Showing posts with label Thoreau. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Thoreau. Show all posts

2020/09/26

86 - Samvega and Pasada: Two Buddhist Emotions Indispensable for Practice - The Zen Studies Podcast

86 - Samvega and Pasada: Two Buddhist Emotions Indispensable for Practice - The Zen Studies Podcast



85 – I Shouldn’t Feel Like This: A Practitioner’s Conundrum
87 – Nyoho: Making Even Our Smallest, Mundane Actions Accord with the Dharma – Part 1
Samvega and pasada keep our practice alive and on course. Samvega is spiritual urgency arising three things: A sense of distress and disillusionment about life as it’s usually lived, a sense of our own complicity and complacency, and determination to find a more meaningful way. Contrary to society at large, Buddhism encourages the cultivation of samvega – as long as you balance it with pasada, a serene confidence that arises when you find a reliable way to address samvega.


I recently encountered an article by one of my favorite Buddhist scholars, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, called “Affirming the Truths of the Heart: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega and Pasada.”[i] As far as I can recall, I had never before heard those terms – samvega and pasada – in my 20-plus years as a Buddhist. Indeed, you won’t find them in Buddhist dictionaries (I looked), and most references on the web are to Thanissaro’s article, in which he admits, “very few of us have heard of” samvega and pasada.
However, despite the apparently limited usage of these terms, I wanted to share them with you. Our human ability to reflect on our own subjective experience has developed hand-in-hand with language, so sometimes we just need the right word and we’re suddenly able to comprehend and express our reality in a whole new way. For me, the definitions of these two “Buddhist emotions” clarify and reflect my own experience in practice, and I find the associated concepts useful.

Samvega: Spiritual Urgency

First, samvega. Thanissaro explains:
“It’s a hard word to translate because it covers such a complex range—at least three clusters of feelings at once: the oppressive sense of shock, dismay, and alienation that comes with realizing the futility and meaninglessness of life as it’s normally lived; a chastening sense of our own complicity, complacency, and foolishness in having let ourselves live so blindly; and an anxious sense of urgency in trying to find a way out of the meaningless cycle. This is a cluster of feelings that we’ve all experienced at one time or another in the process of growing up, but I don’t know of a single English term that adequately covers all three. Such a term would be useful to have, and maybe that’s reason enough for simply adopting the word samvega into our language.”[ii]
Samvega is what made Siddhartha Gautama, later Shakyamuni Buddha, leave home and pursue years of strenuous religious practice. According to the classic story, he was raised in luxury in a palace and carefully insulated from the suffering in the world. Eventually he got curious and ventured outside the palace, only to encounter four sights: A sick person, an elderly person, a corpse, and a renunciate holy man. He was keenly aware upon seeing these things that he and everyone he knew would inevitably get sick, old, or die (or some combination of those). After some careful contemplation, he set out on the path of a renunciate spiritual seeker rather than continue to live as if his youth, health, life, and comfort were going to last forever.
Personally, I started feeling samvega as a young adult but had no word or context for it. Although, like prince Siddhartha, I was comfortable and fortunate in my own life circumstances, life in general seemed meaningless, if not downright unacceptable. So much of human effort seemed aimed at some future pay-off that rarely met expectations, and never provided permanent refuge. In an instant our circumstances could turn from fortune to utter despair and misery, and there wasn’t a thing we could do about it except try to ignore the possibility. I also experienced quite a lot of pain from the cognitive dissonance caused when I contrasted my happy-go-lucky life with the unfathomable human suffering, greed, and corruption I witnessed in the world. Life just didn’t make sense, and it was difficult to rally the enthusiasm to play along when, in my heart of hearts, I was experiencing samvega: An oppressive sense of shock, dismay, and alienation from realizing the futility and meaninglessness of life as it’s normally lived; a chastening sense of my own complicity, complacency, and foolishness in having let myself live so blindly; and an anxious sense of urgency in trying to find a way out of the meaningless cycle.

