I am more and more reflecting on how all spiritual traditions have a reason to exist, and they have something to say to humans. It would be a pity if the highest Utopia were one in which there is only one belief system. Consider Master Sheng Yen's remarks in his small book Establishing Global Ethics:
When people maintain what they believe in is the best religion in the world, they should not forget that others also have the right to say that their faith is the best. When people strive to survive and develop, they should not forget that others also have the right to survive and develop. (p.7-8)
I'd like to add further 'complicating' questions. I wonder, is there ever an ultimate 'end' to spiritual practice, where a person has said that they did it and realized what is Truth? I think this maybe depends on the religious perspective. For instance, some religions envision that human life converges on a final moment, such as a judgment day, when they will be either saved or condemned. According to this view, all human activities converge on a single point which forms the culmination of all their previous actions and views. From my readings of Buddhism, I don't think Buddhist philosophy necessarily considers there to be an end to time or a final state. As long as I am existing in time, there is going to be a past and future state as well. It's only when I see time as constructed by mind that I can see beyond time. But that would not necessarily be some final goal.
But I think there is another aspect to Master Sheng Yen's quote that might be worth exploring. The previous sentence to the above paragraph relates "there still exists the fact that different religions clash or even provoke wars against each other." (ibid) What is alluded to here is how excessive attachment to one's views can lead to all sorts of conflicts. If I were on a desert island, or surrounded only by those who share the same religious beliefs as myself, would conflict be eliminated altogether? Not really, in my opinion: as long as I am attached to some view and hold it up as the only truth worth preserving, I am inclined to feel some kind of suffering. Soon, I will be conflicting with my fellow 'believers' because I might feel that I am more faithful to the truth than they are! In a sense, all spiritual practices are bound to meet with conflicts and doubts. But the attachment to belief is often a cover-up for the fact that everyone has doubts, even about what they cherish as truth. When I don't want to face my own doubts or misgivings, I end up becoming agitated with others, either for harboring the same doubts or having a different level of confidence in what they believe.
Another way of looking at this is: for everything one holds as true, there is bound to be a flipside, or a sense of falsity. As long as I believe that one view is true and the other false, I create a mental pressure to stay on the 'true side' and discard the false, and this creates a lot of turmoil. So religious strife doesn't just happen 'out there' between people, but it can also be an inner struggle between faith and doubt. But if I am not trying to attach to 'my' view, and keep a more open channel to how different kinds of truth can arise in different ways, then I am suffering much less. I am not trying to fix myself to only one set of conditions and then trying to reject all the others in pursuit of one final 'moment' of truth.
Shengyen (2008), Establishing Global Ethics. Taiwan: Dharma Drum Publications
No comments:
Post a Comment