Similarities and Differences in Religious Philosophies

[Guest guest]

Similarities and Differences in Religious Philosophies

 

As much as I as understand, every religious philosophy, like advaita, gnosticism

or any other, tries to give an explanation to a mystical experience, which many

may call by different names, God-realization, Self-realization,

Self-enlightenment, etc. but the experience is the same.

 

Realization happens in one's own self and than, when he starts to explain it for

his disciples using some words, the explanation is a quality of the mind.

Therefore, though the realization happened on the spiritual level, the

explanation/theoretical explanation is done by the mind, and not by the spirit.

First, we should also know that it is not the mind who has realized it, but

still it is the mind who explains, I don't know how fair it is, well, the

explanation is being done by a person, who has not experienced it. I hope you

understand what I mean. Mind is individual, it differs with every person,

therefore the explanation differs and it has to. When I mean, that every

philosophy is the same, I don't mean that their system has to be the same, I

don't mean that their explanation has to be the same, I mean that which is being

explained is the same, can only be the same, therefore has to be the same.

 

You see, God has created this universe with endless varieties, hardly any face

of two person are the same, but still every person in this world has much common

with another person, eyes, nose, ears, hair, legs, hands, etc. In the same way,

the outer appearance of all these philosophical systems have something in common

and something which differs.

 

Those, who see the difference, quarrel and hate. Those who see the similarity,

love and have peace.

 

For example, those who see the difference, he is a white and he is black,

quarrel and hate, and therefore, are disliked by the world and by God. Those,

who see the similarity, all these are human, love and have peace, and therefore

are liked by the world and by God.

 

In this case, what do you choose to do? Try to see the similarity and not be

overwhelmed by the differences, understand their cause and purpose. This is what

I mean to say.

 

More than that, we should know, what is our purpose with studying a religious

philosophy, if it is an academic practice, I don't have anything to say. But if

it is done from a spiritual standpoint, like I do, my first question is....are

we trying to understand the explanation or that which is being explained? If the

first, let us be deluded by the differences and if the second, let us uplift and

realize the truth seeing the similarities and trying to experience that.

 

I see no difference, if you put a bucket of sweet water in to the salty ocean,

some who like to see the difference, would say, "O But this sweet water, though

now in the salty water, surly must remain sweet and therefore different from the

salty water" and a person who wants to see the similarities, would say, "O, but

where to find that sweet water, it has merged in to the salty water and it has

no more any existence of its own". Now, what would you say, if they start to

quarrel with each other? Both are saying the truth from their own standpoint and

no one is really saying something wrong, though they are contradictory.

 

However, Upanishads stress on the merging with Brahman from a certain point of

view, they tell us, "like a river merges in to the ocean, abandoning its name

and form, in the same way a self-enlightened person merges in to the Supreme

Similarity (Parama Saamya) abandoning his name and form (which are causing

differences)" (Mundaka Upanishad 3-1-3).

 

As an interpreter of the Upanishads, but only as an interpreter, please try to

understand what I mean, Shankaracharya is more accurate to the point, than other

Acharyas are, because then there is a statement in Katha Upanishads, "like sweet

water is mixed in to sweet water and becomes the same, a self-enlightened

person's soul becomes the same after merging in to the Supreme". Now, still a

person might like to say, "but that first sweet water possessed some special

crystals and the second didn't have them, therefore, they still must be

somewhere different" or tries to see some other differences, like one water

tends to reflect blue light and the second tends to reflect green light, and so

on and so forth, he is saying the truth and I would understand him. You see,

again every thing depends on ones standpoint of mind, the spirit is the same. I

hope you get me.

Loving Regards,

 

Siddhartha