Tarnishing the Golden Rule
A principle from a Hindu epic that holds truth for many of our worlds
“Do not do to others what is disgusting to you. This is justice, in brief.”
– The Mahabharata
Gold has been treasured throughout the ages because it will not tarnish and rust. However, gold is so soft it is difficult to work with, and is often cut with other metals, thus inheriting their imperfections. So too with the principle that bears its name, the ‘golden rule’, which appears in one form or another in all the major religions. The quote above is spoken by Krishna in the Hindu epic, the Mahabharata. Jesus gives this principle as “do to others as you would have them do to you.” The worlds of the Christians and the worlds of the Hindus are distinct, yet a great many truths cross between these worlds.
What I find particularly intriguing about the approach to this well-known principle in the Hindu traditions is that it is expressly presented as a principle of justice. This indeed is why Krishna presents it as a negative principle - a prohibition against acting in way that would evoke disgust. Conversely, the Christian version is a positive principle, in effect encouraging certain behaviours. Even though the spirit of these two maxims are aligned, they are still distinctly different in how they are expressed. Indeed, this contrast is an important one. It is our laws that uphold justice, and our conscience that underpins morality - there are great dangers whenever we confuse the two.
However, our living in very different worlds creates great difficulties for any ‘golden rule’. Consider Krishna’s remarks: if justice has to take into account all our worlds, then it seems we must make laws that prohibit everyone from doing anything that anyone considers disgusting. In the United States, for instance, this would mean nobody could eat meat (vegans consider it disgusting), drive cars (many cyclists consider them disgusting), dance, gamble, or drink (certain Christian denominations consider these disgusting) or indeed undertake any medical procedure whatsoever (certain religious groups consider them disgusting). I hope it is clear that in a cosmopolitan society where many worlds collide, this is not a practical basis for putting together laws. It would lead to a culture where nothing was permitted. The same problem occurs in a different form if we take Jesus’ advice to ‘do unto others’: your vegan neighbour will not be thrilled when you bring them the barbequed animal flesh you find delicious.
It is not that the golden rule itself is problematic, it is that we no longer live in the close-knit communities that were common in ages past. When many worlds collide within the same society, the circumstances become more complex, and we must begin to think differently. What ought to be disgusting to us, if we want to live in a confluence of many worlds, is forcing one world upon everyone else. Once we understand how these principles, whether positive or negative, need to be applied amidst the culture clash of contemporary life, they hold just as much wisdom as they ever did. Yet it is precisely this broader perspective that has failed ever more deeply with each passing decade, within every political faction.
If we trusted in the spirit of the golden rule, it would still work as a guide for our collective justice. But like gold, we find its mettle is too soft for our tastes, we want to cut it with our own steel so we can strike down those whose actions we find disgusting. Everyone has an excuse as to why their view of justice and conscience must be forced universally upon everyone else, even while complaining that others are trying to constrain them in the exact same way! This failure to accept the diverse worlds of others is the essential crisis of our time, and it tarnishes the golden rule by insisting upon the opposite of what it asks. Everyone is doing what is disgusting to them: forcing their conscience upon those who dwell in different worlds. Until we understand this, it will become increasingly difficult for us to live together, and our collective justice will continue to rust.
"Everyone is doing what is disgusting to them: forcing their conscience upon those who dwell in different worlds."
Live and let live. The struggle becomes especially acute when we're dealing with ideologies that violate this principle. It's the trouble with cultural revolutions. When confronted with a worldview that insists on its perspective and further insists that you must relinquish your own, the tendency is to defend one's position. In the political arena, this self-defence, this recalcitrance is redefined as hatred and made to appear as an attempt to force one's view on others. Even in the case where the one who refuses to follow is not imposing his view, he is presented as doing so. And given the perspective of those insisting on the superiority of their paradigm, recalcitrance appears to be an imposition. The question then becomes, How do we get activists to step back from the fervour of their beliefs?
AGREE #TTGRagr_1: Tolerance Is Now Essential
“Until we understand this, it will become increasingly difficult for us to live together, and our collective justice will continue to rust.”
COMMENT
I can only begin to barely understand what is happening in the US today, but it seems to me that “[Almost] everyone [here] is doing what is disgusting to them: forcing their conscience upon those who dwell in different worlds.” There are only a few of us that think the quote above is true. Moreover, a few of these few think the inevitable result will be far worse than “continue to rust”. For us, the important question is: What should we be doing to address what we see as an impending catastrophe of planetary proportions? Certainly, we can write and post our views. Is that enough? We can try to direct our consciousness and our actions in ways that both preserve our own integrity, and still support everyone else we have contact with in enjoying their own personal world. Is that enough? In a functioning democracy, the future is ultimately determined by collective action. What should we purpose be done differently in our families, our communities, our states, our nations, our Earth, to manifest more tolerance?