Keeping Samvega at Bay Through Denial and Distraction

Sadly, as a teenager I found little solace or guidance about what to do about my samvega. I devoured Thoreau’s Walden, amazed at his gutsy and insightful criticisms of society. I resonated with the Stoic philosophers. It was nice to know I wasn’t the only one, but nothing I read offered me much in the way of advice about what to do about my feelings. Most people I talked to about them just didn’t relate. I think they worried I was self-absorbed or depressed, or just thought I was overthinking things. Overall, the message I got was that samvega was a weird – and hopefully passing – weakness in my personality, causing me to obsess over questions with no answers instead of getting on with life like a grown-up.
The response of society to the possibility of samvega seems, to me, to be expressed in the analogy of Siddhartha Gautama’s father keeping him confined to the palace, thereby insulating his son from the brutal realities of human existence. According to the myth, a prophecy had been made that Siddhartha would leave home, practice as a renunciate, and awaken as a Buddha. His father hoped to prevent this outcome and therefore tried to keep Siddhartha from experiencing anything that could cause samvega to arise. In Thanissaro’s words, Siddhartha’s father sought to “distract the prince and dull his sensitivity so that he could settle down and become a well-adjusted, productive member of society.”[iii] Like the Buddha’s father, those of us in modern society often seem hell bent on keeping samvega at bay by concentrating on the positive, absorbing ourselves in pleasant distractions, fighting the signs of aging, keeping the sick, elderly, and dead out of sight, and turning away from the incomprehensible levels of destruction, injustice, and suffering happening in the world.
To be fair, keeping samvega at bay through denial and distraction makes sense if you have no other way of dealing with it. The cool thing about Buddhism is that it acknowledges, and even encourages, samvega from the beginning, because (again in the words of Thanissaro) it offers “an effective strategy for dealing with the feelings behind it.” Thanissaro also says Buddhist practice is an “opportunity to solve the problem of samvega.”[iv]

Samvega is Not the Same Thing as Dukkha

I remember the first time I read about Buddhism’s Four Noble Truths. I was 24 years old and reading a guidebook in preparation for a short trip to India. As soon as I read, “Life is marked by dukkha” (dissatisfactoriness, suffering, or stress), my heart leapt. I had never heard of a religion or spiritual tradition admitting that as its very first and basic premise. Then I read on to find out Buddhism didn’t just admit the existence of fundamental dissatisfaction, it provided a whole host of tools for addressing and relieving that dissatisfaction and making your life more meaningful. I was sold.
However, although the last 20 years of practice have been very rewarding, I didn’t actually have the concept of samvega with which to frame my experience. Instead, I thought of my initial samvega – my dismay at the ultimate meaninglessness of life as it’s normally lived, my sense of complicity, complacency, and foolishness in letting myself get pulled into living that way, and my sense of urgency about trying to find another way to live – was dukkha. In other words, at least part of me thought my samvega should go away with practice.
Dukkha, as I’ve discussed a number of times on this podcast (e.g. Episode 9 and Episode 14), can range from a very subtle sense of dis-ease to acute suffering. The Buddha taught that the cause of dukkha can be found within our own minds. Essentially, we desire for things to be other than how they are, which is impermanent, not-self, and therefore ungraspable. It’s entirely possible for each of us, in any given moment, to release our desire and be freed from dukkha.
In terms of the way we view life as it’s normally lived – our own lives, as well as the lives of all beings on this planet – we can be freed from distress by giving up our desire for things to be any other way than how they are. In other words, we accept life as it is. We still may find ourselves in painful or difficult circumstances, but it’s all much easier to deal with when we’re not unnecessarily adding dukkha to the equation.

