Rationality and Religious Experience: The Continuing Relevance of the World's Spiritual Traditions (Master Hsuan Hua Memorial Lecture)

Rationality and Religious Experience The Continuing Relevance of the World's Spiritual Traditions

HENRY ROSEMONT, Jr. With a Commentary by Huston Smith Followed by a Response, Discussion, and Epilogue

The Fi rst Master Hslian Hua Memorial Lecture

OPEN COURT Chicago and La Salle, Illinois

To order books from Open Court, call 1-800-815-2280.

Open Cou rt Pu b l i sh i ng Com p any is a d i vi si o n of Car u s Pub li sh i n g Com pa ny.

© 2001 by Caru s Pub li sh i n g Com pany Fi rst pri n t i n g 200 I A ll righ t s re se r ved. No part of t h i s p u b lication may be reproduced, stored i n a retrieva l system , or tra n sm i tted, i n any form o r by any m e an s, e lectro n i c , mec h an i c al, photocopying, recording, o r otherwi se, wit h o u t the p r i o r wri tt e n perm i ssio n of the p u b li sh e r, Open Cou rt Pub li sh i ng Com pany, 315 Fifth Street, P.O. Bo x 300, Peru , I lli noi s 61354-0300. Pri n ted a n d bou nd in the Un ited States of Ame rica .

Library of Congress Cataloging-In-Publication Data

Rose m o n t , H e n ry, 1934R ation ali ty a n d re ligiou s e xperience : the con t i n u i ng re le vance of the

world's spi r i t u al t r adition s / Henry Rose m o n t , Jr. ; wi th a c o m m e n t ary by Hu ston Sm i t h .

p . c m . - (The Master Hsuan Hua memoria l lec t u re ; I)

I n c l udes b i b liogra p h i c a l refe re n c e s a n d i n d e x. I SBN 0-8126-9446-5 (alk. paper) 1. Religio n s.

I. li t le .

II. Series.

BL74. R 67 2001 200-dc21 2001036544

Th i s book i n c l ude s the t e xt of a lec t u re spon sored by t h e I n stitute for World Religion s, t h e G radu ate Theologica l Un i o n , and The Cen t e r for Ch i n e se Studie s of t h e Un i ve r si ty o f Ca lifo rn i a at Berkeley, Apri l 7 , 2000.

CONTENTS

The First Hsiian Hua Memorial Lecture A Brief Portrait of the Venerable Master Hsiian Hua

Preface

Rationality and Religious Experience

vii

.

ix xv

1

Commentary by Huston Smith

35

Response and Discussion

41

Epilogue

63

Notes

95

The Institute for World Religions

105

Index

107

THE FIRST HSLIAN HUA MEMORIAL LECTURE

Th e

I nstitute for World Religions, in ' p artnersh ip with

the Asian Pacific Rim Working Group of the Graduate Theological U nion , and in conj unction with the Cent'er for Chinese Studies/East Asian Studies Center of the U n iversity of California at Berkeley, sponsored the first a n n u a l Venerable H sLia n H u a Memorial Lectu re , held Friday, April 7, 2000 at 7 : 00

P.M.

i n the Memorial

Chapel of the Pacific School of Rel igion , Berkeley. Th is new lectureship focuses on bri nging the ancient wisdom of Asian rel igion s and ph i losophy to bear on the press i ng i ssues of the modern world , especially in the a rea of ethics and spiritual values. The first H sLia n H u a Memoria l Lecture , origi n a l ly entitled "Wh i t h e r the World's Re l igion s ? , " was given by Hen ry Rose m o n t , J r. , who h o l ds an H o nors A. B . from the U niversity o f I l linoi s , Ph . D . i n P h i l osophy from the U niversi ty of Was h i ngton , and has p u rsued post-doctora l studie s i n Lingu istics at M .LT. , a n d in Advanced C h i nese Studies at the U n iversity o f Londo n . H e i s the a u t h o r of A Ch inese Mirror ( 199 1) , vii

the forthcoming Confucian Alternatives ( 2 002), and over seven ty articles in scholarly j ournals a n d anthologies. H e h a s edited a n d/or tra n slated seve n other works, the most recent of wh ich, with Roge r T. Ames, is a t ra n s l a tion of The Analects of Confucius ( 1998). Rose m o n t was Book Review Editor of

Ph ilosophy East and West from 1 9 72 to 1 988; P residen t of the Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy 1 9 76- 19 78, a n d is c u rre ntly editor of the Society's M o n ograph Series. The recipien t of fel lowsh ips from the N E H, AC LS, N S F, a n d the Fulbrigh t P rogram, D r. Rose mont is c u rrently George B. and Will m a Reeves Distinguished P rofessor o f the Liberal Arts at S t . M a ry's College of M a ryland, Se nior Consu l t i ng Professor a t Fudan U n iversity i n S h a ngha i, a n d Professorial Lectu re r at t h e School of Adva nced I n ternational Studies of The J o h n s H opkins U niversity. A lengthy response and discussion fol l owed Dr. Rosemont's lecture, begu n by H u ston Smith ( Professor Emeritu s, U niversity of California at Berkeley), a u thor of The Religions of Man ( 1958) and The World's

Religions ( 1989). Professor Smith, a leading figure in the comparative p h i losophy of religion, is widely regarded as the most eloquent and accessible contempora ry authority on the h i story and philosophy of religions. The lecture was open to the general public.

viii

A B RIEF PO RT RAIT OF THE VENERABLE MASTE R HSUAN HUA

"] have

had many names , " he once sa id, "and a l l

of t h e m a re fal se." I n h i s youth in Manch u ri a , he was known as "the Filial Son Ba i " ; as a you ng monk he was An Tzu (" Peace and Ki ndness"); later, in Hong Kong, he was Tu Lu n ("Wheel of Rescue"); final ly, in America , he was H siian H u a , wh ich m ight be translated as "one who proc l a i m s the principles of transformation." To h i s thousands of disciples across the world, he was always also " S h r Fu " -"Teacher." Born in 19 18 i nto a peasa nt fa m i ly i n a sma l l vil lage o n t h e Manchurian pla i n , Master H ua was the you ngest of ten c h i ldre n . He attended school for only two years , during wh ich he studied the C h inese classics and comm itted many of them to memory. As a you ng teenager, he opened a free school for both c h i l dren and adults. He a l so bega n then one of h i s lifelong spiritual practices: reverential bowing. Outdoors , in a l l weather, he wou ld make over 800 prostrations dai ly, as a profound gesture of h i s respect for all that i s good and sac red i n the u n iverse. ix

He was n ineteen when h i s mother died, and for th ree years he honored her memory by sitting i n meditation i n a h u t beside h e r grave. I t was during this time that he made a resolve to go to America to teach the princi ples of wisdom. As a fi rst step, at the end of the period of mou rn i ng, he entered San Yuan Monastery, took as his teacher Master C h a ng C h i h , and subsequently received the fu l l ordination of a Buddh ist monk at Pu To Mounta i n. For ten yea rs he devoted h i m se l f to study of the Buddh ist scriptural tradition and to mastery of both the Esoteric and the C h ' a n Schools of C h i nese Buddh ism. H e had a l so read and contemplated the script u res of C h ristianity, Daoism , and I s lam. Th u s , by the age of th irty, he had al ready established th rough his own experience the fou r major imperatives of his later m i n i st ry i n America: the primacy of the monastic tradition ; the duty to educate; the need for Buddh i sts to ground themselves in traditional spiritual practice and authentic scri ptu re; and, j u st as essentia l , the i m porta nce and the power of ec u men ical respect and u nderstandi ng. I n 1 948, Master H ua traveled south to meet the Venerable Hsu Yun , who was then a l ready 1 08 yea rs old and C h i na 's most disti ngu ished spiritual teacher. From h i m Master H u a received the patriarchal transmission in the Wei Ya ng Lineage of the C h ' a n Schoo l . Master H u a su bsequently left C h i n a for Hong Kong. He spent a dozen yea rs there , first i n sec l u sion , then later as a teacher at th ree monasteries that he fou nded. x

Finally, i n 1 962 , several of h i s Hong Kong disciples i nvited him to come to San Francisco. By 1 968, Master H ua had establ i shed the B uddh i st Lecture Hall in a loft i n San Francisco's C h inatown , and there h e began giving n ightly lectures, in C h i nese , to an audience of you ng Americans. His texts were the major scriptures of the Mahayana. In 1 969, he astonished the monastic com m u n i ty of Ta iwan by sending there , for final ordination , two American women and th ree American men , all five of them fu l ly tra i ned as novice s , fluent in C h i nese , and conversa n t with Buddhist scripture. During subsequent years, the Master trai ned and oversaw the ordination of h u ndreds of monks and n u n s who came to Cal i forn ia to study with h i m from a l l over North America , as wel l as from E u rope , Austra l i a , a n d Asi a . T hese monastic disciples now teach i n t h e twenty-eight te mples, monasteries, a n d convents that the Master fou nded in the U nited States, Canada , and several Asian countries. The C i ty of Ten Thousand Buddhas, located in C a l i forn ia's North Coast 1 00 m i les north of San F rancisco , i s home to over two h undred Buddh ist monks and n u n s , making it the largest B uddh ist monastic comm u n i ty in North America. Although he understood E nglish wel l a nd spoke i t whe n i t was necessary, Master Hua almost always lectured in C h i nese . H i s a i m was to encou rage Western e rs to learn C h i nese , so that they could become translators , not me rely of his lectures, b u t of the major scriptura l texts of the B uddh i st Mahayana. H is i ntent was rea l ized. So far, the Buddh ist Text Translation Society, which he fou nded, has issued xi

over 130 vol umes of tran slation of the major Sutras, together with a similar n u m ber of com mentaries, in structions, and stories from the Master's teach i ng. As an educator, Master H ua was t i reless. From 1968 to the m id- 1 980s he gave as many as a doze n lectures a week, and he traveled extensively on speak i ng tou rs . He a lso establ ished forma l tra i n i ng programs for monastics and for l a i ty; elementary and seconda ry sch ools for boys and for gi rls; Dharma Realm Buddh i st U n iversity at the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas; and the I n stitute for World Rel igions, in Berkeley. Th roughout h i s l i fe the Master taught that the bas i s of spiritual practice i s moral practice. Of h i s monastic diSCiples he req u i red strict pu rity, and he encouraged h i s lay diSCiples to adhere to the five precepts of the Buddh ist laity. Especially i n his later yea rs, Con fucian texts were often the subject of his lect u res, and he held to the Con fucian teach ing that the fi rst busi ness of education i s mora l education . He ide n t i fied six rules of conduct as the basis of communal l i fe at the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas; the six rules prohibited contention, covetousness, sel f-seeki ng, sel fish ness, profiting at the expense of the com m u n i ty, and fa lse speech . He asked that schoolch i ldren at the City recite these proh ibitions every morn i ng before class. In general, although he adm i red the independent­ m i ndedness of Westerners , he bel ieved that they lacked eth ical balance and needed that stabil izing sen se of public mora l i ty wh ich is characteristic of the East. xii

The Venerable Master i n s i sted on ec u men ical respect , and he del igh ted in i nterfa ith dia logue. He stressed com monalities in rel igiou s traditions-above all the i r emphasis on proper conduct, on compassion , and on wisdo m . He was also a pioneer i n b u i lding bridges between different Buddh ist national traditions; for example, he often brought mon ks from Theravada countries to C a l i forn ia to share the duties of transm itting the precepts of ordination . He i nvited Catholic priests to celebrate the mass in the Buddha Hall at the C i ty of Ten Thousand Buddhas, and he developed a late-i n -Iife friendsh ip with Pa ul Cardi nal Yu- B i n , the exi led leader of the Catholic Ch u rch in Ch ina and Ta iwa n . He once told Cardinal Yu- B i n : "You c a n b e a Buddh ist among t h e Catholics, and I'll be a Catholic among B uddh ists." To the Master, the essential teach i ngs of all rel igions could be s u m med up in a si ngle word : wisdo m . Master H ua i s no longer w i t h u s i n body. Although he con tin ued to travel and lecture occasional ly, he had for the most pa rt reti red by the late 1980s. He entered sti l l ness on June 7, 1995 . Th roughout h is life , he had sh un ned fam e , fa n fa re , a n d celebrity-he sometimes cal led h i mself "the monk with no name"­ and in that spi ri t , h i s pa s i ng was honored with simplicity. Despite his extraordinary legacy and the depth of h is i n fl uence on thousa nds of people during his l i fetime, h i s name i s , sti l l , l i ttle known to the wider publ ic.

xiii

PREFACE

IT WAS A SIGNAL HONOR to have been

i nvited to give the

first Master H slian Hua Memorial Lectu re , sponsored by the I n stitute for World Rel igions , a nd co-sponsored' by the Graduate Theological U n ion (GTU ) a nd the Cente r for C h i ne se/East Asian Studies of the U n ivers i ty of Cal i forn ia at Berkel ey. I am deeply gratefu l to the IWR for the i nvitation , and most espec i a l ly to Drs . Snjezana Akp i n a r, Ron Epste i n , M a rt i n Verhoeve n , Douglas Powers , and B h i ksh u Heng S u re for their kindness wh ile I was there , and for their comments on my lecture thereafter. I was a l so honored and gratefu l to have my disti ngu ished colleague and cherished friend H u ston S m i th offer to make comments on my remarks, and as a lways , learned m uch from h i m . A first dra ft o f the lectu re was given as the a n n ua l Reeves Lectu re at St. M a ry's College of M a ryland, and subsequent to its presentation at GTU give n aga i n at C h u la longkorn U niversi ty i n Bangkok, Tha i land, and as a keynote address at the Annual xv

Meeting of the Asian Studies Development Program at the East-West Center in Honolulu; I am indebted to these audiences for their comments, insights, and encouragement. A close reading of the text by Professors David Wong of Duke University and Leroy Rouner of Boston University have reduced measurably the number of obscurities found in it. As always, David Ramsey Steele, Editorial Director at Open Court, provided much useful commentary and criticism, as did my editor, Kerri Mommer; I am grateful to them both. Both the lecture and my responses to questions have been expanded somewhat from the original presentation, and gross infelicities of expression have been deleted from the transcriptions of the tapes of my discussion remarks. As much as possible, however, it was thought best to preserve the integrity of the evening, and consequently I have added an Epilogue which attempts to deal with issues inadequately covered in the lecture and discussion, and I have also provided notes and references to my texts. I hope the resultant narrative is not too disjointed. Finally, once again I am deeply indebted to Ms. Mary Bloomer of St. Mary's College for turning draft after draft of my handwritten scribbles into a polished and aesthetically pleasing manuscript; poor though my efforts may prove to be, they would be far poorer without her great and always gracious assistance.

xvi

Rationality and Religious Experience

WE ARE AT THE

DAWN NOT ONLY OF A NEW CENTURY,

but

a new m i l le n n i u m. I t i s beco m i ng a com monplace­ perhaps too common-that in both economics and com m u nications we a re on the cusp of becoming a "global vil lage . " Normal ly, h owever, the term "vi l l age" conj ures up a vision of a fai rly sma l l , cohesive com m u ni ty whose members share at least rough ly a common conception of the good, where wealth i s not too inequitably distributed, with fresh air a nd clean water in abu ndance , and where eth n i c distrust a nd disli ke i s rare , and violence at a m i n im u m. Surely t h i s i s not a picture of the "global village , " and i n m y view i t would b e foo l i sh t o believe that a capita l i st econom ic system and com m u n ications advances could make i t a rea l i ty. Not only is wealth distributed grossly i nequ i tably today, the gap betwee n rich a n d poor is widening, not narrowing. And with half of the world's people never having used even a telephone , and far too poor to own one, it i s h ighly u n l i kely that the I n ternet and World Wide Web wi l l serve any but the relatively affluent. I a m not an econom ist, and hence wil l not say too much about economic j u stice in a global con text. Rather do I wa nt to focus on another a rea that appears to sharply divide the h u man race , the world's rel igions , a n d the basic c l a i m I w i l l advance i s that t h e many and varied spiritual traditions of the world have a sign i ficant potential for e nhancing the non material dimensions of our al l-too-h uman l ives , and an equal potential for making thi s a l l - too-fragi l e earth a more 3

peacefu l , j u s t , and h u mane one in the twenty-fi rst century than it was in the twentieth . Th i s i s fu ndamentally a phi losoph ical cla i m , and i n order to defend it with any hope of endorsement I m u st a l so advance a n u mber of others , s ufficient in scope and quantity to make a rgu ing for a l l of them exhaustively distractive from the more genera l c la i m . Consequently, wh ile there i s phi losoph ical analysis in these pages, the th rust of the work is on synthes i s , and I therefore offer apologies at the outset to those whose philosoph ical sensibil ities ru n in the other d i rection.) Before proceeding d i rectly to a consideration of my m a i n thes i s , howeve r, I m u st first attempt to respond to two j u st i fiably skeptical questions about i t at the outset: Can the world's rel igions have a sign i ficant bearing on the l ives of people living i n a globa l , postmodern society ? And second, should they have such a bearing? That i s to say, have n 't the physica l and l i fe sciences broadened and deepened o u r u n de rsta nding of the world we l ive i n to the poi nt where n o intelligent person can c redit the acco u n ts of that world proffered by rel igion s ? And with respect to the second skeptica l question , given the m a n i fold horrors h u m a n bei ngs have visi ted on one another in the name of religio n s , wouldn't h u ma n k i n d be better off without them ? I wa nt to give both of these skeptical questions their j u st due , i n polemic fash ion. To elaborate on the first , i f one can believe that, trou bled by the way 4

some of h i s c reatures were behaving, a C reator of the U n iverse spoke in flawless Hebrew about H i s concern s th rough a b u rn i ng bush that was not consumed by the flames, then one should have no trouble bel ievi ng a s well that when H i s fla m i ng lectu re and i n structions proved inadequate, H e later had a son born to h i m whose major tasks we re t o speak aga i n , a n d then su ffer and die prematurely in order to bring home the importa nce of what H e was sayi ng. In the same way, if one can believe such th i ngs, one should easily be able to al

0

believe that when the

C reator's words aga i n fell on dea f ears , He spoke aga i n ; t h i s time i n elega n t Arabic , t o an i l l i terate shepherd turned mercha n t . And the reason w h y w e should bel ieve a l l o f these t h i ngs i f w e can believe any one of them i s that they e q u a l ly violate t h e pri nciples o f phys i c s , chem i stry, and biology that every rational person accepts today. I do not wish by these re ma rks to castigate only the t h ree great rel igions of the Abra h a m i c tradition . It no less fl ies i n the face of modern science to believe that the preserve r god Vish n u once i ncarnated himsel f as Krish n a , not merely to give cou n sel to the spiritual wa rrior Arj u n a , but a l s o , among many other exploits, to make love to 20,000 m i l km a i ds i n a s i ngle day. Many popular accou nts of Buddh ist and Daoist heaven s and hells a re no less incredi ble , as a re the kami of Sh i nto , the demons of Tibetan Bon , the

5

poison oracles of the Aza nde i n Africa , and the varied c reation stories of Nat ive American peoples. ( Pa renthetical comment: v i rtually alone a mong the world's rel igious traditions, the classical texts of Confuc i a n i sm conta i n no statements that contrave ne physical pri nciples; perhaps that is why some people do not consider Con fucianism to be a gen u i ne rel igious tradition . ) Read litera l ly a s descriptions o f h ow the world came to be , what is in it, how it fu nctions, and what its future wi ll be, all of these accounts m u st , to a nyone even m i n i ma l ly knowledgeable about and sym pathetic to modern science, be given an equal degree of credence , namely, zero. For all of the events and entities descri bed i n these na rratives there i s no empi rical evidence whatsoever beyond the texts themselves , and given that with i n l i m i ts, h u man bei ngs can i ndividually and col lectively shape thei r fut u re in many di fferent ways, that fut u re cannot be predicted. No, we can not accept as factual accou nts of the world m uch that i s sa id and read i n sacred narratives. But even though we can not accept them as such, we can bel ieve that they a re a l l , in one way or another, sayi ng someth i ng that is true; statements can be made d i rectly or indi rectly, and bel iefs about them can ta ke di fferent forms, as can faith . Let me i l l u strate th is poi n t by citing an example from H u ston S m i t h 's Forgotten Truth , i n wh ich he quotes from a n a rticle by the noted physicist Robert Oppenheimer, who wrote :

6

If we ask whether the electron's position changes with time, we must say"No," If we a k whether the position of the electron remains the same, we mu t ay"No," If we a k whether the electron is at rest, we mu t say"No," If we ask whether it is in motion, we mu t ay"No."

