What Is Nishitani's View Of Religion As A Cultural System

In Religion as a Cultural System, Clifford Geertz makes strong claims explaining in a very logical way his definition on religion. While Keiji Nishitani precisely states his perspective on religion and how religion is a necessary journey in his excerpt What is Religion? I aim to prove that Nishitani’s view of religion is better and beneficial for humans than Geertz.
Geertz definition of religion is a system made up of symbols. The symbols are what create the values, ideals, or “moods and motivations “as he puts it. He does this by formulating ideas in a very general order the world and our existence. Then “clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality” which is why these symbols and idea make our or moods and motivations very realistic. His approach is on religion is external; he is looking upon religion and its utility. Most
Nishitani had a existentialists view, existentialists tended to believe that the experiences an individual is what made a person who and what they are. I would say that Nishitanis thesis is “Religion is something we need to livewell, but not for life itself.” We can live life without religion but if you want to live life well and full then you need religion. Not religion itself not the faith that a religion might have but rather the question “what is religion?” It is not the utility of religion but it is the necessary journey one will go on when they ask themselves these questions. If you focus on the utility of religion you will be blind to its true purpose for you. That is why when Nishitani says "Those who question the need for religion are those who need religion the most" he mean it literally. Without religion one can not be on the path to finding themselves and really understanding life. You can live according to others or you can live your life right according to your experiences and your life. I found Nishitani’s point of view more appealing because it is very