kort@hounx.UUCP (B.KORT) (11/04/85)
In Hofstadter & Dennett's _The Mind's I_ there appears a delightful piece by Raymond Smullyan (from his book _The Tao is Silent_) entitled, "Is God a Taoist?" The piece is a Socratic dialogue between two characters named "Mortal" and "God". In the dialogue, the Mortal is gaining enlightenment as to how it happens that he has been endowed with free will. At one point in the dialogue, Mortal is doubting whether he is really having this conversation with God, or whether he is only imagining it. He asks God if there isn't some may He can make Himself known to the Mortal's senses. God tells Mortal that He can't do that, saying, "It would be more accurate to say that I *am* your senses." Still not satisfied, Mortal asks God to explain to him who or what He is. God replies by framing "the best definition that mortals can make of Me at this stage of their evolution." God suggests, "I am the very process of enlightenment." God continues with, "And what you mortals choose to call the Devil (and I wish you wouldn't) is the unfortunate length of time the process takes." I personally found this passage both enlightening and refreshing. It is curious to note that the phrase "process of enlightenment" can often be substituted for "God" without any real loss of meaning. (The process of enlightenment be with you.) --Barry Kort
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (11/06/85)
In article <387@hounx.UUCP> kort@hounx.UUCP (B.KORT) writes: >"Is God a Taoist?" [...] is a Socratic dialogue between two characters >named "Mortal" and "God". In the dialogue, the Mortal is gaining >enlightenment as to how it happens that he has been endowed with free will. >At one point in the dialogue, Mortal is doubting whether he is really >having this conversation with God, or whether he is only imagining it. >He asks God if there isn't some may He can make Himself known to the >Mortal's senses. God tells Mortal that He can't do that, saying, "It >would be more accurate to say that I *am* your senses." >Still not satisfied, Mortal asks God to explain to him who or what He is. >God replies by framing "the best definition that mortals can make of Me >at this stage of their evolution." God suggests, "I am the very process >of enlightenment." God continues with, "And what you mortals choose >to call the Devil (and I wish you wouldn't) is the unfortunate length >of time the process takes." >I personally found this passage both enlightening and refreshing. It is >curious to note that the phrase "process of enlightenment" can often be >substituted for "God" without any real loss of meaning. This is essentially a fundamental Christian doctrine which has been made pantheistic and de-mythologized so that it is more palatable to those who don't like definite and concrete Gods. The doctrine is bound up in the theological terms and symbols of Christ as both the Word and as the Light of the World. The differences are that a) this revelatory action is simply a part of the LORD in Christianity, and that b) a key portion of the revelation is the God himself (or the process of enlightenment, the Word, or whatever itself). So perhaps Jesus was a Taoist. Charley Wingate