Later, S m i th continues, the French poet and novelist Fran�ois Mauriac was shown th i s a rticle, and asked to comment thereo n . After readi ng i t , M a u riac shook h i s head and sa id: "What thi s professor says is far more incredible that what we poor Ch rist ians believe. "2 Now I a m not a Ch ristia n , but l i ke Mauriac , I , too, find Oppenhei mer's statements incredible. I can not accept them as l iteral fact, for they violate basic principles of logic and ordinary physics, and contradict the entire test i mony of my senses over the cou rse of my l i fetime. But i n another way, it i s not difficult for me to

believe there i s truth in what Oppenheimer said;

clearly he i s u s i ng these un usual sentences to help us gai n a purchase on some very un usual features of the world of quantum mecha n ics a s developed by modern physicists. I w i l l return to t h i s theme of direct and indirect statements and beliefs aga i n , but now wan t to address briefly the second skeptica l question : G iven the horrendously l a rge n u mber of paga n s , heath e n s , i n fidels, atheists, and others w h o have been

7

slaughtered over the centuries by fanatical adherents of different faiths, why should we want to keep those faiths a live , and attempt to find i n s p i ration in the m ? I n t h e ancient world, neither t h e Egyptians n o r the Caana n i tes would have been i nc lined to pay homage to the God of I s rae l , with good reason . Ch ristians have persecuted Jews and pagans ever s i nce the C h u rch became powerfu l enough to do so. Far fewe r people wou ld have been kil led had M us l i m s foc used more on the spiritual s ign i ficance of the Hajj , and Ra mada n , a n d less on J ihad. B u t then t h e Crusades probably made some J i hads i n evitable. As we know from the blood-splattered pages of the h i story of such events as the I n q uisition and the Th i rty Years' War, C h ristians have not been loath to persecute other C h ristia n s , easily recognizable as enemies beca use they were heretics. South Asian H i ndus have persecu ted South Asi a n M u s l i m s no less violently, and destroyed more than one mosque. And of cou rse South Asian M u s l i m s have replied i n k i nd. (Another parenthetical com ment: The rel igions of East As i a , and the so-cal led " m i nor" rel igious traditions of i ndigenou s peoples have been much less m u rderous in t h i s regard . ) I n response t o th i s i ndictment-and it i s a n i ndictment-let me suggest t h e fol l owi ng. F i rst , from the former Yugoslavia to IsraeVPa lestine to Kash m i r, and many other areas in between , rel igious violence contin ues to this day, and a n antimodern fundamenta l i s m is widespread in many rel igious traditions. These religions a re by no means goi ng to 8

go away, and to argue that they should go away i s , t o m y m ind, a vacuous i ntel lectual enterprise; the facts of contempora ry rel igious expression m u st be directly confronted, and the most appropriate counter to the bel iefs u nderlyi ng the more violent of those expressions wi ll al most s u rely need to come from with i n the rel igious traditions whence they have sprung. A second response to this i ndictment i s that when we look to the spiritual heroes and heroi nes of the world's fa i t h s , we do not fi nd fanatics eager to behead the u nbel ieve r. On the contrary, sages and sa i nts revered in these traditions-J u l ian of Norwich , Francis of Assisi , Theresa of Avi l a , Moses M a i mon ides , Ibn Khaldoun , Mohandas Gandh i , Gautama the B uddh a , Confuc i u s , Lao Zi, Black E l k , and the Dalai Lam a , to name only a few-h ave a l l proclai med a com mon h u ma n i ty for the world's peoples, and had a profound empathy for h u m a n suffering, wh ich they knew to be u n iversa l . Pol itical and/or p h i losoph ical though some of their works and l ives may have been , they a re reve red both with i n thei r own and across rel igious traditions basica l ly beca u se of thei r spi ritual qualities. These two respon ses a re i n tended j O i n tly to s uggest that efforts to exorc i se re l igion from the hum a n real m beca u se of the m i sch ief that has been com mitted in its name i s to t hrow out the baby with the bath water, and equally to suggest a th i rd response, that there is no hope for the cross-c u l t u ra l 9

dia logues necessary for the c reation and m a i n tenance of a more peacefu l and just twenty-fi rst century u n t i l and u n less everyone can come to u n dersta nd h ow a n intell igent and thorough ly decen t h u man being m ight come to be , or rem a i n, a subscriber to one or another of the world's fa iths. We ca n not focu s o u r atten tion u n d u ly on t h e most fa natical fu ndamenta l i sts a mong them , nor solely on their metaphysica l and theologica l c la i m s . My fi nal response t o t h e question of whether we should endeavor to keep al ive our religious heritages bri ngs me to the hea rt of my remarks, the cla i m that the texts we consider sacred when read appropriately, and in conj u nction with the sacred texts and na rratives of other tradition s , can gu ide us back from the abyss of m ea n i nglessness that is becom i ng increasi ngly characteristic of contem porary l i fe , a n altogether materia l l i fe in wh ich m a n y of u s a re obl iged to take jobs we do not like or fi nd satisfyi ng in order to buy things that we do not need and that do not satisfy u s either, all the wh ile destroying our natura l and social environ ments a s we do so. And even for those of us among the world's peoples who a re fortunate enough to lead interesti ng l ives , there is ever less time to reflect on the wort h i ness and s ign i ficance of the lives we a re leading, and we grow increasi ngly uncomfortable with the knowledge that m uch of our material wel l-being comes at the expense o f the poor. By u rging everyone to approach their own text tradition afresh , and alongside others , I am ass u m i ng 10

what many of you m ight fi nd i m plausible, namely, that in many basic respects all sacred texts a re saying the sa me th i ngs , and conta i n the same truth s we can all come to be lieve without i n any way su rrendering o u r rationa l i ty. 3

LET ME

BEGI

DEFE

01

G THI

ASSUMPTIO

by goi ng back

to the begi n n i ng, Genesi s , a central chapter in a l l three of the Abrahamic rel igious traditions. In it, we are told to believe that an o m n i scient and om n i potent dei ty created the world and everyt h i ng i n it , i n six-sevenths of a ti me-spa n , and thereafter took His leisu re . As I suggested at the outset, th i s i s fantastic to believe . But the ea rly sections of Genesis a re a l so conveyi ng someth ing else, an assu m ption i m plicit in the text and wh ich has been i ndirectly bel ieved by virtually every i n heritor thereof: namely, that the un iverse i s ordered rational ly, and is purposefu l . Given that we have been created in H i s i mage, that i s , a re rationa l , it m u st be that we can come to know what He c reated, and thereby, perhaps gai n i nsight into the question of why He c reated i t , and most speci fically, why He c reated us to be part of the world.4 Th i s i n d i rect belief i n the explanatory i ntel l igi b i l i ty of the world has bee n , I would a rgue, of greater significance for the u n ique manner in wh ich Western civilization has developed than what is su pposed to be directly believed as litera l ly descri bed in Genesis. 11

The h istory of Western sc ience , for example , has no parallels el sewhere , and i f I am righ t , should be see n , like ph i losophy, not as competitive with religion , but as one of its c h i ldre n . Not until the so-cal led E nligh ten ment did the emphasis begin to sh i ft away from an understa nding of natu re-God's creation-to a mere mani pulation of i t . We ca n not , I wou ld s u b m i t , fu l ly u ndersta nd w h a t a Copern i c u s , Kepler, Ga l i leo, or Lei b n iz was about u nless we see each of them as seeking not on ly astronomical but spiritual understa nding as wel l : the more we learn about the detai l s of what He created, the more we may come to a knowledge of the why of it. The patterns of Western education a l so reveal a deep i n debtedness to the Abraha mic a ffirmation that the u n iverse i s explanatorily i n te l l igible, for the dom inant thrust of that education has always been to tra n s m i t i n formation about the u n iverse : to narrate facts about the world , and con struct theories which place those facts i n a rational order. Descri ptive statements about the way the world i s , and fu nctions , a re what textbooks conta i n , statements paraph rased and elaborated upon by teachers. Many facts m u st be s i m ply memorized-wh ich is why we have true/fa l se and m u ltiple-guess exa m i nations-a nd we m u st learn to group facts as wel l , narrated i n essay exa m s , term papers , and doctoral dissertations. Briefly combi ning these rema rks about Western science and education , we may come to appreciate better why science i s so often seen as hostile to 12

rel igio n , especi a l ly i f the Abraham ic traditions a re seen as paradigmatic of rel igion . If Genesi s i s read basically as a description of the way the world came to be, and is, true bel i evers can obviously get in serious trouble tak i ng physics, chemistry, astronomy, geo logy, or biology courses. " Becau se Adam needed a proper compa n i o n " w i l l not ea rn a passing grade as a response to a ny exam questions about female anatomy or gender more genera l ly. These matters a re so centra l to the Western intel lectual tradition that it m ust appear trivial to raise the m . But it i s not triv i a l . Consider I ndia , wh ich has not one, but dozen s of creation na rratives , each of which i s flatly i ncompatible with the others. Nowhere i n the n umerous I ndian texts i s there a n a ffi rmation that the u n iverse i s explanatorily i ntell igible. C h i n a , on the other hand, has no c reation stories in its formative literature , wh ich equally conta i n no affirmation that the u n iverse i s explanatorily i ntel l igible.s I n both c u l t u res, espec i a l ly the C h inese , the world is d i scern ible for what it i s , through the testi mony of the sen ses , that is, th rough a ppea rances; even i n I ndia these appea ra nces a re not genera l ly deceptive ,6 yet the detai l s of the what and the why of the world (that i s , the existence of some u nderlying pri nciples or " stuff" of u l t imate rea l i ty) do not seem to have preoccu pied early I ndian and C h inese th i n kers. They did not have scriptu ral or other good reasons for th i n ki ng that there might be a n explanation of why the world i s u l t i mately as i t i s , and thereby had no reason for seeking an 13

an swer, tra n scendental or otherwise , to the question of why we a re i n th i s world; this i s u n iq uely Western , and Abrahamic. I f this c l a i m is warranted, it suggests t h a t we should read the sacred texts of I ndia and C h i n a in a di fferent way: From Krishna to Con fucius , the ancient sages of Asia should be construed not merely as basically giving us descriptions of a world u niquely c reated for some rational and moral pu rpose , but rather more basically as providing i n structions and exa mples for how thei r students and d i sc i ples can learn to go about, and live worthwhile and satisfying lives i n a world not of their own , or anyone else's , comprehensible pu rposive maki ng.7 To see th i s poi n t another way, and to cast the Abra h a m i c rel igious traditions in eve n sha rper re l ief, we may con s i der stil l other rel igious traditions. The m ajority of them, from Cen tra l a n d South to North America , from Nrica to Southeast Asia , and everywhere i n between , have s i ngle creation stories , most o f wh ich desc ribe n o t o n ly c reation , b u t the origi n s of pa rticular plants, a n i m a l s , h u man beings , and other exp rienced phenome n a . But there's a catc h : i n each i n tance , certa i n t h i ngs a re not expla i ned, ce rta i n events h appen by accide n t , a nd/or divi n ities did what they did beca use they were in a mood to do so. The Hawa i ian creation poem Ku m u l i po , for example, begins with the land rising from the ocean . Why there was an ocean i s not explai ned. The ocean 14

is s i m i la rly s i m ply a given i n the Tokpela , the Hopi narrative of the first world. Contradicting Genes i s , the Popol Yuh of the nat ive Guatemalan M ayan peoples describes how the grandmother of all c reatures fi rst attem pted to create h u man bei ngs from clay and d i rt , b u t then destroyed h e r early creations beca use they were too soft and mal leable, and did not make good serva nts. The second time a round she u sed corn , and was more satisfied with the results. More fam i l iar to u s is Greek mythology. Hesiod tel l s u s what happened at the begin n i ng, but not why, and the same problem plagues the G reeks thereafter: the Delphic O racle i s desperately needed beca u se the gods and goddesses behave capriciously m uch of the time; thei r behavior i s not rel iably predictable. If so wise , why does grey-eyed Athena favor Ach i l les over Hector, when the latter is far more the decent and l i keable of the two? Why does Zeus become so enthral led by Leda that he'll change form i n order to seduce her? Why does he p u n i sh Prometheus so severely for a benevolent action ? Why does Aph rodite cause Helen to fa l l i n love with Pa ris? Beca use they felt l ike i t , that's why. U n l ike Judaism , C h ristianity, and I slam , but of a piece with their Asian ki n , none of these rel igions affi rm a n i ntell igible u n iverse capable of bei ng fu l ly u nderstood by h uman rat ional and moral faculties. And thus i t should not s u rprise u s that the spiritua l ly sign i ficant members of these societies-sha m a n s , magici a n s , healers, witches, sorcerers, gu ru s ,

15

sooth sayers , medicine men , priestesses, teachers all­ devote the i r energies to assisting the other members of their societies to get on i n this world, to lea rn h ow to l ive in it, rather than concentrate on lea rn i ng about it. Contrast all of th i s with Ge nesis 1.1-14, where i n God c reated t h e Heavens and t h e ea rth , separated them , placed vegetation , a n i mals , and h u man bei ngs in the latter, a l l pu rposefu l ly, and for the good , for reasons wh ich we ca n a l l u l t i mately come to know. Contrast it with Matthew 13. 10, where i n Jesus i s q uoted as sayi ng t o the disciples, "To you it h a s been given to know the secrets of heave n , but to them [Le . , the common people] i t has not been give n . " Contrast it with S u ra 21.16 from the Qura n , in wh ich Al lah says , "We c reated not the world and all that i s i n i t for o u r mere a m u sement"-wh ich i s repeated verba t i m i n S u ra 44.

THUS FAR

I

HAVE FOCUSED ON

how different the sacred

texts and na rratives of the Abrahamic traditions a re from other traditions, wh ich i s prima facie i ncompatible with my earl ier claim that at the most fu ndamental leve l , all rel igious texts and na rratives a re sayi ng m uch the sa me thi ngs. The di ffe rences , however, especially to those of u s steeped i n the Abrahamic heri tages, m u st be understood before their far deeper s i m i la rities can be eq ually u nderstood and appreciated. Beca use we a re asked to d i rectly bel ieve the descriptions of 16

the world, and the tra n scendental world beyond i t , as desc ribed i n t h e Hebrew sc ri ptu res , t h e New Testament, and the Qu ra n , we qu ite natura l ly ask, when we begin the study of other religion s , what do the i r adherents bel ieve about how the u n iverse ca me to be , is, fu nctions , what i s beyond it and what its future holds? But if my analysis of these other traditions i s even rough ly on t h e m a r k , it follows t h a t th i s is not the proper way to interrogate or study those other texts and narratives, at least i n itially. Rather should they be read as providi ng d i rections, gu iding u s to lead more mea n i ngfu l lives in this world, the world of o u r experience , i n which w e l ive and die; they map paths we may fol low to aid our e m bodied selves in enduring suffering and celebrating j oy. The concept of the how and the why of the world being explanatorily intel l igible in Juda i sm, Ch ristianity, and I slam i s basic to these three fa ith s , but it by no mean s exhausts what they a re about. If th is be so , the n , i n stead of concentrating solely on how the Abra h a m i c texts and narratives describe this world and the next , giving us pu rportedly factual knowledge which we a re to believe di rectly, perhaps we should reread them , focusing on how they, too , may a l so be providing i n struction for u s i n how to go about i n the world; how t o live p u rposively i n i t , a n d derive a non material n u rt u rance therefro m . The basis of such nurt u ra nce is religious experience , about wh ich I wil l speak later in the context of Ludwig Wittgenste i n 's 17

notion of das Mystiche, the mystical .8 B u t for now I j ust wa n t to note that such experiences are seldom had solely on the basi s of direct beliefs, from purely cogni tive efforts; withi n specific c u l t u ra l contexts, equally specific beliefs about how and why this world and the next are constituted as they a re may be

sufficient for having such experiences, but they are not necessary therefor; a good many agnostics and others have all had such experiences t h roughout h uman h istory and across c ultures. To elaborate on th is poi n t, let m e t u rn for a moment to the n i n eteenth-cen t u ry p h ilosopher and theologian S¢ren Kierkegaard.9

In his famous Either/Or, and other writi ngs, Kierkegaard m a i n tai ned that there a re three planes on wh ich we may lead our l ives; the aesthetic, the eth ical, and the rel igious. In the first of these, we lead our l ives u n re flectively. The hopes, fears, dreams, n ightmares, and aspirations we have are largely due to the i n fl uence of our parents, sibl i ngs, teachers, friends, and n e ighbors. What schools we attend are la rgely determi ned by parents and peers; what jobs we get a re largely determ i ned by what positions a re open when we seek one; and what we hope to get from our l ives is s ign i ficantly determ i ned for u s by c u l t u ral i n fl u e nces. But a lmost all of u s, accord i ng to Kierkegaard, w i l l at some time in o u r l ives h ave the opport u n i ty to "choose ourselves," a most u n usual expression . What 18

Kierkegaard means by it i s that most of us wil l come to the rea l ization someday that we could have chosen othe rw i se than the paths we fol l owed. Having come to this pai n fu l rea l ization, some of u s will accept it, and thereby enter the eth ical plane, wherein we assume fu l l responsibility for what w e h ave don e , a n d w h o w e are ; w e know we must give reasons for what we choose to do, because we a re aware, acute ly aware, that we coul d have chosen otherwise. And adding to the pain is the fact that the eth ical life cannot, in the end, sustain us for Kierkegaard. I t often obl iges us t o choose between evil deeds; i t can req u i re that we act aga i nst the i n c l i nations of true love; we can never do enough ethical ly, and to say that " I do what I can , " i s , for h im, to engage i n self­ deception. Faced with this angst, we may sink i nto despair; a "fear and trembling" can overcome u s , and we can become afflicted with a " sickness u n to death, " to q uote the titles of two o f h i s more famous works. What a few of us may do , however, and a l l of us can do , i s confront and admit the absu rdity of the descriptive account of this world and the next offered in C h ristian scripture , straightforwardly admi t that this accoun t goes altogether against our rational i ty, and nevertheless make a " leap of faith "-he is the originator of the expression-that the scriptural account of the world is yet somehow true, and we a re to live o u r lives i n accordance with that account. For mysel f there i s much that is beau t i fu l , incisive , and i n spiring i n Kierkegaard's writings , but there is also

19

someth i ng m istaken about h i s ana lys i s of the h u m a n condition , and t h a t someth ing, too common i n t h e whole of Western ph i losophy and theology, is t h a t the aesthetic , eth ica l , and spiritual dimensions of our l ives a re easi ly disti ngu ishable, and separate spheres of existence. Al most a l l of the world's rel igious tradition s , especi a l ly t h e Asian , a ffi rm t h e contra ry: that a mea n ingfu l h u man l i fe requ i res the i ntegration of a l l three . But Kierkegaa rd offers u s a special i ns ight i nto rel igion by h i s analysis in that as we progress through h i s planes of existence , we pass from bei ng relatively u n se l f-conscious on the aesthetic plan e , to beco m i ng i n tensely sel f-conscious when we enter the eth ical­ real iz i ng at every step that we alone are responsible for what we have elected to do-and then ascend to being u n se l f-conscious aga i n at a h igher level i f and when we ente r the religious real m . Now I am no longe r the sole author of what I do, n o r d o I w i s h t o be; now I understa nd fu l ly, and accept , what Jes u s said at Gethsemane: " Not as I wi l l , but as thou wilt" (Matthew 26.36). That Kierkegaard's i nsigh t has cross-c ultural validity can be seen by exa m i n ing other sacred texts. " I n the calm of self-surrender, " Kri shna tel l s Arjuna i n the t h i rd chapter of the Bhagavad-Gita, "you need only rely on me; dream not that you do the warrior's ki l l i ng, but go forth i n battle as you m u st. " The Daoist sage Zhuang Zi says succintly: " cease (se l f- ) striving; t h e n there w i l l b e sel f-transformation . " I n a 20

related vei n , Confu c i u s admo n ished h i s students: " Don't worry about not being acknowledged by others; worry about fa i l i ng to acknowledge them " ( 1. 16). I have appea led to Kierkegaard here for a very special reason. To badly paraph rase Kant, I want to del i n eate what we take to be the scope not only of knowledge , but of bel ief and fai th as wel l , i n order to call attention to a different real m of h u m a n experience.

What all of the i m peratives j ust proffered share , and have in common with the i mperatives of yet other traditions, is the necessity of engaging i n a discipl i ne of ego-reduction , a move away from I -the expe riencer­ to what i s actua l ly bei ng experienced. S u rely the knowledge ga i ned i n the Garden of Eden by partaking of the forbidden fru it i s that we a re morta l , and that one day we will i n deed return to become aga i n the ashes and dust whence we h ave come. With such knowledge it becomes more diffi c u l t to sta nd i n awe of a s u n ri se , delight in a b i rd's song, celebrate our childre n 's first hesitant footsteps , or become wholly i m mersed in sharing food , dri n k , and conversation with those we hold dear, for it wil l come to us, sooner, later, impl i citly or exp l icitly, s ubtly or forcefu l ly, but a lways s u rely, that one day we w i l l not be here to stan d i n awe , or del igh t , o r celebrate , or be immersed in these earth ly activities. And our c u rren t

21

appreciation of parti c i pating in these activities can all too easily be d i m i n ished thereby, for in our h eart of hearts we all do know that someday we wil l d i e , and b e dead forever. A n d the more ego-fi l led w e a re , t h e more easily these thoughts c a n d i m i n i sh the qua l i ty of our eve ryday l i fe . I do not bel i eve p h ilosoph ical a n d theological­ that is, purely cognitive-efforts to come d i rectly to terms with t h i s knowledge w i l l be effective for most people, and being told to simply h ave faith in the l i teral truth of scripture wil l fal l on i ncreasingly deaf ears in the twen ty-first century. Organ transplants a re of course with u s now, and perhaps cloning tec h niques and/or genetic implants can i n c rease our l i fe spa n , and it is even conceivable that there m ight someday be a magic p i l l to arrest the ravages of aging so that we a l l m ight l ive t o b e 1 7 5 years o l d or more. S o what? Thi s merely postpones t h e prob l e m . Here I a m rem i n ded o f a New Yorker cartoon i n w h i c h two elderly gentlemen replete with w ings and harps are s i tting on a cloud, with one saying to the other: " I ' m not s u re I'd have wanted to l ive to age 83 if I had real ized I ' d be 83 forever. " Re latedly, i t i s beco m i ng increasingly difficult for sensitive and i ntel l igent people to conti n u e to be comforted by being assured that they will come to apprehend the purpose and reason for their embodied existence i n some vaguely-defined hereafter. Consider Pau l 's memorable words i n F i rst Corinthians (13 .8) :

22

Now I see i n a m i rror d i m ly; b u t then face to face. Now I know i n part, then I will understa n d fu lly, as I h ave been understood fu lly.