How Samvega Can Be a Good Thing

All well and good – but such practice with dukkha, according to Buddhism, should relieve some measure of your own internal stress and misery, but it should not negate your samvega. Samvega is a responsible, compassionate, natural response to the craziness of our world, and it’s what motivates us to practice. We’re right to feel shocked, dismayed, and alienated when we observe life as it’s normally lived (for example, with so many people struggling with abject poverty, generation after generation, while the vast majority of the world’s wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few). We’re right to feel a chastening sense of our own complicity, complacency, and foolishness as we strive to act compassionately and responsibly but so often get pulled back into a comfortable nest of self-interest. We’re right to have a sense of urgency in trying to find a way out of this meaningless cycle.
Not only does Buddhism acknowledge samvega and offer a more meaningful path than life as it’s normally lived, Buddhism encourages you to actually cultivate samvega. Again, you usually won’t find the term samvega used per se, but Buddhist literature is full of exhortations to students to arouse their spiritual urgency. As Thanissaro explains, Buddhism’s “solution to the problems of life demands so much dedicated effort that only strong samvega will keep the practicing Buddhist from slipping back into his or her old ways.” In Theravada there’s a practice of the “five remembrances” for overcoming intoxication with youth, health, life, things we find dear and appealing, and bad conduct, where practitioners recite:
“‘I am subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging.’ This is the first fact that one should reflect on often, whether one is a woman or a man, lay or ordained.
‘I am subject to illness, have not gone beyond illness.’ …
‘I am subject to death, have not gone beyond death.’ …
‘I will grow different, separate from all that is dear and appealing to me.’ …
‘I am the owner of my actions, heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator. Whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir.’ …”[v]
In Mahayana Buddhism we similarly talk about bodhicitta, or the Way-Seeking mind, as being essential to practice. However, bodhicitta can be given a rather positive spin and isn’t nearly as explicit as samvega about identifying a profound dissatisfaction with the way life is usually lived. Some of the urgency and distress of samvega is conveyed, however, by the admonition common in Zen circles and elsewhere to “train as if your hair is on fire.”
In the process of letting go of desire and grasping, and thereby relieving dukkha, we’re not meant to give a big thumbs up to the way life’s normally lived. We’re not meant to rub salve over our sense of dismay, complicity, and determination so we’re better able to derive maximum enjoyment from our fortunate circumstances. However, sometimes Buddhism can seem rather down on ordinary life, so let me be clear that by cultivating samvega we’re not looking to judge others or make moral generalizations about lifestyles. We’re not concluding life is, on the balance, miserable, so only suckers would enjoy themselves. What we are trying to do is keep impermanence, not-self, and dukkha in the forefront of our minds, because life is fleeting. We’re trying to stay awake instead of being lulled back into complacency through denial or distraction.

Pasada, or Calm Confidence: The Balance to Samvega

The key to the Buddhist approach to samvega is cultivating its balancing emotion, pasada. (At least, this is according to Thanissaro Bhikkhu, and my own experience confirms this is true.) Pasada, Thanissaro says, is “usually translated as ‘clarity and serene confidence’” but, like samvega, pasada is a complex emotion amounting to “mental states that keep saṁvega from turning into despair.” In other words, pasada is a strong hope, and later confidence, that we’ve found a way to address samvega – a way to live that’s not futile or meaningless, but positive, fruitful, helpful, and leads to greater wisdom, peace, and compassion. When I say “a way,” I don’t mean just the path of Buddhism, or even to imply all Buddhists are treading the same path. Just as Buddhists aren’t by any means the only people to experience samvega, I’m sure they don’t have a corner on the market when it comes to pasada.
The important thing is recognizing samvega is just depressing or overwhelming unless we have some confidence we can cope with it and address it. When we’re starting to feel overly negative about our lives or the world, it’s time to cultivate pasada. Each of us will have different ways we do this – perhaps spending time in meditation, reading or listening to the Dharma, talking with teachers or Dharma friends, or devoting ourselves anew to our practice (because that usually ends up being a positive experience). Pasada is renewing our serenity and our confidence in our path, not avoiding samvega through distraction or denial; pasada arises in spite of, or even because of, samvega. Pasada is what was reflected in Siddhartha Gautama’s experience when he traveled outside the palace and saw a renunciate spiritual seeker: After being rudely awakened to the realities of old age, disease, and death, the young man was inspired by the serenity of the holy man to start a spiritual search of his own.
It can be challenging to navigate your practice life over time. Sometimes things feel just right – you’re on fire for practice and deeply inspired by the path you’ve chosen. At other times you may find yourself feeling rather complacent and lazy and in the need of more motivation. At still other times, you may feel very determined to find a better and more meaningful way to live, but lacking in the faith that you’ll actually be able to do it. Perhaps the concepts of samvega and pasada will help you approach the inevitable difficulties involved with keeping your practice alive and on course: Sometimes you need to cultivate samvega, and sometimes you need to focus on pasada.


