The Perception of Jesus and Christianity among early German Buddhists

BUDDHIST PERCEPTIONS OF JESUS Papers of the Third Conference of the European Network of Buddhist-Christian Studies (St. Ottilien 1999) edited by Perry Schmidt-Leukel in cooperation with Thomas Josef Gotz OSB and Gerhard Koberlin EOS-VERLAG ST. OTTILIEN 4 Pe r r y Sc h m id t -Le u k e l Homepage of the Network for Buddhist-Christian-Studies: www.buddhist-christian-studies.org At our Homepage you can find: Information around the conferences News about the interreligious dialogue around the world Important dialogue-documents and literature A Forum to share views about the conference themes. Front cover: Image o f Ashura, a defender against evil spirits. Property o f the Kofukuji Temple, Nara. Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnahme Buddhist perceptions of Jesus : papers of the third conference of the European Network of Buddhist-Christian Studies, (St. Ottilien 1999)/ ed. by Perry Schmidt-Leukel in cooperation with Thomas Josef Götz and Gerhard Köberlin. - St. Ottilien : EOS-Verl., 2001 ISBN 3-8306-7069-9 © 2001 by EOS Verlag Erzabtei St. Ottilien, D-86941 St. Ottilien Gesamtherstellung: EOS Druckerei, D-86941 St. Ottilien THE PERCEPTION OF JESUS AND CHRISTIANITY AMONG EARLY GERMAN BUDDHISTS Frank Usarski 1. As Reference Point: A Legend The scene was probably the city of Leipzig. It was the end of the 19th century, and Leipzig, indeed Saxony as a whole, was one of the most industrialized areas in Germany1. Ideologically the times were not very comfortable and people were con­ fronted with an intensifying sense of contingency and vulnerability. The natural sciences and historical thinking were making new demands on the “modern mind”, and the tenability of traditional systems of orientation was up for scrutiny.2 Repre­ sentatives of conventional religion had to face up to the challenges of new or alter­ native world-views.3 Anyone who openly propagated one of the older religious op­ tions was under increasing pressure to legitimate his claims. The already noticeable “heretical imperative”, as Peter L. Berger was to call it several decades later, forced believers of all kinds to account to themselves and their social milieu for their religious choice.4 In this atmosphere a dialogue between the German Buddhist Karl Seidenstiicker and an unidentified Christian clergyman took place. It was a brief discus­ sion about a Christian legend. Though the story as such might seem banal at first ' Cf. Pohl, Hans: "Wirtschafts- und sozialgeschichtliche Grundzüge der Epoche 18701914”, in: Pohl, Hans: [Ed.]: Sozialgeschichtliche Probleme in der Zeit der Hochindustri­ alisierung (1870-1914), Paderborn etc. 1979, pp. 13-55, especially p. 30. 2 Cf. Brüning: “Der biblische Schöpfungsbericht im Lichte der Naturwissenschaft", in: Der Beweis des Glaubens. Monatsschrift zur Begründung und Verteidigung der christlichen Wahrheit für Gebildete, Neue Folge: 20 (1899), pp. 62-77; Rohr, Ignaz: Der Vernichtungs­ kampf gegen das biblische Christusbild, Münster 1908; Nikel, Johannes: Alte und neue An­ griffe auf das Alte Testament. Ein Rückblick und Ausblick. Münster 1908. 3 Cf. Ranzel, Emil: 1870-1950. Geschichte unserer Zeit, Part 1: 1871-1898, München 1951, pp. 56-99. 4 Cf. Berger, Peter L.: The Heretical Imperative, Garden City/New York 1979. T h e Pe r c e pt io n of Je s u s and Ch r is t ia n it y 107 glance, it is of considerable interest with respect to Buddhist criticism of Christi­ anity at the turn of the century. It is therefore worthwhile to look at an article pub­ lished in the periodical “Der Buddhist” at the end of 1906 in which Seidenstiicker recalls that encounter. Approximately ten years earlier, Seidenstiicker writes, a Christian clergyman tried to convince him that already in antiquity chroniclers had attributed to Jesus a sympathy towards the animal kingdom. According to the clergyman this was proven by the following tale: “Once upon a time when the Redeemer and his disciples were on their way, they met a crowd gathered about the dead body of a dog. The crowd was giving vent to its disgust. Everything about the corpse provoked expressions of repug­ nance. Jesus, on the other hand, praised the dead body, commenting: ‘How beautiful the dog’s white teeth are!’” Now exactly the same story, Seidenstiicker reports, can be found in the journal of a contemporary German association for the prevention of cruelty to animals, with the claim that love for animals is an essential aspect of the Christian tradition. But, Seidenstiicker counters, while working on a compilation of ancient Pali-Texts he had recently discovered the true origin of this allegedly Christian legend. There it is told how the Buddha’s disciple Ananda commented favorably on the brilliant teeth of a dead dog, and although that particular version had been edited some centuries after Christ, Seidenstiicker maintains it is perfectly possible that the leg­ end might be found in one of the much older Pali-commentaries. Dating issues aside, it is clear to Seidenstiicker that this legend accords far better with Buddhism than with Christianity.5 5 Seidenstücker, Karl B.: “Der buddhistische Ursprung einer christlichen Legende”, in: Der Buddhist 1906, Oct-Dec., p. 456-458 108 Fr a n k U s a r s k i 2. Interpretation of this example for the issue at hand 2.1 The Christian-Buddhist-dispute around the turn of the century In several respects the report of this discussion illuminates the entire scene. First this interchange between the Buddhist Seidenstücker and the representative of Christianity well exemplifies the situation in the years around the turn of the cen­ tury. Buddhists were not polemicizing with Christianity in a vacuum at that time but were engaged in a far-ranging and to some extent bitter, even wounding debate, especially with Protestant theologians and ministers. The closer the turn of the century came, the more the articles by Christian authors proliferated. These articles were critical of Buddhism in general and of German Buddhists in particular, whose numbers even increased during the first decade of the 20th century. In cities such as Mainz, Essen678, Hannover and Strassburg* and in newspapers such as the “All­ gemeine Zeitung” in Munich or the “Weser-Zeitung”9, representatives of the Church saw to it that arguments against that alien Eastern religion and its ‘aber­ rant’ Western followers received adequate publicity, either through lectures or arti­ cles. The clash of the opposing camps was especially evident in Leipzig, the first strong-hold of German Buddhism. Ministers like Schreiber101, Jeremias and Frenkel" appeared on behalf of Protestantism, while Buddhists such as Hornung and Dietze, side by side with Seidenstücker, put forward their own opinion. Both sides were unyielding, but as far as the tone of the rhetoric and the sheer quantity 6 Cf. Die Buddhistische Welt: l (April 1905-März 1906), p. 11. 