Note first that here we have yet anothe r affi rmation that everyth ing is u l t imately explanatorily i ntel l igib l e ; as a j u st i fication for conti n u i ng t o question what, how, a nd why, astrophysicists and biologists could ask for no more . But as time goes o n , intell igent people w i l l not, I thi n k, be susta ined by Pau l 's words taken l i te ral ly, for inte l ligence wil l generate nagging questions: Why can't our C reator explain why H e c reated u s while we a re stil l embodied, enab l i ng u s to l ive more tranqui l and u sefu l h u ma n l ives ? Why wou ld an a l l -benevolent deity deign to create such brief and often ago n i z i ng placement exam i nations h e re mere ly to determine our eternal transcendental statu s e lsewhe re ? I do not believe answers to such questions can be forthcom i ng on the basis of standa rd rel igiou s beliefs regardi ng scripture, or a Kierkegaardian leap of faith that somehow they a re l itera l ly true, for both requ i re u s to divest ourselves entirely of our rational cogn i tive capac ities. Being unwi l l i ng to renounce the science I have been taught, or to renou nce the diSc i p l i n e of p h i l osophy in which I have been trained professionally, and respectfu l of the principles of pure logic wh ich must govern all h uman thought and com m u nication, I m u st, if I a m to i n s i st on the i m portance of the study of sacred texts and n arratives, suggest that we

23

seek in them different kinds of knowledge and belief, generating di fferent patterns of faith .

IN THE

F I RST PLAC E ,

each of our l ives may be sa id to be

a story. But every story, in order to be even m i n i ma l ly i n te resting and worthy of contemplation and/or e m u lation , m u st have a begi n n i ng, a development, and a n end. Lacking a ny of these elements there would be no story, and especi a l ly without a n end, there wou l d be n o closure , hence no whole t o b e encompassed, reflected u po n , i m i tated , or passed on to succeedi ng generations. We can only applaud the heroes or h e roi nes of a tale who narrowly avoid death wh i le struggl i ng for the good in the knowledge that one day, eventually fu l l of years , they w i l l indeed pass to their reward; if we believed they m ight l ive forever, what wou ld there be to commend, or to appla ud? The Olympian gods and goddesses may have many v i rtues in addition to their vices, but cou rage is not among them ; only mortals can be truly courageous. The moral of this a rgu ment i s as easy to u n dersta nd cogn i tively as it is d i fficult to im plement psychically: we m u st come to confront directly and accept our morta l ity, and then go on to live a p roductive and satisfying l i fe undisturbed by morbid thoughts of the transito ry nature of o u r exi stence. Easier said than done. Good l uck. I O

24

Yet the Abrahamic traditions no less than others tel l us how to go about doing t h i s , how to become less ego-fi lled, more u nself-conscious, and thereby more open to the fu ll panoply of h u man experiences , incl uding rel igious experiences. The latter a re often momenta ry, but the i r effects l inger. Wi th some , the experience can go on for hours, even days perhaps . And for a very few, it i s enduring. I I I n the whole of rel igious l i terature , and in most of the accounts of rel igious experience proffered in the social sciences­ whe re i n too many researchers h ave tended to eat the menu i n stead of the dinner-such experiences are labeled " mystica l , " wh ich has come to be synonymous with the i neffable, the obsc u re , and/or the inexplicable. 12 I w i l l elaborate on the nature of religious experiences i n a moment, but let me first briefly outline severa l specific paths every rel igious tradition proffers to its followers for having such experiences. They all suggest , sepa rately and together, a n u m ber of ways of beco m i ng less sel f-conscio u s , less " I " absorbed, and more open to the experience of

being i n the world , of be i ng in a place , of being with others , of living more fu lly i n the present. Virt u a l ly n o sacred text s , to my knowledge , offer o n ly a s i ngle path , a s i ngle spiritual d iscip l i n e , i n order to experience the sacred in the secular; 1 3 not there , but here a n d

now. O n the contra ry, sacred texts and

narratives outline a m u l tipli c i ty of path s leading to spiritu a l experiences (which i s why a facile reading

25

of those texts m ight suggest that they a re saying contradicto ry t h i ngs at times). B u t c l oser reading suggests that th ose texts a re sayi ng di fferent th i ngs to di ffe rent people with i n t h e i r own tradi tion , offeri ng severa l ways for fol l ow i ng a spiritual path to those who wish to tread one. The most common path i s sim ply acceptance of the overa ll world view presented in the texts of a rel igious tradition , and acceptance thereby of the necessi ty of submitting-becom ing less i ndividu a l i stic, less ego-fu l l-to the sac rifices presc ribed i n those texts , adherence to the rituals thereof, attendance to prayer, the observance of h oly days, and more . Jesus was not the first re l igious th i nker to rea l ize that the mere formalistic practices dictated by a tradition could be utterly devoid of spiritual sign i ficance , but for many people , i n each tradition , fu ll participation i n these prescribed practices has proven efficacious; these practices can be a path to the sacred by faith , by submitting to the demands that fa ith makes on its followers th rough the sacred texts, and th rough th e i r symbol s , ritua l s , and traditions. A second path , especi a l ly among the i n telligentsia i n each tradition , i s th rough scholarsh ip. Th i s method of ego-reduction obliges an absorption i n the sac red texts themselves: wri t i ng com mentaries and glosses on the m , retranslating them , beco m i ng a cleric perhaps, a l l in the attempt to enable the author or authors of the original texts to continue to speak mea n i ngfu l ly to later a udiences. Here the Ta l m udic and Confucian

26

traditions a re espec i a l ly strong, but every tradition has its scholars-that i s , those who write schalia-who disc i p l i ne themse lves to be fa ithfu l and true to their texts. A t h i rd path to spiritual experience is through good works , lead i ng an exemplary moral l i fe . For H i ndus and Buddh ists th i s i s the path of karma-yag; for the early Confucians i t i s the major path to sagehood , 1 4 but i s a common theme i n a l l other re l igious traditions as wel l , wh ich u n i formly offer salvation or l i beration to the u n selfish who eschew personal and material wel l ­ bei ng i n favor of good works , struggl i ng actively to overcome pa i n and suffe ring, and/or to promote j u stice, . freedom , and equality. Sti l l another rel igious path is the meditative , or contem plative . The fol l owers of th i s path u n dertake , in a va riety of mea n s , a rigorously presc ri bed physical and mental disc i p l i ne i n order to achieve a rel igious experience di rectly or i n d i rectly, but usually i m mediate (the " myst ica l " experience ) . Those who have such experiences u n i formly lament the inability of ordinary language to describe t h i s extraordinary eve n t , wh ich is no less u n i formly described as bei ng " beyond the senses. " ( Beat ific visions and vo ices may wel l be gen u ine rel igious experiences as wel l , but " mystical " t hey are not . ) 1 5 These a re fou r paths , fou r spiritual disciplines, every sacred text with wh ich I a m fam i liar provides gU ide l i nes to fol l ow, wh ich I label the (1) faith , (2)

27

scholarly, (3) mora l , and (4) contemplative path s respective ly. There a re , of cou rse , other paths. It is wel l known that in C h inese and Japanese Buddh ism , for example, tra i n i ng i n the tea ceremony, martial arts, 1 6 and landscape a rch itecture can also serve as spiritual disciplines, as do the apprenticeships served by shamans and shamanesses the world over. And i t may n o t b e too m uch of a stretch t o say t h a t even the C h ristian-inspired scientific tradition i n the West can be see n , by some at least, as a spiritual discipline: the struggle to ach ieve obj ectivity surely req u i res rigorous e fforts at ego-reduction . There are sti l l other paths, I believe , especially one which requires a keen sensitivity to and absorption in the natural world wh ich sustains us, but I will not dwell thereon now, because such works as Walden , A Sand

County Almanac, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek, and The Dream of the Earth are not yet ful ly accepted as sacred texts . 1 7 And because my focus herein is on how everyone may profit by rethinking what sacred texts and narratives m ight be saying to us, I wil l not take u p yet another possible path , namely, foregoing the workaday world by entering a monastery or convent with i n a particular tradition , except to note that those who elect this path wil l be obl iged to fol low, with varying degrees of emphasis , all of the first fou r spec i fic paths j ust adumbrated. It m ust a l so be noted that not all rel igious traditions place equal emphasis on all of these path s .

28

The contemplative path i s accorded great weight i n H induism a n d Buddhi s m , less s o i n C h ristian i ty, despite the l ives and works of Meister Eckh a rt , San Juan de la Cruz, and many others. The C h ristian tradition also no longer accords its scholars the same respect and veneration accorded the scholars of other traditions. Classical Daoism says l ittle about e i ther the fa ith or scholarly paths . 1 8 I slam acknowledges its S u fi s , but celebrates i t s rel igious scholars, and champions t h e fa ithfu l , as does Juda i s m , w i t h both Kabba l ists a n d Rabbis as wel l as t h e Orthodox. But all traditions describe a l l paths to follow, and each has its exemplars thereof. Cathol ics, for example, may s i m ply keep the faith; or they can fi nd i n sp i ration i n the l i fe and writings of the scholar/ph i losopher/theologia n s Gabriel Marcel or Evelyn U n derh i l l ; or they can e m u late Dorothy Day and Daniel Berriga n in struggl ing for peace and j u stice , or fol low the example of the Trappist contemplative Thomas Merton . 1 9 Th i s m u l t i p l i c i ty of voices with wh ich a l l rel igious traditions speak i s as it should be. Most people a re obliged to work long and h a rd to susta i n themselves and their fa m i l ies. They have no time to become scholars or contemplatives . Moral they must be , and giving to the best of their abil ities, but it i s the faith path most of them m u st fol low as a spiritual disc i p l i n e . Modern scholars are more i n c l i ned t o sit i n c h a i rs rather than i n the lotus position , and meditators a re not i n frequently iconoclastic with respect to their texts

29

and tradition s . Al l , however, are told to follow at least to some extent the moral path , to which I call attention because it impl ies that every religious tradition has m a n i fold scriptural resources with wh ich to challenge and conde m n the more fanatical and violent of its adhe rents; mora l i m perialism , espec ially of a Western philosophical sort , need not rear its ugly head here . Another reason for calling especial attention t o the ethical path insisted upon in all traditions is that it provides a partial answer to the question of how to live an integrated life- the importance of wh ich is insisted u pon in al most all traditions-in a disintegrating SOc iety. Th is topic is a large one , too large to consider here i n : suffice it t o say that I believe a number of societies are disintegrating today (wh ich is a major reason for fundamentalist/fa natical movements) and deep mora l comm itment w i l l b e necessary t o arrest and reverse the disintegration through fundamental socioeconom ic and pol itical change , and rel igious renewa l .

Now, F I NALLY,

I

MU ST A D D R ESS D I RECTLY

t h e nature of

the spec ific kind of spiritual experiences that are my concern in this lecture , a promissory note l owe you , a n d without which m y prior arguments a n d reflections will probably be of little moment. Some contemporary scholars of religion question whether the concept of " religious experience" can be made meaningfu J ,2o and many more wish to distingu ish between religious 30

experience and mystical experiences. Here i n I must bracket the skeptical thrust of the former claim , and remain silent on the nature of a pure ly mystical experience. What I want to do is define rel igious experience as Wittgenstein suggested for das Mystiche, namely, as the sense that we are absol utely safe.2 1 Th is i s a most incisive and origin a l description , b u t is stil l somewhat e n igmatic, and has a decidedly C h ristian flavor: we are " secure in God's hands. " My work with Confucian texts suggests more genera l ly a sense of belonging, ful ly belonging, i n thei r case to those who have preceded u s , those i n whose m idst we l ive , and those who will fol low us. In the Abrahamic fai th s , i t is a fee l i ng of atonement, or, as I wou ld prefer to syl labica l ly resegment the term , at-one-ment. "Attunement" is also appropriate . As a rgued above , each of the world's rel igiou s traditions offers u s several ways , several paths we m ight fol low in order to achieve this sense of belonging, of safety, of at-one-ment, or attunement. And we may d irectly believe that these paths are efficacious becau se the h istory of each tradi tion provides i rrefutable evidence that countless n umbers of each tradition 's adherents h ave had such experiences; with or without much metaphysics, or fa ctual knowledge of the world , they have achieved the wisdom of how to l ive ful ly i n it with grace , digni ty, and contentment. Th u s I submit that it is ful ly rational to indirectly believe , have faith , that there is m uch truth in the

31

sacred texts and na rratives of the world's religions , even though m uch that i s sa id there i n can not be believed l i tera l ly as factual accou nts of this or any other world. I n the same way, becau se the equations developed by Oppenheime r and his col leagues work­ most of the t i m e , anyway-so too we should indirectly bel ieve , have faith , that there i s truth in h i s remarks quoted earl ier, even though they are logica l ly contradictory i f taken litera l ly as factual accounts of th i s or a ny other world. Th is sense of belongi ng, of safety, can take several forms. We can come to a feel i ng of being at one first and foremost with the h u m a n race, and secondarily with nature (Confu c i a n i sm ) , or the reverse emphasis (classical Daois m , many Native American and Nrican rel igions) , or with one's own depths i n relation to a l l e l se ( Buddh i s m ) , or w i t h somet h i ng tran scendental ( H indu i s m , the Abrahamic rel igions ) ; the forms vary from tradition to tradition , and at times even with i n the same tradition . But however di fferent their foc u s , and how they describe rea lity, all of the world's rel igions provide us i n common with several disciplinary paths for learn i ng how to get on i n the world, enabl i ng us to have that experience of belonging, of sa fety, of at-one­ me nt, of attunement-i n this world, here and now. The i m porta nce of a sense of belongi ng as an i m portant condition for h u man wel l-be i ng i s i l l u strated, I bel ieve , by a perverse form of generating that sense , c u l t membersh i p . Ecstasy, u n i o n , a w i l l i ngness to die , and much else put forward by charismatic leaders are

32

a l l made possible by the strong sense of belonging to the c u l t . I am not at a l l a scholar of rel igious cults, and am fu l ly aware of how a sensationalist media can distort their beliefs and activities, but it does seem to me that the members thereof are more prone to frenzy than sere n i ty, more se l f-absorbed than mora l ly comm i tted, and the i r sen se of belongi ng stems from an exclus ionary rather than i n c l u s ionary orientation: only the few w i l l be saved, the others will not. Equally s ign i ficant, cu lts do not appear to belong to a place , nor to emphasize the discipline of fee l i ng a kinship with the nonh u man world.22 To more fu l ly describe thi s i n c l u s ionary re l igious experience i s difficu l t . I t is certa i n ly not some form of extrasensory perception , but rath er an additive to our sensory experiences. As a simple i l l u stration , imagine return i ng to you r alma mater with some friends wh o have not been there before . As you wal k the campus together, you will a l l see , hear, and smell the same th i ngs, but experience them diffe rently. Your friends will have directly a l l of the visu a l , a u ra l , and olfactory sensations that you do , but i n addition , you will have a sense of belonging there, and they will not. And I wou l d suggest that such experiences have a strong aestheti c , as wel l as a spiritual dimension to them. Thi s sense i s a feel i ng of b e i ng a part of, at one With , someth ing larger than ourselves, someth i ng that was present before we came to be, somet h i ng to which we contribute now, and someth i ng wh ich wil l endure after us. The world's religi o n s a ffirm that th i s sense of

33

belonging, of safety, of at-one-ment or attunement may be experienced by everyone, and they all provide diSciplines by means of which we may become less ego-fu l l , and h ence more open to such experiences. The texts offer no guarantees that we wi l l h ave these experiences; this is ulti mately a gi ft of the spirit. But they do affirm that such expe riences may come to us if the spirit can get the ego sufficiently out of the way. For a l l these reasons , I commend the sacred texts and narratives of the world's re ligions to you r carefu l attention and study. Reread, and read in conj unction with the texts of oth e r tradi tions, each tradition can be re newed , and come to be seen as collaborative rather than com petitive with the others , and thereby, as conducive to lesse n i ng the di stance between "us" and "them . " Perhaps by seriously atte mpting to plumb the spiritual depths of other traditions we can come to more deeply unde rstand and appreciate o u r own-an effort that m igh t well provide rewarding even to those who do not feel as if they a re a part of any religious tradition . These studies m u st be undertaken with great care , with sym pathy, and with the fu l ly rational belief and faith that a l l of these texts contain m uch truth , the discernment of which can aid u s in l iving more meani ngful and sat isfyi ng lives. Such studies cannot by themselves i n s u re that we wi ll find our way in the twenty-fi rst century, but they will reduce Sign ificantly, I bel ieve , our chances of becoming i rretrievably lost in it.

34

Commentary by Huston Smith

IT

IS A V E RY GREAT HONOR,

and spea king even more

personal ly, a very great happiness for me to be able to share this eve n i ng ( i n u nequal proportions I ' m very glad to say) with my dear friend Henry Rosemont. I ' m very m i ndfu l that the a n n o u ncement for this occasion said very c learly that my response was to be brief, and therefore I sha l l forego a more elaborate response. " Brief" is a very wise word, as I could easily t u rn this into a nostalgia trip a n d tel l you about our l u nches in Cambridge where it was H e n ry and I agai nst the other philosophers in the Bermuda Triangle of Harvard , Princeto n , and Cornel l who said there was no p h ilosophy outside of the Western world. I could tel l you about those l u nches. I could tel l you about being at h i s own i nstitution several times, espec i a l ly on the occasion when h e was awarded St. Mary's College's first endowed chair; but enough of reverie . We've had a very great a n d r i c h paper. What I will do is to first distill what I take to be the essence of Henry's message to us this even ing, because i f I ' m wrong there , wel l then , what fol lows wil l b e off the mark. I will then close by raising two questions for h i m . H e wants , a n d I ' m sure that we' re a l l with h i m , to val idate the great enduring wisdom traditions of the world's rel igions, and to i n sist that they have not outlived their usefu lness. The i r usefu lness i s persona l , helping us sti l l with directives for l iving meaningful l ives , b u t a l so social , in the i r potential for c reating a more j ust and more peacefu l world. However, H e n ry goes on from that premise to say that we need to 37

revision them , and the key to this revisioning i s to distinguish between "direct" and " i ndirect" ways of reading sacred texts. By direct, I take it he means l iteral , and a l so pretty much what th ey say abo ut the world. Those fal l into the camp of the direct reading. He i s proposing, moreover, that beca use those have lost their credib i l ity, we move to an indirect reading. And there he makes an initial distinction between the Abrahamic traditions i n the West, and the traditions in South Asia and East Asia. I n the Abrahamic tradition , an indirect reading shows that they tell us, in part, that we have a ration a l , i n te l l igible world. Th at del iverance has led on into modern science , which has occurred i n the West on ly, and not origin a l ly in the other traditions. I ndirect readings of I ndia n , C h inese , and other sacred texts has to do , I take it, with moral and spiritual directives as to how we can l ive productive , satisfying, meaningfu l , a n d contributing l ives. Starti ng with t h e West and h aving then made this detour to I ndia and C h i n a , he proposes that we bring that same indirect reading i nto the Abrahamic rel igions , and look to them primari ly for similar directives . H e n ry, I a m your student here , and if I got it wrong, you wi l l have an opportunity to tel l me. But that, I take i t , i s the basic structure of the lecture. Now I wa nt to proceed to two questions. I was looking for, but did not find i n the paper, with one exception , any mention of the word " metaphysic s , " or perhaps even "cosmology. " I want to propose that this

38

is the way I th i n k of it: cosmology has to do with the natu re , the furniture of this physical u niverse and h ow it works. And I agree that the traditional sects have been retired on the issue of cosmology. But there remains a matter of metaphysics, H e n ry. U n less you h ave bought i nto the postmodern deconstruction of metaphysics, either i n its early version of saying " it's a l l mea n i ngless , " or in the later versions where-u n less you buy i n to one of those , what status wou l d you give to the metaphysical dimensions of these texts? I remind you I am not speak i ng about th is physical world external ly, but to the possibility of oth er dimensions of real i ty. Let me j ust take a quick tour around the world. In C h i n a , (alth ough I am very rel uctant to say anyth ing about C h i na in H e n ry's presence ) , we have earth , but then we also have Heave n . There i s o n e dictum b y Confu c i u s , " O f H eaven and earth , on ly H eaven i s great. " Now does that have a ny metaphysical meaning? Whe n we turn to Daoi s m , w e d o h ave t h e Dao of nature , but w e also have the Dao that is " u n spoken . " We all remember that wonderful quote in the forty-second chapter of the

Dao De Jing: "There is a being-wonderful , perfect­ how quiet it i s , h ow giving it is . . . I do not know its name, so I call it the Dao, and I rejoice i n its Way. " What are we to make of a text l i ke this? Does it simply translate i nto moral directives for leading a meaningful l i fe ? Or, does i t point to someth i ng that has ontological reality? And, very quickly, what a re we to

39

make of sunyata ? Of n irvana as contrasted with

samsara i n I ndia? And i n the Western tradition , what a re we to make of " that i n whose i m age" (rational as you point out) "we are " ? Are these all to be moralized and translated into directives for leading a meani ngfu l and constructive l i fe in th i s world? Or, do they suggest that there may be regions of rea l i ty that slip through the nets of science? To lay my cards on the tabl e , I happen to suspect-more than suspect, I happen to believe-that they do alert modern scientistic society to its b l i ndness , cal l i ng our attention to domains of existence which the West has pretty m uch forgotten . Of cou rse , in the Western ph ilosophical tradition , to conclude my quick tou r, I should assuredly mention that paradigm of the a l l egory of Plato's cave and the sun that lies outside it. My second question relates to it. I real ly l i ked what you moved u p to in the notion of the mystica l , absolute safety, and the notion o f belonging. B u t aga i n , a r e these simply psychological states t h a t these traditions give u s as d i rectives for how we can come to these fee l i ngs? Or, do they dig deeper i n to the nature of thi ngs to describe a reality, the ultimate real i ty wh ich gives grounds for u s to th ink that we are not j u st making it up when we have these sentiments of safety and belonging? Th ese , then , a re two issues I would hope you could take up to concl ude a wonderful lecture.