Photo Credit

Sannyasi in yoga meditation on the Ganges, Rishikesh (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1_Sannyasi_in_yoga_meditation_on_the_Ganges,_Rishikesh.jpg). Ken Wieland from Philadelphia, USA [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Endnotes

[i] Thanissaro, “Affirming the Truths of the Heart: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada” (https://www.dhammatalks.org/books/NobleStrategy/Section0004.html)
[ii] Ibid
[iii] Ibid
[iv] Ibid
[v] “Upajjhatthana Sutta: Subjects for Contemplation” (AN 5.57), translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight (BCBS Edition), 30 November 2013, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.057.than.html

85 – I Shouldn’t Feel Like This: A Practitioner’s Conundrum
87 – Nyoho: Making Even Our Smallest, Mundane Actions Accord with the Dharma – Part 1

2020/09/24

Render unto Caesar - Wikipedia

Render unto Caesar - Wikipedia



Render unto Caesar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
The Tribute Money, by Titian (1516), depicts Jesus being shown the tribute penny.
"Render unto Caesar" is the beginning of a phrase attributed to Jesus in the synoptic gospels, which reads in full, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" (Ἀπόδοτε οὖν τὰ Καίσαρος Καίσαρι καὶ τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῷ Θεῷ).[Matthew 22:21]
This phrase has become a widely quoted summary of the relationship between Christianity, secular government, and society. The original message, coming in response to a question of whether it was lawful for Jews to pay taxes to Caesar, gives rise to multiple possible interpretations about the circumstances under which it is desirable for Christians to submit to earthly authority.

Narrative[edit]

All three synoptic gospels state that hostile questioners tried to trap Jesus into taking an explicit and dangerous stand on whether Jews should or should not pay taxes to the Roman authorities. The accounts in Matthew 22:15–22 and Mark 12:13–17 say that the questioners were Pharisees and Herodians, while Luke 20:20–26 says only that they were "spies" sent by "teachers of the law and the chief priests".
They anticipated that Jesus would oppose the tax, as their purpose was "to hand him over to the power and authority of the governor".[Luke 20:20] The governor was Pilate, and he was the man responsible for the collecting of taxes in Roman Judea. Initially the questioners flattered Jesus by praising his integrity, impartiality, and devotion to truth. Then they asked him whether or not it is right for Jews to pay the taxes demanded by Caesar. In the Gospel of Mark[12:15] the additional, provocative question is asked, "Should we pay or shouldn't we?"
Jesus first called them hypocrites, and then asked one of them to produce a Roman coin that would be suitable for paying Caesar's tax. One of them showed him a Roman coin, and he asked them whose head and inscription were on it. They answered, "Caesar's," and he responded: "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's".
The questioners were impressed. Matthew 22:22 states that they "marvelled" (ἐθαύμασαν); unable to trap him any further, and being satisfied with the answer, they went away.

Historical context[edit]

The coin[edit]

denarius featuring Tiberius. The inscription on the obverse reads Ti[berivs] Caesar Divi Avg[vsti] F[ilivs] Avgvstvs ("Caesar Augustus Tiberius, son of the Divine Augustus"), and the reverse reads Pontif[ex] Maxim[us] ("Highest Priest").
The text identifies the coin as a δηνάριον dēnarion,[1] and it is usually thought that the coin was a Roman denarius with the head of Tiberius. The coin is also called the "tribute penny." The inscription reads "Ti[berivs] Caesar Divi Avg[vsti] F[ilivs] Avgvstvs" ("Caesar Augustus Tiberius, son of the Divine Augustus"). The reverse shows a seated female, usually identified as Livia depicted as Pax.[2]
However, it has been suggested that denarii were not in common circulation in Judaea during Jesus' lifetime and that the coin may have instead been an Antiochan tetradrachm bearing the head of Tiberius, with Augustus on the reverse.[3] Another suggestion often made is the denarius of Augustus with Caius and Lucius on the reverse, while coins of Julius CaesarMark Antony, and Germanicus are all considered possibilities.[4]
A similar episode occurs in the Gospel of Thomas (verse 100), but there the coin in question is gold. Importantly, in this non-canon gospel, Jesus adds, "and give me what is mine."[5]

Tax resistance in Judaea[edit]

The taxes imposed on Judaea by Rome had led to riots.[6] New Testament scholar Willard Swartley writes:
The tax denoted in the text was a specific tax… It was a poll tax, a tax instituted in A.D. 6. A census taken at that time (cf. Lk. 2:2) to determine the resources of the Jews provoked the wrath of the country. Judas of Galilee led a revolt (Acts 5:37), which was suppressed only with some difficulty. Many scholars date the origin of the Zealot party and movement to this incident.[7]
The Jewish Encyclopedia says of the Zealots:
When, in the year 5, Judas of Gamala in Galilee started his organized opposition to Rome, he was joined by one of the leaders of the Pharisees, R. Zadok, a disciple of Shammai and one of the fiery patriots and popular heroes who lived to witness the tragic end of Jerusalem… The taking of the census by Quirinus, the Roman procurator, for the purpose of taxation was regarded as a sign of Roman enslavement; and the Zealots' call for stubborn resistance to the oppressor was responded to enthusiastically.
At his trial before Pontius Pilate, Jesus was accused of promoting resistance to Caesar's tax.
Then the whole company of them arose and brought him before Pilate. 2 And they began to accuse him, saying, "We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king." (Luke 23:1–4)

