What do you think?
Rate this book
Beyond Theology: The Art of Godsmanship
Examines world religions from a mythic as well as a philosophical perspective and explores the role of Christianity in developing human consciousness
231 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1960
35 people are currently reading
712 people want to read
About the author
Alan W. Watts
255 books7,987 followersAlan Wilson Watts was a British philosopher, writer and speaker, who held both a Master's in Theology and a Doctorate of Divinity. Famous for his research on comparative religion, he was best known as an interpreter and popularizer of Asian philosophies for a Western audience. He wrote over 25 books and numerous articles on subjects such as personal identity, the true nature of reality, higher consciousness, the meaning of life, concepts and images of God and the non-material pursuit of happiness. In his books he relates his experience to scientific knowledge and to the teachings of Eastern and Western religion and philosophy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
November 12, 2020
The subtitle of the book is "The Art of Godmanship". The author was a former Anglican priest who had become a practitioner of Zen before he died in 1973. He argued that our normal sense of the person as a lonely island of consciousness is a dramatic illusion based on theological imagery. He suggested that Jesus had a strong sense of "cosmic consciousness", but was unable to express it in terms of Judaic theology without blasphemy (p.112).
As a former insider, Watts did a devastating critique of the church:
Quote, p.xii: "There is not a scrap of evidence that the Christian hierarchy was ever aware of itself as one among several lines of transmission for a universal tradition...My previous discussions did not take proper account of that whole aspect of Christianity which is uncompromising, ornery, militant, rigorous, imperious and invincibly self-righteous."
Written in 1964, these assertions really resonated with me when I read them over a decade later. Describing the church, he said (p.82-3): "How can one quite put a finger on it? Is it moralistic sentimentality-something unctuous, something sanctimonious, something clothesy, undancing, strait-laced, and against the loveliness of the human body? Whatever it may be, it is the plainly identifiable stink of piety."
Again, I recognised that smell. I gave the book to my pastor, and he complained that the author did not use scripture to support his views. I looked more closely, and found scripture quoted regularly.
As a former insider, Watts did a devastating critique of the church:
Quote, p.xii: "There is not a scrap of evidence that the Christian hierarchy was ever aware of itself as one among several lines of transmission for a universal tradition...My previous discussions did not take proper account of that whole aspect of Christianity which is uncompromising, ornery, militant, rigorous, imperious and invincibly self-righteous."
Written in 1964, these assertions really resonated with me when I read them over a decade later. Describing the church, he said (p.82-3): "How can one quite put a finger on it? Is it moralistic sentimentality-something unctuous, something sanctimonious, something clothesy, undancing, strait-laced, and against the loveliness of the human body? Whatever it may be, it is the plainly identifiable stink of piety."
Again, I recognised that smell. I gave the book to my pastor, and he complained that the author did not use scripture to support his views. I looked more closely, and found scripture quoted regularly.
Read
September 13, 2020In Beyond Theology Alan takes his argument in The Two Hands of God and delves into how it plays out in Christianity. What was a cursory glance through the various myths of polarity is here a deep exploration into how the myth is swept under the rug in Christianity (and the places where the myth peaks out from under the rug).
The parts I found most interesting were the following. Alan marvelously points out that Christianity is so opposed to the possibility of non-being that they get rid of it all-together. Both saved and unsaved live forever, and there is no such thing as non-existence, there is only endless suffering or endless joy. In Christianity death has been completely excised from life that even Christian death (aka hell) is still life. Alan also delves into how this complete divorce between the poles coincides with the complete divorce between self and non-self in the Christian view of individuality. Most joyously, Alan urges us not to write this off as a mistake, but to see it as taking the game to a higher level - these hardcore Christians (truly any follower of the Abrahamic religions) are the ones who are truly far-out.
Of further interest is Alan’s interpretation of Christ and the role he plays, or should play. Taking the ahistorical point of view, Alan argues that whether the miracle of Jesus’ story happened or not doesn’t matter. What matters is what the story means, and this is a story whose meaning is truly inexhaustible.