40

Response and Discu ssion

HR :

As h e so frequen tly doe s , H uston gets

right to the heart of matters when h e c h a l l e nges my s i l e nce on m e taphysical issues taken up in sacred texts . I am pl eased that h e agrees with m e that the cosmologies described in these texts can no lo nger be credited as describing the world of h u m a n experience , b u t that st i l l leaves open the possib i l i ty of t h e i r bei ng "other dimensions of real i ty, " or "dom a i n s of existence , " a s h e puts it, that " s l i p t h ro ugh the nets of science . " Th i s i s a m ost i m porta n t issue , b u t m y silence o n i t wa s i ntention a l , for a n u mber o f reaso n s . F i rst , these "other d i m e n sions of real i ty" h ave traditio n a l ly been taken as belonging to a transcenden tal rea l m , u s u a l ly defi n e d as o n e on wh i c h o u r physical and h u ma n worlds depend wholly for t h e i r existe n c e , b u t which i s not i n any way dependent o n t h e m ; a world "wholly other" than the one we l ive in. Such a tra n scendental "world" is s uggested i n some Indian p h i losop h i c a l works , b u t i s otherwise , i n my view, characteristic of o n ly the Abra h a m i c tradit i o n s of the West. No s u c h metaphysical claims i nvest B u ddh i s t , Confuc ia n , or D a o i s t texts as I r e a d t h e m , a n d wh i l e t h e s e latter rel igion s , a n d a l l oth ers , h ave supernatural entities described in t h e i r oral or written cano n s , these entities rem a i n a l together l i n ked to th is world. The tian ( m i s leadi ngly tra n s l ated as " H eave n " ) o f the C o n fuc i a n s , a n d t h e Daoist dao both h ave rel igiou s connotation s , b u t t h ey do not refer to a rea l m conceptua l ly separate from the world o f h u ma n

43

experience and effort. 23 The many gods and goddesses described and ve nerated i n the C h i nese trad ition all share the q u a l i ty of bei ng deceased h u man bei ngs , a ncestors or otherwi se . A second reason for my si lence on metaphysical matters concerns language . I f, as I have a rgued, a more serious effort to obta i n i nterfa ith understa nding i s to take place , a keen sensitivity to the n uances of la nguage and la nguage use wi l l be necessary, not only with respect to our own native tongu e , but as well to the many other la nguages employed to a rticulate rel igious experience. I endorse fu l ly the Chom skya n c l a i m-i n itially counteri ntuitive-that h u man bei ngs basically speak one language , with ( n ot i n consequential) dialectical va riations; th u s I m u st reject the Sap i r-Wh o rf hypothesis of l i nguistic determ i n i s i m cum relativity. 24 But these dialectical va riations-in their phonologica l , syn tacti c , and pragmatic dimensions no less than the semantic­ certai n ly influence the way( s) we th i n k about and describe real ity, and conseq uently statements which rely on speci fic metaphysical assumptions or presuppositions for thei r pla USibi l i ty should be approached with great caution i n c ross-cultural i n terfa i th dialogues. In other work I have taken u p the i m porta nce of attending in new ways to i ssues of tra n slation and i n terpretation when engaged i n compa rative ph i losoph ical and rel igious research , and i n i n terfaith dialogue.25 The l i nguistic issues a re too complex to

44

rehearse now, but I can hint at some of what I mean by noting that no one attempts to translate terms such as karma or dharma; they a re simply included now in the E nglish lexicon . Dao is slowly ach ieving this status, and as Roger Ames and I a rgued in our new translation of the Analects, tian too should be glossed and transliterated, for " H eave n " is too fraught with Judaic­ C h ristian cosmological and theological concepts to serve as translation for tian. 26 Still another reason for my si lence on metaphysical matters is that I do not need to ra ise them in order to argue for the ongoing relevance and importance of the world's religions for the citizens of the twenty-first century. The major th rust of my remarks , however inadequate ly proffered, has been that even the most dyed- in -the-wool , empirical ly and logica l ly oriented agnostic ration alist has good rea sons for attending to the sacred texts of the world's rel igions with great respect , in the ful ly rational belief that those texts can aid u s measurably i n leading productive and u l ti mately satisfying live s , enhancing the joys thereof, and m itigating their sorrows. Th is is a woefu l ly brief response to your inci sive questions , H uston , but I hope that they wil l at least convey the general direction in which I am going. Perhaps some further amplification will occ u r as I atte mpt to respond to audience questions; many hands are going u p , and I wou ld l ike to recogn ize other challenges, comments , and inqu iries.

45

QUESTION:

I q u i te agree that there is somet h i ng

formally s i m i l a r among a l l rel igi o n s , namely the sense of sec urity, this sense of belonging. But how can we dialogue based on this sense of sec u r i ty which we a l l share , as you a rgue , i f w e d ivorce that sense of sec u r i ty from the metaphysics that n u rt u res i t i n the di fferent traditions? Or from the positions aga i n st metaphysic s , for exa m p l e , i n some B u ddh ist traditio n s ? We m ight h ave these formal s i m i l a rities among all the tradition s , b u t i f w e take o u t t h e conte n t , what basis d o w e h ave for dialogue ? For exa m p l e , h ow could a C h ristian sense of safe ty a n d belonging based on Tri n ity, be i n dialogue with the B uddh ist sense , ba sed on

sunyata ,

or

emptiness? HR: That's a splendid question . Let me fi rst respond by th roWi ng one of its imp l ications back at you . If two traditions h ave i n compatible metaphys i c s , then the poss i b i l i ty of a gen u i n e dialogue and u ndersta nding between them i s al most s u re ly not goi ng to happe n . You w i l l end up o n ly with debate . B u t i f w e start out on a lower, nonmetaphysical leve l , we can come to apprec iate that the view of the world a B uddh ist has somehow helps B uddh ists come to terms with their h u m a n l ives i n the same way a C h ristian view helps C h ris tia n s . Th is i s a substantive S i m i l a ri ty, I bel ieve , not s i mply a formal o n e . 2 7 And with that beg i n n i ng, we can hope that Buddh i s t s , as wel l as

46

H i ndu s , M u s l i m s , and so on , can come to see h ow bel iefs , and attenda n t sym bols and practice s , can contribute to the mea n i ngfu l ness of h u ma n l ives in differing rel igious tradition s , and therefore come to h ave a sympathy for those ways of looking at the world , if not a n accepta nce of them . A q u i c k exa m p l e . Statues of the I ndian sku l l - necklaced goddess Kal i may we l l be h orri fy i ng to C h ristia n s , even if viewed less hysterically than i n the fi l m

Temple of Doom .

Indiana Jones and the

But clearly a crucifi x , espe c i a l ly a

bleeding one , c a n be no less repe l l e n t to a H i ndu , no matter h ow much it s ignal s the sac red to a Cath o l i c . For a n aive Buddh i st the sacrament of com m u n ion may wel l smack of ritual c a n n i b a l i s m even t h o ugh that is not at a l l the way E p i scopa l ians i nterpret the ceremony, although the latter, m igh t , with equal n a ivete , be tem pted to dismiss Buddhist

sunyata

merely as a form of n i h i l i s m .28 Aga i n , I wou l d i n s i st that the basic question we m u st keep befo re us i n studying rel igions i s h ow rational , sensitive , and mora l h u ma n bei ngs can adhere to spiritual traditions very d ifferent from those with wh ich we a re fam i l iar, espec i a l ly with respect to their metaphors and sym bo l s . 29 If th i s question is kept i n i t i a l ly u ppermost , we m ight then go on to come to a ful le r appreciation of the

moral

d i mensions of

rel igious tradi t i o n s , and th u s come to see h ow all of them , as I h i nted briefly i n my lectu re , h ave m a n i fold resources to generate more u n iversa l ly acceptable ideal s of j u stice and equality, with atte n da n t 47

ren u nciations of violence as a means for rea l izing those idea l s . Th at i s , when y o u start tak i ng the sacred texts seriously and see h ow m uc h is in the m that you can appreciate a n d sympathize with spiritual ly, the eth ical w i l l fol l ow, I think, ( a s wi l l the aesth eti c ) and much of the sting of the c h a rge of c u l t u ra l i mperial i sm on the part of the West goes away. Part of the sting w i l l rem ai n , h owever, bec a u se w e w i l l come t o s e e a s w e more deeply appreciate those other moral traditions that the Western h e ritage doesn't h ave a monopoly either on moral virt u e , spiritual i n s ight, or aesthetic sensitivity. Th is i s necessary i f we a re to h ave both a greater c ross-c u l t u ra l dialogue on h ow to l ive in a m o re peacefu l a n d j u st world , a n d h ow each of u s , each tradition , m ight contribute t o h e l p i ng the others to gen u i nely l ive an authentic , integrated l i fe aesthetical ly, eth ical ly, and spiritually. That's a sketchy begi n n ing towa rd a n a n swer to a splendid question .

QUESTION:

As the probl e m s of the twen ty-first

century push us toward hopelessness and apathy, are the world's rel igions becoming any more or less rel evant i n combating that hopelessness a n d apathy? HR: They are becom i ng more rel eva n t , I bel ieve . I f u nj ust and i mmoral actions are taking place , mora l agents i n every c u l t u re w i l l struggle t o stop those actions by the best means at their d isposal . You

48

struggle i n order to stop those actions. B u t if you r efforts a re not successfu l , a fter a ti me you m a y we l l get discouraged, or feel that c h a nge cannot occu r, and become apathetic; thi s will a l most s u rely h appen to everyone who struggles o n ly to bring about the change s , that is, those who a re strugg l i ng to win the battle , and is one of the u ntoward consequences of a p u rely u t i litarian or pragmatic moral orientation. B u t we can a l so struggle aga i n st the evil s of the world s i mply bec a u se they a re evi l s , ful l stop; so long as they endure , the struggle m ust go on, witness m u st be born e . Th is way of th i nking is fa r m o re characteristic of rel igiou s eth i c s , I believe , than secu lar mora l theories, and the i m portance of the difference between them can make a difference. As i s often the case , Confu c i u s can serve as a model h e re . Wh en trave l i ng from state to state , one or two disciples p receded the retin u e i n order to secure lodging i n the next town . I n one i nstance, the disciple Zilu approached a town , a n d the gatekeeper a sked h i m "Wh o i s your master ? " Z i l u rep lied, " M aster Kong o f Lu . " T h e gatekeeper interrogated h i m fu rther: " I s n 't h e t h e o n e w h o knows it's no u se , b u t keeps t ryi ng? " "Th a t 's h i m , " a n swered Z i l u ( 1 4 . 3 8 , amen ded) .

QUESTION:

O u r society is overba lanced with a

view toward the rational , a n d s ubsequently towards sel f-centeredness. The resu l t i s overco n s u m ption , lack

49

of regard for the i ndividua l 's effects on the com m u n i ty. H ow can an Eastern rel igiou s perspective assist with balancing this perspective , i n other words to get rid of greed and enhance the view of the who l e ? HR: Part of the a n swer i s t h a t readi ng t h e n o n ­ Western texts wil l h e l p yo u read t h e texts of t h e Abra h a m i c traditions i n a d i ffe rent way as wel l . Attending carefu l ly t o the non materialist th rust of most of the world 's rel igions can re m i nd u s that it i s very h a rd to quote script u re i n favor of the tel evange l i sts , i n favor of t h i s overcon s umption , i n favor o f a l l the th i ngs that are destruct ive of com m u n i ty, and contri b u te to a meani nglessness that i s i n c reasi ngly affecting a l l of o u r l ives . I t i s very h a rd to q uote from the Gospe l s , t h e Hebrew scriptures , o r the Quran t o j ustify the present "American way of l i fe . " " Not by bread alone , " i s fa i rly centra l . I t i s true that God helps those who h e l p themselve s , but w e m ust l ove o u r neighbor as ou rselve s . "May the best m a n wi n " i s m o re than offset by many examples of the view that " I t i s not whether you wi n or lose , but how yo u play the game that counts . " The E nglish j u rist Coke said that " Every m a n 's home i s h i s castl e , " yet we agree with the Engl i s h c leric John Donne that " N o m a n i s a n i s l a n d . " We h ave the resources with i n the Western tradition to combat ra mpant materi a l i s m and the destruction of o u r soc i a l and natu ra l environments.3o M a ny of t h o s e resou rces h ave been given short s h r i ft s i nce the r i se of capita l i sm , b u t they a re there , to be i n terpreted a n ew

50

aga i n st t h e background of exa m i n i ng other tradition s , a n d i ncorporating t h e i r wi sdom accordingly. A n d , o f cou rse , t h e same may b e s a i d for t h e other traditions as we l l .

QUESTION:

Regardi ng sec u ri ty, w h i c h a l so

i n c l udes a sense of belonging that you mentioned, An n i e D i l la rd sa i d , "We a re most deeply asleep at the switch e s when we fa ncy we h ave any control at a l l . " I s n 't the idea of rel igion pre c i sely to help u s u n de rstan d t h a t there i s no such th i ng as " security ? " HR: I h a d h o ped t o get a few easy quest i o n s ; that's a n o t h e r h a rd but equally excellent o n e . D i ll a rd i s , of c o u rse , working with the sense of security that comes from a fa i rly l i teral reading of the Abra h a m i c texts where i n w e a re told , aga i n , that w e a re " se c u re i n God's h a n ds , " wh i c h , when we observe a n d conte m p l ate nature as deeply as she does , see ms assuredly not to be the case. Such obse rvation a n d conte m plation renders h igh ly i m p l a u sible Leibnizian an d other a rguments that a l l i s for the best i n th i s best of a l l possible worlds , and a pa rt of what D i l l a rd is doing, I believe , i s u pdating Vol ta i re 's critique of such a rgu ments. I t i s i n teresti ng to n ote that D i l l a rd's question i ng of S i m p l i stic fa ith i n God h e re appl i e s e q u a l ly to S i m p l i s t i c fai t h i n science to m a ke us more secu re by the " co n q uest of nature "-aga i n , a concept u n ique to the Abra h a m i c traditions , a n d ste m m ing from the faith

51

as wel l that the u n iverse i s expla natorily i n te l l igib l e . And for those w h o defe n d the fa ith i n science t o give us secu rity on the gro unds of the progress that h a s been m a d e i n th i s rega rd, I woul d reply that th i s enta i l s a n u n u s u a l defi n ition o f the word " p rogress " : o u r a b i l i ty t o a rrest death h a s been m ore t h a n matched by o u r abi l i ty to spread i t , a n d the percentage of h u m a n bei ngs who go to bed h u ngry every n ight-if they h ave a bed-is s u rely h ighe r than i t wa s th ree or more centuries ago , everywhere i n the world. Th i s i s not a plea to retu r n to feu da l i s m , or the Stone Age . You r quote from D i l lard i s in the context of an analogy she draws between the in c redible complexity of chaotic i n teractions i n natu re with a ra i l road system that has grown , u n m anaged, to the point where its worki ngs a re u ncontrol l a b l e , with tra i n s c ra s h i ng everywhere . 3 1 But let's th i n k of h e r analogy i n a differen t way. Rai l roads a re a h u ma n , n o t a natural , c reati o n . There a re p robl e m s i nh e re n t with them , b u t i f managed w i t h an eye to people and not profits , rai l roads can move those who need to go somewhere e l se with a means of doing so that is far m ore h u m a n ly i n teractive , e ffi c i e n t , aesthetically pleasing, energy sav i ng, a n d eart h susta i n i ng than S UVs by t h e m i l l ions barre l i ng a long m i l l ions of acres of asphalt and concrete , with drivers comforted on ly by c e l l phones a n d g u n s i n the glove box, attempting to avoid the l a rge tra i l e r-trucks that m ove materi a l goods-freight-in a m a n n e r far more i n e fficient and ecologically u n sound t h a n tra i n s can move those goods.

52

Rel a tedly on sec u r i ty : a basic e l e m e n t of sec u r i ty i s food security, wh ich the rich of the world b u t not the poor e nj oy: this type of secu rity also bears o n the issue o f funda m e n ta l i s m and fa n a t i c i s m in rel igious tradition s . Th e m i ddle c l a sses a n d ru l i ng e l i tes i n these tradi t i o n s ove rwh e l m i ngly d o n o t resort to violence in adva n c i ng t h e i r b e l i e fs ; onl y the m i nd­ n u m b i ngly a n d bone-weary poor do th i s , wh i c h is not m e rely a c o i n c ide n c e . Although some wou l d have i t so, the d i s t i n c t i o n is not to be drawn between the educated and the noneducated, for i t i s d i ffi c u l t to rece ive a n education i f t he re a re n o schools with i n fifty m i les of you r h om e , a n d eve n i f there a re , i t i s d i ffi c u l t t o atte nd to yo u r studies w h e n y o u have n 't eaten i n th ree days . B u t l i ke rai l roads, the economic distribution of food is a human c reation , a n d hence controllable ; i f i t can be done , as it i s at presen t , a l together u nj u stly, then it c a n be done j ustly too . Food is essential for life , a n d consequently s h o u l d not , perhaps , be seen a s a commodity on a par with VC Rs, a utomob i l e s , electric toothbrushes, a n d ciga rette l ighters; perhaps societies o ught not to be measured, a s econo m i sts and some other soc i a l scientists a re wont to do , by h ow m uch food they produce , b u t rather by h ow equ itably they distri b u te t h e i r produce. I f s u c h be done , I wou l d s uggest that both the q u a l ity and quantity of violence i n the world wou l d decrease s ign i ficantly, rel igiously or otherw i se inspired;

53

occa s ional ly, but seldom , do people with a sec u re food s u pply wish to wreak h avoc on their n e ighbors. A fi nal poi nt on D i l lard. I wou ld m a i n ta i n that a l though she does i n deed convey, movi ngly, the sense of the u ncontrol la b ili ty of nature to wh ich you righ tfu l ly c a l l attention , she neve rtheless has a strong sense of belonging at her cabin and envi ro n s a t Ti n ker C reek, wh ich i s one reason I mentioned h e r work in the lecture . I n many passages her fu ll absorption i n what she i s perce iving i s obv i o u s , eve n wh e n what she is perceivi ng i s fa i rly gory. She i s fu l ly absorbe d , h a s a n a ffi n i ty and a ffection for, a sense of belonging i n her l ittle world that far s u rpasses h e r fee l i ngs of h elplessness and/or estrange m e n t . At least that i s the way I read h e r.32

QUESTION:

Th e word itself-" metaphys i c s "­

wou l d suggest " beyond the physi ca l , " the presu pposi t ion of somet h i ng beyond. I s n 't t h i s an oxymoron , attempting to describe the metaphysical with the physica l ?

HR: Another excellent question , t o which I would love to hear H u ston 's response . My own m u st be in stage s , and h i nge crucially on my perhaps idiosyncratic rea d i ng of the Western ph i losoph ical tradition a s i n h e rited from the a n c i e n t G reeks.

54

We a l l know that the term " metaphys i c s " itse l f derives from a n arbitra ry deci s i o n on t h e part of h i s editors t o a rrange t h e works of Ari stotle i n a certa i n way. B u t i n h i s works, n o l e s s t h a n Thales a n d H e racl i t u s ( " a l l i s water, " " a l l i s fi re " ) , phys ic a l i ty, the " st u ff" of

this

world, is never lost; there i s noth ing

tra nscendental i n these c l a i m s . Greek ontologies were c h a l lenged, of cou rse , by later metaphys i c i a n s : Descartes c l a i med two su bstances , Spi noza one , a n d L e i b n i z a n i ndefi n i tely large n u mber of t h e m . But a l l of these modern th i n kers, and m a n y others, wou l d describe themselves today, I th i n k , as doing science; were they to be rei ncarnated today, they wou l d seek appo i ntments i n mathematics , biology, or physics departments, not ph i losophy, for they were endeavoring to provide the fou n dational elements for the scientific di scoveries of their day. O f course , Le ibniz wrote the the

Theodicy,

Natural Theology of the Ch inese

as wel l as the

Monadology;

and

b u t he wrote

the latter for very d i ffere nt reasons than he wrote the former, both of which metaphys i c a l ly req u i re a C h ristian tra n scendental rea l m i n a way the

Monadology

does not. 33

Th ere a re (at least) two see m i ngly tel l i ng counterexa m ples to t h i s c l a i m about the G reek i n te llectual h e ritage , the first being Plato's Form s , or I deas

(eidos),

a n d t h e othe r, Socrates's

a utobiographical remarks i n the

Apology about

abando n i ng what we wou l d today refer to as the " sc ie n t i fic method" as a way of obta i n i ng knowledge .

55

Z

But I read these exa m ples as attempts to come to gri p with di scoveries i n geometry made by Pythagorean

�

th i n kers who preceded them , i n days far precedent to

rJj rJj

the works of Leibn iz and Newton on the calc u l u s . We all know, or at least believe , that i f a statement is true , it m ust refer to, be about, someth ing that is the case , wh ich we can verify by observation . We also know, or at least believe , that any diagonal that we actual ly draw connecting the end points of a right triangle with both sides equal as one, wil l have a fi nite length . U n fortunately the Pythagorean Theorem show conclusively that this i s not true: -,/ 2-to wh ich the Greeks wou ld not give a symbol as a n u m ber-is a nontermi nating decimal fraction ; and a related argu ment holds for circles and

1t .