7 Cf. “Vom evangelisch-sozialen Kongress in Hannover", in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 1 (April 1905-März 1906), No. 4, p. 28 8 Cf.: “Zu Strassburg auf der Schanz", in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 1 (April 1905-März 1906), No.9, p. 70: "Aus der buddhistischen Welt”, in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 4, 1911, No. 7/8, p. 162 9 Cf. Pfungst, A.: Ein deutscher Buddhist (Oberpräsidialrat Theodor Schnitze), Stuttgart 1901, p. 42 f. andp. 47. 10 Cf. Leipziger Tageblatt 97.Jg., No.508. 11 Cf. “Gegnerische Stimmen", in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 1 (April 1905-März 1906), No. 1/2, p. 11. Th e Pe r c e pt io n of Je s u s and Ch r is t ia n it y 109 of derogatory statements is concerned, the Christian party was as a whole more of­ fensive. Conciliatory tones were an exception*9*12*. 2.2 Seidenstücker as the representative of early Western Buddhism Another factor governing the selection of our introductory example is the figure of Seidenstücker himself: he was the one personally involved in the encounter and the one who reported it. Now Seidenstücker’s outstanding role in the early years of or­ ganized Buddhism in Germany is well known and has been objectively docu­ mented.11 With this in mind at least a few aspects demonstrating the significance of the given example bear repeating: With his erudition and philological expertise, Seidenstücker can be seen as the typical German adherent of Theravada during a particular period in the adoption of Buddhism. This period can be roughly marked off by, on the one side, the year 1888, in which Friedrich Zimmermann’s Cate­ chism o f Buddhism appeared, giving rise in the long run to the institutionalization of German Buddhism14 and, on the other side, the beginning of the first World War, which symbolically marked the end of this particular phase.15 In these years a linguistically proficient study of Buddhist texts paved the way for a committed adoption of Buddhism16, which was on the whole approached intellectually by its German followers.17 With regard to the constitution of a German Buddhist organi­ L Cf. “Eine christlich-buddhistische Debatte", in: Buddhistische Warte, 1 (1907/1908), No. 9 (Dez.) pp. 282-288. 13 Cf. Steinke, Ulrich: Karl Bernhard Seidenstücker (1876-1936). Leben, Schaffen, Wirken, M.A. Thesis, Univ. Tübingen 1989. 4 Cf. Notz, Klaus-Josef: Der Buddhismus in Deutschland in seinen Selbstdarstellungen. Eine religionswissenschaftliche Untersuchung zur religiösen Akkulturationsproblematik, Frankfurt/M. etc. 1984. 15 Cf. Baumann, Martin: Buddhisten in Deutschland. Geschichte und Gemeinschaften, Mar­ burg 1993. 16 Cf. Benz, E.: "Buddhismus in der westlichen Welt”, in: Dumoulin, H. [Ed.]: Buddhismus der Gegenwart, Freiburg i. Br. 1970, pp. 191-204, especially p. 198 f. L Cf. Usarski, Frank: "Das Bekenntnis zum Buddhismus als Bildungsprivileg. Strukturmo­ mente der ‘lebensweltlich ’ Theravada-Rezeption in Deutschland im Zeitraum zwischen 1888 und 1924", in: Antes, P.; Pahnke, D. [Eds.]: Die Religion von Oberschichten, Marburg 1989, pp. 75 - 86. 110 Fr a n k Us a r s k i zation, Seidenstiicker was undoubtedly the most vigorous and ambitious Buddhist in the years between 1903 and at least 1909, and also the most decisive for the pro­ file of the movement.18 His significance as an organizer is best illustrated by the fact that he was the spokesman and outstanding representative of the eight-member group which established the association “Buddhistischer Missionsverein fiir Deutschland” in Leipzig in 1903, the very first European Buddhist organization at all19. His initial importance as opinion-leader, though not undisputed, can be seen from his role as publisher or editor of Buddhist magazines such as the justmentioned periodical “Der Buddhist”, its supplement “Die buddhistische Welt” and the follow-up journal “Buddhistische Warte”. Moreover Seidenstiicker did not miss an opportunity to take up the debate: Under his pseudonym, Bruno Freydank, he abandoned all academic restraint and offensively denounced Christianity’s his­ tory, cultural impact and current situation as well as denigrating its representatives. 2.3 Rhetorical Characteristics of the Buddhist-Christian Dispute Finally, the introductory example is significant because it gives us an insight into the dominant rhetorical elements of the dispute. First of all, the talk between Seidenstiicker and the clergyman did not really ever reach an evaluation of Jesus, and that is characteristic of the whole Buddhist-Christian encounter. The starting point of the conversation at Leipzig was the clergyman’s assertion that chroniclers in an­ tiquity had attributed to Jesus a sympathy towards the animal kingdom. Indeed, the real focus of the conversation from both the clergyman’s and from Seidenstiicker’s side was not Jesus himself but rather the issue of whether a sympathetic and pro­ tective attitude towards animals, as a desirable element of human culture, had been transmitted by this or that religious tradition. In other words, neither theological nor soteriological aspects were at the fore. What predominated was the question of ,s Buttler, P.-G.: “Die buddhistische Bewegung in Deutschland", in: Hutten, K.; Kortzfleisch, S.v. [Ed.]: Asien missioniert im Abendland, Stuttgart 1962, pp. 73-120, espe­ cially p. 77 and pp. 81 ff. 19 Cf. Baumann, Martin: "Creating a European Path to Nirvana: Historical and Contempo­ rary Developments o f Buddhism in Europe", in: Journal o f Contemporary Religion, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1995, pp. 55-70, especially p. 56. Th e Pe r c e pt io n of Je s u s and Ch r is t ia n it y ill the authenticity of a given spiritual heritage and its potential to elicit an ethically responsible or life-supporting attitude in the minds and hearts of the contemporary generation. From this angle, the example cited can be seen as an expression of the “Zeitgeist”. This “spirit of the times” was reflected particularly in the commentar­ ies of the intellectuals of the period, including the statements which contributed to the Buddhist-Christian dispute. Concerning the latter, two basic features deserve a brief comment: first, the influence of historical thinking, and second, the concern to preserve Occidental culture. Both were widespread at the time and actualized within the context of the Buddhist-Christian dispute. 2.3.1 Historical thinking and its implications for the Buddhist-Christian dispute During the 1880’s historical thinking made its way into all cultural fields, achiev­ ing the status of a fundamental paradigm in the humanities.20 Restricting ourselves to those consequences relevant to the issue at hand, we note that within Protestant theology this widespread intellectual development manifested itself as the “Religionshistorische Schule”21 and, at the same time, fostered a comparative study of Buddhist sources with Christian texts in order to demonstrate the possibility of a dependent relationship. Both trends intensified in the years around the turn of the century and put Christianity at a considerable disadvantage22. Representatives of the “Religionshistorische Schule” were committed to investigating the Bible in the context of the general history of religions, and thus undermined Christianity’s tra­ ditional claim of being a timelessly true religion by virtue of revelation. In a par­ allel development institutionally independent of the Religionshistorische Schule as Cf. Kupisch, K.: Kirchengeschichte, Vol.5. Das Zeitalter der Revolutionen und Welt­ kriege, Stuttgart etc. 1982, p. 72 f ; Schnädelbach, H.: Philosophie in Deutschland. 