Alan invites us to see the crucifixion in every act of suffering and murder the we see in the universe - because that’s exactly what is happening: “I see the crucifix when I swat a mosquito or eat an oyster, and how much more in all encounters with human pain.” Here, as well, I see a connection to Jordan’s argument in 12 Rules for Life: “I cannot avoid the challenge of the crucifixion, for it means that just in being alive I am unavoidably responsible for untold misery and pain. Apologies are hollow. Attempts at improvement create new entanglements.” Except Jordan would disagree with that last sentence, that actually the way of Christ represents the actual way towards improvement that creates no entanglements, only good. Of course that way is the one of pursuing meaning and the alleviation of suffering through increased responsibility.
Alan next explores the significance of the Eucharist in relation to the myth of polarity. He sees in the rite, again, the Godhead becoming each and every form and figure and suffering what it has to suffer. “Jesus is saying, in the symbolism of the Supper, that all flesh which is eaten is his flesh, and all blood which is shed is his blood.” It’s shed for the remission of sins, remitted in the realization that everything we eat is another one of the Lord’s disguises in which he gives himself away.
Perhaps the best part of the book is Alan’s discussion on the Christian repression of sexuality. The main point is that the way we express sexuality in society is a question of “Where do you draw the line?” Christianity wants the line drawn to the point of eliminating sexuality completely (understandably so, since Christianity has already attempted to eliminate so many other fundamental parts of reality, such as death, evil, and the interconnectedness of the self and others). Alan puts it beautifully when he states that sexuality must not go completely the other way though: “As the seducer plays to lift the lady’s skirt higher and higher, so the progressive liberal tries to extend the areas of sexual freedom, to push the line of taboo back and back--and sometimes it seems as if he wanted to get rid of the line altogether. Contrariwise, the reactionary conservative, the square, the stuffed-shirt, bluenose, and hidebound traditionalist want to lower the skirt down to the ground like a nun’s habit, and to restrict the area of intimacy to the utmost.”
The discussion reaches a climax (heh) when Alan says that the Christian union of Word and Flesh, if it’s serious about it, truly means the divinization of sexuality, something Christianity was on the verge of getting right in the idea of Holy Matrimony and especially in the marriage between Christ and the Church (one of the strangest ideas in all Christianity).
Alan wraps the book up wonderfully by looking at critiques of this viewpoint of Christianity, and brings up marvelously that what truly matters most is plausibility. In this manner, Christianity is best viewed as a dramatic triumph, as the maya of the Hindus kicked up to 11, nay to a thousand. The chapter is highly recommended as basically Alan’s final word on Christianity in the face of Eastern thought.
I will end, however, by quoting some large swaths of the chapter on sex, because it’s one of my favorite Alan Watts. Thank you for reading.
There is no way of being non-sexual. The church reeks of sexuality because it is the one thing intentionally and obviously absent, the one thing definitely concealed, and thus the one thing really important. The religions of the world either worship sex or repress it; both attitudes proclaim its centrality.
The divinization of sex is obviously something very much more than the philosophy that the very best thing in life is sexual intercourse, considered as a physiological action. Our difficulty with sexuality is that we regard it as something “merely” physical, the isolated interplay of two organs, culminating in a pleasurable sensation of convulsive detumescence. We see the sexual relationship as a somewhat grotesque, undignified, more-animal-than-human spasm, which doesn’t fit at all well with our image of ourselves as ladies and gentlemen.
Our attitudes toward that most blatant sexual organ, the flower, are just the opposite. Flowers call to mind a world of innocence and light, transparency and joy. They may adorn the altar, be held as exemplars of faith (“Consider the lilies”), be symbols of the Holy Virgin. Yet the flower is the lust of the plant, opening itself with the allure of scent and color as if to say, “and yes I said yes I will Yes!”
If man is supposed to be made in the image of God, it should follow that human generation has its archetypal pattern in the divine act of creation.
If we can see through the bewitchment of the lust/guilt, prudery/prurience sex-game, it becomes obvious that sexual intercourse of human beings should evoke the same kind of “cosmic wonder” that we feel for the stars, for mountains, and for all the timeless marvels of nature, myth, and art. Here we step out of the costumes which designate our temporal roles to become again Adam and Eve, Shiva and Parvati, and Logos and Sophia, Christ and his Church.
The lament about the transiency of fleshly beauty is a half-truth, for the other side of the matter is that love and beauty are always returning--every situation of love being the reincarnation of the Primal Pair, somewhat as a particular sonata may be played again and again upon thousands of instruments.