Both Socrates and Plato opted

for geometry over observation , and endeavored to j usti fy thei r option ; but th is i s a long way both from modern science and from the transcendental world of Judaism and C h ri stian i ty, Augustine notwithstanding. "What is tru ly rea l ? " is not a q uestion asked in the phi losoph ical and rel igious traditions of most cultures-and I ndia is only a partial exception-but it is a straightforward one to ask when mathematical developments precede the formative periods of ph i losoph ical and rel igious specu lation h i storical ly.34 In su m-and harking back to l i ngu i stic sensitivitie mentioned earl ier-even i f I could somehow tran slate "What i s truly rea l ? " i nto the classical C h i nese la nguage of Con fu c i u s , I would suspect he wou ld be no less perplexed by it than if asked, in response to 56

h i s " rectification of names" a rgu ments, to comment on the l i ngu i stic sign i ficance of the famous "colorless ,, green ideas sleep fu riously. 35 What I conclude from these reflections is that if " metaphysics" i s defined only narrowly, then only t h i n kers i n the West have engaged i n it. I am deeply suspicious of such a claim and its chauvi n istic overtones, and believe a more open defi n ition is needed for genu i n e inte rfa ith dia logues and com parative p h ilosoph ical research to go forward.

QUESTION: The centra l message of your thesis has someth i ng to do with the idea that the power and most va l uable message of all the world's rel igions has to do with what you cal l "ego-reduction , " or " ego­ shrinkage . " And yet , the most centra l value in the world today, i n both the U n i ted States and C h i n a , is ego-expansion , selfishness, and so forth . What does that mea n , the n , for the world's rel igions? What role a re they to take ? Are they to become more iconoclastic i n going aga i n st the preva i l i ng gra i n ? H ow can they seriously be heard by popu lations that a re movi ng more and more towa rds ego-en l a rgement and se l f­ gratification ? What stance do they assum e , whether i n Asia o r America, Eastern o r Western ? HR: I most defi n i tely t h i n k that the basic truths

conta i ned in the sacred texts of the world's rel igions

57

"go agai nst the gra i n " of the poisonous ethos of contem porary sel f-centered materia l ism , whe re i n flesh a n d blood h u man bei ngs play no rol e , leaving only those with money-that is, potential p u rchasers/consumers-acknowledged as existent by the advertisi ng-driven propaga nda machine a l so known as the U . S. media. G iven that an i n c reasi ngly destructive capita l i s m is not o n ly dom i nating our l ives , b u t o u r ways o f t h i n ki ng about o u r l ives as we l l , I perso n a l ly believe that p u rely sec u l a r a l ternatives thereto wil l not ga in much p u rchase; rather m ust we look, at least in pa rt , to the traditions of the sacred, East and West , for the revi sioning and renewa l of o u r I ives .36 As I hoped to m a ke c lear in my lectu re , I do not see the distinction between the sec u l a r and the sacred as an ontological one. A tra n scendenta l rea l m there m ay wel l be , but by foc u s i ng on it as developed i n t h e West w e have n o t on ly failed t o u n de rstand and apprec iate fu l ly other rel igious tradition s , we h ave lost sight of m uc h of o u r own as we l l . As n u merous I ndian sages h ave i n structed us, adva nced spiritual u nderstanding eventuates i n apprec iating that and

samsara

nirvana

a re not di sparate , but rather that the

former is deeply i m bedded i n the latter. And a l th ough there a re no c lose lexical a n a l ogues for either " secular" or " sacred" in the C h i nese text s , those texts a re a l so best u n derstood , I believe , by apprec iating h ow the C h i nese sages a re tel l i ng u s how to more fu l ly dwe l l in the sec u l a r to make i t sacred.

58

These i n structions from o u r friends from the East c l early lead to the ego-reduction of which we have spoke n , b u t let me come at the problem from another p h i losoph ical direction , one more central to the Western intellectual heritage . H uston , i n h i s remarks , s uggested that my lack of ontologi cal commitment to " other dom a i n s of rea li ty" l e ft me with o n ly the " merely psychologica l " to defend my claim for the i m portance of t h e world's re l igions in the twe nty- first century. Although I disagree with H u ston on ly with great re l u ctance on a ny issue, there i s , I regret , a d i fference betwee n u s h e re wh i c h I hope the fol lowing rem arks m ight bridge , at least i n part. The rapture we fee l hearing a piece of bea u t i fu l m u sic p l ayed s u perbly; sharing the j oy o f a friend a fter some accompl is h m e n t ; grief felt at the loss of a l oved o ne ; a l l of these and a great many oth ers may be c a l led psychological state s , b u t c a l l i ng the m " me re " can cause u s to lose sight of the fact that they a re the basic stu ff of o u r l ives . They appear to be u n iversa l states , fou n d i n a l l c u l t u res past a n d presen t , a n d i f I h ave not been radic a l ly wrong in my account of rel igious experie nce s , these too , appear to be " p sychological states " fou n d in a l l c u l t u re s . But because they serve to enhance and e n ri c h our other experiences , I want to give them the h u ma n i m po rtance I bel ieve they deserve , which was the major focu s of my lecture and which c a n a l l too easily be neglected or disparaged by e ngaging i n too m u c h metaphysics a n d theology-or psychology.

59

Re latedly, H u ston suggests that without some metaphysical confidence i n a n u lti mate rea l i ty h igher than that of h u ma n experience , we can have no grounds for bel ievi ng that "we a re not j u st making it up when we have t h i s sentiment of safety a n d belonging. " Yet t h i s is not necessarily so, on logi cal no less than psyc h ological grounds. I t see m s to me that i f someone says "I h ave a strong sense of belonging h e re , " we m u st a l l ow for the poss i b i l i ty that they m ight be deceiving us, for one reason or another. 3 ? B u t i f we a l low that poss i b i l i ty we m u st a l low eq u a l ly the possibility that they a re te l l i ng the tru t h . I f s u c h i s the case , then we cannot, on logical gro u n d s , say of them that they a re engaged i n se lf-deception , or a re " j u st making it u p . " I wou l d hope that H u ston m ight give some sympathy to my position h e re , if not an endorsement. For som e , abstract metaphysical engagement may we l l be efficacio u s , indeed necessary, a n d on this score I wou l d " let a h u n dred flowe rs bloom . " But u n t i l very di ffere n t , less tra n scendenta l (and more pla u sible) metaphysics a n d theologies a re put forth , we m ight wel l follow the advice of Confu c i u s when asked whether the spirits of the ancestors were presen t at t h e ritual sac rifices t o the m : " Sacri fice t o t h e spirits as though the spi rits a re present" ( 3 . 1 2 ) . Attending to this a n c i e n t C h i nese wi sdom can help u s u ndersta nd i n a d i fferen t way the l i nes from Alexa n der Pope , wh ich , apart from the sexist la nguage , I commend to you :

60

Know then thyself. presume not God to scan; The proper study of mankind is man

I have enjoyed this eve n i ng greatly; thank you very muc h .

61

Epilogue

To THE READ E R WHO

HAS COME TH I S FAR

it wi l l be

appa re n t , I fea r, that my responses to the issues a n d concerns ra i sed b y H u ston S m i t h and b y the a udience a re woe fu l ly i ncomplete. Th i s fea r was brought home to me by the severa l fri ends and colleagues acknowledged in the Preface , who i n d ividua l ly and col lectively suggested-graciously but firm ly-that a n u m be r of my c l a i m s req u i red a m p l i fication and/or fu rth e r j u st i fication i f they we re to command a reade r's attention in the pages of a small book. Hence t h i s E p i logue. One set of i s s u e s c l u stered a ro und my v iews of science: how I see m odern i n relation to earl i e r science i n the West; h ow I s e e science i n other t rad i t i o n s ; a n d h ow I see science i n re lation to metaphys i c s , espec i a l l y the metaphys i c s fou n d i n re l igious texts. I t i s necessary fo r me t o say more about these matters i n orde r to m a ke c l e a re r my stronge r c l a i m that we can ta ke the sacred texts of t h e worl d's re ligions as i n struct ive fo r o u r l ives w i t h o u t a c c e p t i n g the speci fi c metaphysical ( a n d theologica l ) views a n d bel i e fs e m bedded i n each of those texts. And fi n a l ly, I need to expa n d somewhat my opt i m i s m for bel ieving t h a t those texts c a n contribute t o t h e disc i p l i ne of ego-reduction necessa ry for the k i nds o f rel igious expe riences I have descri bed w h e n w e a re l iving i n a n i n c reasingly se lf-cente red, c o n s u m e r­ oriented, h ighly competi tive capita l i st soc iety that t h reate n s to engu l f the whole world.

65

Science first. I n one sense modern Western science i s deeply i n debted to its Greek ancestors , that sense being the assu m ption of an u n derlying rea l i ty-matter, substance-that beget the world of appearances, a n eve r-changing world. (The C h i nese d i d n o t make t h i s assumption , a theme to w h i c h I ' l l ret u rn below) . I n most other respect s , h owever, a n c ie n t and modern Western science a re rather differe nt . Contemporary practitioners of the severa l scientific disc i p l i n e s clearly de l i neate a dom a i n of data which they take as their task to expla i n ; em brace a theoretical perspective that is both productive a n d constra i n i ng; they engage i n extre me ly c lose observations-aided by h ighly soph i sticated tech nology-of experiments designed to i solate and con trol variables; and they n a rrate the res u lts of their efforts i n quantitative statements. F u rther, relatively l i ttle of t h i s work i s motivated sim ply b y t h e des i re t o learn m o re about h ow the world happens to be. Rather i s the thrust of researc h to learn to m a n i p ulate the world more e ffic iently: nob ly, by fi nding a c u re for A I D S , or malari a ; comme rcial ly, to fi nd a better bea u ty c ream to h ide wrinkles; and more base , to c reate deadly chem ical or biological weapo n s of wa r. Most ancient G reek p h i losophers did not engage i n t h e s e practices. "True opi n i o n " ( a b o u t the world of appea rances) was , fo r Socrates and Plato , decidedly i n fe rior to knowledge (of u n c hanging rea l i ty) , which was to be obta i ned by dialectical reasoning, not observation and experim e n t . 38 Wh i l e Aristotle took the

66

empirical world more seriou sly than h i s teac h e rs , h e , too , was far more concerned with t h e conceptua l-the syl logi s m , c a u sa l i ty, form , and so on-than with the observational or expe ri mentaP9 And the u n derlying question of all of the i r in tel lectual e fforts wa s , I wou l d m a i n ta i n , n o t o n e that w e look t o modern science to a n swe r today, name ly, what is the best l i fe for h u ma n be ings? I do not i n tend t h i s comparison of ancient G reek and modern Western sc ience a s a n invidious o n e ; it is, a fter a l l , on the bas i s of modern science that I have a rgued for the bracket i ng of the cosmo logical and ontological-that i s , metaphysical-statements fo u n d in t h e sacred texts and na rratives of the world's re l igio n s . Except for method, h owever, modern Western science has by no mea n s been monolithic: there a re a la rge n u m be r of meta physical views fo und in the h i story of modern science , many of wh ich a re incompatible with each other. I f we c a n appreciate h ow a n d why th i s is so, perhaps we can come to a l so a ppreciate h ow a n d why scie n t i fic e fforts a re not t h reate n i ng to re l igio n . One i s s u e t h a t bea rs equa l ly on science , metaphys i c s , a n d rel igion w i l l be we l l known to everyon e who has taken an introducto ry p h i l osophy course : the m i nd-body prob l e m . As we u nde rsta nd it today, the problem originates with Descartes . There has been some spec u lation about why he was so obsessed with the issue of c e rta i n ty, from whence the m i n d-body problem a rose . It has been a rgued that

67

Descartes was tra u matized by the assa s s i nation of H e n ry of Navarre , and the s u bsequent Th irty Years' War i n which h e was i nvolved, and w h i c h i n c l uded theological disputes such as the " true " n a t u re of tra n s ubstantiation . 4o Others have specu l ated that the you ng Rene was fru strated deeply by a mathematical problem h e could not solve , the frustration arising from the fact that deduction proceeds by a series of sma l l , i n c remental steps, each of wh ich s h o u l d be clearly and distinctly obvious from the prior step . 4 1 Wh ile taking both of these spec u lations seriously, it is also e n t i rely possible that Descartes was s i m ply conti n u i ng the ancient G reek tradition o f atte m pting to concept u a l ly reconc i l e the facts of c h a nge appare n t to the sen ses on the one h a n d , a n d the fact that nature neverth eless conforms to itse l f on the oth er, by pos i t i ng a s u bstantial real i ty u n derlying the apparent c h a nge s , whether t h a t s ubstance w a s the water of Tha l e s , the fire of H e racl i t u s , or the atoms of Democritus and Lucreti u s . B y meditating long and h a rd , Descartes discovered two substance s , m i n d (that which t h i n ks ) , and body (that wh ich is exte nded ) . I n keeping with the best scientific traditions of h i s day, h owever, and with respect for Occa m 's Razor, substance s , whatever they were , had to be i rreducible to other substances, and hence could not i n teract. Th u s Descartes's prob l e m , the legacy of which rem a i n s with us today: what i s the relation between m i nd and body? Spinoza attempted to solve-or dissolve-the probl e m by going to the

68

extrem e of a rg u i ng for only one substa n c e , with d i fferen t m odes a n d attributes. Le i b n i z wen t to the other extre m e , a rgu ing for a n i ndefi n itely large n u mber o f substances: his beloved monads , which , although they could not i n teract , cou l d nonetheless dance bea u t i fu l ly i n a preesta b l ished h a rmony to m u sic com posed by God. Science a n d p h ilosophy parted company at t h i s t i m e , for a l ready i n Leibn iz's day the concept of body­ matter, substance-h ad u n de rgone a profo u n d c h a nge . Descartes also posited " subtle matter, " which could provide a strictly mechanical account of heat, l ight , gravi ty, e lectric ity, magnetism , celestial motion , a n d m u c h e l se . M ovement th rough th is " subtle matter"­ later, "aether"-was tra n s m i tted by physical contact , wh ich c o u l d a l ter both speed and direction . Newton 's equatio n s , h owever, req u i red that bodies-su bstance , matter, (subtle or otherwise) be capable of a ffecting each other without being i n any physical contact, doo m i ng the moving bodie s , matter­ i n - motion , b i l l iard-ba l l Cartesian mechanical u n iverse once and for a l l . Newton h i m se l f, in the wel l -known quote , " fe igned no hypothese s " about h ow t h i s action­ at-a-distance , occ u l t phenomenon could take place (wh ich i s the maj o r reason Le ibniz was so rel ucta nt to accept Newton 's res u l t s ) ; b u t h e n c e forward , " body" could no l onger mean for scientists what it h a d meant to Descartes . H i s n otion of " subtle matter" w a s n o t al together abandoned for over two centurie s , but as the "aether, "

69

i t , too , c h a nged a n d was deve loped u n t i l E i n ste i n 's equations permi tted a very d i fferen t explanation of the results of the M ic h a e l son-Morley experiments (wh ich s upposedly showed that the speed of l ight partic l e s was not im peded by the aether) . I n addition to body a n d aether, oth e r concepts were i nvente d , c h a nged , and devel oped by scientists: the " h u m o u rs , " for exa m p l e , h e lped exp l a i n the worki ngs of the h u ma n body for H a rvey in a d i ffe re n t way t h a n for H ippocrate s . A n e w s ubt le body-ph l ogiston-was i ntroduced to accou n t for combustion . L i ke aether, these latter terms a re no longer fou n d in the scientific l iterature ; now, we a re tol d ,

real

bodies a re ever-so­

wee-th i ngs , ferm i o n s . Someday, perh a p s , ferm ions w i l l g o the way of p h l ogisto n , a n d perhaps space-another term whose meaning has c h a nged over t i m e-w i l l tu rn o u t not to be c u rved i n Riem a n n ia n fashion , b u t good old­ fas h ioned E u c l idean a fter a l l . B u t what i s sign i ficant, I think, i s that wh i l e e m ploying terms l ike " aether, " " p h l ogi ston , " and " h u m o u r s " i n redefi n i ng the meaning of " body, " or " m atter, " scientists h ave given us inva l uable i n sights i n to the natura l wo rld we i n h a b i t , even as many of these terms later gave way to others. Th u s , for myse l f, I a m happy to let scientists define " body" i n whatever way it suits t h e m , a n d to tell me h ow I should use the term , i f not i n everyday parlan c e , then at the least in tec h n ical ph i losoph ical discourse . 42

70

Turn i ng n ow to the other term , " m i n d , " I h ave no truck with reduc t i o n i stic effo rts to translate the l anguage of mental states i n to the l a nguage of b ra i n ( body) states. Reducti o n i s m i s a tried and true methodology in the natura l sciences , the mathematical results of which h ave h igh predictive val u e . But at least for the foreseeable fut u re , it w i l l rem a i n that the lexicon of mental terms serves a very di fferent explanatory fu nction than the la nguage of physical ( body) term s . I t m u st b e noted t h a t wh i l e the study of t h e brain­ as physical body-belongs to the natura l sciences, the study of the m i n d i s the p u rview of the soc ial a n d behavioral sciences, which , owi ng to the complexity of the human mind, i s a major reason for their s t i l l not being truly worthy of being conside red sciences. D i ffering concepts of mind can differentiate disc i p l i n e s , and theories with i n the m . F o r econom ists, a n d some political scientists , the m i n d is a n exq u i site m a c h i n e for calcu lating se l f- i nterest among competing poss i b i l ities (an ego-en h a n c i ng concept ) . For most a n t h ropologists and soc iologists , it is the mechanism whereby o n e 's behavior is i ntegrated with the behavior of oth e rs (ditto ) . F reudians ascribe both subconsc i o u s a n d u nconscious d i m e n s i o n s to the m i n d , and poi n t t o a power to suppress a n d repress parts of itse l f (ditto aga i n ) . Other psychologists of a S k i nnerian bent i n s i st that a concept of m i n d is u nnecessary to develop a science of behavior. C h o mskya n l i ngUists describe the

71

m i nd as modul a r, with h ighly spec i fic cogn itive capacities , triggered i n to activity by environ m e n ta l sti m u l i rather than b e i n g shaped b y them . The res ults of these soci a l and behavioral i nvestigations , described i n m e n ta l i stic l anguage , but with d i ffering conceptions of the m i n d , h ave been fa i rly m eage r i n aiding o u r u n derstanding of the world i n wh i c h w e l ive when compared t o t h e natura l (bodily) sc iences, and h ave made it m uch more d i ffi c u l t for u s t o be open t o rel igiou s experi e n c e , b u t they h ave not been inco n sequential ; we do now know m o re about the dyna m i c s of our l ives as i ndividua l s , a n d a s members of com m u n ities, tha n o u r a ncestors did, a n d t h i s knowledge d i d not c o m e a b o u t because of o u r notion of body: concepts of friendsh i p , power, honor, shame , l ove , gu i l t , oppression , dign i ty, val u e s , and much more , are all essential for u nderstan d i ng what i t i s to be h u ma n , and the appropriate l anguage for com m u n icating t h i s knowledge is menta l i stic from start to fi n i sh . For these reaso n s , I wi l l bow to the soc i a l a n d behavioral scientists i n a l l owing them to define m i n d as they di ffere ntia l ly wish , j u st as I bowed earlier to t h e natura l scientists w i t h respect to body. I wil l n o t bow anywhere near as deeply, of course , because the former do not speak with one m i n d , a n d hence each should rem a i n open to c o m m e nts and criticisms from p ractitioners of the other disc i p l i n e s , a n d from p h ilosophers and other h u ma n ists as wel l , espec ially with regard to what they have to say about religion .

72

It th u s appears to me that the concept of body h a s evolved considerably i n the natura l sciences over t h e p a s t three c e n t u r i e s , and there is c u rrently no ge nerally accepted theory of the mind i n the social and behavioral sciences , and I concl ude from these observations that no s u ffi c i en t ly prec i se defi n itions of e i th er m i n d or body can be given to clearly form u late a prob l e m concern i ng their relation to each oth e r.43 Clearly my readi ng of the h i story of modern Western science req U i res atte n tiveness not o n ly to c u l t u ra l , but a l so to temporal con text , which shows that scientists h ave frequently c h anged their m i nds about what there was , and was not, in the u n iverse they studied. Th u s , if my readi ng of that h istory i s a p l a u s i b l e o n e , a n u mber of i n ferences c a n b e drawn from i t . T h e first o f these i n ferences recapitu lates o n e of H u ston 's c l a i m s : although it does n o t today speak of d i ffering level s of rea l i ty, tomorrow's science may postu late such , perh a ps eve n to i n clude a tra n scendental rea l m . I perso n a l ly am agnostic with respect to such metaphysical c la i m s , b u t the th rust of my reply to H u ston i s that such c l a i m s a re not

necessary

in order to a rgue for conti n u i ng to take most

seriously the sacred texts a n d narratives of the world's traditions. And as with the tra n scende n t , so too with the teleological . Western scienti sts u sed to employ the terms " pu rpose" and " p u rposive " regularly i n their accounts of God's handiwork , not rad ic a l ly d i ffe re n t

73

from their use of " ph logiston " or "aether" except for the level of abstraction i nvolved. B u t old ideas may return-th i n k of the atoms of Democritus , the h e l i ocen tric views of Aristarc h u s-espec i a l ly i n the social a n d behavioral sciences: many i n s ights m ight be gained by asking what the goal of h u ma n society is, or what p urposes person s m ight h ave; such questions a re perhaps too i mporta nt to be e n tru sted solely to p h i l osoph e rs and theologi a n s . There a re o t h e r reasons w h y I have discu ssed the so-ca lled " mi n d-body p roblem " at some lengt h ; i n deed I want to discuss it fu rth e r, now i n a cross-cu l t u ra l context. I n my lecture I a rgued t h a t w e w i l l most productively re read the rel igious texts of our own traditions i f we read carefu l ly the texts of other traditions at the same time. And I wou l d maintain that scientific and p h i losoph ical texts should be reread i n the s a m e way.

