Tolkien spiritualty... A hint of Buddhism?

[Baran]

I consider myself a follower of Lord Buddhas teaching, and I've read much of Tolkiens work. I've never drawn any parallels beetween Buddhism and Tolkiens books, rather I've found Tolkien to oppose with much of Lord Buddhas teaching. More of that later.

First I want to point out that the whole idea of a persons soul passing on to another body when he dies is a harsh simplification and common misunderstanding of Lord Buddhas teaching. In Buddhis the consept of an eternal, everlasting soul does not exist. Everything is momentary and impermanent. The human mind (soul) is purely a product of the body and the perception of the sense organs. There no mind without body, like there is no fire without air or firewood. This is quite complicated matters wich I am not even close to comprehend, and trying to interpret what little i know is a task far beyond my school-taught English. To get to the point, the kind of re-incarnation the elves are going trough clearly is influated by the Christian (or any other major religion) view of soul. The soul (fear) of the dead elf passes on to another "host"body (hroar). Still it is certainly possible for readers of the book to find a connection beetween their knowledge of Lord Buddhas teaching and LOTR, and there is nothing wrong with that. But I would guess that they would not find the same connection if they had some more knowledge of Buddhism.

When I wrote that I find Tolkien's writing to oppose with much of Lord Buddhas teaching, I meant the escapist-aspect of it. I really like the books, but the concept of making a kind of parallel world disaccords with the Buddhist attempt to live in the present. That goes of course for all kinds of escapism, like tv-shows and entertainment flicks. The thing with LOTR is that it's so well-written that through the books you can almost move to M-E on a permanent basis. I am a big consumer of popular culture, but I believe that loosing yourselfe totaly in a book like LOTR might not be good for you. But that a different discussion, fit for its own thread.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Baran -

Thanks for that interesting explanation. I do not have your knowledge of Buddhism, but I have heard similar reservations expressed by others who do have such a background.

My only question would be your characterization of Tolkien's writings as "escapist":

When I wrote that I find Tolkien's writing to oppose with much of Lord Buddhas teaching, I meant the escapist-aspect of it. I really like the books, but the concept of making a kind of parallel world disaccords with the Buddhist attempt to live in the present. That goes of course for all kinds of escapism, like tv-shows and entertainment flicks. The thing with LOTR is that it's so well-written that through the books you can almost move to M-E on a permanent basis. I am a big consumer of popular culture, but I believe that loosing yourselfe totaly in a book like LOTR might not be good for you. But that a different discussion, fit for its own thread.

My own reading experience has been different. While Tolkien tells a whopping good story in the context of a different "age", I also find myself drawn face to face with some themes that stand at the heart of who we are: the nature of courage, the importance of mercy, the price that sometimes has to be paid for "goodness" to prevail. This list could go on at length. From my perspective then, the book is not escapist.

That is not to say a person couldn't "abuse" the book by focusing so completely on it that other essential things are lost in their life. This could happen not only with Tolkien, but with many good things. Food, family, friends, literature/art, and work all have a place in our life, but even good things may get "out of balance" if we lose a sense of perspective. And, in this limited sense, Tolkien's writings are as capable of abuse as many other things.

One last question.....are you (or is anyone else out there) familiar with the book The Dharma of Dragons and Daemons, Buddhist Themes in Modern Fantasy by David Loy and Linda Goodhew? The book is not widely known but has gotten strong reviews in both general publications and those written within the Buddhist community (at least the reviews I bumped into on the internet). Among the author's examined are Tolkien, Pullman, Ursula K. LeGuin and the anime movie Princess Mononoke.

Loy and Goodhew apparently make the argument that Dharma is found in all good and complex tales, and that it is therefore possible to see certain aspects of Budddhism's teachings reflected in stories such as those of Tolkien and LeGuin. In terms of LotR, they specifically focus on two things: those portions of the book that stress non-violence, including the repeated sparing of Gollum's life, and the idea of Frodo's quest as one of renunciation, virtually a lesson in detachment.

This might be interesting to read, if only because the authors take such a different perspective than the one I personally bring to the text. But nowhere, in any of the reviews, is there any mention of "reincarnation"...

[Garen LiLorian]

Dharma is the struggle that people face from living their lives with too many cravings, more or less, hence anyone wishing to become Buddha must relinquish many of these desires and strive for the Middle Path.

