Secularism and Minority: Elements of a Critique

Abstract

There is a famous scene in Gotthold Ephraim Lessing's reputedly philoSemitic play, Nathan the Wise (1778), in which the protagonist, a twelfthcentury Jewish merchant living in Jerusalem, is asked by Saladin, then ruler of Palestine, to declare which of the three great monotheistic religions is the true one. The answer Nathan eventually gives is in the form of a parable that is usually read as being about religious tolerance and coexistence.1 What is more interesting for my purposes here, however, is the speech immediately preceding the telling of the parable. Nathan, left alone by Saladin to think through the answer he is going to give, launches into a soliloquy. I should note here that this is their first meeting, and Nathan has been sent for because Saladin is short of money-Accursed, wretched money! he calls it2-and hopes to borrow some from Nathan. Given his discomfort at his consistently precarious financial situation, and given also the Jewish reputation for shrewd tightfistedness which he takes for granted, Saladin has deliberately kept Nathan in the dark about the true nature of his summons. Instead of asking the merchant straight out for a loan, Saladin decides, as he puts it, to dissemble (NW, 227). Hence the question about the one true faith and Nathan's soliloquy. Nathan's first reaction is of course to recognize that he is being dissembled with. How should he now proceed? What a question, he wonders to himself, asking for the bare and blank truth-bare and blank, as he puts it, like coin from modern mints, / Which but the stamp creates (NW, 230). He must be cautious, and not allow himself to be trapped: