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, 1934-

R 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 vii

A Brief Portrait of the Venerable Master Hsiian Hua . ix

Preface xv

Rationality and Religious Experience 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 Indiana Jones and the
Temple of Doom . 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 Natural Theology of the Ch inese and
the Theodicy, as wel l as the Monadology; 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 nirvana
and samsara 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 wu
xing 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 sheng
i n the Book of Documents 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 Analects make refe rence to
the shi, 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 : all shengren are junzi, and all junzi were
forme rly sh i , 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. Shi a re , re latively
speaking, fai rly n u me rou s, junzi a re more scarce ,
and sheng 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 junzi, who know the
Ii 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 junzi,
the shengren 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 shengren who
leads the way of the h u ma n being (ren dao) i n to its
more certa i n fut u re .
I n reading t h e re lationship between the sh i, junzi,
and shengren 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
Co. , 1 996) . j;.U
I I . See James, op. c i t , especi a l ly Lextu res XVI and XVI I . E-
1 2 . For an a n a l ysis of the rel igious d i m e n sions of t h e
0
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, �
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
0
�
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. ,
2
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,

mecha n ics on geometry or tereometry, a n d harmonics on a r i t h m e t i c ;

o
s i m i l a rly, he says, Phaenomena (that is, observational astronomy)
depend on ( t heoretical ) ast ronomy.
z

( 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, fu ndamenta l i s m , 30
82 , 84 , 88 and econom ic security, 5 3
Analects , 45 , 82 , 83 , 86, 8 7 ,
88, 90, 92
on kinds of persons, 82-83 G a l i leo, 1 2
Copern icus, Nicholas, 1 2 Gandh i , Mohandes, 9
cosmology, 39 Genesis ( Bi b l e ) , 1 3 , 1 6
creation stories i n fl uence of, 1 1
and C h i n a , 1 3 global vil lage , 3
of di fferent cultures, 1 4- 1 5 G reek phi losophical heritage ,
explanatory role of, 1 4 55
and I ndia, 1 3
Cruz, San Juan de l a , 28
cult mem bersh i p , 32-33 H a rvey, Wi l l i a m , 70
Hector, 1 5
Helen , 1 5
Dalai Lama, 9 H e n ry o f Navarre , 6 7
Danto, Arthur, 1 04 Heraclitus, 5 5 , 68
dao , 88 Hesiod, 1 5
Dao De Jing, 3 9 , 90 H i ppocrates , 70
Day, Dorothy, 29 Hsuan H u a , Venerable Master,
Democritus, 68, 73 b iographical sketch of. ix-x i i i
Descartes , Ren � , 5 5 , 6 7 , 69 on rel igion , commonalities i n ,
D i l lard, An n i e , 5 1 , 5 2 , 54 xiii
Donne, Joh n , 50 teach i ngs o f , xii
Dream of the Earth , The, H suan H u a Memorial Lecture ,
28 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 Jesus ( Bibl ical ) , 20, 26, 8 1

" Four E lements , " 75 Jones, J i m , 9 7
Francis of Assisi , 9 J u l ian of Norwich , 9 , 8 1

1 08
junzi, 8 2 , 85 , 86, 8 7 , 88 deemphasizing i m portance
of, to spiritual experience,
�
78-8 1 �
Kal i , 4 7 , 80 as oxymoron , 5 4 Q
Kan t , I m ma n u e l , 2 1 , 98
ka rma-yog , 2 7
of sacred texts , 39-40 , 43-44,
46 Z
....
Kepler, Joha nnes, 1 2 and sense of belongi ng, 60
Khaldo u n , I b n , 9 and Western though t , 5 7
Kierkegaard, SlI1re n , 2 1 , 83 M ichaelson-Morley
critique of, 1 9-20 experiments, 70
Eith er/Or, 1 8 m i nd, differing concepts of, 7 1 ,
planes of existence, 1 8-20 73
Krish n a , 5, 20 m i nd-body problem , 6 7-68 , 69,
Ku h n , Thomas 73
The Struct u re of Scientific and C h i nese though t , 74-75 ,
Revolutions, 1 03 77
K u m u l ipo, 1 4 and reduction ism , 70-- 7 1
Moham med, 8 1
monads, 69
morta l i ty
Lao Z i , 9
Abra h a m ic t radition on , 2 4
" leap of fa i t h , " 1 9
dea l i ng with , 2 1 -2 3 , 24
Leda , 1 5
das Mystische, 1 8, 3 1
Leibniz, Gottfried Wi lhel m , 1 2 ,
5 5 , 56, 68, 69
Monadology, 55
Newto n , S i r I saac, 56, 69
Na tura l Theology of the
Ch inese , 55
Theodicy, 5 5
Oppenhei mer, Robert , 6 , 3 I , 80
l i fe , as a story, 24
Lucret i u s , 68
Pa ris, 1 5
Pa u l ( Biblica l ) , 2 2 , 2 3
M a i mon ides, Moses , 9 Pilgrim at Tinker Creek , 28
Marcel , Gabrie l , 29 planes of exi stence , 1 8-20
materialism , combatting, Plato, 55, 56, 66
50 Plato's cave , 40
M a u riac, Fran�ois, 7 Plato's Forms , 55
mea n i nglessness, of modern Pope , Alexander, 60
l i fe , 1 0 Popol Yu h , 1 5
Mencius , 86 progress, q uestion i ng, 52
Merton , Thomas, 29 Prometheus, 1 5
metaphysics Pythagorean Theore m , 56
and Abrahamic t radition,
43
concept of, 5 4-55 rational i ty, 98