Interpretations[edit]

Malczewski Jacek, Render unto Caesar
The passage has been much discussed in the modern context of Christianity and politics, especially on the questions of separation of church and state and tax resistance.

Foreshadowing[edit]

When Jesus later was crucified, he was in a sense rendering unto Caesar the body that belonged to Caesar's (human, earthly) realm, while devoting his soul to God. Augustine of Hippo suggested this interpretation in his Confessions, where he writes
He himself, the only-begotten, was created to be wisdom and justice and holiness for us, and he was counted among us, and he paid the reckoning, the tribute to Caesar.[8]

Separation of church and state[edit]

Jesus responds to Pontius Pilate about the nature of his kingdom: "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But now (or 'as it is') my kingdom is not from the world" (John 18:36); i.e., his religious teachings were separate from earthly political activity. This reflects a traditional division in Christian thought by which state and church have separate spheres of influence.[9] This can be interpreted either a Catholic, or Thomist, way (Gelasian doctrine) or a Protestant, or Lockean, way (separation of church and state).
The Tribute Money, by Joachim Wtewael (1616)
Tertullian, in De Idololatria, interprets Jesus as saying to render "the image of Caesar, which is on the coin, to Caesar, and the image of God, which is on man, to God; so as to render to Caesar indeed money, to God yourself. Otherwise, what will be God's, if all things are Caesar's?"[10]

Theonomic answer[edit]

H. B. Clark writes, "It is a doctrine of both Mosaic and Christian law that governments are divinely ordained and derive their powers from God. In the Old Testament it is asserted that "Power belongs unto God," (Ps 62:11) that God "removes kings and sets up kings," (Dan 2:21) and that "The Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomever He will" (Dan 4:32). Similarly, in the New Testament, it is stated that "...there is no power but of God, the powers that be are ordained of God" (Rom 13:1).[11]
R. J. Rushdoony expands, "In early America, there was no question, whatever the form of civil government, that all legitimate authority is derived from God... Under a biblical doctrine of authority, because "the powers that be are ordained of God (Rom 13:1), all authority, whether in the home, school, state, church, or any other sphere, is subordinate authority and is under God and subject to His word." This means, first, that all obedience is subject to the prior obedience to God and his Word, for "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29; 4:19). Although civil obedience is commanded, it is equally apparent that the prior requirement of obedience to God must prevail."[12]

Justification for following laws[edit]

Some read the phrase "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" as unambiguous at least to the extent that it commands people to respect state authority and to pay the taxes it demands of them. Paul the Apostle also states in Romans 13 that Christians are obliged to obey all earthly authorities, stating that as they were introduced by God, disobedience to them equates to disobedience to God.
In this interpretation, Jesus asked his interrogators to produce a coin in order to demonstrate to them that by using his coinage they had already admitted the de facto rule of the emperor, and that therefore they should submit to that rule.[13]
For example, one Mennonite explained why he was not a war tax resister this way:
We are against war and do not wish to aid the war effort by conscription or by paying war taxes to the government. Doing so only helps to strengthen and perpetuate the war machine. Matthew 22:21 Jesus said "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's." Romans 13:1 "Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God." If the law of the land is that everyone must pay war taxes then that is what we must do. It is the law! We should however, work and pray extremely hard to change the law. The ideal situation would be to have the law abolished. The alternative would be to have a choice of designating our portion of the war tax towards efforts of peacemaking. This route would be a more lawful, constructive, and positive effort.[14]

Respecting obligations when enjoying advantages[edit]