18311933, Frankfurt/M. 1983, pp. 51 f. 21 C f Ittel, G.W.: Urchristentum und Fremdreligionen im Urteil der religionsgeschichtli­ chen Schule, Diss. Erlangen 1956; Lüdemann, G.; Schröder, M.: Die Religionsgeschicht­ liche Schule in Göttingen, Göttingen 1987, p. 9. Cf. Usarski, Frank: “Die Debatte um buddhistisch-christliche Parallelen als religions­ geographisches Argumentationsfeld —Ein disziplingeschichtlicher Rückblick", in: Büttner, M., et.al. [Ed.]: Einflüsse zeitgebundener und umweltbedingter Geisteshaltung(en) auf Wis­ senschaft und Kunst seit der Aufklärung, Bochum 1991, pp. 107-134. 112 F r a n k Us a r s k i such, followers of Schopenhauer23 and particularly of Rudolf Seydel24 propagated the hypothesis that several biblical and apocryphal texts might be based on Bud­ dhist models. They questioned the authenticity of Christianity and cast doubt on its claim to supremacy, especially when compared with a religion which, after all, had arisen several centuries before the appearance of Jesus. 2.3.2 Concern for the maintenance of Occidental culture and its implications for the Buddhist-Christian dispute The implications of historical thinking for the Buddhist-Christian-dispute shed ad­ ditional light on Seidenstiicker’s claim for the Buddhist ancestry of the legend of the dog with the brilliant teeth. But the example also refers to a second general is­ sue fiercely discussed in those days: the compatibility of Christian religion with an ethical concern for the compassionate treatment of animals. The main points can be summarized as follows: The industrial revolution’s successes had led to high ex­ pectations of a glorious future, but by 1870 consciousness of a profound crisis within European culture began to take hold in certain sectors of the population and maintained its grip up to the beginning of the first World War.2526“Culture” ex­ ploded as a major topic at all levels, and found its way into the academic discourse of various disciplines as well. In this context, the idea of a dialectical relation be­ tween culture and religion played an important role and became a fashionable finde-siecle theme, not only in Protestant theology but also in philosophy and sociol­ ogy ,2fi Two distinct and contrasting lines of rhetoric within this debate marked off the area of ideological conflict in which the Protestants of that time were involved: 23 Corresponding remarks, similar to Seidenstücker's argument regarding the Buddhist mentality o f protecting animals, can already be found in Schopenhauer’s Preisschrift über die Grundlage der Moral. 24 Cf. Seydel, Rudolf Das Evangelium von Jesus in seinen Verhältnissen zu Buddha-Sage und Buddha-Lehre, Leipzig 1882; Seydel, Rudolf: Die Buddha-Legende und das Leben Jesu nach den Evangelien, Leipzig 1884. ~s Cf. Schöllgen, Gregor: Max Weber, München 1998, p. 30. 26 Cf. "Einleitung: Kulturbegriff, Kulturkritik und Kulturwissenschaften um 1900", in: Bruch, Rüdiger vom: Wilhelm Graf; Gangolf Hübinger [Eds.]: Kultur und Kulturwissen- Th e Pe r c e pt io n of Je s u s and C h r is t ia n it y 113 From 1870 onwards the thesis of “cultural inferiority” was applied to Catholi­ cism, demonstrating that the topic of culture could be used as a weapon against competitors in the religious field. In this respect the debate with Buddhism can be seen as the manifestation of an already-ongoing argument. But the culture-issue could also cut the other way: the editor Eugen Diedrichs, for example, accused Christianity in general of being responsible for the crisis of culture, calling Christi­ anity a destructive “poison” and an “accomplice of the superficiality and mechani­ zation of life.”27 It was exactly this atmosphere to which the early German Buddhists were at­ tuned. Their variations on the overall arguments will be detailed in the following paragraphs. 3. Early German Buddhists’ Perceptions of Contemporary Christianity In numerous Buddhist periodicals, pamphlets and books, explicitly or implicitly, in general or as a direct rejoinder to this or that theologian or minister, early German Buddhists (especially Karl Seidenstiicker) criticized Christianity - or more pre­ cisely: the history and the actual manifestation of the institution of the Church. The most dramatic expressions of this are two early books by Seidenstiicker, published in 1903 and 1907 under his pseudonym Bruno Freydank. Considerable parts are overtly hostile towards Christianity, blaming its tradition and representative insti­ tutions for everything bad within European and European-influenced cultures. 3.1 Jesus as an outstanding personality Before we lay out the main contents of the early Buddhists’ argumentation, it has to be remembered that Jesus was generally excluded from their criticism. Insofar as individual Buddhist authors directly hit out at the founder of Christianity at all, schäften um 1900. Krise der Moderne und Glaube an die Wissenschaft, Wiesbaden 1989, pp. 9-24. "7 Cf. Kippenberg, Hans G.: Die Entdeckung der Religionsgeschichte. Religionswissenschaft und Moderne, München 1997, p. 245. 114 Fr a n k U s a r s k i their negative judgements were rejected explicitly by reviews published in Bud­ dhist periodicals. This indicates the general character of mainstream-opinion within early German Buddhism 28. The latter is expressed even in Bruno Freydank’s (alias Karl Seidenstiicker’s) publication, the title of which can be translated as The Hor­ ror o f ‘Christian’ Civilization. The term ‘Christian’ polemically appears in quota­ tion marks. The book contains twelve fictitious letters from an invented figure, a Tibetan Lama named “Tsong-Ka-Pa”, who settles accounts with European culture after several years as an eyewitness of the situation as a student in Germany. In the Foreword Freydank writes: “Tsong-Ka-Pa is an ardent adherent of the Buddha; nevertheless he pays sincere admiration and deep respect to true Christianity and its founder. He could not believe that the terrible dark sides of Occidental culture could be called ‘Christian’.” Seidenstiicker adds that he put the term ’’Christian” in quotation marks “only to point up the glaring contradiction in which this same culture stands in relation to Jesus Christ.”29 Later on Seidenstiicker has his alleged penfriend Tsong-Ka-Pa write: “The true Christianity, of which Jesus set an exam­ ple according to his sublime teaching, is full of beauties and truths. Of that Christi­ anity, however, nothing can be found in Europe today.”30 Seidenstiicker repeated this argument on various occasions. Concerning his second book under the pseudonym of “Bruno Freydank”, entitled Buddha and Christ, he explained that he had chosen this title to suggest that both had been great masters and their basic teachings had been similar.31 In another place Seidenstiicker acknowledged explicitly that Jesus’ remarks about love are characterized by “a very high degree of perfection.”32 28 Corresponding hints in the review o f Theodor Schnitze ’s "Die Religion der Zukunft” [Die buddhistische Welt, 1905, No.2, pp. 14-16] can be considered paradigmatical for the rejec­ tion o f a ’’onesided” —as it is called - interpretation o f Jesus [cf. p. 15], 29 Die Greuel der ‘christlichen ’ Civilisation. Briefe eines buddhistischen Lama aus Tibet. Herausgegeben von Bruno Freydank. Leipzig 1903. 