Question to the Archbishop of Canterbury

[Guest guest]

Today the Religious Education Council (REC) of England and Wales met at the Russian Orthodox Church in Kensington. The REC is a very prominent body which makes a very valuable contribution to the way Religious Education is promoted in this country. We represent the Hindu Council UK as well as the Vivekananda Centre London. In the afternoon session we had a prominent visitor, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams. The discussion centred around the issue of Empathy over Evaluation in religious matters, i.e. the classic claim by many religions is that they are a matter of belief rather than rational investigation. The discussion ended without a clear consensus. The REC members were given the opportunity to ask Dr Williams questions, so we took the opportunity to question Dr Williams over his use of the word 'tolerance' in reference to other religions, and suggested the use of the phrase 'accepting the validity' of other religions. The reason for asking this pointed question was to see the extent to which the Church of England is prepared to go to accept the validity of non-Christian faiths like Hinduism. The answer given by Dr Williams was interesting. He said that even though he has used the word 'tolerance' he is not happy with it, as it suggested a 'concessional approach' which is certainly not right. He would prefer to use phrases such as 'respect for other religions' and added that this is synonymous with 'educated acceptance'. This response makes us feel that the Church of England is open to dialogue and is moving in the right direction to accommodate more serious interfaith encounters which then at some stage has to culminate in reconciling the truth claims of different religions. In days to come we will contribute in that debate. We presented Dr Williams with our textbook "Hinduism for Schools" and pointed out to him the detailed material on Religious Pluralism as well as on Religion and Rationality. We felt that the meeting had been fruitful in developing closer ties between Hinduism and Christianity.

 

jay

[Guest guest]

Hi Jay,

 

In this context, I would like to highlight a fact that nor does

Hinduism "accept the validity" of any other religion. In the past, our

philosophers have constantly tried to utterly demolish the base of

other religions by engaging in philosophical debates and have won most

of the times. Therefore, though there was tolerance in that people were

allowed to do anything they want, Hindu gurus have never accepted other

religions as valid in history. One famous saint, either Ramanujacharya

or Madhvacharya, even remarked that while Indic religions such as

Buddhism/Jainism etc. merited attention and philosophical debates,

other religions such as Christianity/Islam were not worth having any

attention or study at all!

 

I would like to bring to your attention a major drawback among many

Hindus of today who consider that "all religions are the same". Please

read this article by Dr. Frank Morales:

http://www.sulekha.com/expressions/articledesc.asp?cid=307498

 

love and peace,

sooraj.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sooraj

 

You have raised an important point. Some Hindus too, have been intolerant in the past and have not accepted the validity not only of other religions but of different sectarian movements within Hinduism. But this is precisely why Sri Ramakrishna's teachings are so important for this age. With him has come this very liberal teaching of modern Hinduism: 'As many attitudes that many paths to God'. With him has also come the 'only solid' proof of 'validity of many religions.' Unless we discover one individual who asserts that he has the same 'God experience' by following the prescriptions of different religions (i.e. Hinduism, Christianity and Islam) the assertion of religious pluralism would have been purely academic.

 

In reference to Frank Morales, at one stage I saw him criticse Vivekananda for promoting the attitude that 'All religions are the same'. This is utter rubbish! Vivekananda or Ramakrishna have never said any such thing. Pluralism does not mean that all religions are the same! All religions are very different hence the use of word 'pluralism.'

There are a few individuals like Morales who seem to think that Hinduism is suffering today because it promotes 'all religions are same' and they (indirectly) blame Vivekananda for that! They have missed the point and are taking Hinduism backwards rather than forward. Of course by showing flaws in Vivekananda they may feel that they have established their own credibility as modern gurus!

 

jay

[Guest guest]

Sri Ramakrishna said:

 

" God can be realized through all paths. All religions are true.

The important thing is to reach the roof. You can reach it by stone stairs

or by wooden stairs or by bamboo steps or by a rope.

You can also climb up by a bamboo pole. "

 

" Rama said, 'brother, go beyond both knowledge and ignorance.'

He who has knowledge has ignorance also.

If a thorn has entered your foot,

get another thorn and with its help take out the first;

then throw away the second also. "

 

Om Tat Sat

[Guest guest]

I totally agree with you on this Jay. I had come across this article on

Sulekha some time ago and I could not help notice how slanted and

ill-informed he is of the real teaching of Hinduism as propounded by

Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, although he couches himself in an atmosphere of

authenticity drawing from a seemingly impressive amount of literature.

 

What does he want Hindus to do? Draw the sword and attack the infidels? The

essence of our religion is understanding and love. As Swami Vivekananda has

said before, show me one instance anywhere in our wide literature where it

says the Hindu alone will be saved!

 

Regards,

Sudheesh

 

 

 

<snip>....WE HAD TO EDIT OUT THE LONG TAIL END OF PREVIOUS MESSAGE. PLEASE

PLEASE REMEMBER TO DELETE THIS EVERYTIME YOU RESPOND....jay

[Guest guest]

Friends,

Dormant spirituality in all human hearts must be awakened through meaningful exercises in this life. Religions come and go like we all do! Branding, labelling,chopping, changing,colouring all come naturally because we want to feel safe in this transient,temporary and very unsafe world. A kind of comfort zone mentallity. No one can define infinity and no one ever will, so stay where you are, change if you so wish,but please do not fight with yourself. All are same. We are all equal, we are not different. Om tat sat.

Asis Bagchi

Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour

[Guest guest]

RE: " All are same. We are all equal, we are not different. "

 

Comment: Here is qote from the Sri Sri Ramakrishna Kathamrita:

 

" Does He shower His grace more on one and less on the other? If that

be so, God is guilty of creating inequality (amidst His creation).

 

Sri Ramakrishna — What do you say! Take the two words `ghora-ta' and

`sara-ta'*. Both have `ta' (as suffix). Ishwara Chandra Vidyasagar

also said the same as you are saying. He said, `Mahashay, has God

given more power to one and lesser to the other?' I replied, `He is

present in every being as Vibhu (omnipresent). So he is in everything.

As He is in me, He is in ant too. But there is special power in some.

If everybody is equal, why have we come to see you on hearing your

name, Ishwara Vidyasagar? Have you two horns that we have come to see?

That is not so. You are generous, you are learned. You have more of

these qualities than others. So, you are well known. You know there

are persons who can defeat a hundred men single handedly while there

are others who run away in fear of a single person.'

 

" If there was no special power, why would people consider Keshab so great?

 

" The Gita says: If a person is considered great by many, whether it is

because of his learning, or ability to sing, or play on musical

instruments, or his oratory, or anything else, know it for certain

that he has special power of God within. "

 

Om Tat Sat