Some see the parable as being Jesus' message to people that if they enjoy the advantages of a state such as Caesar's, as distinct from God's authority (for instance, by using its legal tender), they can't subsequently choose to ignore the laws of such a state. Henry David Thoreau writes in Civil Disobedience:
Christ answered the Herodians according to their condition. "Show me the tribute-money," said he; – and one took a penny out of his pocket; – If you use money which has the image of Caesar on it, and which he has made current and valuable, that is, if you are men of the State, and gladly enjoy the advantages of Caesar's government, then pay him back some of his own when he demands it; "Render therefore to Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God those things which are God's" – leaving them no wiser than before as to which was which; for they did not wish to know.
Mennonite Dale Glass-Hess wrote:
It is inconceivable to me that Jesus would teach that some spheres of human activity lie outside the authority of God. Are we to heed Caesar when he says to go to war or support war-making when Jesus says in other places that we shall not kill? No! My perception of this incident is that Jesus does not answer the question about the morality of paying taxes to Caesar, but that he throws it back on the people to decide. When the Jews produce a denarius at Jesus' request, they demonstrate that they are already doing business with Caesar on Caesar's terms. I read Jesus' statement, "Give to Caesar…" as meaning "Have you incurred a debt in regard to Caesar! Then you better pay it off." The Jews had already compromised themselves. Likewise for us: we may refuse to serve Caesar as soldiers and even try to resist paying for Caesar's army. But the fact is that by our lifestyles we've run up a debt with Caesar, who has felt constrained to defend the interests that support our lifestyles. Now he wants paid back, and it's a little late to say that we don't owe anything. We've already compromised ourselves. If we're going to play Caesar's games, then we should expect to have to pay for the pleasure of their enjoyment. But if we are determined to avoid those games, then we should be able to avoid paying for them.[15]
Mohandas K. Gandhi shared this perspective. He wrote:
Jesus evaded the direct question put to him because it was a trap. He was in no way bound to answer it. He therefore asked to see the coin for taxes. And then said with withering scorn, "How can you who traffic in Caesar's coins and thus receive what to you are benefits of Caesar's rule refuse to pay taxes?" Jesus' whole preaching and practice point unmistakably to noncooperation, which necessarily includes nonpayment of taxes.[16][17][18]

Tax resistance[edit]

Mennonite pastor John K. Stoner spoke for those who interpret the parable as permitting or even encouraging tax resistance: "We are war tax resisters because we have discovered some doubt as to what belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God, and have decided to give the benefit of the doubt to God."[19]

American Quaker war tax resisters[edit]

As American Quaker war tax resistance developed during the 17th through 19th centuries, the resisters had to find a way to reconcile their tax resistance with the "Render unto Caesar" verse and other verses from the New Testament that encourage submission to the government. Here are a few examples:
Around 1715, a pseudonymous author, "Philalethes," published a pamphlet entitled Tribute to Cæsar, How paid by the Best Christians... in which he argued that while Christians must pay "general" taxes, a tax that is explicitly for war purposes is the equivalent to an offering on an altar to a pagan god, and this is forbidden.[20]
In 1761, Joshua Evans put it this way:
Others would term it stubbornness in me, or contrary to the doctrine of Christ, concerning rendering to Caesar his due. But as I endeavored to keep my mind in a state of humble quietude, I was favored to see through such groundless arguments; there being nothing on the subject of war, or favorable to it, to be found in that text. Although I have been willing to pay my money for the use of civil government, when legally called for; yet have I felt restrained by a conscientious motive, from paying towards the expense of killing men, women and children, or laying towns and countries waste.[21]
In 1780, Samuel Allinson circulated a letter on the subject of tax resistance, in which he insisted that what was due to Caesar was only what Caesar would not use for antichristian purposes:
…the question put to our Savior on the point was with evil intention to ensnare and render him culpable to one of the great parties or sects then existing, who differed about the payment of taxes, his answer, though conclusive, was so wisely framed that it left them still in doubt, what things belonged to Cæsar and what to God, thus he avoided giving either of them offence which he must inevitably have done by a determination that tribute indefinitely was due to Cæsar. Our first and principle obedience is due to the Almighty, even in contradiction to man, "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). Hence, if tribute is demanded for a use that is antichristian, it seems right for every Christian to deny it, for Cæsar can have no title to that which opposes the Lord's command.[22]
In 1862, Joshua Maule wrote that he felt that the "Render unto Caesar" instruction was compatible with war tax resistance, as there was no reason to believe for certain that the tax referred to in that episode had any connection to war:
The words of Christ, "Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and to God the things that are God's," have often been brought forward as evidence that He approved of paying all taxes; it being said, in connection, that Cæsar was then engaged in war. The distinction, however, is sufficiently clear: the things that were Cæsar's were, doubtless, those which appertain to the civil government; the things which belong to God are, surely, a clear and full obedience to His commands and to His laws. We know that all the precepts and commands of Christ which can be applied in reference to this subject are of one tendency, enjoining "peace on earth and good-will to men." We do not know, after all, however, what was the exact nature and use of the tribute collected in those days, nor what were the situation and circumstances in which Christians or others were then placed in regard to such things.[23]