Hmmm. This is, at the least, an odd explanation of Dharma. Perhaps it differs greatly from the Hindu version I'm more familiar with. I'm afraid I'm not very knowledgeable about Buddhism...
But anyway, to my understanding Dharma is right action, action taken to further the cause of one's soul. This runs the gamut from action which gets you enlightened (I suppose Suldaledhel's definition could fit in there) to stuff you've got to do to get rid of karma. There's a lot of this. By this definition, Child's quote;

Loy and Goodhew apparently make the argument that Dharma is found in all good and complex tales, and that it is therefore possible to see certain aspects of Budddhism's teachings reflected in stories such as those of Tolkien and LeGuin.

makes perfect sense. Dharma is neccessarily present in all tales that deal with greater themes. (although poor Túrin seems to work hard to be an exception...)
But I don't really see any significant link between Dharma and Tolkien, or at least any more so than Dharma and Harry Potter, or any other book you'd care to name.

[Baran]

That is not to say a person couldn't "abuse" the book by focusing so completely on it that other essential things are lost in their life. This could happen not only with Tolkien, but with many good things. Food, family, friends, literature/art, and work all have a place in our life, but even good things may get "out of balance" if we lose a sense of perspective. And, in this limited sense, Tolkien's writings are as capable of abuse as many other things.

Of course it is possible to read LotR and enjoy it for what it is, a highly enertaining book. I don't think Tolkien tried to make a statement or to preach anything, he wanted to write a great story. And he did, he created a vaste world you can "dwell" in, and many people define their identity from it. Who of you didn't find it sad to put LotR down after finishing reading it, because you were going to miss all the characters and places in the book? i know I did. And some people might distance themselves from their own world, replacing it with the fictional world of M-E. As Child of the 7th age wrote, this is of course not only a phenomen of Tolkiens work, humans do this all the time, with drugs, movies, star-wars, fassion, stamp-collections...
I personaly can't compare the work of Tolkien with other great books I've read. I don't feel I learned much from reading it, I was just highly entertained. Where really good books invites you to take a look at yourself and the world around you from a different perspective, for me LotR just was a good story.

Earlier i wrote that people define their identity from LotR. Imo this is one of the basic needs people have. Thats where everything from religions to fan-clubs steam from, and that's how you create yourself and the sense of a soul. The goal of Buddhism is to rid yourself of this "illusion" of self and soul. This is my opinion of the books from a personal Buddhist-infuenced perpective, and I won't argue that what I'm saying applies to other people. You might read the books and get to know yourself better, I just didn't.

[Assasin]

Tolkien was a Creationist, not a Buddhist.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Tolkien was a Creationist, not a Buddhist.

Yes, I think we can all agree that he was not a Buddhist. And we can also agree that Tolkien's writings primarily reflect the ideas he had garnered from his study of northern myth, his own vast knowledge of languages, and his commitment to his Catholic faith.

Yet, a piece of writing has a life of its own: it is more than what an author puts into it. The readers who come to Lord of the Rings bring their own knowledge and background, and these are certainly not identical to Tolkien. When an individual looks at the stories and filter them through his minds, his response to the text will be unique, different than that of any other reader. This is what makes literature so exciting. If it was just a set piece that could be understood in only one way, things could get boring very fast.

Sometimes, our response to the text is a personal one. We see something that's happened to one of the characters, and we can see how it's similar to something that's occurred in our own life. It's as if a light goes on, and a door opens up. A passage that we'd read a dozen times before suddenly has new meaning. Tolkien didn't necessarily put that meaning there intentionally, but we see it through the prism of our own experience.

This one-on-one encounter applies not just to personal experiences but also to the more general set of knowledge each reader brings to the text. If someone is familiar with a particular religion, historical period, or philosophy they may look at the book and see echoes that remind them of related themes or examples. That doesn't mean that Tolkien was an adherent of that particular religion or movement, or that he put something in intentionally for that reason. What it does mean is that, despite all our differences, there are underlying, universal themes that find expression in many different mythological, religious and historical forms.

Tolkien, for example, may have presented war and non-violence as an early twentieth century man who was influenced by his own Christian beliefs and by examples from his beloved northern myths. Yet there are other myths and religions. even other historical epochs, that also have something to teach us about these same universal themes. In my opinion, it is legitimate for a reader to point out such similarities and differences. Whether you would agree with a particular interpretation or not, whether you see a similarity or difference, is something else. Like any reader, you have the right to agree or disagree.

Child, newly converted proponent of the reader's right to interpret the text

[Aiwendil]

Assassin:

Tolkien was a Creationist, not a Buddhist.

Tolkien was a creationist? That's news.