The unity of all myth and religion, and Joseph Campbell

[Willamena]

I came across this sermon today, by Mark Bernstein of the UU church. In it, he discusses his own and Campbell's insights into meaning that is common across all religious symbolism. I thought it might be of interest to some here at RF.

http://www.usguu.org/documents/Joseph_Campbell_sermon_copy.pdf

All myths, all religions speak to the same reality and convey the same message. The stories differ because a different language was needed to speak to each time and culture. The message is how to live in this world.

Only two things could explain the commonalities: dispersion from a single source, or independent creation by diverse peoples emerging from common human experience, emanating from the same human psyche, which is in fact connected with a transcendent reality.

 

[robtex]

Willamena,

the book you may be looking for that expounds upon that theory is "The Power of Myth" by Campbell. In it he theorizes that, we as humans, explain our emotional self-in the terms of allegories and myths and that many of the grand stories of religion, wheather it be, Pagan, Native American, Aztec Christianity ect have overlapping common themes and as such all hold cultural values that are more universal than distinct. Based on the pdf I am guessing that Bernstein read "The Power of Myth".

 

[Willamena]

Thanks for the recommendation, Robtex.

 

[sandandfoam]

Thank you very very much. That was fantastic.
This is it for me:-

As metaphor all religions are
true, all myths are real in their universal unity,
pointing to the mystery of life.​

​

 

[robtex]

Thank you very very much. That was fantastic.
This is it for me:-

[/left]
[/size][/font]

can you expound upon that while loosely defining, religion, metaphor and their relationships to "the mysteries of life"?

 

[sandandfoam]

can you expound upon that while loosely defining, religion, metaphor and their relationships to "the mysteries of life"?

Sure,
Religion for me is my search for an understanding of my own existence, my will to meaning.
The religion that surrounds me is Christianity. When I was younger the narrow-mindedness and sectarianism that Christianity inspired turned me off it. All this literal interpretation in Christianity aroused hostility in me. Then I did a course in Classical Studies. I fell in love with the works of Homer. Then gradually it dawned on me that if I thought of Christianity in a similar manner to that in which I thought of Homer it meant something to me. I'm rolling on from there but that in a roundabout way is what I mean by religion as a metaphor.
The relationship for me between religion/metaphor and the mysteries of life is that I feel that the concepts and understandings I require to understand my existance may best be found in the loose and dynamic yet multi-layered world of language and meaning that is the realm of story or myth. Not in the difficult world (for me) of mathematics or the constrictive world of dogma or literalism.
I don't think that my way is the only way. There are as many ways to understanding I imagine as people. Every religion that I've encountered seems to me to have the seeds of understanding in it, problems arise when they are taken literally and become constrictive.
I read a Zen book one time which I think captures what I'm attempting to say. Scriptures and religions are rafts to get us across the river. Problems arise when we get too attached to the raft and stop looking at the riverbank we are trying to reach.
I hope that's clear ?

 

[Sunstone]

"Only two things could explain the commonalities: dispersion from a single source, or independent creation by diverse peoples emerging from common human experience, emanating from the same human psyche, which is in fact connected with a transcendent reality."

Campbell was of the opinion the commonalities could be explained by dispersion. I'm of the opinion the commonalities are explained by a common human psyche.

 

[Runt]

As a religious studies student, I am bothered a little by Campbell's work. He tends to ignore or at least under-emphasize the stunning variety present in religious iconography across the globe in a perennialist attempt to reduce the content of all myths down to one common system of archetypes. In many ways, it seems ethnocentric to me, as though he is assuming that reality is not and could not possibly be the reality indigenous people think it is and that all indigenous religions---even if indigenous people don't know it---are "really just" symbolically "tapping into" that reality. I think it is much more important and valuable to allow indigenous peoples to define the meaning of their myths and explain to Western scholars, rather than having Western scholars explain to them, what those myths reveal about the reality in which they are situated.

While I recognize that there are undoubtedly certain strong shared experiences all humans have simply by virtue of being human, I also think it is immensely important to remember that our understandings of reality are constructed by the society and environment in which we live. The differences between different cultures must not be overlooked or underemphasized.

 

[Escéptico]

Campbell's thesis, as well as the work of Jung that obviously inspired it, is of limited appeal to me. I'm fascinated by the subject of mythology and meaning, but the whole mystical-schmistical 'world psyche' concept seems more inspired by imagination than responsible research.

That said, I remember being impressed by his literary analysis of Joyce's Finnegans Wake.

 

[Willamena]

"Only two things could explain the commonalities: dispersion from a single source, or independent creation by diverse peoples emerging from common human experience, emanating from the same human psyche, which is in fact connected with a transcendent reality."

Campbell was of the opinion the commonalities could be explained by dispersion. I'm of the opinion the commonalities are explained by a common human psyche.

The quote that immediate follows the one I made above is: "Joseph Campbell’s scholarship ruled out dispersion from a common source." Perhaps his opinion changed.

 

[Sunstone]

The quote that immediate follows the one I made above is: "Joseph Campbell’s scholarship ruled out dispersion from a common source." Perhaps his opinion changed.

I don't know, Patty, I could be wrong. Yet, having read several of his books, I've gotten the impression Campbell wrote about the dispersion of myths.

 

[PureX]

I came across this sermon today, by Mark Bernstein of the UU church. In it, he discusses his own and Campbell's insights into meaning that is common across all religious symbolism. I thought it might be of interest to some here at RF.

http://www.usguu.org/documents/Joseph_Campbell_sermon_copy.pdf

"Only two things could explain the commonalities: dispersion from a single source, or independent creation by diverse peoples emerging from common human experience, emanating from the same human psyche, which is in fact connected with a transcendent reality."

There was a third choice: "independent creation by diverse peoples emerging from common human experience". And this is the most likely solution. The "connection" is not to a transcendent reality, but simply to each other through the similarity of our forms.

 

[Escéptico]

The "connection" is not to a transcendent reality, but simply to each other through the similarity of our forms.

Good point. We're all wired for essentially the same existence our not-so-distant ancestors lived on the savannah. It's not surprising that diverse human cultures arrived at some interestingly similar mythological forms, and it hardly argues for the existence of some mystical collective unconscious.

 

[Troublemane]

Sure,
Religion for me is my search for an understanding of my own existence, my will to meaning.

Great dude! I love that term "Will to Meaning"! Nietzsche would approve!

 

[sandandfoam]

Great dude! I love that term "Will to Meaning"! Nietzsche would approve!

The term is from Viktor Frankl, I agree it's a great one.

 

[Willamena]

There was a third choice: "independent creation by diverse peoples emerging from common human experience". And this is the most likely solution. The "connection" is not to a transcendent reality, but simply to each other through the similarity of our forms.

I see that as the second choice. The "transcendent reality" need only be an interpretation of a part of us.

 

[Runt]

The term is from Viktor Frankl, I agree it's a great one.

Now THERE's a man who had something worthwhile to say about religion and spirituality!

 

[sandandfoam]

Now THERE's a man who had something worthwhile to say about religion and spirituality!

I couldn't agree more