I f the m i nd-body problem is a u n iversal o n e , it should be fou n d i n other traditions that h ave what can legitimately be conside red science a n d p h i losophy. C h i n a most assuredly h a s both , b u t no m i nd-body " problem " is ever considered i n the writings of its p h i losophers and scientists. Si mply p u t , there a re n o simple term s in the lexicon of ancient C h i nese for " m in d " or " body"-o r Greek

soma

for that matter-su ffi c i e n tly approximating the

E ngl i sh terms to effect a clear tra nslation of the

74

" prob lem , " even i f those terms a re taken solely i n t h e i r ord i n a ry, everyday senses. Body fi rst . Th e C h i nese expression

wan wu

is

u s u a l ly tra n s l ated a s " t h e ten t h o u s a n d th i ngs , " and the tra n s l a t i o n i s not m i s l e a d i n g s o long a s we re m e m b e r t h a t t h e E ngl i s h " th i ngs " does not a lways re fe r to material obj e c t s . It does in expre s s i o n s l i ke " foo l s a n d th i ngs , cabbages a n d k i n gs , " b u t sh i fts somewh at in t h e fa m o u s q uote fro m Rebecca West , "Art does n ot copy t h e wo rld; one of the da m n e d t h i ng i s e n o ugh . " I n t h e o l d s o n g , "These Foo l i s h Th i ngs Re m i n d M e of Yo u , " h a l f of t h e ite m s cata l oged-so u n d s , s m e l l s , m e m o ries- a re not su bsta n t i a l , a n d we a l l k n ow a n d u n de rsta n d fu l ly t h e keen observati o n th a t " th e best th i ngs in l i fe a re n 't th i ngs. " For ove r two h u ndred years another C h i nese express ion ,

wu xing,

has been rendered as the " five

elements , " a n d it is u n derstandable why t h i s was done , bec a u se the q u i n tet refe rred to was made u p of meta l , wood , fi re , earth , and water. B u t

xing

doesn 't mean

" e l e m e n t " i n any way re motely rese m b l i ng the G reek " Fo u r E lements" theory. The proper tra n slation for

xing

wu

i s " five phases . "

I n s i st i ng on t h e acc u racy o f tra n slation h e re i s not a n exe rc ise in etymologica l n it p i c k i ng. In order to comprehend the early C h i nese view of the cosm o s , the good earth , and the place of h u man bei ngs there i n i t is necessary t o attempt t o see , fee l , u n derstand t h e world a s n o t s o m u c h made u p of substa n c e s , matters ,

75

bodies-no u n s-bu t rather as series of eve n t s , processe s , relations. Cons ider the fol lowi ng statement from Nathan Sivi n : Scientific thought bega n , i n C h i na as e l sewhere , with atte m pts to compreh end how it i s that a l t hough i ndividual th i ngs a re constantly c h a nging, a lways com i ng to be and peri s h i ng, n a ture as a coherent o rder not o n ly endures b u t rem a i n s conformable to itself. I n the West the earliest such attempts ide n t i fied the u nc h a ng i ng rea l i ty with some basic stuff out of which a l l t h e t h i ngs a ro u n d u s , despite t h e i r appare n t divers i ty, a re formed. In C h i n a the earliest a n d i n the long r u n the most i n fluential scientifi c explanations were in term s of t i m e . Th ey made sen se of the momentary eve n t by fi tting it i n to the cyc l ical rhyth ms of natura l process.44

(It can be noted i n passing that perhaps one reason the C h i nese foc u sed on time in their sciences i s that they did not h ave any revelato ry a ffirmation that the h ow and why of the u n iverse could be u ltimately i n te l l igible to h u ma n beings, a n d hence were more concerned with tempora l regu larities fou n d i n natu re than with explanations grounded i n the s u pernat u ra l . ) I wou l d extend S ivi n 's coge n t acco u nt t o i n c l ude not only scientifi c , but C h i nese moral and re l igious description s , a n a lyse s , and eva l uations as we l l . The basic " stu ff"-body, matter, substa n c e , the u nderlying rea l i ty that is u n c h a ngi ng-of the scientifi c West is concept u a l ly analogo u s to the endu ring sel f ( " strict self- i dentity" ) , or sou l , of the moral and rel igious West. The C h i nese , on the oth e r hand, made sense

76

of personal identity " by fitting it i nto the cyclical rhyth m s of natura l process . " M a ny factors e n ter i nto the analysis of benefactor-benefiCiary roles i n Confucian i s m , b u t ti me i s essential . 45 When we hear someone say, " I ' m not the person I u sed to be , " we i n te rpret the statement as a lament o n the aging process. For the C h i ne se , h owever, the state ment wou l d be qu ite l i terally tru e . When you ng I was a benefi c i a ry of my parents a n d e l ders , n ow I a m their benefactor. M a rriage made me a di fferent perso n , a n d becom i ng a parent cha nged m e even m o re , as did entry i n to grandfa therhood. D ivorce wou l d make me yet d i fferen t aga i n , and one day I w i l l be beneficiary of my c h i ldre n , no l onger a benefactor. Of course t h rough a l l of these cyc l i c , tem pora l c h anges I h ave a body, b u t what kind of body? Sivin once more: In C h i n a the bou ndaries of the [ h u m a n ] body were di ffere n t than in G reece . The term s norma l ly used for the body, shen, and ti, cove r a great dea l m ore than G reek samai , which clea rly denotes the physic a l .

Shen i n c l u des the i n dividual perso n a l i ty, a n d m a y refe r i n a general way t o the perso n , rather than to the body. Ti refers to the concrete physical body. . . . I t c a n a l so mean " e m bod i m e nt , " and m ay re fe r to a n i ndivi d u a l 's perso n i fication o f someth i n g . Chu comes closer to the scope of the E u ropea n notion of body, b u t ling chu i m p l i e s the perso n , and chu was not a c o m m o n word. The o n ly term for the body that has noth i ng to do with the person seen who l e , xing , l itera l ly mea n s "shape . " It often refers to the body's o u t l i n e rather than to i ts physical identity. It is not surp r i s i ng that the E u ropean m i n d-body dichotomy (a mong a great m a ny other mental habits) seems exotic to East Asian s . . . 46

77

Th u s the ancient C h i nese did not have C a rtesian bodies. They didn't have C a rtesia n m i nds e i t h e r. U n l i ke the n u merous C h i nese graphs that may be translated as " body" on occasion , there i s o n ly one rende red as " m ind " :

xin ;

origi n a l ly a styl ized pictu re of

the aorta , it is the seat of though t . But there 's a catc h : it is a l so t h e seat of fee l i ng. The

xin

equa l l y reason s ,

refl ects , hope s , fea rs , a n d desires. Th u s there i s no sharp cogn itive/a ffective spl it i n ea rly C h i nese though t , n o t becau se of a n y na ivete or epistemological astigmatism on the i r pa rt , but rather to their not post u l a t i ng a larger m i n dlbody ontology of which the cogn itive/a ffective dichotomy i s a logical coro l l a ry.47 I hope this le ngthy exc u rsus i n to d i ffering concepts of m i n d and body, both i n Western science and p h i losophy, and i n C h i n a , wi l l make cleare r my a rgu ments for approach i ng re l igious texts in a different way, a n d more i m portan t , why I have attem pted to fram e those a rgu ments without making metaphysical commitments. My major c l a i m i s that the sacred texts and na rratives a re a l l describi ng s i m i l a r spi ritual disciplines to fo l l ow i n order to be open to rel igious experiences, which a l so appear to be very s i m i l a r across t i m e , place , la nguage , and c u l t u re . B u t : th ose descri ptions a l l em ploy symbol s , metaphors , a n d desc riptions of the world that a re gro u n ded i n tempora l ly and c u l t u ra l ly spec i fic metaphysical views (whether a lways made explicit i n the text s , or not) . Hence I a m obl iged to concl ude that no

specific

set of metaphysical views or beliefs is necessary

78

for everyone to hold i n order to follow a spi ri tual path and be open to the kinds of rel igious experiences that countless n umbers of adherents of every tradition have had throughout h i story. Th is i s a ge nera l phi losoph ical claim on my part , fa i rly abstract . Even if it be accepted , it does not adeq uately warrant my seemi ngly more radical­ beca use cou nterintuitive-claim that speci fic metaphysical and theologica l views and beliefs a re not necessa ry i n order to gain i nsight into the nature of paths to rel igious experience from the text(s) wh ich a re defined by these speci fic metaphysical and theological views and beliefs. But think, for exa m p l e , of gra i n s and grapes , products o f the earth , which , with i ndividual and collective h u man e ffort, provide food and dri n k necessa ry t o susta i n our h u ma n l ives , a n d thereby l i n k u s i rrevocably to this ( i n c reasi ngly fragi le) good ea rth . One m igh t come to feel this l i n k at any t i m e , in any c u l t u re , perhaps w h e n pa rta king of bread or wine. Yet that sen se of " li n kage "-a weaker but not inconsequential form of "belongi ng"-wi l l a l most surely com,e more easily to those who atte n d carefu l ly to the demonstrative prono u n s with i n the tradition that sac ra l izes the statements "Th i s is my body; t h i s is m y blood . " Now I ask, not a l together rhetorical ly, a re these statements utterly devoid of sign ificance for those unwi l l ing or unable to accept the theological-and hence metaphysical-claim that Jesus C h rist i s

79

the Son of God? Couldn't these statements contribute to generating a sense of at-one-ment for those who hold different theological beliefs , or who hold n o such beliefs whatsoever? Th e a n swe r, of cou rse , i s " No " i f the statements a re o n ly read l iteral ly, t h a t i s , d i rectly ( t h i n k of Oppe n h e i m e r aga i n ) . A n d at the extre m e , such readers may wel l fi nd repe l lent a tradition that i n s i sts on ri tual c a n n i b a l i s m as one of its h ighest sacraments , as I suggested earl ier. (Th i n k of t h e H indu goddess Kal i aga i n ) . B u t I wan t t o g o further i n deemphasizing the i m portance of the spec i fic metaphysical and theological u nderpi n n i ngs of each of the world's rel igions when studying their sacred texts and n arratives. Consider aga i n the tra n scendental rea l m , central t o t h e Abra h a m i c heritage . B y focu si ng o n t h i s rea l m as a rea l i ty wh olly o t h e r than the real i ty we experience in o u r daily l ives , we focu s s i m u l taneou sly on the radical otherness of God , and the div i n i ty of C h rist. On th is God we a re depende n t without remai nder for o u r l ives , a n d o u r eternal future; wh en he " c a l l s " us, we die. We trust that i f we fol low the Good Book fa ithfu l ly we wi l l be rewarded; but no matter h ow h a rd we strive , such reward is not guaranteed. We cannot command God in any way, b u t m ust, in the end, re ly on H i s love , and H i s grace , for a desired h e reafter. Wi th such metaphysics and theology u ppermost i n our m inds , it wi l l obviously be more di ffi c u l t to h ave the k i n ds of rel igious experience I h ave described, the

80

experience of belonging, of safety, of at-one-ment or attu n e m e n t , i n and with the world of o u r everyday l ives. E q u a l ly or even more i m porta n t , a preoc c u pation with the tra n scendental real m m a kes i t extremely d i ffi c u l t to appreciate what the I ncarnation and the Passion of C h ri st actua l ly sign i fies: God is

in,

and of,

th i s world He c reated. ( For mysel f , with i n the C h ristian tradition , the healthiest antidote to the over­ tra nscendental izing of God is the writi ngs of J u l ia n of Norwi ch ) . 48 S i m i la r a rgu ments apply to other rel igious traditions. H indus a n d B u dd h i sts preoccu pied with the ontological dimensions of

karma

and

dharma

may m i ss

a n i m po rtan t message the South Asian sacred texts convey: that we alone a re responsible for o u r place in a world not of o u r making, and for our responses to it; if the world bri ngs us sorrow, it is u p to u s , not the world , to a l leviate the sorrow, and to come to term s with that world. Non-M u s l i m s will s i mi larly misunde rstand I slam if Moham med is taken as the counte rpart of Jesus. I f the C h ri stian God enters the l ived world through His son , Allah enters the world th rough his words , as dictated to his Prophet and recorded i n the Qu ran (wh ich is why reCiting that text is a sacrament for M u s l i m s , and a l so why there can be no authentic tra nslation of i t ) . 49 These examples, and many others that m ight be proffered i n brief compass, may wel l n o t sway a skeptic convinced that a rel igiou s text can o n ly provide gu idance for leading more meaningful l ives 81

to those who accept its metaphysical and theological assumptions or presuppositions. My examples, it m ight be objected, can either be seen as anecdotal , or as my simply reading out of specific passages i n speci fic texts a n u m ber of ideas by which I have already been seized. I should therefore l i ke to exa m i ne a specific text more syste matical ly, describing a path that can lead to spi ritual experience, a path that may commend itse l f to people with a wide range of metaphysical or theological views and beliefs , or who have none at a l l , a path that dichotom izes neither the l ived from a tra n scendental world , nor m i nds from bodies, nor ourselves from others , or from the lived world. My text i s the Analects of Confuc i u s . I chose it not only beca use it is one with which I have had a long and c lose association , but also beca use it can be read as conta i n i ng no explicit metaphysics, and not h i ng affi rmed i n the text con fl icts i n any way with the pronouncements of modern science.so In the Analects Confucius and at times his disciples make approbatory remarks about severa l ki nds of persons , t h ree of wh ich I want to focu s o n : the shi or " scholar-apprentice , " junzi, "exemplary person , " and

sheng or shengren , " sage , " contrasting these t h ree with the xiaoren , " petty person . " All th ree o f these expressions were i n use before the time of Confucius. In the Book of Songs , for example, the term shi is used for a man of m iddle social status, at other times for a retai ner, and yet aga i n to deSignate a

82

serva n t . It a l so a ppeared to be the term for a lower­ level fu nctionary of a lord , perhaps a man of a rm s , somewhat a k i n t o t h e old Englis h kn ight ( a n d Waley so translates the term ) . A junzi was a lord's son , or perhaps the ba sta rd son of a lord. The character i n the

Book of Documents

sheng

wou ld appear to have the

mea n i ng of "very wise person . " C o n fu c i u s appropriated a l l o f these terms for h i s own u se , giving them con n otations a n d denotations that sh i fted t h e i r sense a n d refe rence away from position , ra n k , b i rth , or fu nction toward what we ( n ot h e ) wou l d term aesthetic , mora l , and spiritual characteristics. Owi ng to Kierkegaa rd a n d others , these . th ree a reas of h u m a n concern a re d i st i nct rea l m s i n t h e West; t h e i r i nterrelatedness wou l d b e sel f-eviden t t o Confuc i u s . T h e sacred i s n o t t ra n scendenta l ly distinct from the secu l a r i n C h i n a . 1\ve lve passages i n t h e the

shi,

Analects

make refe rence to

most of which suggest that they a re apprentices

of some k i n d . The

shi

a re to be precise a n d formal ,

pu ncti l io u s perhaps. They have a l ready exte n ded themse lves beyond the fa m i ly, for i n no passages in the

Analects

is xiao-fi l i a l piety-assoc iated with the

shi.

Moreove r, wh i l e the structure of the twelve passages has suggested to most tra n slators that what i s being described a re the

shi's

qua l ities-that is, what they

a re-I bel ieve th ose passages are better con strued as i n structions for what the

shi

should do. They have set

out on a path , a roa d , but they sti l l have a long way to go , and there i s m uc h yet to be done . As M a ster Zeng says (8. 7) :

83

Schola r-apprentices (shi) can not but be strong and resolved, for they bea r a heavy c h a rge a n d the way (dao) i s long. Whe re they take a u thoritative conduct (ren) a s thei r c h a rge , i s it n o t a heavy o n e ? And where t h e i r way ends only in death , is it not i ndeed long?

By describing the shi a s one who has assumed the b u rden of

Ten ,

we get a strong h i n t that it is a

mora l and spiritual appren ticesh i p the shi a re serving, for

Ten

i s the h ighest excel lence for C o n fu c i u s . F u rther

evidence that the shi i s one who has set o u t on a spiritual path i s fou n d el sewhere ( 4 . 9 a n d 1 4 . 2 ) i n w h i c h negative i n structions a re give n , t h e th rust of which i s to eschew material we l l - be i ng. There a re , of cou rse , n u m e rous positive i n structions the Maste r proffers , not o n ly for the shi, but for others as we l l : become steeped in poetry

( 1 6. 1 3 ) , a n d in h i story ( 3 . 1 4) ; study and practice the ritu a l s ( 1 2 .20); l i sten to , play, become absorbed in music ( 3 . 2 3 ) ; perform p u b l i c service when it is appropriate to do so ( 1 3 . 20); a n d above a l l-a nd by so engagi ng i n these e fforts-lea rn to extend one's human sympathies beyond the fa m i ly, c la n , a n d v i l l age

( 1 3 . 2 8 ) , a n d learn to become benefactor and beneficiary with i n a m u c h l a rge r c i rc l e . Agai n , the shi a re never i n structed in the proper behavior and demeanor due one's pa rents, c h i ldre n , or oth er relative s ; more is needed: Zizh a ng sa id, "Those sh i a re q u i te acceptable who on see i ng danger a re ready to put thei r l ives on the l i n e , w h o on see i ng a n opport u n i ty for ga i n concern

84

themselves with what is appropriate, who in perform i ng sacrifice concern themse lves with p roper respect and who i n pa rt i c i pa t i ng i n a fu nera l concern them selves with gri ef. " ( 1 9. 1 )

I f my reading of these passages is wa rranted, it wi l l follow that the major goal towa rd which the shi i s striving i s to become an exemplary person , or junzi. The shi does, wh ile the junzi more nea rly is. In the text , the junzi i s al most always descri bed ( for the benefit of the disciples) , not i nstructed ( because presumably they don 't need it). They have traveled a goodly distance a l ong the way, and l ive a goodly n u m ber of roles. Benefactor to many, they a re stil l beneficiaries of others l i ke themselves . Wh i le sti l l capable of a nger i n t h e presence of i n appropriateness and concom itant i n j u stice , they a re i n their person s tranq u i l . They know many rituals a n d m u c h m u s i c , and perform a l l of t h e i r functions n o t only with s ki l l , b u t also with grace , dign ity, a n d beauty, and take del ight in the performances. Sti ll filial towa rd parents and elders , they now take "all under tia n " as their dwe l l i ng place. Wh ile rea l enough to be sti ll capable of the occasional lapse in the i r otherwise exemplary conduct ( 1 4 . 6 ) , they are resol utely proper in the conduct of the i r roles-conduct which is not forced , but rather effo rtless , spontaneo u s , c reative. There i s , i n sum , a very strong aesthetic a n d eth ical dimension to t h i s l i fe ; junzi have reauthorized the /i-rituals-a n d therefore become respected authors of t h e dao of h u ma n k i nd.5 1

85

For most of u s , the goa l of junzi is the h ighest to which we can aspi re . The re i s , however, an even loftier h u m a n goa l , to become a " sage " or shengren ; but in

o

the Analects it is a distant goa l indeed . There a re eight refe rences to shengren i n the text. In one passage , Confu c i u s dares not ra n k h i mself a

shengren ( 7 . 3 4 ) , i n another he laments that he never h a s , and p robably never wi l l , meet one ( 7. 2 6 ) , and i n sti l l a nother h e gently chastises Zigong when t h e latter l i ke n s him to a shengren (9.6). And later, even though Mencius allows that the man in the street who acts l i ke a Yao or a S h u n (that i s , a shengren) is a sage , h e , too , suggests strongly that th is goa l i s beyond the reach of most morta l s (6b2) . Yet i t is there . Th ere a re shengren . They have risen beyond the level of junzi, because 1 6. 8 describes

junzi as those who stand in awe of the words of the shengren . From 6 .30 we learn that one who confers benefits on and assists everyone is a shengren. And fi nal ly, Zixia a l lows that it is not even the

junzi, but the shengren alone "who wa lks this path every step from start to fi n i sh " ( 1 9 . 1 2 ) , begi n n i ng with what was near, and getting to what was distant ( 1 4 . 3 5 ) . I f t h e career of Confucius is o n e example of sagehood , perhaps walking the path from start to fin ish reports on Confucius h i m se l f, who, at the end of his l i fe , could give his " h ea rt-and- m i nd free rein without overstepping the bou ndaries" ( 2 . 4 ) . To summarize this brief reading of t h e qualities of, and relations between , the shi, the junzi, and the

86

shengren : forme rly

all

sh i ,

shengren

are

junzi,

and all

were

junzi

but the conve rse does not hold. These

a re , in oth e r words , ranked types of perso n s , and the ran k i ng i s ba sed on a p rogression from scholarly apprenticesh i p to sagehood. speaking, fai rly n u me rou s, and

sheng

Shi

junzi

a re , re latively a re more scarce ,

are very few a n d far between , owi ng to the

" h eavi n ess of the b u rde n , a n d the distance of the j o u rney" (8. 7 ) . The

shi

a r e resol ute i n fol l ow i ng t h e

dao

as i t is

embodied i n c ustom , tradi t io n , and ritual propriety

(Ii)

that gove rn the i n terperson a l relations defi n i t ive of the

shi's

several roles. Much farth e r a l ong this j o u rney

of learning and doi ng we h ave the

Ii

junzi,

who know the

thoroughly enough to express its spirit even i n the

absence of precedent; they perform their roles m asterfu l ly, and derive a deep satisfaction from the grace , digni ty, effortlessness , and creativity with which they h ave come to conduct them selves with others, strangers n o less than k i n . And i t is the

junzi

who

ascend i n the m idst of many to p rovide a bearing for exe m p l a ry conduct th rough e ffective service i n rol e s of soci a l and pol itical respo n s i b i lity. At the upper end of this conti n u u m a re the

shengren .