30Ibid., pp. 172f. 31 Cf. Freydank, Bruno: Buddha und Christus. Eine buddhistische Apologetik, Leipzig 1907, pp. VI and p. 9. 32 Seidenstiicker, Karl B.: “Soziale Kräfte im Buddhismus und Christentum. Kritische Be­ trachtungen über die Ausführungen der Herren Pfarrer Lie.Hackmann und Professor Th e Pe r c e pt io n of Je s u s and C h r is t ia n it y 115 In a similar vein, in an article published in 1909, Seidenstiicker brought for­ ward recent developments of Liberal Theology. This new approach is of consider­ able interest to Buddhists, he writes, because it no longer regards Jesus as a godman whose expiatory sacrifice redeemed mankind from its sins. Rather, Christ is considered a teacher and a “shining example”. His adherents are invited to become like him and to mature towards perfection. Divine grace no longer plays a role; only individual efforts are important. “This is truly Buddhist,” Seidenstiicker con­ cludes.33 Another example is the early German Buddhist Arthur Pfungst of Frankfurt, who distinguished between the correctly interpreted Jesus and the institution of the Church. In more than three hundred articles he criticizes the current state of affairs including the public presentation and role of the two main Christian churches in Germany. It was not his intention to deconstruct the personal belief of a religiously or mystically disposed mind. Rather, he was motivated “to tear off the mask of the state-approved sham of religious Christianity in order to show how hideous it looks underneath”34. 3.2 Questioning the cultural achievements and effects of Christianity 3.2.1 Destructive modes of theological and ethical thinking in the Bible Despite profound similarities between Jesus and Buddha, Seidenstiicker sustained the reproach that in neither the Old nor the New Testament could a hint of compas­ sion for animals be found. Even Jesus, Seidenstiicker protests, sent his disciples to prepare a lamb as a sacrifice at the Feast of Passover35. It remains uncertain whether Seidenstiicker associated this with Jesus himself or attributed it to the in­ capacity of the evangelists to completely grasp the original message. In any event D.Harnack auf dem diesjährigen Evangelisch-sozialen Kongress”, in: Der Buddhist, I (1905) No.5, pp. 149-159, especially p. 156. 33 Seidenstiicker, Karl B.: “Buddhismus, Christentum und Abendland”, in: Die Buddhis­ tische Welt: J (1909), No. 4, pp. 29-33, especially p. 32. 34 Arthur Pfungst, “Sein Leben und sein Werk”, in: Pfungst, Marie [Ed.]: Arthur Pfungst. Gesammelte Werke, Voll, Frankfurt/M. 1926, pp. 1X-CXXV1, p. XX. 33 Cf. Seidenstiicker, Karl B.: “Soziale Kräfte... ”, op.cit.. 116 Fr a n k U s a r s k i this accusation is heightened by arguing that cruelty to animals, which Seidenstiicker viewed as the paradigmatic indicator of the quality of true humanity, is rooted in biblical anthropology which implicitly attributes supremacy and privi­ leged status to the human being in relation to the rest of creation. This belief in a “royal central power”, as Seidenstiicker calls it, fostered a destructive attitude not only towards animals but also towards one’s fellow human beings, and was the source of the brutalization of the European population.36 The commentaries of early German Buddhists contain further critical argu­ ments, mentioned only in passing but whose dramatically defamatory quality is all the more evident today. These remarks fed anti-Semitic sentiments and were al­ ready unambiguously expressed by Theodor Schultze in his book The Religion of the Future. According to a 1906 review, the work basically focused on the issue of which world-view, the Jewish-Christian or the Indian, should be credited with higher cultural value.3 The review quotes Schultze: “The Israelites, like the Sem­ ites in general, were incapable of turning their spiritual awareness towards the subjective depths of consciousness, there to grasp general questions of ultimate human interest and then to search for solutions to them through self-observation and reflection. The Indian branch of the Aryan tribe in particular had [...] an ex­ ceptional talent for this”.38 3.2.2 The Claim that Christianity Lacks Authenticity The accusation that from its very inception Christianity had lacked an interior quality was further supported in those days by the extremely popular debate about the so called “borrowings-argument”, i.e., the previously-mentioned hypothesis that parts of the New Testament and the apocryphal scriptures draw on older Bud­ dhists sources. The corresponding academic debate was initiated in 1882 by, sur­ prisingly enough, Rudolf Seydel, professor at the University of Leipzig. Especially during its first period the discussion was highly speculative. Nevertheless early German Buddhists treated the principal idea as a given, citing examples put forth 36 C f Die Greuel der ‘christlichen ’ Civilisation. Op.cit, pp. 20 ff. 37 Die Buddhistische Welt: 1, No.l (April 1905-März 1906), pp. 14- 16, especially p. 14. 3S Ibid., p. 15. Th e P e r c e pt io n of Je s u s and Ch r is t ia n it y 117 by various scholars in favor of the “dependency-hypothesis” and considering them proofs of Christianity’s overall lack of authenticity and originality. Christianity ap­ peared syncretistic in comparison with Buddhism and was seen, of course, as the inferior religion. Faced with the popularity of the debate, even representatives of the church had to admit “frightening similarities” between the two traditions.39 In an apologetic article in 1901 one Christian theologian laments: “Some of those weary of the Christian faith are not content with attempts at a historical deduction of our religion from Gautama’s. They declare the Buddha-wisdom in general as more superb than both the religion and the morals of Christianity”40. The significance of the “borrowings-argumenf ’ can be seen in the fact that the Buddhist Catechism, which Friedrich Zimmermann had published in 1888 under his pseudonym Subhadra Bhikshu and which, in the long run, had prepared the way for the institutionalization of German Buddhism, had already referred to this idea. On the other hand, even in 1919 the topic was extensively elaborated in a se­ ries of articles by Wolfgang Bohn in the periodical “Buddhistischer Weltspiegel.”41 In the time between these two publications a number of books, commentaries and reviews by early German Buddhists steadily contributed to the debate. Although some reviews appeared quite objective,42 an anti-Christian tone was often clearly expressed and whenever anything even quite peripheral to the discussion itself seemed to support the borrowings-argument, it was mentioned in one of the Bud­ dhist periodicals of the time. For example, A. Malvert’s Wissenschaft und Religion, published in 1904 and treating mythological analogies of the world religions, was recommended to the readers of the “Buddhistische Welt” because, in the opinion of Falke, Robert: Christentum und Buddhismus. Ein Vortrag gehalten im Berliner Zweigver­ ein des Evangelischen Bundes, Berlin 1898, p. 7. 