Yes, the image of the hand pointing to the moon is crucial in understanding the function of Faith and the distinction between it and Knowledge. I capitalize that word here because in our language there are senses of words which overlap. That is useful as entertainment and expression, but when it comes to metaphysical clarity it can be a hindrance. A classic example of this is the distinction in Eastern teachings of “I” as referring to Substance and "I’ as in English referring to “me” or the contents of awareness and experience. In English we tend to treat “I” and “me” synonymously due more to ignorance and language structure than intent. Books have been written on this matter, but they are fingers pointing to the moon.
But that distinction also helps to explain why there are so many different religions. For instance, Catholicism can be categorized as an “ascending/exoteric” faith, while Buddhism is a “descending/esoteric” practice. While both exist in the same field of Awareness, the value ascribed to Consciousness as such is different. Interesting treatments of that idea may be found
here and
here. Had one that first book in their hands, they would find an appendix on the nature of Eternity valuable. As for the second, it would explain much in terms of reconciling many faiths. A reading of the biography of T.E. Lawrence might be useful as well.
Nevertheless, the variety of religions is explicable, (aside from the truth value of any one of them ascribed to their own by adherents,) by parochial differences in the needs of smaller groups dealing with specific needs. This can be exemplified in small degree by, say, the relevance of fig trees to Esquimaux under the attention of their first missionaries. They might too have had difficulties understanding what a lamb is, as one translation of the Bible tells them of the “Seal Pup of God.”*
Are we not a bit arrogant in believing that our own set of acquired perceptions and parameters for getting along distribute over all of humanity and all of time? Even the porter who was taken to a mountain top from his jungle where maximum line of sight is 300’ can be informative. First, he got sick because he’d never been in a speeding jeep such as which transported him there. Second, he had to be physically taken to a distant herd of gnus in order to convince him that they were not tiny ant sized animals nearby. His environment had imposed certain limits on his perceptions and assumptions. Are we so free of those? I’ll bet we think we are.
Is is not possible then that other cultures, tuned to different strata or frequencies of information bands might see the Universe through a different lens, and similarly account for its existence by other stories than our own? Hmmmmm… I wonder.
Code:
*Rev. Eugene A. Nida's translation for Labrador Eskimos, American Bible Society. Other interesting translations , eg "worship" in Cuicatec becomes "to wag one's tail before God." In Nama they speak of "Jesub" because "s" is a feminine ending. etc. ad--ok, not infinitum, but ad thousands.