I n addition to possessing a l l of the qualities of the the

shengren

junzi,

appear to see and feel custom , ritua l s ,

and traditions holistically, as defi n i ng a n d i ntegrating the h u man comm u nity broadly, and as defi n i ng and i n tegrating as wel l the com m u n ities of the past, and of the fut u re . Thi s seei ng and feel i ng of the

shengren

can

87

be described as an awareness which gives one the capac i ty to go beyond the particular time and place in which we l ive , effecting a conti n u i ty not only with our contemporaries , but with those who have preceded u s , a n d with those who wi l l follow after u s ; t h a t is t o say, a strong sen se of belonging, of safety, of at-one-ment, attunement, with all of our fellow h uman beings. The metaphors u sed to describe the

shengren

a re

cosmic and celesti a l : " C o n fu c i u s is the s u n and moon which no one can c l i m b beyo n d " ( 1 9 . 2 4 ) . The c u l t u re that fi nds its focus i n t h i s rare person elevates the human experience to heights of profound aesthetic , mora l , and rel igious refi n e m e n t , making the h u man being a worthy partner with the heave n s a n d the e a rth . The m odel of the

shengren

shines across gen e rations

and across geographical boundaries as a l igh t that not only sta b i l izes a n d secu res the h u man worl d , but that a l so serves h u mankind as a source of c u l t u ra l n o u rish ment a n d i n sp i ration. I t i s t h e leads the way of the h u ma n being

shengren

who

i n to its

(ren dao)

more certa i n fut u re . I n reading t h e re lationship between the and

shengren

sh i, junzi,

h ierarc h i c a l ly, i t m ust be emphasized

that the h i e rarchy s h o u l d not j u st be i m agined vertical ly, concluding i n a tra n scendent we-know­ not-wha t . Rather do I wan t to maintain the rich path i m agery of dao i n the

Analects:

the

shengren

h ave

traveled, appropriated , a n d e n l a rged a longer stretch of the road than the

shi

and

junzi,

and they a re providing

Signposts and a bearing for the latter as wel l . And to

88

follow that road is to engage i n an ego-reducing spiritual discipline. Th is is a woefu l ly brief accou nt of the major spiritual discipline of the early Confucia n s , a path that in tegrates the aesthetic, the mora l , and the socio­ pol i tical with the rel igiou s. As we fol low that path , we will be led to see ou rselves less as free , autonomo u s , unchanging selves/so u l s , l e s s as a ltogether distinct from the physical world, and more as co-membe rs of a m u ltiplicity of com m u n ities , who , th rough susta ined effort , a re increasingly in tegrated into an ever-larger com m u n ity, something larger than ou rselves. We must come to see and feel ou rselves as fundamental ly, not accidental ly, intergenerationally bound to our ancestors , conte m poraries, and descendants. It is not that we a re to become sel fless , i . e . , a ltru istic , for this would i mply a n isolated sel f to be surrendered , the pure existe nce of wh ich any Confucian mu st deny; rather must we come to see and feel our personh ood as dependent on others for its u niqueness, j u st as oth ers m u st depend on u s for their u n iqueness: in order to be a friend, or a lover, I m u st have a friend or lover; and " freedom " m u st be seen not as a state of being, but as an ach ievement for each of u s . So long as I feel I must meet my defi n i ng obl igations I a m obviously not free. Only when I come to wa nt to meet the m , enjoy doing so , and come to feel at-one- ment with my fellows past, prese n t , and future , can I enjoy true freedom , and make spiritual progress in both the soc ial and natura l worlds. 89

Fol lowing such a path c l ea rly i nvolves ego­ reduction , and the prom ise of the re l igious expe rience of belonging, in the case of the

Analects,

to and with

the h u ma n com m u n i ty. Had I c hosen the

Dao De ling,

the ego- reducing path wou l d lead more to a sense of safety, of attu nement with the natura l world . And we may read Buddh i s t , H indu , a n d other sacred texts and narratives i n s i m i lar ways . But

I

chose to elaborate t h e Way of the

Analects

beca u se the concept of the person fou n d there i n i s the m o s t contrastive w i t h the concept of a utonomous i n dividual selves/sou l s that have tended to dom inate the Abra h a m i c tradi tion s , espe c i a l ly since the E n l ighte n m e n t period and the rise of i n d u strial capita l i s m , a n d a l so beca use i t speaks not of a tra n scendental real m nor of a nyth i ng i ncons istent with t h e pronouncements of contemporary science .52 Everyone i n the West with eyes to see is aware of the m a n i fold probl e m s attenda n t on an a l together i n d ividualistic orientation , b u t

I

do not believe we take

those probl e m s seriously enough at the conceptual or experiential leve l . F irst-generation h u m a n righ t s , for exa m p l e , gro u n ded i n the concept of freely ch oosing a u tonomous i n dividua l s , may indeed offer some protection from the wh i m s of despotic governm e n t s , b u t they also serve to maintain a gross and growing m i sdistribution of the world's wealth , th ey provide lega l j ustification for tra n s national corporations to do a s they w i sh , a n d they h ave led to a n i n c reasing l o s s o f com m u n i ty. Relatedly, as a u tonomous individua l s , i t

90

is extremely d i ffi c u l t for u s to contemplate se riously that there may be a h igh er good i ndependent of o u r concept ion of it, a n d we wi ll continue to i n s i s t , i n the p u b l i c sphere a t least , that j u st i ce c o n t i n u e t o b e defi ned proced u ra l ly rather than distribu tively. Wo rse , as a u tonomous i n d ividua l s , " they" -th e Other-a l l t o o e a s i l y become rad i c a l ly other, and eve n " we "-those very s i m i la r to u s-become Other in a capita l ist soc iety where i n competition is the norm i n a series of zero-s u m ga mes; i f y o u g e t the golden ring, I do not. Whether we a re u l t i mately a u tonomous i ndividu a l s or co-members of the h u ma n com m u n i ty is of cou rse not an e m p i rical questi o n , a n d I know of no concl u s ive rational a rgu ment for one or the other, a priori or otherwise. Worse , these d i ffering views a re in many ways self-prophetic ; the more we be lieve ourselves to be esse n t i a l ly a utonomous i n dividua l s , the m o re easily we become s uc h . Th is view is very deeply rooted i n contemporary Western c u l tu re , espec i a l ly i n t h e U . S . , a n d i n m y opin ion is largely responSible for m u c h o f t h e m a l a i se i n c reasi ngly defi n i t ive of i t . I n t h i s sen se classical Confucian spiritual i ty proffe rs a radical alternative view of the world and o u r place i n it, but for a l l that , I b e l i eve it is a viable o n e . We a re the offspring of o u r parents; we a re s i b l ings , ne ighbors , students, lovers , pare n t s , spo u ses , friends , a n d m u c h e l se o f a n i nterpersonal nature . The C o n fucian v i s i o n does not s h ri n k the personal h u m a n sprit by isolating it as a self-contai ned ato m , but rather e n l a rges it by l i n k i ng it

91

to a l l othe r h u ma n spirits, and with the natura l world whose spirit e q u a l ly a n i mates u s a l l . Moreover, th i s Confucian vision of relatedness may a l so assist u s i n overcoming a n a l together materi a l i stic orientation-personal and metaphysica l-toward that natu ral world that m a kes the sen se of belonging i n it far more d i ffi c u l t to ach ieve . Science describes that natural worl d , b u t does not contradict the view expressed not only i n the

Analects

b u t i n a l l sacred

text s : we do not l ive by b read a l o n e .

To CONCLU D E b y way of reiteration :

comparative

rel igious studies have been l a rgely a Weste rn i ntel lectual e ndeavor, a n d hence it is not s u rp ri s i ng that the Abrahamic tradition h a s been taken as paradigmatic of rel igio n . Th u s when exa m i n i ng other traditions it h a s been common to ask what the i n h e ritors thereof believe with respect to how the world came to be , is, a n d will be , wh ich I bel ieve is a m i sguided approach , for virt u a l ly a l l such c l a i m s i n every tradition can not be m a d e to square with contem pora ry science. Th i s focu s , resting on the a ffirmation that the u niverse i s u l t imately inte l l igible to u s-that the "why ? " questions a l l have a n swers­ generates a reading of the Abra h a m i c a n d other texts that foc u s in t u rn on the question of the mea n i ng of l i fe .

92

But by reading these texts to learn how they a l l describe path s t o fol low for fi n d i ng meaning

in

l i fe ,

meaning may i ndeed b e fou n d . That meaning wil l very probably not be a godly or cosm i c meaning, b u t a human one; which wou l d not, h owever, be i nconsequenti a l , for h u m a n i s what we a re .

NOT E S

About these notes: ( 1 ) Term s , perso n s , place s , quote s , and facts that a re common place a re not referenced be low; to have done so wou l d make t h i s section much longer than all of the oth e rs combi ned.

(2) B i b l ical refe rences a re to the Expanded Edition of the

Oxford Annotated Bible,

Revi sed Standa rd Versi o n .

( 3 ) References t o t h e Confu c i a n Analects a re t o t h e translation b y Roge r A m e s and me ( Ba l l a n t i n e , 1 998).

(4) Books c i ted that a re fol l owed b y a n aste ri sk ( * ) a re suggested as fu rther reading for those i n t e rested i n p u rs u i ng fu rth e r the maj o r themes I have a l l too briefly taken u p h e re i n .

9S

I . On a n u mber of issues, h owever, I have expanded on my a rgu ments in the D i sc u ssion and E p i logue sections, and in these notes.

-

2 . Forgotten Tru t h · ( Ha rperSa n F rancisco, 1 992 ) , p. 1 07. 3 . I n addition to H uston S m i t h , o t h e r scholars of com pa rative religions have a l so a rgued that the s i m i larities among and between the world's rel igions a re more sign i ficant than their d i fferences. See , for example, M i rcea E l iade , t rans. W. Trask, The Sacred and the Profane· ( Ha rper & Row, 1 96 1 ) ; Frithjof Sch u o n , The Transcendental U n ity of Religions ( Ha rper & Row, 1 9 75 ) ; and of

cou rse the classic of Wi l l i a m James, The Varieties of Religious Experience· (Mentor, 1 95 8 ) . In a rgu i ng their cases, however, a l l of

these scholars e m ploy ontological assumptions I am re luctant to re ly u pon defending my cla i m . 4 . Th i s c l a i m was first made b y S. N . Balagangadhara i n ' The Heathen in His Blindness . . . ': Asia and The West and the Dyna m ic of Religion ( E . J . B ri l l , 1 994). See a l so my " How Do You Learn to

Be Rel igious ? " as a response to t h i s book, in Cultural Dynam ics 8 , n o . 3 ( J u ly, 1 996). 5 . C reation stories do not begin to appear i n China until the early H a n Dynasty, wel l over a century a fter the classical period of C h i nese thought ( s ixth t hrough the th i rd centuries B.C. E . ) ends. 6 . In the severa l schools of H i nduism , the concept of maya does not e n ta i l that the world we perce ive is ba sically i l l u sory; what is i l l u sory i s that many feat u res of the perceived world appear to have a permanence about them wh ich they do not have . For B uddh ists and the doctrine of co-dependent origi nation , t h i s applies to the world t o u t court.

7. See note 4 . 8 . Tractatus , 6 . 5 2 2 ( Pears and McG u i ness t ra nslation ;

Rou tledge & Kegan Pa u l , 1 96 1 ) 9. For speci fic c i tations regarding Kierkegaard here and fol lowi ng , see my " Kierkegaard & Confuc i u s : On Fol lowing the Way" i n Philosophy East and West 36, no. 3 (Ju ly, 1 986). There a n d here i n I have profited from Joh n Douglas M u llen'S Klerkegaard's Philosophy: Self-Deception and Cowardice in the Presen t Age· (Mentor, 1 98 I ) .

1 0. For fu rther reflections on t h i s theme, and for excerpts from a n umber of other writers, see Herbert F ingarette's meditation

96

(and anthology) Dea t h : Philosophical Soundings (Open Court Pub.

C/'J j;.U

Co. , 1 996) .

E0

I I . See James, op. c i t , especi a l ly Lextu res XVI and XVI I .

1 2 . For an a n a l ysis of the rel igious d i m e n sions of t h e

Z

concept of " Experience , " see t h e essay of that n a m e by Robert H . Sharf i n Critical Terms for Religious S t udies , edited by Mark Taylor ( U n iversity of C h i cago P ress , 1 99 7 ) . As should be clear from my text , I do not en dorse Sharf's skept i c i s m about t h e poss i b i l i ty of usefu l ly e m ploy i ng the term in re l igious studies resea rc h . The most c l ea r, and to my m i n d most useful brief work on t he myst ical experience re m a i n s W.T. Stace's I n troduction to h i s Teachings o f t h e Mystics · (Men tor, 1 960) . F o r a n accou n t of

psychology's con t r i b u t ion-or lack of i t-to a ny u n dersta n d i ng of myst i c i s m , see Frits Staa l , Exp loring Mysticism ( U n iv. of Cal i fornia Press, 1 9 75 ) . I n Civiliza tion and I ts D isco n ten ts (Norton , 1 96 1 ) , F reud describes what he takes to be rel igious experience as a n " ocea n i c feel ing, " a n d i s obviously suspicious of t h e myst ica l ; see espec i a l ly pp. 1 4-20 . For fu rt h e r p h i losoph ical d i scussion of m ysticism I wou l d recom mend Sa l l ie B . K i ng's " Two E p i stemological M ode l s for the I n terpretation of Myst i c i s m " a n d H u sto n 's " I s There a Pere n n i a l Ph i losoph y ?" both of w h i c h appear i n t h e Journal of the American Academy o f Religion ( S m i t h 's i s i n vol . 5 5 , n o . 3 , Ki ng's i n vol . 5 6 , no. 2 ) . Both King a n d S m i t h chal lenge t h e a n a lysis of myst i c i s m proffe red i n the wri t i ngs of Steven B. Katz, who responds to these two critica l essays i n vol . 5 6 , no. 4 , w h i c h i s fol lowed by rej o i n ders from h i s two critics. I wish the "ea t i ng the m e n u i n stead of the d i n ner" was my own , b u t it origin ated with Alan Watts, Th e Way of Zen ( Pa n theon , 1 95 7) , p. x i , para p h ra s i ng Wi l l i a m James, op. c i t . : "offering a pri n ted b i l l of fa re as the equ iva l e n t for a sol id m ea l " ( p . 3 7 7 ) . 1 3 . F o r t h e Confucian orientation t o t h i s l i n kage , see t h e now­ classic Confucius-The Secular as Sacred· by Herbert F i ngarette ( H a rper & Row, 1 9 72). 1 4 . An excellent overview of the extent to which t h i s path permeates a l l of Confucianism for over two m i l le n n ia i s P h i l i p J. I va n h oe , Con fucian Moral Self-Cultiva t ion ( H ackett Pub. Co. , 2nd ed. , 2000). See also note 50, below. 1 5 . See Note 1 1 , and Stace , op. c i t . The purely mystical experience seem s regularly, but not always , to eventuate i n the kind of rel igious experience which i s my focu s .

97

1 6. On th i s score , see espec i a l ly Roger T. Ames, " Bush ido: Mode or E th i c ? " i n Japanese Aesthetics and Culture, ed. Nancy G. Hume (SUNY Press, 1 995 ) . 1 7. F o r mysel f, t h e best edition of Thorea u 's Wa lden for fu lly appreciating the text is Philip Van Doren Stern 's The Annotated Wa lden * (Clarkson Potter, I n c . , 1 9 70) . A Sand Cou n ty Almanac* is by Aldo Leopold (Oxford U n iv. Press, 1 966) , with many repri n t i ngs. An n i e D i l l a rd's Pilgrim a t Tin ker Creek* was p u b l i shed by H a rper & Row, 1 9 74. Thomas Berry is a u thor not only of The Dream of the Earth * (Sierra C l u b , 1 988) , but the more recen t The Great Work * ( Bell Tower, 1 999) . 1 8. B u t they say m uch about the meditative . H a rold D . Rot h , Original Dao (Colu m b i a U niversity Press, 1 999) , is the best i ntroduction , in my m i nd , to t h i s path in early Daoism. 1 9 . In addition to their writi ngs , a l l o f these treaders of d i ffering Catholic paths now h ave biograph ies as wel l . 2 0 . See note 1 2 . 2 1 . Wittgenstein u sed the terms " mystica l , " " religiou s , " and "ethica l " a l most i nterchangeably t h roughout h i s writi ngs to sign i fy a l l t h a t was beyond "was d e r F a l l i s t " ( Tractatus 1 ) and a t times i n c l uded the aesthetic as wel l : " Ethics and Aesthetics are one and the same" (Tractatus 6.42 1 ) . Consider the fol l owing rema rkable a u tobiograph i c a l statements, given i n a lecture on ethics to Cam bridge u n dergraduates: I b e li e ve the best way of descri bi n g [ t h i s e xperience of the eth i c a l] i s t o say that when I h a ve i t I

wonder at the existence of the world . . . .

I w i ll m e n t i o n a nother e xperience stra ight away which I a lso know a n d which others of you m ight be acqua i n t ed with: it i s, what one m ight ca ll, t h e e xperience of fee li n g absolutely sa fe . I mean the state of m i n d in which one is i n c li ned to say " I a m safe, noth i n g can i n j u re me whate ve r h a ppe n s ."

( "Wittgenste i n 's Lectu re on E t h i c s , " in the Philosoph ica Review 74 ( 1 965 ) : 8; italics in the origi n a l ) . According to Ray M o n k , Wittgenste i n 's most comprehensive biographer to date , Wittgenstei n first got t h i s notion of safety i n early Vie nna , watc h i ng a play by the Austrian dramatist L udwig Anzengruber. Thereafter, accord i ng to M o n k , " For the rest of h i s l i fe he con tin ued to regard

98

the fee l i ng of being "absolutely safe " as paradigmatic of religious

r./j �

experience . " L udwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Gen ius ( F ree Press,

� 0 2

1 990, p. 5 1 ) . I t should also be noted that in the lecture on eth ics, Wittgenstein claimed that h i s statements about wonder and safety

�

w ere " nons e n se' '' To the best of my kno ledge , Wi l l i a m james was t h e fi rst to l i n k re I igious experience wit h , sa fety. " See esp. op. cit. , p. 367. 2 2 . I am th inking here of such groups as those of j i m jones i n G uya n a , the Branch Davidians of Texas , and the H eave n 's Gate group of C a l i forn i a , a l l of which reaped the wh irlwind. 2 3 . David H a l l and Roger Ames h ave a rgued well and at length i n a n umber of works on the u n iqueness of the concept of a transcendental real m to the Western cultural tradition , begi n n i ng with their Th inking Through Confucius * ( S u ny Press, 1 98 7 ) . 2 4 . Noam Chom sky, Powers a n d Prospects (South End Press, 1 996) , p. 27. 2 5 . " O n Representing Abstractions i n Archaic C h i nese , " i n Philosophy East a n d West 2 4 , n o . 1 (January, 1 9 74) ; "Against

Relativism , " i n In terpreting Across Boundaries , ed. G . Larson and E. Deutsch ( Princeton U n iv. Press, 1 98 7 ) ; and the I ntroduction and appendices to the Analects tra nslation , op. cit. 26. The gra m m a r of our native tongue i n fl uences our cognitive efforts in ways that are very difficult to change . Consider the following from the h ighly perceptive com parative philosopher Sallie B . King: Wittgenstein m a y have persuaded us t h a t words have many other fu nctions, b u t the fac t rem a i n s t h a t i n everyday use we very frequently do use words to refer to t h i ngs , and t h e very fact that when we speak of 'God' the su rface gra m m a r a ppea rs to m a ke 'God' i n to a t h i ng , results i n a deeply i ngra i ned concep t u a l h a b i t . H e nce my advocacy o f the a n t i -concept.

( " Concepts , Anti-Concepts, and Rel igious Experience" i n Religious St udies 1 4 [ 1 9-) : 458). I com mend Ki ng's notion of "anti­

concepts" to the reader's atten tion , but here wan t to call attention to her footnote to th is passage: If a confessional note be a l l owed by way of i l l u stration, I have somehow a rrived at t h e poi n t where I t h i n k ' God' in association w ith

99

t h e grou nding mystery, but whe n I hea r or read t h e word 'God,' I i m mediately associate the word wi t h a being, Ou r Father in H e a ve n .

(Ibid . )

No such being dwells i n the / i a n of Confucius, which is why I reject " heave n " as t ranslation , and merely tra n s l iterate it .

27. To expand this poin t further: I n the cou rse of a n i n c i sive critique of the dra ft of my lecture , David Wong argued that I had underplayed the sign i ficance o f the descriptions of the world proffered by the world's rel igions with respect to the con ten t of the spiritual experiences obta ined by the adherents thereof. ( P rivate correspondence . ) I do not at all wish to u n derplay the religious sign i ficance of those descriptions for the fai t h fu l , and am grateful to Wong for obliging me to say more on th i s poi n t , which I attempt to do i n the Epilogue. 28. And a t t imes the not so naive as wel l . Ka n t , di sparaging mysticism as somet h i ng a person engages i n "where h i s reason no l onger u nderstands itse l f and its own i n tentions , " then attributes this engagement to Daoism , sayi ng, "Out of this m isbehavior the mon ster system o f Laotse arises, teach i ng that the h ighest good consists in not h i ngness . . . . Th is noth i ngness, truly conceived, is a concept which a n n i h i lates a l l u nderstanding and in which thought itse l f a rrives a t its end. " Quoted from " Das E nde aller Di nge" by Richard Kroner in his Kan t 's Weltanschau u ng, trans. Joh n S m i t h ( U n iv. of C h icago Press, 1 95 6 ) , p p . 1 5- 1 6.

