Search results

1

The phenomenological method revisited: towards comparative studies and non-theological interpretations of the religious experience

100%

Sander A.

ARGUMENT: Biannual Philosophical Journal

|

2014

|

vol. 4

|

issue 1

9-34

EN

During the last decades, two major and interrelated themes have dominated the study of religion: (a) the theme claiming that the long taken-for-granted so-called secularization thesis was all wrong, and (b) the theme of the so-called “return” or “resurgence of religion”. This global revival of religion — on micro, meso and macro levels — has been chronicled in a number of important books lately. As even a quick glance in some of the many textbooks about religious studies reveal that there are many various ways of studying religion — theologically, sociologically, psychologically, anthropologically, philosophically, etc. — and they can be tackled from many different ideological or theoretical “slants” or perspectives – gender, postcolonial, orientalism, postmodernism, inside/outside, hermeneutical, etc. And it seems to be a general rule within science that the more important, complex and controversial a subject area is perceived to be, the more heated the debate about theory, method and definitions of concepts seems to be within it. Comparative religion can, very broadly, be carried out from two types of data: texts or actual living human beings. During the last thirty or so years, and in tandem with the initially mentioned two themes, the latter – what many scholars now call “lived religion” (Hall, 1997; Orsi, 2005; Ammerman, 2007; Mcguire, 2008) – have more and more come to the fore in departments of religious studies. This can be seen as a “rejuvenation” of Friedrich Schleiermacher’s opinions that the only way to study religion adequately was in and through the religious beliefs and practices of actually living human beings and that the heart of religion was to be found, not in rules and regulations, hierarchies and hymnbooks, but in the individual’s experience of dependence upon a power infinitely greater than his own. The student of religion must, in other words, concentrate, not on what people might do, ought to do, or what the textbooks say they are supposed to do, but on what they actually do, and the ways in which they actually behave, and why they do what they do — their motives, reasons or inducements for doing what they do.

2

Jan Nepomucen Józef Braun (1926–2015), filolog klasyczny, orientalista, kartwelista, sumerolog

100%

Witczak K. T.

Collectanea Philologica

|

2021

|

issue 24

203-227

EN

Jan Braun, born on 15th May 1926 in Łódź, studied classical philology and classical archaeology at the University of Lodz (years 1947–1951). His MA thesis (1951) was devoted to the ethnogenesis of the Etruscans. He also worked as junior assistant at the Department of Classical Archaeology, University of Lodz (from May 1949 do September 1950) and later as junior lecturer at the Department of Classical Philology of the same university (from October 1950 to September 1951). In October 1951, Braun left for Georgia in order to complete his doctoral studies. From there he returned to Poland as PhD, specializing in Georgian and other oriental languages, especially the ancient languages of the Near East. In the years 1955–2002, he worked at the University of Warsaw, initially as assistant professor. In 1970, he became associate professor. In 1991, he received the higher doctoral degree (habilitation), and in 1995 he obtained the position of full professor. He studied the genetic relations of ancient and modern languages, including a suggested Basque-Kartvelian connection. During his habilitation colloquium, he gave an interesting lecture entitled Basic problems of historical-comparative research over the ancient languages of the Mediterranean area (Warsaw, May 28th, 1991), which is presented in Appendix No. 1 (with some comments and bibliographical references). The paper presents Braun’s main fields of research and his achievements made in Łódź (Poland), Tbilisi (Georgia) and Warsaw. According to Braun’s view, suggested as early as 1951, Etruscan represents an external member of the Anatolian languages (deriving from Luwian), so that it belongs to the Indo-European language family. In his opinion, Basque is a western member of the South Caucasian (or Kartvelian) family.

3

Dharma and religion in Tagore’s views

88%

Milewska I.

ARGUMENT: Biannual Philosophical Journal

|

2014

|

vol. 4

|

issue 1

81-88

EN

Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941), one of the greatest contemporary Indian thinkers, discussed the problem of religion and faith on the ground of global pluralism and religious diversity. He presented his views in numerous poetical works (including Gitanjali, a collection of Song offerings translated into English, for which he was awarded with the Noble Prize in literature in 1913), but he also delivered many speeches, mostly addressed to the Western audience (e.g. The religion of Man). In his writing, Tagore often uses the terms “religion” and dharma interchangeably. This article focuses on both key terms and on the question whether they may be seen as equivalent according to him. Does he really equalize both terms? or, How was his understanding of “religion” and dharma influenced by his cultural background? The article opens with the analyse of the dictionary definitions of both key terms. Next, at the basis of dictionary explanation the main question is raised: whether “religion” and dharma could be treated as equivalents in their whole range of meanings or should their understanding be limited to a chosen definition or definitions? In the following section, Tagore’s concept of the so called “Man the Eternal” and “Divinity in Man” is briefly described. Final comments include some remarks on both terms explained in the light of Tagore’s view on comparative methodology. He claims that “religion” and dharma are close in meaning, since they both stand for the rational description of the individual experience of divinity. Therefore, they may ultimately lead to the common end, regardless their different cultural roots and various circumstances in which both concepts developed. Tagore argues for freedom as the preliminary condition for understanding of the phenomenon of transcendence of human nature towards the experience of divinity. He understands freedom as perfect harmony realized in this world but not merely through our response to it in knowing but in being. Only when such an approach is accepted the experience of “Man the Eternal” can be achieved. In this respect all human beings may meet, regardless they come from Western or Eastern culture. Such an exposition of the core of religious experience allows us to use the terms of “religion” and dharma interchangeably, and thus contribute to the comparative methodology in religious studies.

Refine search results

2 ARGUMENT: Biannual Philosophical Journal

1 Collectanea Philologica

1 Milewska I.

1 Sander A.

1 Witczak K. T.

1 2021

2 2014

The phenomenological method revisited: towards comparative studies and non-theological interpretations of the religious experience

Jan Nepomucen Józef Braun (1926–2015), filolog klasyczny, orientalista, kartwelista, sumerolog

Dharma and religion in Tagore’s views