I read "Siddhartha" by Hermann Hesse. One of the main points, I think, is that realization of Truth cannot be learned from communication, only by experience. (To an extent, I agree.) The other main point is that transcendence of selfishness to selflessness occurs primarily by compassion; and compassion arises, often, by recognizing the self-same qualities of ourselves in others: the same pains, pleasures, hopes, fears and so on. It was an interesting book.

-- John

Indeed, Hermann Hesse's books are interesting - but do not fotget, they are not Christian. Hesses spirituality is a diffuse spirituality from the quality of "pantheistic" feeling... Sorry to say that, because I liked Hesse's books very much, when I was a young student! But the beauty of language and literally expression is a "big seducer"! But nevertheless with a critical eye you can profit by reading! Father Michael Geras

A critical eye and careful foot. Like when reading Hegel. It can be seductive to read his "Philosophy of History". His logic and reason is self contained, but he doesn't always clarify the assumptions his arguments are bound to. One would be taking a dangerous step if he were to accept those premises.

Terry

JOHN:

Christ is Risen!! Indeed He is Risen!!

Sounds like so much New Age stuff I've heard lately. If you don't have an "experience" you cannot "know." I wonder what this does to communication of such things as the Truth of the Faith. If one cannot communicate the Faith to another, but each person must "experience" it himself, then we'd have to have the Lord here with us always because each new addition to the family of the Faith would ahve to have the direct experience that the Apostles had. Reminds me of a sermon I heard--that I challenged--that developed the theme "If you don't have a 'falling off the horse' experience like St. Paul had, you have no faith just an illusion." I've never had such a dramatic experience in my pilgrimage but I still believe I have had a faith gift given to me. And the faith gift was developed by a string of God-inspired, solid orthodox and Orthodox spiritual fathers who communicated to me many things, including portions of their own spiritual pilgrimages.

In Christ,

BOB

If Truth cannot be learned from communication, then divine revelation from Scripture and Church authority makes little sense. It is true that grace works mysteriously in our soul, but we can't have a freestyle faith; we must dance with Christ and with the Fathers and Saints as they dance with Him too.

By dancing alone we separate ourselves from God and believe our life has experienced something new under the sun; we make a hell of our spiritual life and call it reasonable.

It seems better to keep our eyes and ears open for the beckoning of tradition and the faithful to life the life of faith, to persevere in faith to this end.

Terry

Siddhartha is a favorite of mine. I do think that there is something fundamentally right in the notion that ultimate truth cannot be known apart from experience. Of course, Hesse is portraying a buddhist view, but this seems to be consistent with Orthodoxy. The divine mysteries are revealed, but they are only really known by the one who has faith and tastes of the Holy Spirit. That is why St. Seraphim of Sarov said that the life of the Christian is to "acquire the Holy Spirit." The ultimate truth about God is not known discursively through objectified reason, but is experienced by the saint who has purified himself and has attained theosis.

Joe

What we know of God comes from revelation. But to know the ultimate truth of God, we would have to be greater than God; it is impossible to know God as He is.

"The divine mysteries are revealed, but they are only really known by the one who has faith and tastes of the Holy Spirit."

This is right on, but how is this compatible with the analogies Hesse constructs in his novel? I don't understand how he "seems to be consistent with Orthodoxy."

I haven't read the book.

Terry

Terry,

I certainly don't think that the whole of what Hesse is saying is compatible with Orthodoxy. After all, the book is buddhist, not Christian. But the important distinction that is made in the book between knowing about enlightenment and actually experiencing enlightenment holds for all religious experience. I think that this is the main point he is trying to get across, that one can't achieve enlightenment simply by studying the buddha's teachings or using some ascetical techniques. Rather, one has to actually live the way the Buddha lived and experience what the Buddha experienced in order to achieve enlightenment. This is why Siddhartha chooses not to stay with the Buddha but to go into the world and experience everything in the world so he can come to the realization for himself that all is samsara. He has to go through this in order to really understand samsara and nirvana. He can't learn it simply by listening to a sage. I happen to think that this is a valid point and I suspect that many of the Church fathers, especially the ascetics, would say that one must truly live a holy life and achieve apatheia in order to understand theosis. One can't simply learn it from a book.

Joe

"One can't simply learn it from a book."

Exactly. That is what makes the difference between poets and critics.

Terry

Friends,

I haven't read Hesse's book either, so I cannot comment on its usefulness. I do think, however, that the Buddhist emphasis on experience as knowledge is, in some ways, shared by Christianity and particularly by Orthodoxy. To "know" in the biblical sense, after all, means to experience someone or something deeply--beyond the level of cognition.

I think it would be an overstatement to say that in Buddhism "Truth cannot be learned from communication, only by experience", since the Buddha himself was a teacher who himself gave many sermons and instructions. What he did stress repeatedly, however, was that his disciples ought to receive his teaching passively, but practice it themselves so that they could know it to be true. Perhaps it is better to say that in Buddhism knowledge of Truth is incomplete without experience. Hence the Buddhism axiom: "Ehipassiko" -- "Come and see". In this sense, it seems to me, there are some points of contact between him and the Eastern Fathers like St. Diadochos of Photiki and St. Symeon the New Theologian, for example.

W.H.

W.H.

Excellent points.

Joe