Spot the difference - a game for simple folk

[tariki]

From Acts 4:12:-

And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among mankind by which we must be saved.


From the Lotus Sutra, "The Parable of the Dharma Rain":-

I bring fullness and satisfaction to the world,
like rain that spreads its moisture everywhere.
Eminent and lowly, superior and inferior,
observers of precepts, violators of precepts,
those fully endowed with proper demeanor,
those not fully endowed,
those of correct views, of erroneous views,
of keen capacity, of dull capacity -
I cause the Dharma rain to rain on all equally,
never lax or neglectful.
When all the various living beings
hear my Law,
they receive it according to their power,
dwelling in their different environments.....
.....the Law of the Buddhas
is constantly of a single flavour,
causing the many worlds
to attain full satisfaction everywhere;
by practicing gradually and stage by stage,
all beings can gain the fruits of the way.

Can these two texts ever be reconciled. Yes, simply by recognising the difference between the Word as Text and the Living Word, a "word" that blows where it will.

Simply by applying the spirit of Christ to the Word as Text, this according to how the Biblical text should be approached and known by those interested in healing the divisions of Religion........

To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another. (Dei Verbum, III, 12, 2)

[PaulS]

On 4/29/2023 at 5:21 PM, tariki said:

Can these two texts ever be reconciled. Yes, simply by recognising the difference between the Word as Text and the Living Word, a "word" that blows where it will.

I'm not as convinced that the individual authors would agree that their respective writings are pointing to the same thing, but I commend your merits for reconciling them Derek - I think any 'positive vibes' for wellbeing in our world are a good thing. 

[tariki]

The reconciliation comes from applying the Catholic way of seeking to understand scripture. That is, recognising the historical and existential circumstances/origins of those words recorded in Acts rather than seeing/reading them in the ahistorical manner of the Protestant Fundamentalist tradition. By doing so the "only way" beloved of the Protestant Conservatives becomes very problematic!

[tariki]

Entering the turgid realms of philosophy, relevant here is the idea of "argument by relegation" (rather than "argument by refutation"), a summary of this to be found in "A Sourcebook of Japanese Philosophy".

 

For those interested:-

 

 The preference for internal relations and an interdependence of wholes and parts is also reflected in the logic of argumentation by relegation. Here opposing positions are treated not by refuting them, but by accepting them as true, but only true as a part of the full picture. That is, rather than denying the opposing position, I compartmentalize or marginalize it as being no more than one part of the more complete point of view for which I am arguing. This is different from argument by refutation, a form of disputation very common in the West and, interestingly, also in India. In that form of argument, the purpose is to obliterate the opposing position by showing it to be faulty in either premises or logic. The argument by refutation implicitly accepts the law of the excluded middle and the law of non-contradiction. That is, assuming there is no category mistake in the formulation of the position, either p or not-p must be true and they cannot both be true in the same way at the same time. Therefore, in the refutation form of argumentation, if I can show the opposing position to be false, my position is affirmed with no need to say anything more.

Argument by relegation, which is much more common in Japanese philosophy, has its own advantages. Logically, it broadens the scope of discussion. Even if I am persuaded that another’s view is incorrect in some respect, it is nevertheless a real point of view and my theory of reality must be able to account for its existence. It carries with it the obligation to show how, given the way reality is, such a partial or wrongheaded view is possible in the first place. Rhetorically, an argument by relegation has the appearance of being irenic or conciliatory rather than agonistic or adversarial, but if we both share the model of argument by relegation, we will indeed be competing over which position can relegate which. Argument by relegation does engage in a kind of synthesis, but the purpose of this synthesis is not to show the complementarity of positions, but instead the superiority of one position over the other. This style of argument is pervasive in Japanese intellectual history and helps, in part, explain the enduring fascination with Hegelian dialectical thought in modern Japan.

Well, back to my coffee in McDonalds.

 

 

Edited May 1, 2023 by tariki