Christian anarchist tax resisters[edit]

The Tribute Money by Gustave Dore(1866)
The less you have of Caesar's, the less you have to render to Caesar.
— Dorothy DayThe Catholic Worker
Christian anarchists do not interpret Matthew 22:21 as advocating support for taxes but as further advice to free oneself from material attachmentJacques Ellul believes the passage shows that Caesar may have rights over the fiat money he produces, but not things that are made by God, as he explains:[24]
Render unto Caesar..." in no way divides the exercise of authority into two realms....They were said in response to another matter: the payment of taxes, and the coin. The mark on the coin is that of Caesar; it is the mark of his property. Therefore give Caesar this money; it is his. It is not a question of legitimizing taxes! It means that Caesar, having created money, is its master. That's all. Let us not forget that money, for Jesus, is the domain of Mammon, a satanic domain!
Ammon Hennacy interpreted Matthew 22:21 slightly differently. He was on trial for civil disobedience and was asked by the judge to reconcile his tax resistance with Jesus' instructions. "I told him Caesar was getting too much around here and some one had to stand up for God." Elsewhere, he interpreted the story in this way:
[Jesus] was asked if He believed in paying taxes to Caesar. In those days different districts had different money and the Jews had to change their money into that of Rome, so Jesus asked, not for a Jewish coin, but for a coin with which tribute was paid, saying "Why tempt me?" Looking at the coin He asked whose image and superscription was there inscribed and was told that it was Caesar's. Those who tried to trick Him knew that if He said that taxes were to be paid to Caesar He would be attacked by the mobs who hated Caesar, and if He refused to pay taxes there would always be some traitor to turn Him in. His mission was not to fight Caesar as Barabbas had done, but it was to chase the moneychangers out of the Temple and to establish His own Church. Whether He winked as much as to say that any good Jew knew that Caesar did not deserve a thing as He said, "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's," or not, no one knows. …Despite what anyone says each of us has to decide for himself whether to put the emphasis upon pleasing Caesar or pleasing God. We may vary in our reasons for drawing the line here or there as to how much we render unto Caesar. I make my decision when I remember that Christ said to the woman caught in sin, "Let him without sin first cast a stone at her." I remember His "Forgive seventy times seven," which means no Caesar at all with his courts, prisons and war.[25]

Versions[edit]

King James Version of the Bible:Matthew 22:15–22Mark 12:13–17Luke 20:20–26
New International Version:Matthew 22:15–22Mark 12:13–17Luke 20:20–26
The extracanonical Gospel of Thomas also has a version, which reads in the Stephen Patterson and Marvin Meyer Version 100:[26]
They showed Jesus a gold coin and said to him, "The Roman emperor's people demand taxes from us." He said to them, "Give the emperor what belongs to the emperor, give God what belongs to God, and give me what is mine."
The fragmentary Egerton Gospel in the Scholar's Version translation (found in The Complete Gospels) 3:1–6 reads:[27]
They come to him and interrogate him as a way of putting him to the test. They ask, "Teacher, Jesus, we know that you are [from God], since the things you do put you above all the prophets. Tell us, then, is it permissible to pay to rulers what is due them? Should we pay them or not?" Jesus knew what they were up to, and became indignant. Then he said to them, "Why do you pay me lip service as a teacher, but not [do] what I say? How accurately Isaiah prophesied about you when he said, 'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart stays far away from me; their worship of me is empty, [because they insist on teachings that are human] commandments […]'

