more freedom to discuss how they view these books that were written for our pleasure and personal insight, as opposed to how the books "should" be viewed. I believe there is currently a comparison there between Lord of the Rings and Peter Pan, although I don't remember Peter ever flying through Middle Earth.

I rather think this to be an interesting topic to look into, and an enlightening one at that, and I only regret that I am not knowledgable enough on the subject to add more.

Fea

I don't mind. you may if you wish to. It might appeal to others in that part of the forum.

Respectfully,

The Ka

[Estelyn Telcontar]

It seems that a majority of posts on this thread are discussing the validity of this discussion rather than contributing to it. As this forum's moderator, I would like to speak out. We have a policy of friendly openness on the Barrow-Downs; our restrictions are that topics be Tolkien-related and that posts should be polite and respectful. Child has already shown that various viewpoints can be discussed in relation to LotR; those of you who remember Maril... will recall that she wrote about the Buddhist point of view on religion threads a couple of years ago. Unfortunately, she's not been around lately, or she would certainly be able to contribute to this discussion.

I am leaving this thread here on the Books forum and I am leaving it open for discussion. However, like all touchy themes, I will keep a close eye on the posting and will delete off-topic, impolite posts without warning. If you have nothing substantial to add to the topic, do not post. If it does not interest you, you need not read it. But variety is the spice of forum life, and as long as members post their opinions in an appropriate manner, the discussion can enrich this forum. Thank you! [/end of moderator's note]


Now for my personal thoughts on the topic:

Your thoughts on the topic are interesting, THE Ka; though we all know from Tolkien's own words that he wrote the story in a specifically Christian context, some of his concepts could be compared to Buddhist teaching. Everyone recognizes that there are also many elements of pagan religions included, especially the concept of "gods".

I would see the reincarnation theme in a more Christian than Buddhist context, for the reason mentioned above; the Elf is reincarnated in a body that is basically the same as his previous one. It is my understanding that in Buddhist teaching, what little I know about it, reincarnation serves the purpose of betterment, so that the individual takes on a different form in each life. The concept of a new, same body is closer to Christian resurrection, where persons will be recognizable in the afterlife.

As to the fate of Men, Tolkien does not say that they will "dissolve" into nothingness after death, just that the Elves do not know what humans' fate will be. I see no element of Nirvana there.

[HerenIstarion]

As the thread is 'still open' for discussion, and as Bb and Fordim haven't shown up yet, and, having burra's famous close-fistedness with regards to long discourses (in the light of verily true maxim of Nothing is more false than to say that all mockery is hostile), let me help you out if I can.

Leaving aside what Tolkien as author said (C-thread, c-thread, you take my breath away...), and relying mainly on what is inside his works, let me bring forth the judgement that there is no buddhist flavour to Tolkien whatsoever

The ground is simple:

Buddha's search for Nirvana (release from reincarnation circle) is based on the idea that body is, in a way, not what there should be, that soul/spirit living in a body is like to prisoner in a cell, that release is good, and living in a body is bad.

Now elves held an opinion that their hroar (generally, if not precisely may be translated as 'body') were made to perfectly fit their fëar (generally, if not precisely, may be translated as 'spirit'. I personally prefer translation 'will')
That they were not fitting each other perfectly was attributed to Melkor who 'tainted' all matter of Arda. But in case Arda were not Marred, such an union should have been perfect mode of being, bringing about incessant joy of existence. Fading of the elves, which can be reversed in Aman only, is due to imperfections of hroa brought about by Melkor, and the death is not release of reincarnation cycle - quite the opposite - it is proper for a fëa to seek reincarnation if it died. (Still more reincarnate takes up the same body as before - built out of its memories of it)

Men (or wise among men, Andreth as their spokeswoman) likewise, held an opinion that in the beginning of things, before Fall of Man took place, similar arrangement was provided for men, and that forcible parting of fëa with hroa known since as 'human death' was simultanesouly, a punishment for the Fall and means of redeeming it. I.e. - here too, perfect and only natural condition of created Children of Eru is viewed not as spirit on its own, but union of fëa and hroa as a whole. If such a 'divorce' ever takes place, is mainly 'thanks to' Melkor

I can imagine few things least like Buddhism in such philosophy, to be honest

I'm unable to provide quotes to back me up at the moment. If you are ready to take me on my word, great, if you're not satisfied, I'll try to dig citations up shortly

cheers

PS. Nothingness was already addressed by Estelyn, so I haven't elaborated the point. But 'dissoving into Nothingness' is a negative term. Positively, it should be 'being one with the whole Existence'. But even such 'positive' dissovling is not taking place with Tolkien - all fëar are not only to retain their hroar - they are, firstly, to have their hroar completely remade - as the Arda and whole the matter of Arda is to be Remade, and they are not only to retain their individuality, but have it enriched - not sameness, but multitude of perfect creaters, in correct relation to their Creator, sharing same love but conducting it in an unique way each.