40 "Buddha oder Christus”, in: Der Beweis des Glaubens, 1901, pp. 403-404, especially p. 403. 41 Cf. Bohn, W.: “Der Buddhismus in den Ländern des Westens", in: Buddhistischer Welt­ spiegel, 1, No.l (Juli 1919), pp. 25-31, No 2-3 (August-Sept. 1919), pp. 97-104; No 5-6 (Nov.-Dez.1919), pp. 203-210; No. 7-8 (Jan.-Feb. 1919), pp. 284-289; No 9-10 (März.-April 1920), pp. 356-366. 42 Cf. "Über buddhistische Einflüsse im Christentum ”, in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 3, No.34 (April 1907-März 1908), pp. 108-109; Buddhistische Warte: 2, No. 3/4 (1909/1910), pp. 112-118. 118 Fr a n k U s a r s k i the reviewer, Malvert’s discourse was extraordinarily well-suited “to sweep away the musty dogmatic air in the church with a fresh, free breeze.”43 At the time of the publication of the Catechism Zimmermann was obviously in­ fluenced by the special discussion of what might have happened to Jesus between his twelfth year and the third decade of his life. The French author Jacolliot ad­ dressed this “gap” in the biography of the Messiah in a book which appeared in 1868, asserting that during those years Jesus had studied in Egypt and India. There, under the guidance of a high-ranking monk, he had achieved enlightenment. Fi­ nally, he had returned to Palestine, not teaching the original Buddhism, however, but a decadent version mixed with Jewish elements. Four years before the publica­ tion of the Buddhist Catechism, the allegedly Russian author, Notovich contributed to the debate with a kind of back-up version of Jacolliot’s book.44 Taking these wild speculations seriously Zimmermann equated the “loving Nazarene” with a Buddhist saint and called for a reestablishment of the origins of Jesus’ teachings in Europe. The time had come for the Western descendants of the Aryans, he contin­ ued, to listen to the pure and unadulterated message of the Buddha. Thus Zimmermann not only stood in line with Jacolliot and Notovich, but gave their arguments a point by adding national overtones to the initial hypothesis. Yet over and above the innuendoes, the message remained that Christianity is a diluted religion which actually owes its leftover spirituality to the supreme teaching of the Buddha.45 The anti-Christian attitude revealed in the aforementioned section of the Cate­ chism provoked vehement reactions on the part of theologians. For example, in an apologetic article published in 1899 Hoop protests that Zimmermann used the “borrowings-argument” only to “to bring Christianity into discredit”; the Cate­ chism was a “weapon” and a “keen sword in the fight between the two world- 43 “Wissenschaft und Religion”, in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 1, No.10 (April 1905-März 1906), p. 79. 44 Notowitsch, N.: Die Lücke im Leben Jesu, Stuttgart etc. 1984. 45 Cf. Dräseke, J.: “R.Seydels Untersuchungen über das Verhältnis von Buddha-Legende und Leben Jesu", in: Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Theologie: 41, pp. 502-514, especially p. 503. T h e P e r c e pt io n of Je s u s and Ch r is t ia n it y 119 religions.”46 The very choice of words sheds light on the heated atmosphere around the turn of the century, to which the early Buddhists and their sympathizers had contributed in their own way, for they were always alert for new opportunities to elaborate upon the “dependency-hypothesis” by applying the borrowings-argument to new discoveries. One welcome idea suggested that Jesus had come out of the se­ cret society of the ascetic Essenes, who had alienated themselves from their Bud­ dhist origins but had preserved many principles of the Buddha’s teachings in their community. Karl Striinkmann,4748for instance, argued in a 1910 article in “Die Buddhistische Welt” that the assertion that Jesus had belonged to a Buddhist sect which had spread to the Near East could be seen as a confirmation of the corre­ sponding claims in Zimmermann’s Catechism4S. There is good reason to believe the “Jesus-the-Essene” theory was also propagated in a commentary by Nielsen in another volume of “Die Buddhistische Welt” in 1910.49 Yet another facet of the overall “borrowings-argument” was the thesis that not only the rosary but also parts of the Christian liturgy were copies of Tibetan Bud­ dhist rituals. This idea was put forth by Seidenstiicker, alias Freydank, alias TsongKa-Pa. However, Seidenstiicker emphasizes, only the outer form of these elements was preserved and practiced without the true meaning; the inner spirit was lost. Moreover, the general focus of the Christian service had changed the original im­ pulse: Instead of understanding that God is within everyone’s heart and instead of following the Master’s words to care for widows and orphans, the Christians prayed to an idol projected onto an external heaven, ready to be manipulated ac­ cording to the human being’s fantasies and needs.50 46 Hoops, Heinrich: "Das Eindringen des Buddhismus in christliche Länder”, in: Der Beweis des Glaubens: XXXV (1899), pp. 348 - 358, especially p. 353 andp. 356. On Strünckmann, who became inspired by national ideology and finally turned away from Buddhism, cf. Wedemeyer, Bernd: “Völkische Körperkultur in Niedersachsen in der Weimarer Republik. Das Beispiel Dr. Karl Strünckmann, ” in: Langenfeld, Hans: Stefan Nielsen [Eds.:]: Beiträge zur Sportgeschichte Niedersachsens, Part 2: Weimarer Republik, Göttingen 1998, pp. 175-184. 48 Cf. Strünckmann, Karl: “Buddhismus und Christentum ”, in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 4, 1910, No. 3, pp. 59-64, especially p. 61. 49 Cf. "Aus der buddhistischen Welt”, in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 4, No.4 (Okt.1910), p. 83. 50 Cf. Die Greuel..., op.cit.p. 174. 120 Fr a n k U s a r s k i The most far-reaching political conclusion of the “borrowings-argument” how­ ever was formulated by Adolf Brodbeck in 1893. “The Christian religion”, he wrote, “is Buddhism in Jewish garment. Buddhism is by far more original, true and precious than the Christian religion.” “Christianity in its present form cannot re­ main a state religion; the presuppositions of its special divine dignity and its origi­ nality (in view of which the constitution had in a certain sense declared it state re­ ligion) have collapsed. It is thus the duty of government and the representative body of the people to legislatively redefine the relation between state and religion, in accordance with the way things stand at the moment.”51 3.2.3 Transgressions in the course of Church History Since Christianity is now seen as lacking in principle theological substance and authenticity, it is but a logical deduction that the Church, as its incorporation, has turned out to be an inferior ethical impetus throughout its history. The history of Christianity is written “in bloody letters”, proclaims a commentary in the periodi­ cal “Die Buddhistische Welt” of 1911.52 Of course Seidenstucker/Freydank brought up this painful subject too: The first Christian Councils were occasions for feuding, uprising and bloodshed; the so-called “holy” Emperor Constantine was a “bloodhound of the worst kind”; other famous figures of Church history, such as Boniface or Charlemagne, were no better. All this, Seidenstiicker asserts - in addi­ tion to those ever-valid symbols of Christianity’s transgressions: the Crusades, witch-burning and the Inquisition, as well as its cruel, repressive attitude towards other religions53 - has made Church history “an illustrated catalogue of dreadful crimes and scandals.”54 This heritage, as further evaluated in a report from the opening speech of the annual general meeting of the German branch of the Ma- 51 Brodbeck, Adolf: Leben und Lehre Buddha 's, des indischen Heilandes, 600 Jahre vor Christo, Zürich 1893, p. 3 andp. 5. 