Enai de a lukal
Well-Known Member
Truth in Different Religions
Different people, and different cultures, have esteemed truth and honesty differently; not everyone values it in the same way. There is a parable about a Spartan youth who stole a fox and, when he was surprised, hid it under his shirt to escape detection; the fox bit deep into his abdomen and yet the boy gave no sign of pain, and became a hero for dying with such calm self-control. In Spartan culture, resourcefulness, courage and indifference to pain were valued above honesty and truth; honesty and truth-seeking had no place in the Spartan ideal.
Different attitudes towards truth can also be seen in different religions; it is often supposed or claimed that religion (usually one's own religion) is a way to truth- and from this same supposition comes the occasional conflict between religion and science. However, not all religions place the same value on truth as such, and most religious people place as much or more value on ethical conduct than they do on the truth of any particular religious beliefs or metaphysical doctrines. A brief look at attitudes towards truth in various religions:
Truth in Buddhism
-The teaching of the Buddha forms the core of Buddhism, which are transmitted in the form of the Four Noble Truths, which are held and were clearly intended to be understood as literally true. But beyond that, Buddhism doesn't prize truth as such. The Buddha is like "a physician who treats a single disease, knows how to treat it, and does not care to know anything else"- Buddhism is concerned with a particular way of life, one in which suffering is annihilated; it values truth insofar as they are necessary to achieve this (the 4 Noble Truths), but beyond that, truth is simply not very useful.
-Thus, a conflict with truth/science in Buddhism is only conceivable on this level; the Buddhist could object, not that science or facts are mistaken, according to the teachings of their religion, but rather that such investigations are superfluous
Truth in Zen Buddhism
-Zen, on the face of it, rejects all truths, including the truths of Buddhism; in many Zen monasteries, the prayer recited first thing in the morning and before every meal says "there is no knowledge, no ignorance, no destruction of ignorance... there are no four truths, viz., there is no pain, no origin of pain, no stoppage of pain, and no path to the stoppage of pain" (DT Suzuki, An Introduction to Zen Buddhism, 50) and is no kinder to other religions:
"The... prayers of St Ignatius (Loyola) are, from the Zen point of view, merely so many fabrications of the imagination elaborately woven for the benefit of the piously minded" (ibid)
and even goes one further and ridicules all propositional truth:
"Empty handed I go, and behold the spade is in my hands;
I walk on foot, and yet on the back of an ox I am riding;
When I pass over the bridge,
Lo, the water floweth not, but the bridge doth flow" (Jenye/Fudaishi)
According to Zen, the beginnings of wisdom start with the recognition of the limitations and futility of propositional truth, including and especially religious dogmas. Truth is rejected, and once again, a way of life is sought.
Truth in Judaism
-The main concern in Judaism is with not truth as such, but with what Christians have usually, though misleadingly, called "The Law". But the Law is more a matter of good form than legislation, a matter of respect for tradition and the established order of things. Judaism, like Buddhism, is primarily concerned with a way of life; the "unique directedness from a historical past into a messianic future, from Mount Sinai to justice for orphan, widow, and stranger and the abolition of war". (Kaufmann,62)
- The key to this way of life, for Judaism, is scripture; but unlike in Christianity, Judaism has never become a dogmatic religion- specific formulations of Scripture have never gained authoritative status, and scripture is viewed as the inexhaustible, multifarious text that it is. For instance, in the field of Haggadah, there is no "right" or "true" interpretation- there are degrees of profundity and poetic beauty, and two conflicting interpretations can both be highly esteemed.
Truth in Christianity, or, Jewish and Christian Faith
-With Christianity and its notion of faith, concern with truth moves to the forefront; distinguishing Jewish faith from Christian faith puts this in stark contrast. The words "faith" and "belief" can mean both faith/belief in (i.e. trust) and faith/belief that (i.e. belief that certain propositions are true). Faith, in Judaism, consists primarily in the former sort- faith as trust; this is the faith of Abraham, the paradigm case, but is also the faith of Job ("Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him" 3:15). But not only of faith, but of intimacy- this is what characterizes the faith of Jonah, or of Moses (as in the 90th Psalm).
-Now, Christian faith, beginning with Paul, consists in trust as well, but also adds faith that to the picture; beginning with Paul, dogma and holding certain propositions to be true becomes more and more crucial. There is also a notable loss of the sense of intimacy- such intimacy with the divine is an exception in Christianity (someone like Eckhart), whereas it was more the rule in Judaism.
-But it is no accident that most people consider the distinguishing mark of a Christian to be holding certain beliefs about the person of Jesus Christ- according to the Gospels, and many subsequent Christian writers, faith as trust is insufficient for salvation, faith that certain dogmas are true is essential. And the very notion of a dogma is problematic; as humans, all of our knowledge and belief are fallible, and a dogma is defined as something which is held true come what may- thus, they must be held as true, even if they turn out not to be true.
-Thus, the concern with truth which is fairly unique to Christianity also leads it to more radical conflict with truth than any other religion- witnessed in the history of conflict between the church and science, and the Christian tendency towards anti-intellectualism.
(for more on Christian theology on truth and anti-intellectualism/fideism, visit my other thread; http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/science-religion/149973-theologians-vs-reason.html)
Different people, and different cultures, have esteemed truth and honesty differently; not everyone values it in the same way. There is a parable about a Spartan youth who stole a fox and, when he was surprised, hid it under his shirt to escape detection; the fox bit deep into his abdomen and yet the boy gave no sign of pain, and became a hero for dying with such calm self-control. In Spartan culture, resourcefulness, courage and indifference to pain were valued above honesty and truth; honesty and truth-seeking had no place in the Spartan ideal.
Different attitudes towards truth can also be seen in different religions; it is often supposed or claimed that religion (usually one's own religion) is a way to truth- and from this same supposition comes the occasional conflict between religion and science. However, not all religions place the same value on truth as such, and most religious people place as much or more value on ethical conduct than they do on the truth of any particular religious beliefs or metaphysical doctrines. A brief look at attitudes towards truth in various religions:
Truth in Buddhism
-The teaching of the Buddha forms the core of Buddhism, which are transmitted in the form of the Four Noble Truths, which are held and were clearly intended to be understood as literally true. But beyond that, Buddhism doesn't prize truth as such. The Buddha is like "a physician who treats a single disease, knows how to treat it, and does not care to know anything else"- Buddhism is concerned with a particular way of life, one in which suffering is annihilated; it values truth insofar as they are necessary to achieve this (the 4 Noble Truths), but beyond that, truth is simply not very useful.
-Thus, a conflict with truth/science in Buddhism is only conceivable on this level; the Buddhist could object, not that science or facts are mistaken, according to the teachings of their religion, but rather that such investigations are superfluous
Truth in Zen Buddhism
-Zen, on the face of it, rejects all truths, including the truths of Buddhism; in many Zen monasteries, the prayer recited first thing in the morning and before every meal says "there is no knowledge, no ignorance, no destruction of ignorance... there are no four truths, viz., there is no pain, no origin of pain, no stoppage of pain, and no path to the stoppage of pain" (DT Suzuki, An Introduction to Zen Buddhism, 50) and is no kinder to other religions:
"The... prayers of St Ignatius (Loyola) are, from the Zen point of view, merely so many fabrications of the imagination elaborately woven for the benefit of the piously minded" (ibid)
and even goes one further and ridicules all propositional truth:
"Empty handed I go, and behold the spade is in my hands;
I walk on foot, and yet on the back of an ox I am riding;
When I pass over the bridge,
Lo, the water floweth not, but the bridge doth flow" (Jenye/Fudaishi)
According to Zen, the beginnings of wisdom start with the recognition of the limitations and futility of propositional truth, including and especially religious dogmas. Truth is rejected, and once again, a way of life is sought.
Truth in Judaism
-The main concern in Judaism is with not truth as such, but with what Christians have usually, though misleadingly, called "The Law". But the Law is more a matter of good form than legislation, a matter of respect for tradition and the established order of things. Judaism, like Buddhism, is primarily concerned with a way of life; the "unique directedness from a historical past into a messianic future, from Mount Sinai to justice for orphan, widow, and stranger and the abolition of war". (Kaufmann,62)
- The key to this way of life, for Judaism, is scripture; but unlike in Christianity, Judaism has never become a dogmatic religion- specific formulations of Scripture have never gained authoritative status, and scripture is viewed as the inexhaustible, multifarious text that it is. For instance, in the field of Haggadah, there is no "right" or "true" interpretation- there are degrees of profundity and poetic beauty, and two conflicting interpretations can both be highly esteemed.
Truth in Christianity, or, Jewish and Christian Faith
-With Christianity and its notion of faith, concern with truth moves to the forefront; distinguishing Jewish faith from Christian faith puts this in stark contrast. The words "faith" and "belief" can mean both faith/belief in (i.e. trust) and faith/belief that (i.e. belief that certain propositions are true). Faith, in Judaism, consists primarily in the former sort- faith as trust; this is the faith of Abraham, the paradigm case, but is also the faith of Job ("Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him" 3:15). But not only of faith, but of intimacy- this is what characterizes the faith of Jonah, or of Moses (as in the 90th Psalm).
-Now, Christian faith, beginning with Paul, consists in trust as well, but also adds faith that to the picture; beginning with Paul, dogma and holding certain propositions to be true becomes more and more crucial. There is also a notable loss of the sense of intimacy- such intimacy with the divine is an exception in Christianity (someone like Eckhart), whereas it was more the rule in Judaism.
-But it is no accident that most people consider the distinguishing mark of a Christian to be holding certain beliefs about the person of Jesus Christ- according to the Gospels, and many subsequent Christian writers, faith as trust is insufficient for salvation, faith that certain dogmas are true is essential. And the very notion of a dogma is problematic; as humans, all of our knowledge and belief are fallible, and a dogma is defined as something which is held true come what may- thus, they must be held as true, even if they turn out not to be true.
-Thus, the concern with truth which is fairly unique to Christianity also leads it to more radical conflict with truth than any other religion- witnessed in the history of conflict between the church and science, and the Christian tendency towards anti-intellectualism.
(for more on Christian theology on truth and anti-intellectualism/fideism, visit my other thread; http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/science-religion/149973-theologians-vs-reason.html)