[davem]

Originally Posted by The Ka

This is proably the most noticed element of Buddhism and older Teutonic (European) spirituality

This is perhaps the relevant part as regards the legendarium. But it doesn't simply apply to Teutonic spirituality. The Celts certainly believed in the transmigration of souls - Caesar mentions it as a central aspect of Druidic teaching.

Where this concept does come in to an understanding of Tolkien is that his motivation (at least in the begining) was mot to create a brand new myth cycle, but to re-create what had originally existed. So, if the North-Western peoples (Celts, Teutons, Finns) had this belief, it must have had some origin. Tolkien was attempting to discover what those peoples had believed, why they believed it, & offer an account of it.

Now, obviously, he didn't leave it at that stage, & went on to develop the idea of Elvish reincarnation in various later works (tying himself in knots to a great extent) from a 'theological' perspective.

What we must keep in mind though, is that original intention - to provide an re creation of what had been. Where did the belief in reincarnation/transmigration of souls come from - why did our ancestors believe that happened? The Bible told Tolkien that humans do not reincarnate, but the idea of reincarnation was accepted by our ancestors.

There is a further issue - Tolkien was wishing to explore the question of mortality vs immortality, the ultimate question of why we die & how that affects our relationship to the world. He chose to do that by having two major races, one mortal, one immortal, one destined to inevitably pass from the world, one destined never to do so. Now, logically, no incarnate being can be physically indestructible - any physical object can be destroyed by a powerful enough force. But if the body of an 'immortal' being could be destroyed then some mechanism had to be found to keep that being in the world - otherwise it would not serve the purpose Tolkien needed it to serve - to be bound within the circles of the world for all eternity. Reincarnation in some form was probably the best he could come up with. It wouldn't be enough for them to simply hang around as ghosts (though his eventual idea of their fea burning away their hroa does seem to offer that destiny). They would have to be fully, physically, present within the world because this would emphasise their 'boundenedness' to the world, that they cannot leave it. Also, their nature expresses itself in art, in creativity, so that would require physicality.

And finally, we could bring in the Christian idea of incarnation - created beings are physically incarnate incarnate in a physical world. Body & soul are bound - for men temporarily, for Elves permanently - & this is the primary difference (for Tolkien's philosophical needs) between them.

I think Buddhism is the wrong way to go in this, as reincarnation is merely one aspect of that system, & is believed in for different reasons.

[mark12_30]

(A minor aside: Memory may be lacking but I thought elves were supposed to last as long as Middle-Earth, as Arda, and then after that nobody knew? Or does somebody eventually know within the legendarium?)

[HerenIstarion]

Or does somebody eventually know within the legendarium?)

Not certain knowledge, but supposition (backed up by 'joy of the heart' on Finrod's part, which is considered a sign of recognition of truth) by Finrod (in converse with Andreth) that in Arda Remade elves would be given the role of annalist-poets - to remember things that were before

That bodies should be remade is my own supposition, not groundless I believe, as it is stated that all matter is to be destroyed and than remade and, as bodies are made out of matter, and as hroar are stated to be essential for fëar and both's well-being, it is logical to suppose that to be probable too.

I discuss the passage in the Evil Things post #90 The citation as follows:

'But this is strange to me, and even as did your heart when I spoke of your unrest, so now mine leaps up as at the hearing of good news.

'This then, I propound, was the errand of Men, not the followers, but the heirs and fulfillers of all: to heal the Marring of Arda, already foreshadowed before their devising; and to do more, as agents of the magnificence of Eru: to enlarge the Music and surpass the Vision of the World!

'For that Arda Healed shall not be Arda Unmarred, but a third thing and a greater, and yet the same. I have conversed with the Valar who were present at the making of the Music ere the being of the World began. And now I wonder: Did they hear the end of the Music? Was there not something in or beyond the final chords of Eru which, being overwhelmed thereby, they did got perceive?
'Or again, since Eru is for ever free, maybe he made no Music and showed no Vision beyond a certain point. Beyond that point we cannot see or know, until by our own roads we come there, Valar or Eldar or Men.

'As may a master in the telling of tales keep hidden the greatest moment until it comes in due course. It may be guessed at indeed, in some measure, by those of us who have listened with full heart and mind; but so the teller would wish. In no wise is the surprise and wonder of his art thus diminished, for thus we share, as it were, in his authorship. But not so, if all were told us in a preface before we entered in!'

'What then would you say is the supreme moment that Eru has reserved?' Andreth asked.

'Ah, wise lady!' said Finrod. 'I am an Elda, and again I was thinking of my own people. But nay, of all the Children of Eru. I was thinking that by the Second Children we might have been delivered from death. For ever as we spoke of death being a division of the united, I thought in my heart of a death that is not so: but the ending together of both. For that is what lies before us, so far as our reason could see: the completion of Arda and its end, and therefore also of us children of Arda; the end when all the long lives of the Elves shall be wholly in the past.

'And then suddenly I beheld as a vision Arda Remade; and there the Eldar completed but not ended could abide in the present for ever, and there walk, maybe, with the Children of Men, their deliverers, and sing to them such songs as, even in the Bliss beyond bliss, should make the green valleys ring and the everlasting mountain-tops to throb like harps.'