52 Cf. "Aus der buddhistischen Welt", in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 4 (1911), No.7/8, pp. 162163, especially p. 163. 53 Cf. Freydank, Bruno: Die Greuel...., op.cit, pp. 179ff. 54 Freydank, Bruno: Buddha und Jesus, op.cit., p. 50. Th e Pe r c e pt io n of Je s u s and Ch r is t ia n it y 121 habodhi-Society in 1914, had discredited Christianity across the board, so that its message of compassion and benevolence was no longer credible53*. 3.2.4 The Destructive Effect of Contemporary Christian Missions in Asia With regard to the current state of affairs, it was evident to Seidenstiicker that the cruel, intolerant spirit of institutionalized Christianity had only been dampened, not at all however overcome, by the prevailing political conditions. Regarding the church he stated: “Often enough under the velvet paws the sharp claws come to light.”56 Here the targets of his attack are the unscrupulous actions of Christian missions and their disastrous impact on the cultural integrity of Asiatic societies, such as those of Ceylon, Burma and China. Proselytizing is judged to be an imperi­ alistic, violent penetration into ethically intact regions. To demonstrate the fanati­ cism of Christian mission societies, a 1905 issue of “Die Buddhistische Welt” cited an article from “The Daily Express” about a revolt in which a local missionarystation was burned down and some of its members murdered. According to the in­ terpretation of “Die Buddhistische Welt”, however, the situation became clearer when the history of the unfortunate case was considered. In fact, the revolt was provoked by the leader of the missionary-station during an indigenous religious procession. On this occasion Chinese people carried images of their deities, thereby displeasing the missionary, who was watching the celebration march. After emphatically but unsuccessfully asking the Chinese to put the “graven images” down, the missionary tried to snatch the idols away. Obviously this had provoked the aggression, which was only a reaction. With such examples Seidenstiicker and some of his companions expressed their concern about the future of the Buddhist nations. For instance in 1912 the periodi­ cal “Mahabodhi-Blatter” commented on the destructive influence of the increasing number of bars in Ceylon. This in turn was the result of failing politics under alien Ji Cf. Ansprache des Vorsitzenden zur Eröffnung der 3.Hauptversammlung der MahabodhiGesellschaft (D.Z.), 31. Mai 1914 zu Leipzig, in: Mahabodhi-Blätter. Eine Zwei­ monatsschrift für Buddhismus: 2 (1913/14), No. 7, Mai-August 1914, pp. 22-26, especially p. 23. 56 Cf. Freydank, Bruno: Buddha und Christus, op.cit, p. 52. 122 Fr a n k U s a r s k i influence, and would lead to growing numbers of drunkards and destroyed fami­ lies. “More than ever before,” Seidenstiicker puts into Lama Tsong-Ka-Pa’s mouth, peoples outside the European culture area are in danger “of being poisoned by the rot of the ‘Christian’ civilization”.57 “The cross is immediately followed by the lash and the bottle of brandy. In our Buddhist lands, as soon as one of our fellow coun­ trymen goes into a bar or a distillery, it is a sure sign he has become a Christian. Where Christian missionaries sit and build a church, there will very soon be a tem­ ple of the demon alcohol.”58 In the same tough spirit Seidenstiicker, Hornung and Dietze presented them­ selves at a public discussion with Protestant ministers in 1907 in Leipzig as advo­ cates of the endangered Asian societies. There Seidenstiicker exclaimed: “On be­ half of millions of Ceylonese and Burmese I bring charges against many of the Christian missionaries for their outrages and brutal dealings [...] Gentlemen, this is a disgrace for Europe. In the future, whenever we take note of such infringements and whenever German missionaries are involved, we intend to publish these cases, giving names, the place and the date to the press. [...] These incredible instances of fanaticism and brute force must stop! They are a stain on our culture!”59 3.2.5 The Backwardness and Disintegrating Effects Of Christianity On Modern Society Although moral accusations predominated, early German Buddhists also stressed the intellectual backwardness60 of Christianity and its disintegrative effect in an in­ creasingly rational world61. Christianity was criticized for its insistence on mere belief as the central element of religion. Hornung, in particular, linked this feature with the hierarchical organization of the Christian church and the distance between church officials and ordinary members, as well as with the interplay of order on 57Ibid., p. 183 ss Ibid, p. 187 19 “Eine christlich-buddhistische Debatte", in: Buddhistische Warte, 1 (1907/1908), No. 9 (Dez.) pp. 282-288, especially p. 288. 60 Cj. Seidenstiicker, Karl B.: “Buddhismus, Christentum und Abendland”, in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 3, No. 4 (Okt. 1904), pp. 29-33, especially p. 30. 61 Cf. “Buddhismus", in: Die Buddhistische Welt: 5, 1912, No.9. pp. 279-283. T h e Pe r c e pt io n of Je s u s and Ch r is t ia n it y 123 one side and obedience on the other.62 Buddhism, on the other hand, qualified as a system completely in tune with modem science and reasonable thinking,'63 devoid of immature believers, encouraging self-responsibility64 and emphasizing that no aspect of Buddhist teaching should be accepted without intellectual proof. A number of the arguments put forward to demonstrate the cultural inferiority of Christianity included claims that scientific cognition would serve as the ideo­ logical foundation of future civilization,65 and that the growing plausibility of natu­ ral science would increase the gap between blind faith and modern thinking.66 Schulemann67 and Hornung68, for example, drew the conclusion from this that Christianity would be forced increasingly onto the defensive, while Buddhism would turn out to be “religion of the future”.6970Early Buddhists thus concluded that Christianity represented an anti-modem enclave, a disintegrative element within a progressing society. Especially those who were still affiliated with the church had to suffer the “blatant split” between a scientific frame of mind and Christian dog­ matic patterns; the latter were imprinted on the soul already during childhood and the individual experienced this as inner conflict. Needed was a harmonious worldview, both mentally and sensually fulfilling - and that was, of course, Buddhism. Seidenstucker even propagated the idea of a fundamental change within European culture, comparable perhaps to the period of the decline of the Roman Empire: “a 62 Cf. Hornung, F.: "Weshalb Buddhismus? Vortrag, gehalten zur Feier des 2457. Wesak am 19. Mai 1913 in Leipzig”, in: Mahabodhi-Blätter: 2 (1913), No. 1, Mai-Juni 1913, pp. 113, especially p. 7 63 Cf. Seidenstücker, Karl: "Was ist Buddhismus? Einundzwanzig Leitsätze", in: Flug­ schriften der "Buddhistischen Welt", 1909, No.l 64 Cf.Dräseke, J., op.cit., p. 503. 