The parts I found most interesting were the following. Alan marvelously points out that Christianity is so opposed to the possibility of non-being that they get rid of it all-together. Both saved and unsaved live forever, and there is no such thing as non-existence, there is only endless suffering or endless joy. In Christianity death has been completely excised from life that even Christian death (aka hell) is still life. Alan also delves into how this complete divorce between the poles coincides with the complete divorce between self and non-self in the Christian view of individuality. Most joyously, Alan urges us not to write this off as a mistake, but to see it as taking the game to a higher level - these hardcore Christians (truly any follower of the Abrahamic religions) are the ones who are truly far-out.
Of further interest is Alan’s interpretation of Christ and the role he plays, or should play. Taking the ahistorical point of view, Alan argues that whether the miracle of Jesus’ story happened or not doesn’t matter. What matters is what the story means, and this is a story whose meaning is truly inexhaustible.
Alan invites us to see the crucifixion in every act of suffering and murder the we see in the universe - because that’s exactly what is happening: “I see the crucifix when I swat a mosquito or eat an oyster, and how much more in all encounters with human pain.” Here, as well, I see a connection to Jordan’s argument in 12 Rules for Life: “I cannot avoid the challenge of the crucifixion, for it means that just in being alive I am unavoidably responsible for untold misery and pain. Apologies are hollow. Attempts at improvement create new entanglements.” Except Jordan would disagree with that last sentence, that actually the way of Christ represents the actual way towards improvement that creates no entanglements, only good. Of course that way is the one of pursuing meaning and the alleviation of suffering through increased responsibility.
Alan next explores the significance of the Eucharist in relation to the myth of polarity. He sees in the rite, again, the Godhead becoming each and every form and figure and suffering what it has to suffer. “Jesus is saying, in the symbolism of the Supper, that all flesh which is eaten is his flesh, and all blood which is shed is his blood.” It’s shed for the remission of sins, remitted in the realization that everything we eat is another one of the Lord’s disguises in which he gives himself away.
Perhaps the best part of the book is Alan’s discussion on the Christian repression of sexuality. The main point is that the way we express sexuality in society is a question of “Where do you draw the line?” Christianity wants the line drawn to the point of eliminating sexuality completely (understandably so, since Christianity has already attempted to eliminate so many other fundamental parts of reality, such as death, evil, and the interconnectedness of the self and others). Alan puts it beautifully when he states that sexuality must not go completely the other way though: “As the seducer plays to lift the lady’s skirt higher and higher, so the progressive liberal tries to extend the areas of sexual freedom, to push the line of taboo back and back--and sometimes it seems as if he wanted to get rid of the line altogether. Contrariwise, the reactionary conservative, the square, the stuffed-shirt, bluenose, and hidebound traditionalist want to lower the skirt down to the ground like a nun’s habit, and to restrict the area of intimacy to the utmost.”
The discussion reaches a climax (heh) when Alan says that the Christian union of Word and Flesh, if it’s serious about it, truly means the divinization of sexuality, something Christianity was on the verge of getting right in the idea of Holy Matrimony and especially in the marriage between Christ and the Church (one of the strangest ideas in all Christianity).
Alan wraps the book up wonderfully by looking at critiques of this viewpoint of Christianity, and brings up marvelously that what truly matters most is plausibility. In this manner, Christianity is best viewed as a dramatic triumph, as the maya of the Hindus kicked up to 11, nay to a thousand. The chapter is highly recommended as basically Alan’s final word on Christianity in the face of Eastern thought.
I will end, however, by quoting some large swaths of the chapter on sex, because it’s one of my favorite Alan Watts. Thank you for reading.
There is no way of being non-sexual. The church reeks of sexuality because it is the one thing intentionally and obviously absent, the one thing definitely concealed, and thus the one thing really important. The religions of the world either worship sex or repress it; both attitudes proclaim its centrality.
The divinization of sex is obviously something very much more than the philosophy that the very best thing in life is sexual intercourse, considered as a physiological action. Our difficulty with sexuality is that we regard it as something “merely” physical, the isolated interplay of two organs, culminating in a pleasurable sensation of convulsive detumescence. We see the sexual relationship as a somewhat grotesque, undignified, more-animal-than-human spasm, which doesn’t fit at all well with our image of ourselves as ladies and gentlemen.
Our attitudes toward that most blatant sexual organ, the flower, are just the opposite. Flowers call to mind a world of innocence and light, transparency and joy. They may adorn the altar, be held as exemplars of faith (“Consider the lilies”), be symbols of the Holy Virgin. Yet the flower is the lust of the plant, opening itself with the allure of scent and color as if to say, “and yes I said yes I will Yes!”