29. " Rationa l i ty" need not, of course, be appl ied o n ly to those who accept the i m plausible a ffirmation of the fu l l expla natory i ntel l igibility of the world; if so applied, the majority of the h u ma n race would h ave to b e classified as n o n - or ir-rationa l , myse l f incl uded. Agai n follOWi ng Chom sky, wh i l e I bel i eve w e can come to know much more a bout the world, there a re l i mits on h u m a n understanding i m po ed b y our menta l and physical structures. At the top of my l ist of possible sciences not possible for h u m a n bei ngs is a science of h u man motivation and behavior. Such a Science-perhaps ava i lable to di fferent forms of i ntel l igent bei ngs , constituted very di fferently than we a re-would have to be able to describe a n d expla i n what is beyond h u m a n cogn itive capacity; while tau tologous, i t can be i m po rta nt to say that what i s beyond our capac ity to t h i n k is beyond our capa c i ty to t h i n k . Chomsky has

100

di cussed t h i s view cogently on a n u m ber of occasions, one ource bei ng h i s R u les and Representations (Col u m b ia U n iv. Press , 1 980) , pp. 25 1 -5 3 . 30. One of t h e most i m portant of these resources i s the sense of com m u n ity, neighborhood, the i m po rtance of bei ng in a place. For severa l excellent discus ions of th i s theme, see The Longing for Home, ed. Leroy Rou ner ( U n iv. of Notre Dame Press, 1 996).

3 1 . D i l l a rd , op. c i t . , pp. 1 75-76. 32. And I suspect she would concur with at least some of what I h ave been a rgu i ng: "Self-consciousness, h owever, does h i nder the experience of the present" ( I bid . , p. 8 1 ) . 3 3 . Wh i l e G od is decidedly i m portant for the Monadology, He is not nece ary; a n atheist metaphysician could s i m ply a ffirm the monad , and assent that their harmonious i n te ractions were a fact about how the world happens to be . Obviously no atheist cou ld write the Theodicy, and the Discourse was written largely in defense of the Ricc ian " Accommodationist" view of how C h i nese conversion to the One True Faith could best be effected. 34. After being pressed for weeks by my C h i nese graduate students at Fudan i n 1 982 on how I accounted for the radical di fferences between the early development of C h i nese and Western p h i l osophy, this was my best a n swer: sophisticated work in arithmetic and geometry preceded the classical period of philosophy i n Greece, and followed it i n C h i na. 3 5 . Despite my Wittgenstei n ian predilections, I am relucta n t to draw a sharp di ti nction between so-ca l led " re ligious" and " no n re ligiou s " la nguage , i n the form of "ga mes" or otherwise. Consider the fol lowi ng sentence: " Everyone has duties entailed by the concept of h u m a n rights. " Th i s seem s to fa ll wit h i n the categories of mora l , lega l , or pol i t ical d i scour e (or all t h ree) , at least i n the West; it i s not construed as a rel igious statement. But " Everyone has duties entai led by the concept of dharma" wou l d be seen by most people (aga i n , at lea t i n the West) a a rel igious statement. What is the d ifference between the two? For mysel f, the di fference i s basical ly c u l t u ra l , not conceptua l . ( See a l so " Rel igious and Non - Rel igious Language , and Propositions About H u man Righ ts" by Jayson A. Wh i te ; u n published ms. , An keny, Iowa . )

lOl

36. I have offered critiques of capitalism and the "American way of l i fe " i n other writi ngs. Two exa m ples: "On F reedom and I nequal i ty" i n The Aes thetic Tu rn: Essays Dedicated to Eliot Deutsch , ed. Roger T. Ames (Open Court Pub. C o . , 1 999); "Wh ich Righ ts? Whose Democ racy? A Confucian Critique of Modern Western Libera l i s m " i n Confucian Eth ics: A Comparative St udy of Self, A utonomy and Com m u n ity , ed. K. L. S h u n and D. Wong

(Cambridge U n iv. Press, 200 1 ) . 3 7 . A particul arly puzzling in stance of such a remark was made by Wittgenste i n . All of his biographers i n sist he wa s a man of the utmost i ntegrity, and scrupulously honest-al most ruth lessly so. They fu rther agree that h i s l i fe was regularly a tormented one. Yet h i s fi nal words (cited by M o n k , op. c i t . , p. 4 1 1 ) were " Te ll them I 've had a h appy l i fe . " I have pondered t h i s remark often for over three decades now, and still do not know what to make of it. 38. Socrates m a kes fa i rly clear h i s foc us on the conceptual rather than the e m p i rical in the Apology: I m u st read out t h e i r a ffidav i t , so to speak, as though t h ey were my lega l acc u sers: Socrates i s g u i l ty of cri m i n a l medd l i ng, in that he i n q u i res i n to t h i ngs below the earth and in the sky. . . . It r u n s som e t h i ng l i ke t h a t . You h a v e s e e n i t f o r yourselves i n t h e play by Aristophanes, where Socrates goes wh i rl i ng a ro u n d , procla i m i ng t h a t he i s wa l k i ng on a i r, a n d uttering a great d e a l of other nonsense about t h i ngs o f which I k n ow noth i ng whatsoever. I mean no disrespect for such kn owledge , if a nyone is rca l l y versed in it . . . , but the fact i s , gen t lemen , t h a t I t a k e no i n t e re t i n it ( I 9 b.-g . ) .

(Socrates 's Defense, trans. H ugh Trede n n i c k , i n Plato: Collected Dialogues , ed. Edith H a m i lton and H u n t i ngton Ca i rn s [ Pa ntheon

Books, Bol l i ngen Series, 1 96 1 J . ) Most o f the Meno ( I bid.}-as well as o t h e r dialogues-is given over to discussions of tr u e o p inio n o n the one hand (the way to Larissa ) , and t o knowledge (of how to double the a rea of a square) on the other. 39. I would certa i n ly not c l a i m that my reading of Aristotle i s a , or the, defi n i t ive o n e , but at least s o m e G reek scholars would, I bel ieve , endorse i t . Heath , for exa m ple, says: In appl ied mathematics Aristotle recogn izes optics a n d mechanics in addition to a t ronomy a n d h a rmonics. H e calls optics, harmonics, and

1 02

astronomy t h e more physica l bra nches of mathematics, and observes t h a t t h ese s u bjects and mec h a n i c

depend for the proofs of t h e i r

propositions u pon the p u re mathematical subjects, optics on geometry,

o z

mecha n ics on geometry or tereometry, a n d harmonics on a r i t h m e t i c ; s i m i l a rly, he says, Phaenomena (that is, observational astronomy) depend on ( t heoretical ) ast ronomy.

( S i r Thomas Heath , A History of Greek Mathematics , vol . I [ Dover Publications, 1 98 1 J . p. 1 7) 40. Stephen Tou l m i n , Cosmopolis (The F ree Press, 1 99 1 ) . 4 1 . Ph i l i p Davis and Reuben Hersc h , Descartes ' Dream ( Ha rcou rt , Brace, J ovanovic h , 1 996). 4 2 . The i n fl uence of Thoma K u h n on my t h i n k i ng about science is obvious, especially a conta i n ed i n The Structure of Scien tific Revolutions, 2nd edition ( U n iversity of C h icago Press,

1 96 7 ) , and i n his i n itial essay and concluding response i n 1 . Lakatos and A . M u sgrave , editor

,

CritiCism and The Growth of

Knowledge (Cambri dge U n iver ity Press, 1 970). I m ust confess,

however, that I did not fu l ly appreciate how "wrong" terms in science were nevertheless fru itfu l until I began readi ng carefu l ly the detai l ed entries i n the Dictionary of the His tory of Science, edited by W. F. Byn u m , E . J . Browne, and Roy Porter ( Pri nceton U n iversity Pre s, 1 98 1 ) from which severa l of the deta i l s i n my na rrat ive have been drawn. 4 3 . Th i s concl u s ion should not be taken a

uggest i ng that

the Meditations no longer be read i n u n de rgraduate ph i lo ophy courses . The work i s a classic i n the h istory of We tern p h i losophy, and can be h igh ly u sefu l for getting students to clarify their own t h i n k i ng about how they conceive " m i nds" and " bodies . " But I do not believe the problem is a rea l one for professional phi losophers, even when i t h i fts to the concept of consciousne s , or zombies, as i cu rrently being don e . 4 4 . " C h i ne e Alchemy and the Manipulation of li m e , " i n Science a n d Tech nology in East Asia , edited by

athan Sivi n

(Science H istory Publications, 1 97 7 ) , p. 1 1 0. 45. I have discussed the be nefactor-benefi c i a ry nature of Con fucian roles i n a n u m ber of places, i n c luding A Chinese Mirror (Open Court Pub. Co. , 1 99 1 ) , the " I nterlude" chapter.

103

46. Nathan Sivi n , "State, Cosmos, and Body in C h i na , " in Traditional Medicine in Con tempora ry China (Center for C h i nese

Studies, U n iversity of M ich igan Press, 1 98 7 ) . 4 7 . S o m e recent work i n the neurosc iences is suggesting that this ancient Confucian concept of the xin may be appropriate for scienti fic i n q u i ry. See , for exa m p l e , Philosophy In the Flesh by George Lakoff and Mark Joh nson ( Basic Books, 1 999) , or Descartes Error by Antonio D'Amasio ( G . P. Putna m , 1 994).

48. G race M . Jantze n , Ju lian o f Norwich ( Pa u l ist Press, 1 98 7 ) . 49. Schuon , o p . cit. , h a s a rgued wel l for these readings. 50. For a fu ller account of this theme, see my "Tracing a Path of Spiritual Progress in the Analects " in Confucian Spirituality, edi ted by M a ry Evelyn Tucker and Tu We i m i ng (C rossroads Press , 200 1 ) , and in condensed form , in the " I ntroduction " to the t ra nslation of the Analects by Roger Ames and me (op. c i t . ) . 5 1 . There a re m a n i fold references to the junzi i n the Analects that bea r on t hese themes: 1 . 2 , 4 . 5 , 4 . 9 , 4 . 1 0 , 4 . 1 6 , 7 . 3 3 , 8 . 7 , 1 2 . 5 , 1 3 . 2 3 , 1 5 .9 , 1 5 . 2 1 , 1 7. 4 , 1 8 . 7-a nd many more. 52. Wh ile fa r too many contem porary Western p h i l osophers cont i n ue to s i m ply ignore non -Western though t , Art h u r Danto has at least attem pted to j ustify that ignorance by c la i m i ng that the moral t raditions of Asia can have no p u rchase on us because the moral claims a re all j usti fied by appeal s to metaphysical views which can not be c redited in our contem porary world (Mysticism and Morality, Col umbia U n iv. Press, 1 9 76 ) . Yet t h i s seem s to be

little more than a case of special pleading, for wh i le Danto, to h i s c redit, exe m pts Con fucianism from h i s a rgu ment, he nowh ere suggests that it is worthy of our serious attention .

104

THE INSTITUTE FOR WO RLD RELI G IONS

With

the u nderstandi ng that spiritual va lues a re

centra l to the h u man experience, the I n stitute for World Rel igions exists to advance m utual u nder­ standing among the world's spiritual traditions. The I n stitute for World Rel igions faci l itates sha red i n q u i ry into the founding visions of the world's fa iths so that all m ight lea rn from the othe rs' strengths wh ile preserving the i ntegrity of their own . The I n stitute for World Rel igions is a l so comm i tted to providing an open foru m where clergy, theologians, phi losophers , scientists, educators , and i ndividuals from a wide va riety of disc i p l i nes can exa m i ne the role of rel igion i n a modern world. All of the I n stitute 'S activities take place i n a n atmosphere of mutual respect and promote the u n iversal h u man capacity for goodness and wisdo m . Establ ished i n 1976 , t h e I nstitute was t h e d i rect result of the inspiration and pla n n i ng of the Buddh ist

1 05

C h 'an Patriarch Hsilan H u a and Roman Catholic Cardi nal Yu- B i n . Both of these distingui shed i nternational leaders in rel igion and education bel ieved that harmony among the world's rel igions is an indispensable pre req u i site for a j ust and peacefu l world. Each shared the conviction that every rel igion should affi rm h umanity's common bonds and rise above narrow sectarian di fferences. I n keeping with its m ission , the I nstitute offers progra ms designed to bring the major rel igious traditions together i n discourse with each other and with the contempora ry world. I ts prox i m i ty to the U niversity of Californ ia at Berkeley, Stanford U n ivers i ty, the Graduate Theological U n ion , and the rich acade m i c , rel igious, and c u l t u ra l environment of the San Francisco Bay a rea provides an ideal environment for the I nstitute's programs.

1 06

INDEX

Abra h a m i c re l igious t raditions a u tonomy in, 90 explanatory approach of, 1 1 - 1 2 , 1 5 , 1 7 , 92 indirect reading of, 38 i n fl uence of, 1 1 as i n structive , 1 7, 38 and mea n i ng , 92 on morta l i ty, 24 and other rel igions, contrast among, 1 3- 1 6 and science, 38 and security, sense of belongi ng, 5 1 -5 2 tran cendental rea l m i n , 80 Ach i l les, 1 5 aest hetic plane, 1 8 Ames, Roger, 45 Ana/ects , 45 , 82 , 86, 88, 90 as i n struct ive, 83 no metaphysics in, 82 types of persons i n , 8 7 Anzengruber, Ludwig, 98 a pathy, and religion, 48-49 Aph rodite, 1 5 Ap% gy, 55, 1 02 Aristarc h u s , 74 Aristotl e , 5 5 , 66, 1 02 Arj u n a , 5 , 20

Athena, 1 5 at-one-ment, 3 1 , 79, 89 Augustine, Sai n t , 56

Berriga n , Dan i e l , 29 Bhagavad-Gita , 20

Black Elk, 9 body, concept of, i n science , 72 Book of Documents , 83 Book of Songs , 82 B uddha , Gautama , 9 Buddh ist Text Translation Society, x i i i

cap i ta l i st economy, critique of, 3 , 58 Chang Chih, Master, x i i C h i nese c u l t u re , and c reation stories, 1 3 C h i nese though t , on t i m e , i m porta nce o f , 76-7 7 Chomsky, Noa m , 1 00 Coke, Sir Edward, 50 Confucianism ego-reduction in, 89 i n tegration in, 89 as i n terpersona l , 9 1 -92

1 07

Confucius, 9, 20, 3 9 , 49, 5 6 , 60, 82 , 84 , 88 Analects , 45 , 82 , 83 , 86, 8 7 , 88, 90, 92 on kinds of persons, 82-83 Copern icus, Nicholas, 1 2 cosmology, 39 creation stories and C h i n a , 1 3 of di fferent cultures, 1 4- 1 5 explanatory role of, 1 4 and I ndia, 1 3 Cruz, San Juan de l a , 28 cult mem bersh i p , 32-33

Dalai Lama, 9 Danto, Arthur, 1 04 dao , 88 Dao De Jing, 3 9 , 90 Day, Dorothy, 29 Democritus, 68, 73 Descartes , Ren � , 5 5 , 6 7 , 69 D i l lard, An n i e , 5 1 , 5 2 , 54 Donne, Joh n , 50 Dream of the Earth , The, 28

1 08

fu ndamenta l i s m , 30 and econom ic security, 5 3

G a l i leo, 1 2 Gandh i , Mohandes, 9 Genesis ( Bi b l e ) , 1 3 , 1 6 i n fl uence of, 1 1 global vil lage , 3 G reek phi losophical heritage , 55

H a rvey, Wi l l i a m , 70 Hector, 1 5 Helen , 1 5 H e n ry o f Navarre , 6 7 Heraclitus, 5 5 , 68 Hesiod, 1 5 H i ppocrates , 70 Hsuan H u a , Venerable Master, b iographical sketch of. ix-x i i i on rel igion , commonalities i n , xiii teach i ngs o f , xii H suan H u a Memorial Lecture , The F i rst, v i i H s u Yun , Venerable, x

Eckhart , Mei ster, 28 ego-reduction i n Confucianism , 89 discipline of, 2 1 , 26 and rel igious experience , 33-3 4 , 5 7 , 5 9 of shengren , 8 8 E i n ste i n , Albert , 6 9 eth ical path , t o i ntegrated l i fe , 30 eth ical plane, 1 9

I ndian c u lture, and creation stories, 1 3 Indiana Jones and the Temple or Doom , 4 7 i ndividual ism , problems of. 90-9 1 I n stitute for World Religions, vii , 1 05- 1 06 in tegrated l i fe , eth ical path to, 30

" fear and trembling," 1 9 " Four E lements , " 75 Francis of Assisi , 9

Jesus ( Bibl ical ) , 20, 26, 8 1 Jones, J i m , 9 7 J u l ian of Norwich , 9 , 8 1

junzi, 8 2 , 85 , 86, 8 7 , 88

Kal i , 4 7 , 80 Kan t , I m ma n u e l , 2 1 , 98 ka rma-yog , 2 7 Kepler, Joha nnes, 1 2 Khaldo u n , I b n , 9 Kierkegaard, SlI1re n , 2 1 , 83 critique of, 1 9-20 Eith er/Or, 1 8 planes of existence, 1 8-20 Krish n a , 5, 20 Ku h n , Thomas The Struct u re of Scientific Revolutions, 1 03

K u m u l ipo, 1 4

Lao Z i , 9 " leap of fa i t h , " 1 9 Leda , 1 5 Leibniz, Gottfried Wi lhel m , 1 2 , 5 5 , 56, 68, 69 Monadology, 55 Na tura l Theology of the

�

deemphasizing i m portance of, to spiritual experience, 78-8 1 as oxymoron , 5 4 of sacred texts , 39-40 , 43-44, 46 and sense of belongi ng, 60 and Western though t , 5 7 M ichaelson-Morley experiments, 70 m i nd, differing concepts of, 7 1 , 73 m i nd-body problem , 6 7-68 , 69, 73 and C h i nese though t , 74-75 , 77 and reduction ism , 70-- 7 1 Moham med, 8 1 monads, 69 morta l i ty Abra h a m ic t radition on , 2 4 dea l i ng with , 2 1 -2 3 , 24 das Mystische, 1 8, 3 1

�

Q Z ....

Newto n , S i r I saac, 56, 69

Ch inese , 55 Theodicy, 5 5

l i fe , as a story, 24 Lucret i u s , 68

M a i mon ides, Moses , 9 Marcel , Gabrie l , 29 materialism , combatting, 50 M a u riac, Fran�ois, 7 mea n i nglessness, of modern l i fe , 1 0 Mencius , 86 Merton , Thomas, 29 metaphysics and Abrahamic t radition, 43 concept of, 5 4-55

Oppenhei mer, Robert , 6 , 3 I , 80

Pa ris, 1 5 Pa u l ( Biblica l ) , 2 2 , 2 3 Pilgrim at Tinker Creek , 28

planes of exi stence , 1 8-20 Plato, 55, 56, 66 Plato's cave , 40 Plato's Forms , 55 Pope , Alexander, 60 Popol Yu h , 1 5 progress, q uestion i ng, 52 Prometheus, 1 5 Pythagorean Theore m , 56

rational i ty, 98

1 09

rel igion (s) and apathy, 48-49 and capita l i s m , 50 and ego-reduction , 5 7 , 5 9 e t h i c s o f , 48-49 as i n structive, 1 4 , 1 6 , 1 7 , 3 7 , 3 9-40 and meani ngfu l living, 3 7 , 4 7 and metaphysics, 39-40, 78-8 1 as nonmaterialist, 50 potential role of, 1 0 and science, 4-7 and sec urity, 5 1 and sense of belonging, 80 s i m i l a rities among, 1 6 , 46 skepticism about, responses to, 4-9 violence in name of, 7-9 religious experience, 1 7 , 2 4-25 defin i ng, 30-3 1 and ego-reduction , 3 3-34 incl usionary, 3 3 and metaphysics, 78-8 1 paths to, 2 5-2 9 com mon , 26 contemplative, 2 7 fa ith , 2 6 , 2 7 , 29 good works , 2 7 meditative, 2 7 mora l , 2 7 , 2 9-30 scholars h i p , 26, 2 7 a n d sense o f belonging, 3 1 -3 3 rel igious traditions , moral dimensions of, 4 7-48 ren , 84

sacred, in the secular, 5 8-5 9 sacred texts direct reading of. 38 and ego-reduction , 65 indirect reading of, 38 as i n structive , 65

l lO

and mea n i ng, 92 metaphysics i n , 3 9-40 , 43-44 , 46 releva nce of, 73 revision i ng of, 38 s i m i larity among, I I , 78 Sand Cou n ty Almanac , A, 28 Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, 44 science ancient a n d modern , differences between, 66-67 and Ch inese though t , 76 metaphysics i n , 6 7 and rel igion , conflict between , 1 2- 1 3 and security, 5 1 -5 2 Western , 1 2 , 76 secular/sacred connection , 5 8-5 9 sec urity and economic distribution , 53 and food, 5 3 a n d religion , 5 1 -52 and science, 5 1 -5 2 sense of belonging i m portance of, 32 a n d re l igious experience, 3 1 shengren , 86, 8 7 , 88 s h i , 82-88 Sivi n , Nath a n , 76, 7 7 Sm ith , H u ston , 73 Forgotten Tru th , 6-7 Socrates, 5 5 , 5 6 , 66 , 1 02 Spi noza , Baruch , 5 5 , 68 spiritual traditions, potential of, 3, 1 0 "su btle matter, " 69

Thales, 5 5 , 68 Theresa of Avi l a , 9 Tokpela , 1 5 tra nscendental rea l m , 7 3 , 90 problem of, 80

translation issues, i n compa rative research , 44-45

U nderh i l l , Evelyn , 29

explanatory approach i n , 1 1-14 rel igion a s i n fl uence on , 1 1-12 Wittgen stei n , Ludwig, 1 7 , 30, 1 02 on sa fety, 96 Wong, David, 1 00 wu xing , 75

violence, a n d food security, 53 Vish n u , S Vol ta i re , Fran�ois Marie Arouet de, 5 1

Yu - B i n , Pa u l Cardi nal , x i i i

Wa lde n , 28 W U , 75 West, Rebecca , 75 Western though t , on u n derlying rea l i ty, 76 Western traditions

Zeng, M aster, 8 3 Zeus, 1 5 Zh uang Z i , 20 Zigong, 86 Z i l u , 49 Zixia, 86

wan

111