65 Cf. Schulemann, G.: “Religion ", in: Buddhistische Warte. Monatshefte für Ethik, Erk­ enntnis und Geisteskultur: I, No. 3 (Juni 1907), pp. 65-73, especially p. 70. 66Seidenstücker, Karl B.: "Die Weltmission des Buddhismus und das Abendland", in: Bud­ dhistische Warte: 3 (1911-1912), No. 1-2, pp. 2-34. 67 Cf. Schulemann, G., op.cit, p. 70. 6S C f "Buddhismus”, in: Die Buddhistische Welt: V, 1912, No. 9, pp. 279-283, especially pp. 280f. 69 Cf. Schultze, Theodor: Die Religion der Zukunft, Frankfurt a. M. 1901. 70 Cf. Seidenstücker, Karl: Die Weltmission.., op.cit., p. 7f. 124 Fr a n k Us a r s k i process of reconstruction and the ferment of dying, changing ideas and notions: a reorganization of many traditionally sanctioned values.”71 3.2.6 Christianity’s incapacity to promote moral standards in the contemporary world The aforementioned lines of argument culminated in the accusation that Christian­ ity, especially in its present form, was incapable of educating people and fostering moral standards. In support of this Seidenstiicker cited a Christian missionary who had worked some years in Africa and after returning to Europe with his wife, won­ dered: “Have we really moved from the land of heathens to the land of Christians, or rather from the land of Christians to the land of heathens?”72 Hornung held Christian soteriology responsible: “Absolutely unequalled greed and boundless hedonism prevail everywhere in the Western world. We [...] have here the miserable drama of religions which, with their teachings about the for­ giveness of sin and that sort of thing, get rid of the last, ultimate limits of con­ sciousness.” And the servants of these religions justify “the whole misery as willed by God’s world order.”73 The most drastic words however can be found in “Tsong-Ka-Pa’s” first letter: The ‘Christian’ civilization, Seidenstiicker argues there, “is a quagmire of moral degeneration and barbaric crudeness, a pool of excrement of the most awful besti­ ality, which lets its fetid smells pour forth, threatening to poison the whole of man­ kind.”74 71 Ibid. p. 7. 72Freydank, Bruno: Buddha und Christus op.cit., pp. 57f. 73 Hornung, F.: ‘‘Weshalb Buddhismus? Vortrag, gehalten zur Feier des 2457. Wesak am 19. Mai 1913 in Leipzig", in: Mahabodhi-Blätter: 2 (1913), No. 1, Mai-Juni 1913, pp. 1-13, especiallyp. 12. 74Die Greuel..., op.cit, p. 16. Th e Pe r c e pt io n of Je s u s and Ch r is t ia n it y 125 4. Interpretation In interpreting the whole complex discussed so far we need to bear in mind at least four aspects of the situation. Firstly, for early German Buddhists too, “apologetics” meant “defense”, and the more their religion was attacked by German theologians of that time the greater became the need for Buddhists to defend themselves. Sec­ ondly, the biographies of individual converts to early Buddhism have to be taken into consideration as elements influencing their perception of Christianity. Thirdly, the drawing-up of firm borders between a foreign religious system and that of the surrounding “host-society” is an important means of religious acculturation. Fi­ nally the aggressive rejection of Christianity is also a reflection of a specific style of adopting Buddhism in Germany in the years between 1888 and 1914. 4.1 Anti-Christian statements as a form of “apologetics” While discussing our introductory example we noted that the emergence of early German Buddhism was accompanied by highly critical comments from Christian theologians. Not long after German Buddhists started to introduce their religion to the public, representatives of the Church made Buddhism itself a critical issue. In the following decades hundreds of articles were published, denigrating Buddhism in general and German Buddhists in particular. In most cases Buddhism was de­ fined as an inferior, dysfunctional, or even destructive religion.75 It was accused of being an “enemy of all culture”, a “paralyzing” or even “hypnotizing force”, an “energy-destroying practice”, and a “teaching lacking a true ethic”. At the same time, it was asserted that due to the Buddha, Asiatic societies suffered a lower level of social evolution. One popular argument repeatedly confronting the German Buddhists was the equation of their religion with Schopenhauer’s pessimism. It 75 An overview o f this argumentation including biografical notes can be found in the first part o f mv article: “‘Nihilierung’ als Strategie der Abwehr ‘neuer Religiosität’: Zur Kritik an Pauschalisierungen im Kontext der bundesdeutschen ‘Sekten’-Debatte", in: FritschOppermann, Sybille [Ed.]: Der Geist und die Geister. Über die Bedeutung ‘‘neuer religiöser Bewegungen" für Kirche und Gesellschaft, Loccum 1998. pp. 83-97. 126 Fr a n k U s a r s k i was said that Buddhism fostered the tendency to escape from an active life, or en­ couraged even a suicidal disposition. An indication of the extreme negativism attributed to Buddhism in general by Christian-oriented authors is found in the following quotation: “In front of its icy, destructive breath, all life grows stiff, every flower wilts, every splendor of artistic beauty crumbles away. In it, the proudest triumphs of human thinking and creativ­ ity are buried, and when one wants to call this life, it is the life of the modern ca­ daver.”76 All this indicates that not only Buddhists but also Christians exhaustively em­ ployed the argument that Occidental culture was threatened by destructive ideolo­ gies and elements from within. However (with the exception of Bruno Freydank’s publications) the rhetoric and the tone of Christian theologians were by far the more injurious. Although it is impossible today to trace the complicated interplay of action and reaction back to its origins, it is evident that in many cases Buddhists felt themselves provoked by the extreme attacks of Christian theologians. In other words, a considerable part of the anti-Christian rhetoric can be understood as the attempts of the early German Buddhists to pay back the representatives of the church with their own coin. 4.2 Biographical reasons for Anti-Christian statements A second factor in interpreting the situation is the deeply-charged psychological significance of the dispute with Christian theologians for at least some of the early German Buddhist protagonists. Seidenstiicker, for example, whose father was a senior minister, had been raised in the spirit of Protestantism. Thus his scathing attacks against Christianity can also be understood as his effort to jettison this part of his biography and stabilize his personal identity as a Buddhist. If Steinke’s hy­ pothesis is correct - that from about 1924 onwards Seidenstiicker returned to 76 Sinthern, Peter: Buddhismus und buddhistische Strömungen in der Gegenwart. Eine apologetische Studie, Münster 1909, p. 124. T h e Pe r c e pt io n of Je s u s and Ch r is t ia n it y 127 Christianity, becoming finally a convinced Catholic77 - then Seidenstiicker’s tem­ porary anti-Christian radicalism appears in an even more psychological light. Less striking though still instructive examples are offered by Georg Grimm, who gave up his studies of Catholic theology shortly before ordination to the priesthood, and Hans Much, who stemmed from a Protestant home in Prussia7*. 