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Thayer's Lexiconδηνάριον
  2. ^ "Tiberius, Tribute Penny". Archived from the original on 8 September 2011. Retrieved 7 September 2011.
  3. ^ Lewis, Peter E.; Bolden, Ron (2002). The Pocket Guide to Saint Paul: Coins Encountered by the Apostle on his Travels. Wakefield Press. p. 19. ISBN 1-86254-562-6.
  4. ^ Michael E. Marotta (2001). "Six Caesars of the Tribute Penny". Archived from the original on 12 October 2011. Retrieved 7 September 2011.
  5. ^https://www.marquette.edu/maqom/Gospel%20of%20Thomas%20Lambdin.pdf
  6. ^ Marshall, I.H. Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text p. 735; Gross, David (ed.) We Won't Pay!: A Tax Resistance ReaderISBN 1-4348-9825-3 pp. 1–7
  7. ^ Swartley, Willard M. The Christian and the Payment of Taxes Used For War 1980 "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 21 April 2006. Retrieved 22 April 2006.
  8. ^ Augustine of Hippo, Confessions, book 5, chapter 5 (Sarah Rudentranslation)
  9. ^ Spivey, Jim (Summer 1994). "Separation No Myth"Southwestern Journal of Theology36 (5). Retrieved 18 February2017.
  10. ^ from The Writings of Tertullian. vol. I, ed. by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark, 1869) p. 164. [1]
  11. ^ Clark, H. B. (1944). Biblical Law. Portland, Oregon: Binfords & Mort. p. 51.
  12. ^ Rushdoony, R. J. (1973). The Institutes of Biblical Law. The Craig Press. p. 214.
  13. ^ Brown, John The law of Christ respecting civil obedience, especially in the payment of tribute (London: William Ball, 1839) 3rd. ed, p. 183 "It is as if our Lord had said, 'The common circulation of Caesar′s coin among you, shows that you stand in a certain relation to him as your ruler. Perform all the duties which are due to him in that relation'"
  14. ^ Sawatzky, Anne, quoted in Peachey, Titus Silence and Courage: Income Taxes, War and Mennonites 1940–1993 MCC Occasional Paper #18, August 1993, p. 34
  15. ^ in Peachey, Titus Silence and Courage: Income Taxes, War and Mennonites 1940–1993 MCC Occasional Paper #18, August 1993, p. 29
  16. ^ Gandhi, Mahatma (27 March 1930), "Render Unto Caesar"Young India, archived from the original on 25 September 2012
  17. ^ The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (PDF)48. 1998 [1930]. p. 483.
  18. ^ Gross, David M. (2008). We Won't Pay!: A Tax Resistance ReaderCreateSpace. p. 373. ISBN 978-1-4348-9825-8.
  19. ^ Taxpayers Who Fail to File Federal Income Tax Returns: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Oversight of the Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, First Session, October 26, 1993United States Government Printing Office. 1994. p. 154. ISBN 0160440769. Archived from the original on 28 August 2012.
  20. ^ Philalethes (pseud.) "Tribute to Cæsar, How paid by the Best Christians, And to what Purpose; With Some Remarks on the late vigorous Expedition against Canada. Of Civil Government, How Inconsistent it is with the Government of Christ in his Church. Compared with the Ancient Just and Righteous Principles of the Quakers, and their Modern Practice and Doctrine. With some Notes upon the Discipline of their Church in this Province, especially at Philadelphia" (1715?) as found in Gross, David M. (ed.) American Quaker War Tax Resistance (2008) ISBN 978-1-4382-6015-0 pp. 23–42
  21. ^ Evans, Joshua "A Drop in the Ocean" as found in Gross, David M. (ed.) American Quaker War Tax Resistance (2008) ISBN 978-1-4382-6015-0 pp. 90–91
  22. ^ Allinson, Samuel "Reasons against War, and paying Taxes for its support" (1780) as found in Gross, David M. (ed.) American Quaker War Tax Resistance (2008) ISBN 978-1-4382-6015-0 pp. 154–71
  23. ^ Maule, Joshua "He Could Not Have the Money for That Purpose" (~1862) as found in Gross, David M. (ed.) American Quaker War Tax Resistance (2008) ISBN 978-1-4382-6015-0 pp. 369–78
  24. ^ "Ellul, Jacques ''Anarchism and Christianity'' p. 20" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 February 2012. Retrieved 7 May 2012.
  25. ^ Hennacy, Ammon The Book of Ammon (5th printing, Feb. 1970), pp. 393–94
  26. ^ "The Gospel of Thomas. Translated by Stephen Patterson and Marvin Meyer".
  27. ^ The Complete Gospels, Robert J. Miller ed., Polebridge Press, 1992, ISBN 0944344305, pp. 409–10

External links[edit]