If man is supposed to be made in the image of God, it should follow that human generation has its archetypal pattern in the divine act of creation.
If we can see through the bewitchment of the lust/guilt, prudery/prurience sex-game, it becomes obvious that sexual intercourse of human beings should evoke the same kind of “cosmic wonder” that we feel for the stars, for mountains, and for all the timeless marvels of nature, myth, and art. Here we step out of the costumes which designate our temporal roles to become again Adam and Eve, Shiva and Parvati, and Logos and Sophia, Christ and his Church.
The lament about the transiency of fleshly beauty is a half-truth, for the other side of the matter is that love and beauty are always returning--every situation of love being the reincarnation of the Primal Pair, somewhat as a particular sonata may be played again and again upon thousands of instruments.
July 15, 2017
Wonderful to read this book again! One of my favorites!
October 29, 2012
Wow, this book is incredible, although I would assume for a select audience. I would highly recommend it to anyone on a serious path of seeking spirituality.
February 26, 2019
This has been in my bookcase for years, a left-behind by my ex, I think. Published in 1964 and again in 1973, the year Watts died. I’m not sure why I picked it up — I didn’t really know much about it or why I had it but I’m pretty omnivorous in my reading and enjoy theology. In this book Watts posits an interesting proposal, that Christianity could learn a lot from Hinduism, saying that in that tradition, God is not separate from us but part of us. His critique of organized Christianity is pretty standard but may have been more challenging in the mid-60s. His concept that the “Godhead” is really the “GodManhead” may also have been much fresher in the day. He acknowledges that his ideas, that lean toward a sort of pantheism and inject certain Hindu mystical concepts into the Christian mythology, are going to be highly objectionable but I found his thoughts to be interesting and worth contemplation. Again, my theological readings are amateur and disorganized. I would guess this book is very dated and its ideas presented more freshly by others since.
October 8, 2023
This is actually one of those books which I will give a higher rating than what my gut tells me to rate it at — for no other reason than this book is incredibly personally challenging. The ideas are discernible, if not a tad bit outdated at this point, and I can parse the prose. What is difficult is the whole perspective of perceiving Christianity through the lens of Hindu cosmology; what Watts calls “The Chinese Box” exercise.
My initial reaction is to shut it away from that point and read it as purely spectacle: something sterile to keep at a safe distance and read only for the sake of knowing what others have thought about Christian theology and comparative religious studies in the past. That would be very easy for me to do — just to pass it off as a man interesting study in mysticism, but that’s it. Not for me, no thank you; I’m a sensible person who couldn’t possibly find meaning in the ramblings of a clearly errant minister.
Except… I have found meaning in challenging ways. That is why I’ve rated it five stars; I’ve done so in spite of myself. In time, I may realize that some of what I was fascinated with was actually bunk all along. And there are certainly ideas and forms of logic in this book which I did find unappealing and antiquated (including a brief section with a startlingly Malthusian line of interrogation about the future). However, even in those cases I found myself asking… why exactly do I disagree with what he is writing? In some cases, like above, it was very clear and I know why I disagree. In other cases, the only reason I could find is that I was fighting back on the basis of some learned, inculcated wisdom passed down to me from a young age. Such supports deserve to be pressed against and tested with books such as these.
Once again, this book was special to me because of my peculiar positioning as a recently re-constructed Christian. If that is not you, then this book probably won’t be as engaging or meaningful. However, it holds some insights which would likely engage even moderately interested readers, and certainly doesn’t hold back about taboo topics in standard Christian circles, like sexuality, the eternal question of who God is (or, more accurately, who God isn’t), and whether the universe is an essentially human space or whether humans are a manifestation of an essentially universal consciousness.
TL;DR It’s a wacky hippy book that made my life more complicated in a necessary way. Go figure at this point.
My initial reaction is to shut it away from that point and read it as purely spectacle: something sterile to keep at a safe distance and read only for the sake of knowing what others have thought about Christian theology and comparative religious studies in the past. That would be very easy for me to do — just to pass it off as a man interesting study in mysticism, but that’s it. Not for me, no thank you; I’m a sensible person who couldn’t possibly find meaning in the ramblings of a clearly errant minister.
