educationforpeace-dot-com educationforpeace-dot-com: Developing skills for a better world       
 

Nathan the Wise

By Gotthold Ephraim Lessing (1779, full text available online)

The story of the ring could be used for younger age groups, but the text of this play can only be used with quite advanced students, as it is written in the original English from 1729

Introduction

Lessing was born in 1729 to a clergyman in Germany. Although he began his university training as a theology student, he soon turned towards literature. His reputation as a free-thinker began early in his life; letters to his parents while he was at the University proclaimed that one’s religion should not merely be inherited blindly. Lessing was an open-minded individual who was great friends with Jews at a time when Jews were scorned and mistrusted. The character Nathan, in Nathan the Wise, is modeled after Lessing’s good friend Moses Mendelssohn, a Jew. They were good friends from 1754 until Lessing’s death in 1781. And it was a Jew, Moses Wessely, who loaned Lessing money when he was in financial distress. And Christians severely persecuted him for editing text that pointedly questioned certain Christian traditions.

Summary

The play, through many entangled relationships and identity confusions, points to the futility of attempting to define or judge anyone according to the religion they appear to be born to. Within the play, the wise hero, Nathan the Jew, recites the Parable of the Three Rings, which is recounted in the following excerpt.

Excerpt

SALADIN (the Sultan):
To gain instruction quite on other points.
Since you are a man so wise, tell me which law,
Which faith appears to you the better?

NATHAN:
Sultan, I am a Jew.

SALADIN:
And I a Mussulman: The Christian stands between us.
Of these three
Religions only one came be the true.
A man, like you, remains not just where birth
Has chanced to cast him, or, if he remains there,
Does it from insight, choice, from grounds of preference.
Share then with me your insight--let me hear
The grounds of preference, which I have wanted
The leisure to examine--learn the choice,
These grounds have motived, that it may be mine. . . .

NATHAN:
In days of yore, there dwelt in east a man
Who from a valued hand received a ring Of endless worth: the stone of it an opal,
That shot an ever-changing tint: moreover,
It had the hidden virtue him to render Of God and man beloved, who in this view,
And this persuasion, wore it.
Was it strange The eastern man ne’er drew it off his finger,
And studiously provided to secure it
For ever to his house. Thus--He bequeathed it;
First, to the MOST BELOVED of his sons, Ordained that he again should leave the ring
To the MOST DEAR among his children—and
That without heeding birth, the FAVOURITE son,
In virtue of the ring alone, should always
Remain the lord o’ th’ house--

From son to son,
At length this ring descended to a father,
Who had three sons, alike obedient to him;
Whom therefore he could not but love alike.
At times seemed this, now that, at times the third,
(Accordingly as each apart received
The overflowings of his heart) most worthy
To heir the ring, which with good-natured weakness
He privately to each in turn had promised.
This went on for a while. But death approached,
And the good father grew embarrassed. So
To disappoint two sons, who trust his promise,
He could not bear. What’s to be done. He sends
In secret to a jeweller, of whom,
Upon the model of the real ring,
He might bespeak two others, and commanded
To spare nor cost nor pains to make them like, quite like the true one.
This the artist managed.
The rings were brought, and e’en the father’s eye
Could not distinguish which had been the model.
Quite overjoyed he summons all his sons,
Takes leave of each apart, on each bestows
His blessing and his ring, and dies--

Scarce is the father dead, each with his ring
Appears, and claims to be the lord o’ th’ house.
Comes question, strife, complaint--all to no end;
For the true ring could no more be distinguished
Than now can--the true faith.

SALADIN: . . .
I must think That the religions which I named can be
Distinguished, e’en to raiment, drink and food,

NATHAN:
And only not as to their grounds of proof.
Are not all built alike on history,
Traditional, or written. History
Must be received on trust--is it not so?
In whom now are we likeliest to put trust?
In our own people surely, in those men
Whose blood we are, in them, who from our childhood
Have given us proofs of love, who ne’er deceived us,
Unless ‘twere wholesomer to be deceived.
How can I less believe in my forefathers
Than thou in thine.
How can I ask of thee
To own that thy forefathers falsified
In order to yield mine the praise of truth.
The like of Christians.

Now let us to our rings return once more.
As said, the sons complained. Each to the judge
Swore from his father’s hand immediately
To have received the ring, as was the case . . .

The judge said, . . . you tell me that the real ring
Enjoys the hidden power to make the wearer Of
God and man beloved; let that decide.
Which of you do two brothers love the best?
You’re silent. Do these love-exciting rings
Act inward only, not without? Does each
Love but himself? Ye’re all deceived deceivers,
None of your rings is true. . . .
If you will take advice in lieu of sentence,
This is my counsel to you, to take up
The matter where it stands. If each of you
Has had a ring presented by his father,
Let each believe his own the real ring.
‘Tis possible the father chose no longer
To tolerate the one ring’s tyranny;
And certainly, as he much loved you all,
And loved you all alike, it could not please him
By favouring one to be of two the oppressor.
Let each feel honoured by this free affection.
Unwarped of prejudice; let each endeavour
To vie with both his brothers in displaying
The virtue of his ring; assist its might With gentleness, benevolence, forbearance,
With inward resignation to the godhead,
And if the virtues of the ring continue
To show themselves among your children’s children,
After a thousand thousand years, appear
Before this judgment-seat--a greater one
Than I shall sit upon it, and decide.
So spake the modest judge.

Questions and Discussion

According to Nathan the Wise, who created all three monotheistic religions? – Why is that point important?

Which religion does Nathan claim to be the true one?

What are we, as the Sultan, supposed to learn from the Parable of the Three Rings?

The Sultan insists that the three religions are different, how does the parable show they are similar?

What are some of the religions in our society? How are they similar?

Lessing was never wealthy and never held the most prominent positions in society. He died without money. (Someone else had to pay for his funeral.) And yet, his life was an example of tolerance to be emulated and his works espoused tolerance and have influenced individuals for centuries.

Who are some of the individuals you respect and whish to emulate who taught tolerance and equality?

What can you do, now and in the future, to influence those in your community to become more tolerant?