The Golden Rule, over
the years, has come in for its fair share of spoofing. When I was in college
there was a movie that proclaimed the Code of the West. “Do unto others … before they do it unto you.” And I don’t know who first said
it, but I’ve heard it repeated often that real golden rule is: Those who have the gold make the rules. There is some truth to that, but it is assuredly not the subject this morning. And one of my favorite playwrights,
George Bernard Shaw, had a caution about the Golden Rule. He said, “Do
not do unto others as you would wish they would do unto you. Your tastes may
not be the same. “
Yet there is no escaping,
as we’ll see today, that the Golden Rule transcends time, space, religions, cultures and continents. We’ll want to examine that – and we’ll have an open discussion later. Yet I would hope for us to avoid the sort of discussion I overheard when I was a child. It’s too perfect, but I swear to you, I did not make this up.
I remember it much too
well. It was an argument between a Jew and a Christian. The argument was over whose version of the Golden Rule was better.
The Christian proclaimed that “Jesus got it right. He stated the
Golden Rule in a positive way. DO unto others as you would have others do unto
you. The Jews,” and he shook his head, “as is far too often the case
– nothing personal – are negative. Do NOT do unto others.”
It probably won’t
come as a shock to you to learn that the Jewish person saw it differently. “You
Christians – nothing personal – are all about acquisition. You give,
in hope of getting. Do unto others as you hope others will do unto you. Hillel got it right. He tells us not
to be hurtful. Do not do to your neighbor that which is hateful to you.”
At the time I kept my
mouth shut, which was probably very wise, being not only younger, but a whole lot smaller than they were. Yet I pondered the arrogance of both positions. This was over
fifty years ago. It made an impression!
My dog’s better than your dog. My dad can whop your dad. My religion’s got the right answers and yours doesn’t.
Today, a lot older
and, I hope at least a smidge wiser, I realize that the truth of it is, we would much, MUCH rather argue about the golden
rule than try to live it. The truth of it is that the Golden Rule is a great
and difficult calling. Indeed, I think that, perhaps, is why it keeps being repeated
over and over again. Century after century.
It needs to be repeated … because it hasn’t taken. We write
it. We chisel it in stone. We praise
it. We shout it from the rooftops. We
do everything, everything but follow
it.
Each tradition says it
a little differently. Each culture frames it a little differently. And if one version calls to you as I read it, please don’t feel you need to scramble to write it
down. In a little bit, we’ll be handing out a list of some of the ways
the Golden Rule has been framed. There are fourteen versions on the list. And you may well ask, “Why fourteen? What’s
the symbolic relevance of fourteen?” I am here to tell you that there is
no symbolic relevance. There are fourteen listed, because fourteen fit nicely
on the page. There are scores, and probably hundreds of versions out there. This list is not exclusive.
And while I am an admirer
of both Hillel and Jesus, my personal favorite of the fourteen comes from a proverb preserved by the Yoruba of Nigeria. “A person preparing to use a pointed stick to poke a baby bird should first
try it on himself to see how it feels.”
The Lakota of North America
have perhaps the most expansive of the versions. “All things are our relatives;
what we do to everything, we do to ourselves.”
From the Baha’i,
“Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee…”
From Jainism, “A
man should wander about treating all creatures as he himself would be treated.”
And I’m guessing that women are included too.
From Islam, “None
of you is a believer until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.”
Again, I’m sure this includes the women.
From Buddhism, “Do
not treat others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.”
From the Wiccan, “What
you send out from yourself will come back to you threefold.”
From Hinduism, “This
is the sum of duty: do not do to others what would cause pain if done to you.”
From Ancient Greek philosophy,
“Do not do to your neighbor what you would object to from your neighbor.”
From Humanism, “Don’t do things you wouldn’t want to have done to you.”
From Confucianism, “Do
not do to others what you do not want them to do to you.”
Zoroastrianism, “Whatever
is disagreeable to yourself do not do to others.”
The Golden Rule,
however we frame it, however we word it, calls upon us to engage the world. We
are called to respect the “other” as we would be respected. To help
the “other” as we would be helped. To encourage the “other”
as we would be encouraged. To refrain from mistreating the “other”
as we would hope not to be mistreated. To remember the humanity of the
“other” as we would always wish our own humanity to be remembered.
Every race. Every religion. Every
continent. Four thousand years ago, three thousand, two thousand, five hundred
years ago. Yesterday.
And again, what so fascinates
me is how easy it is to proclaim the Golden Rule, and how difficult it has been
to live it. How easy it is to say, “Cut me some slack, will you? I’m
only human.” And yet how difficult it is to cut another some slack because,
she or he is only human.
I believe, and this
is not on stone tablets, it is my belief, that one of the most important reasons for a spiritual community is to help us,
to guide us to living the Golden Rule. Whether you be Hindu or Humanist, Buddhist or Baha’i, Muslim or Mormon, Jain
or Jew, Celt or Christian … and I’m running out of alliterations,
what Interfaith asks of you is to ask yourself: is my spiritual path helping me to live the Golden Rule?
What we hope to
do here, why we are called here, is in no small part to support each other as we strive, even struggle, to live the Golden
Rule.
Amen.