Except… I have found meaning in challenging ways. That is why I’ve rated it five stars; I’ve done so in spite of myself. In time, I may realize that some of what I was fascinated with was actually bunk all along. And there are certainly ideas and forms of logic in this book which I did find unappealing and antiquated (including a brief section with a startlingly Malthusian line of interrogation about the future). However, even in those cases I found myself asking… why exactly do I disagree with what he is writing? In some cases, like above, it was very clear and I know why I disagree. In other cases, the only reason I could find is that I was fighting back on the basis of some learned, inculcated wisdom passed down to me from a young age. Such supports deserve to be pressed against and tested with books such as these.
Once again, this book was special to me because of my peculiar positioning as a recently re-constructed Christian. If that is not you, then this book probably won’t be as engaging or meaningful. However, it holds some insights which would likely engage even moderately interested readers, and certainly doesn’t hold back about taboo topics in standard Christian circles, like sexuality, the eternal question of who God is (or, more accurately, who God isn’t), and whether the universe is an essentially human space or whether humans are a manifestation of an essentially universal consciousness.
TL;DR It’s a wacky hippy book that made my life more complicated in a necessary way. Go figure at this point.
January 26, 2023
Alan Watts is my favorite contemporary philosopher. He challenges Western traditions and status quo ideologies that keep our society in a cyclical, spiritual dilemma. This is perhaps his most inaccessible work--and if you are looking to get into Alan Watts, I really wouldn't recommend starting here. An easier entry point is the inimitable classic "The Wisdom of Insecurity."
What I really appreciate about this book in particular is the challenge of re-enlivening the Christian tradition in the West. He presents some thoughts and ideas about how the Church has become stale and rigid, and how the living and resurrected Christ has become an archaic idol...one that is not immediately grasped and touched and lived out here in the modern times we occupy.
There was a segment of thought somewhere in the middle of the book about Adam and Eve and sexuality that I couldn't quite contextualize. I will inevitably read this masterwork again and again, as there is always something new to take away from it.
This is theology and philosophy that can alter your own spiritual practice, enhance it, challenge it, and maybe even change it.
What I really appreciate about this book in particular is the challenge of re-enlivening the Christian tradition in the West. He presents some thoughts and ideas about how the Church has become stale and rigid, and how the living and resurrected Christ has become an archaic idol...one that is not immediately grasped and touched and lived out here in the modern times we occupy.
There was a segment of thought somewhere in the middle of the book about Adam and Eve and sexuality that I couldn't quite contextualize. I will inevitably read this masterwork again and again, as there is always something new to take away from it.
This is theology and philosophy that can alter your own spiritual practice, enhance it, challenge it, and maybe even change it.
May 8, 2019
This is an earnest exercise in a “meta-theology” that seeks to find how Christianity and Hinduism might be related (theologically speaking). It goes beyond a typical “compare and contrast” essay, and instead seeks to find a relationship that can only be described as small little nesting “Russian dolls” or “Chinese boxes”.
In essence, imagining opening the box of Christianity to find it, in its entirety, in the box of Hinduism! (Rest assured that is too simple, and not even the larger *point* of a meta-theological argument). A bit controversial, no?
I cannot recommend this as an introduction to Watts’s work, but, as a human that was raised catholic, I can honestly say that this text is a great illustration of the theological “trickery” or “discomfort” that many christians begin to feel after awhile. If that sounds like you, well, then you’ll enjoy this book.
It’s available for free on “open library” via the Internet Archive, so check it out.
In essence, imagining opening the box of Christianity to find it, in its entirety, in the box of Hinduism! (Rest assured that is too simple, and not even the larger *point* of a meta-theological argument). A bit controversial, no?
I cannot recommend this as an introduction to Watts’s work, but, as a human that was raised catholic, I can honestly say that this text is a great illustration of the theological “trickery” or “discomfort” that many christians begin to feel after awhile. If that sounds like you, well, then you’ll enjoy this book.
It’s available for free on “open library” via the Internet Archive, so check it out.
October 31, 2023
Terrific book.
Alan Watts was one of my favorite writers back in my mid-20s. I haven't read a whole lot of his stuff since then and had sort of forgotten how much I enjoyed his writing.
Finally got a copy of this book (for my birthday, from my sister; thanks) and am so glad to have experienced it.