4.3 Anti-Christian statements as means of acculturation A third interpretative consideration stems from the approach of Klaus-Josef Notz, who discusses the efforts of early German Buddhists under the rubric of “accul­ turation”79. Notz stresses that as an originally foreign religion, Buddhism found it­ self in high tension with the mainstream culture of German society in the decades around the turn of the century. In its new surroundings the “alternative” religion was confronted with an ambiguous situation: To maximize its chances for success it had to be interpreted within the prevailing circumstances; it had to appear as an option adequate to and capable of fulfilling the predominant needs of the time. On the other hand, the presentation of Buddhism as an “up-to-date” religion meant a concession to the new public and a challenge to Buddhism’s identity. From the point of view of Notz’s system-theory, a religion’s identity in general is a matter of distinguishing a social sub-system from its surrounding social environment. Seen in this light one could say that in taking up counter-positions against competing ideologies, early German Buddhists were symbolically demarcating their own sub­ system in order to achieve and stabilize its identity. The extremely skeptical, often hostile, arguments against Christianity in particular are rooted in the fact that Christianity was regarded not only as the most influential ideological force in Western societies but also as the main rival. Insofar as Buddhists made use of their criticisms of Christianity so as to elaborate the corresponding positive sides of Buddhism, the dispute also served as a platform to demonstrate that Buddhism was 77 Cf. Steinke, Ulrich: Karl Bernhard Seidenstücker (1876-1936): Leben, Schaffen, Wirken, Chapter 8: "Seidenstücker als Girimananda", Fassung vom 28. Juni 1996, URL: http://www.payer.de/steinke/steink08.htm. 7S Cf. Notz, Klaus-Josef, op.cit, p. 47; p. 68. 79 Cf. op.cit. 128 F r a n k UsARSKi a religion completely in accordance with contemporary needs and modern stan­ dards. 4.4 Anti-Christian Sentiments as Constitutive Elements of the Initial Phase of the Adoption of Buddhism in Germany When we consider the final interpretative factor it becomes apparent that the adop­ tion of Buddhism in the period between 1888 and the first World-War differed in a variety of ways from its subsequent development. In the process both the method and the content changed. As mentioned earlier, the initial phase was characterized by a cognitive style of adoption (though the German Buddhist association “Bund fur Buddhistisches Leben”, founded by Wolfgang Bohn in 1912, tended to employ the moral aspects of the dharma in day-to-day life). The later phase, gradually tak­ ing shape in the first half of the 1920’s, saw a growing interest in Zen Buddhism and a turn to Zen Meditation. Hence what began as an intellectual approach to Buddhist wisdom shifted to a mystical approach. As far as the perception of Christianity is concerned a greater openness evolved, in some cases leading towards a syncretistic interpretation of Buddhism and Christianity80 - a further proof that differences between religions seem more important the more the discriminating intellect is at work. The latter emphasizes the dogmatic whereas mysticism is holistic in nature, tends to transcend concepts, has a unifying effect and fosters interreligious dialogue. From this perspective it is interesting to consider that Seidenstiicker had already come upon this idea: In Bruno Freydank’s Buddha and Christ he mentions the intimate relationship be­ tween Christian mysticism and Buddhism, but maintains that not much of a mysti­ cal tendency could be found in contemporary Protestantism.81 That perceptions had changed after the first World War is indicated in a passage from Georg Grimm. In an article written in 1919 Grimm leaves no doubt that he disagrees with contempo­ rary Christianity. But concerned about increasing materialism and atheism he 80 Cf. Bergler, M.: “Ein Abriß der Rezeptionsgeschichte des Zen-Buddhismus in Deutsch­ land. Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Beitrages von Graf Karlfried von Dürckheim, ” in: Zeitschrift für Religionsgeschichte und Geistesgeschichte: 36 (1984), pp. 39-52. 81 Cf. op.cit, p. 17. Th e Pe r c e pt io n of Je s u s and Ch r is t ia n it y 129 speculatively reflects on the value of religion in general, and judges Christianity as “less bad” than no religion at allST Even more instructive are two other examples, also stemming from the period following the First World War. The first picks up the “borrowings-argument” from a mystical point of view: Similarities between Christian and Buddhist texts are thus not interpreted as a chronological dependence in favor of Buddhism, but as syn­ chronic expressions of the ultimate truth underlying all the relative manifestations of historical religions. In the periodical “Buddhistischer Weltspiegel” the German Buddhist Mensi-Klarbach wrote in 1919: “There is and can be only one truth, but there are many ways leading to it. Is it then a surprise that these ways come closer, cross, [...] or at least run parallel, the more they approach the temple of truth?”828384 Three years later Hans Much declared Buddha to be the “crown and fulfillment of humanity”, but at the same time acknowledged that all religious leaders, including the wisemen of the Upanishads, Lao-tze, Rumi or Meister Eckhart, are representa­ tives of the one and only truth. “All true masters of mankind,” Much wrote in 1922, “ascend from the lowlands to the same mountain. Only the starting point and the directions of the path are different. For the mountain is situated in the midst of all lowlands, and the higher they ascend, the more they approach each other. Yes, from a high hillside, all their ways meet - the high hillside of correlation.”’'4 82 Cf. Grimm, Georg: “Das Verhältnis des Buddhisten zum Christen", in: Buddhistischer Weltspiegel. Monatsschrift für Buddhismus und religiöse Kultur auf buddhistischer Grund­ lage: 1 (1919), August-September, pp. 94-95. 83 Mensi-Klarbach, Alfred: “Buddhistische Anklänge bei Deutschen Mystikern ", in: Bud­ dhistischer Weltspiegel, 1 (1919), pp. 76 - 89, especially p. 77. 84 Much, Hans: Die Welt des Buddha. Ein Hochgesang, Dresden 1922, p. 11.