1 09
 rel igion (s) and mea n i ng, 92
and apathy, 48-49 metaphysics i n , 3 9-40 ,
and capita l i s m , 50 43-44 , 46
and ego-reduction , 5 7 , 5 9 releva nce of, 73
e t h i c s o f , 48-49 revision i ng of, 38
as i n structive, 1 4 , 1 6 , 1 7 , 3 7 , s i m i larity among, I I , 78
3 9-40 Sand Cou n ty Almanac , A, 28
and meani ngfu l living, 3 7 , 4 7 Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, 44
and metaphysics, 39-40, science
78-8 1 ancient a n d modern ,
as nonmaterialist, 50 differences between, 66-67
potential role of, 1 0 and Ch inese though t , 76
and science, 4-7 metaphysics i n , 6 7
and sec urity, 5 1 and rel igion , conflict
and sense of belonging, 80 between , 1 2- 1 3
s i m i l a rities among, 1 6 , 46 and security, 5 1 -5 2
skepticism about, responses Western , 1 2 , 76
to, 4-9 secular/sacred connection ,
violence in name of, 7-9 5 8-5 9
religious experience, 1 7 , 2 4-25 sec urity
defin i ng, 30-3 1 and economic distribution ,
and ego-reduction , 3 3-34 53
incl usionary, 3 3 and food, 5 3
and metaphysics, 78-8 1 a n d religion , 5 1 -52
paths to, 2 5-2 9 and science, 5 1 -5 2
com mon , 26 sense of belonging
contemplative, 2 7 i m portance of, 32
fa ith , 2 6 , 2 7 , 29 a n d re l igious experience, 3 1
good works , 2 7 shengren , 86, 8 7 , 88
meditative, 2 7 s h i , 82-88
mora l , 2 7 , 2 9-30 Sivi n , Nath a n , 76, 7 7
scholars h i p , 26, 2 7 Sm ith , H u ston , 73
a n d sense o f belonging, Forgotten Tru th , 6-7
3 1 -3 3 Socrates, 5 5 , 5 6 , 66 , 1 02
rel igious traditions , moral Spi noza , Baruch , 5 5 , 68
dimensions of, 4 7-48 spiritual traditions, potential of,
ren , 84 3, 1 0
"su btle matter, " 69

sacred, in the secular, 5 8-5 9

sacred texts Thales, 5 5 , 68
direct reading of. 38 Theresa of Avi l a , 9
and ego-reduction , 65 Tokpela , 1 5
indirect reading of, 38 tra nscendental rea l m , 7 3 , 90
as i n structive , 65 problem of, 80

l lO
translation issues, i n explanatory approach i n ,
compa rative research , 1 1-14
44-45 rel igion a s i n fl uence on ,
1 1-12
Wittgen stei n , Ludwig, 1 7 , 30,
U nderh i l l , Evelyn , 29 1 02
on sa fety, 96
Wong, David, 1 00
violence, a n d food security, 53 wu xing , 75
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 Zeng, M aster, 8 3

wan W U , 75 Zeus, 1 5
West, Rebecca , 75 Zh uang Z i , 20
Western though t , on u n derlying Zigong, 86
rea l i ty, 76 Z i l u , 49
Western traditions Zixia, 86

111