Hard for me to "explain" this book in just a few sentences. Essentially, Watts is looking at Christianity through the lens of Hindu thought, coming at Christian theology from a different viewpoint. He rethinks The Fall, the death and resurrection of Christ, eternal life, sexuality, creation and the rest from this angle. What he offers is, I think, much more interesting than the Christianity one gets in many American churches. More interesting and ultimately more meaningful, more useful, more connected to our actual experiences.
Much more that could be said, but you're better off just reading the book. Good stuff.
Alan Watts was one of my favorite writers back in my mid-20s. I haven't read a whole lot of his stuff since then and had sort of forgotten how much I enjoyed his writing.
Finally got a copy of this book (for my birthday, from my sister; thanks) and am so glad to have experienced it.
Hard for me to "explain" this book in just a few sentences. Essentially, Watts is looking at Christianity through the lens of Hindu thought, coming at Christian theology from a different viewpoint. He rethinks The Fall, the death and resurrection of Christ, eternal life, sexuality, creation and the rest from this angle. What he offers is, I think, much more interesting than the Christianity one gets in many American churches. More interesting and ultimately more meaningful, more useful, more connected to our actual experiences.
Much more that could be said, but you're better off just reading the book. Good stuff.
December 30, 2022
Alan Watts final position on religion
This is Watts final word on the dialogue between science and theology. He argues persuasively that modern physics and biochemistry are perfectly compatible with mystic religion, including mystical Christianity. (Time has only made his insights more accurate). Always witty and intelligent, reading Watts is a pleasure.
This is Watts final word on the dialogue between science and theology. He argues persuasively that modern physics and biochemistry are perfectly compatible with mystic religion, including mystical Christianity. (Time has only made his insights more accurate). Always witty and intelligent, reading Watts is a pleasure.
November 3, 2023
Watts is a better (more entertaining) lecturer than author and fragments of the ideas presented within here I’ve heard communicated more efficiently in his talks.
The middle chapters re-examining the crucifixion and communion are rewarding in their own way but they’re bookended by dull examinations of the Self, sexuality, etc which are not easy going.
The middle chapters re-examining the crucifixion and communion are rewarding in their own way but they’re bookended by dull examinations of the Self, sexuality, etc which are not easy going.
May 22, 2023
Tough on my taught notions!
Christianity takes a beating here! So does the idea of an "individual soul", and responsibility under Law. It up-ended much of what I have been taught, but it opened me to more of a letting go. It is not for everybody, but Alan Watts never was!
Christianity takes a beating here! So does the idea of an "individual soul", and responsibility under Law. It up-ended much of what I have been taught, but it opened me to more of a letting go. It is not for everybody, but Alan Watts never was!
July 6, 2021
Goddamn. What a genius.
June 17, 2025
Informative, but boring.
September 22, 2015
This was an important book for my spiritual journey. I didn't agree with where it led, but Watt's thought process, which brought him beyond theology all together, helped clarify my path. I needed to hear this extreme along with the tedious systematic theologies at the other extreme in order to settle on a bare-bones mystical doctrine of the Oriental Orthodox Church, which is the tight rope I now attempt to walk. Paradoxically I needed to read Watt's path to "no theology" in order to find a bare-bones theology with breadth, depth, and authenticity which holds the creative tension between the extremes. Highly recommended!
-Amos Smith (author of Healing The Divide: Recovering Christianity's Mystic Roots)
-Amos Smith (author of Healing The Divide: Recovering Christianity's Mystic Roots)
December 12, 2010
Beyond Theology by Alan Watts takes a look at Christianity from the context of Hinduism. It contains a clear explanation of what Christianity teaches. This book ties together his earlier works and later writings. His thinking over the years evolved from the Anglican view of Christianity to the Eastern philosophies embodied in Hinduism and Buddhism. You'll find some valuable psychological insights in this small, easily read volume.
March 30, 2021
I read this back in the early 1970's and was quite taken with it. The author had once served as a priest in the Episcopal Church and thereafter was known for his writings on Zen Buddhism and comparative religion, and in this volume sets forth a different, more mystical, understanding of Christianity than what you were likely to find in most churches at the time, or today, for that matter.
August 20, 2010
There are moments when I began to feel that Watts had crafted an idea of what a materialist or scientific viewpoint might necessarily be like, which was certainly quite inaccurate as far as I'm concerned, but luckily they did not last long.
March 9, 2009
This was a tough read. I would recommend it for Watts fans but not for general reading.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews