APPROACHING FAITH-TRADITIONS IN THE INDIAN CONTEXT
Rev. Dr. Selvam Robertson
APPROACHING FAITH-TRADITIONS IN THE INDIAN CONTEXT
Introduction
This paper is an attempt to draw insights from the larger
arena of scientific study of religions, glimpses from missiology and sketchy
significance from the values of secular principles in India
In this
process the expression faith-traditions is used mainly in the place of
religions to mean religions and at the same time to allow space for some
faith-orientations which are not considered as religions in the usual sense of
the term religion. Indian context is used to suggest the plural nature of
Indian life, particularly in the realms of religions, and to underline the
communal facet of events starting from politics and to emphasis the need for
religions to cooperate and if possible to work together towards a sustainable
existence. The expressions ‘struggles of life’ and ‘sustainable life/existence’
are used to accommodate any struggle including theological and content to
include the entire aspect of life together with humans.
Since the
matter of faith-traditions is the core launch pad I shall focus largely on the
issues emerging from the scientific study of religions. Since these issues are
gaining ground in other aspects of study a graphic reference to two facets
-missiology and secularism are made.
1
Insight from the Scientific Study of Religions
A thorough
analysis of the major approaches to the scientific study of religions throw open
the following challenges. They are; religion is as old as human history, there
is in essence ‘unity of religions’, there is a possibility of ‘free sharing
among religions’, superiority claim of religions is untenable, as India houses
many living religions a special approach to study faith-traditions is called
for, there is need for ‘integration of theology and religion’, and struggles of
life can be a relevant paradigm for varying faith traditions to contribute
resources-spiritual and others towards a sustainable existence.
1.
1 Religion is as old as Human History
Scientific
study of faith-traditions reveals that religion is as old as human history.[1] It has survived and continued several ages
and developments. In the process of growth and development faith-traditions
have accommodated newer spiritual insights and human insights depending the
context.
Every
faith-tradition was intended to enrich and enhance life in its texture, of
course, often not without specific interests. So much of human elements have
entered in to the original and purposeful revelations. For example in India
Nevertheless
the fact that every one follows some form of religion and all the
faith-traditions have trodden similar paths needs to be accepted.
In this issue,
Christians, particularly theological community, have a responsible role to
perform. They have to identify and single out the human-made religiosity and
help the people to realize the original revelation and the original relation
between God and creation. This, Christians alone, may not be able to do. They have to even join with others or
mobilize the help of all fellow religious seekers. This initiative helps
protecting people from the onslaught of personally motivated and communally
loaded interpretations of faith-traditions.
As a Christian
one has to maintain her/his faith and conviction in the unique revelation of
Jesus Christ. At the same time she/he should help his neighbours to realize the
uniqueness of his/her own revelation, while calling attention to the necessity
of living together amidst differences, for the sake of wider and meaningful
engagement.
1.2
Unity of Religions
Study of religions reveals that there is a basic unity behind the diversity of religions, i.e.
“Unity of Religion”.[2] It is already present in religions but we
need to realize it.[3] Its realization helps bring home the idea
that ‘religion was one’ and manifold forms are its existence and application in
diverse cultural contexts.
T. Swami Raju
puts this fact as “Christians have to continue their search for re-visioning
new spiritualities and build up better inter-religious relations. Christians
need to express their willingness to accept plurality of faiths and religions.”[4]
It is not jut
enough to understand unity of religions and accept plurality for the sake of
just tolerating the other. This process should be substantial. In Samartha’s
words “Mystery provides the ontological basis for tolerance without which it
runs the risk of being uncritical friendliness.”[5]
Swami
Vivekananda always held that ‘all religions are branches of the same tree’.[6] He also said ‘to a man who has realized, all
religions are paths that lead to the same goal’[7] Gandhi’s analysis has been put in a nut-shell
as “after long study and experience I have come to the conclusion that: (1) all
religions are true, (2) all religions have some error in them, (3) all
religions are almost as dear to me as my own Hinduism.”[8]
Realizing the
unity of religions is not to compromise with our own faith-traditions but to be
earnestly committed to one’s own faith-tradition and at the same time
acknowledge the spiritual and other significances of other faith-traditions. It
is anchoring oneself concretely in his or her faith orientation and use that
strength for furthering the spiritual vision of that particular faith
tradition, possibly in co-operation with the faith-traditions of others as
well. In the words of Swami Vivekananda “it is only by releasing a flood of
enlightened religious feeling that society can be cleansed and men and woman
made to grow to their spiritual heights”.[9]
John Hick
calls for the recognition of the oneness of humanity and the diversity of
revelation. He says “it is clear that we
are being called today to attain a global religious vision which is aware of
the unity of all mankind before God and which at the same time makes sense of
the diversity of God’s ways within the various streams of human life.”[10]
To put it differently, unity of religion and the unity of life behind the
diversity of religions need to be accepted and utilized as a relevant paradigm
for a sustainable approach.
1.
3 Free Sharing among Religions
Scientific
study of religions has helped transcending the religious boundaries and realize
the necessity of ‘free sharing among religions’ i.e. interaction among them.
Paul F. Knitter highlights the necessity of ‘free sharing among
religions’. In his words “somehow, they
must meet each other and relate to each other not in order to obliterate or absorb
each other but to learn from and help each other.”[11]
Jesudason
Baskar Jeyaraj writes “enabling each religious community to accept other
communities and seeing the need to work with them are major challenges today.”[12] The purpose of facilitating free sharing or
interaction among faith-traditions is necessitated by the demand for working
together for sustainable existence.
Mahatma Gandhi
has suggested as to how different religions should approach each other. For him “the correct attitude is one of firm
adherence to one’s own religion coupled with an equal reverence towards all
other religions. It is not simply a
question of tolerating other faiths, but of believing that all faiths lead to
the same goal.”[13]
Again he maintained that “Let Hindus become better Hindus, Muslims better
Muslims and Christians better Christians.”[14]
We cannot stop with Gandhi. It is not enough to just have equal reverence for
all faith-traditions. It is not enough to be silent so that every one matures
in his/her faith-tradition. The reverence and individual spiritual enhancement
should ultimately lead to constructive life sustaining initiatives.
This fact is
further substantiated by the view that “in a world haunted by fear and torn by
strife what is the need of the moment is a spirit of tolerance and
understanding, not the mere grudging admission of other religious views but the
glad recognition of the variety of the human mind.”[15]
Acknowledging the possibility of diversity and its purpose is essential for
fruitful co-operation among different faith-traditions.
Wilfred
Cantwell Smith highlights the risk of non-cooperation among different
faith-traditions. He writes “unless men can learn to understand and to be loyal
to each other across religious frontiers, unless we can build a world in which
people profoundly of different faiths can live together and work together, then
the prospects for our planet’s future are not bright.”[16]
This is true and obvious in a situation like ours (Indian).
1.
4 Superiority Claim Untenable
According to the
scientific study of religions ‘all our faiths have some value’ and the
superiority claims of religions becomes untenable[17]
and suspicious[18]
because in one sense every religion was a true religion in its context.[19] Each religion is a unique response to the
ultimate. Samartha writes, “in the last analysis, religions should be
recognized as having responded differently to the mystery of the Ultimate.”[20]
Samartha,
emphatically and candidly expresses the impossibility of claiming superiority
on religious grounds. His consideration is significant to understand other
faith-traditions and co-operate with them. His proposal to accept the faith
experience of other faith-traditions is expressed in the form of a question as,
“why then is it necessary to deny the credibility and the genuineness of the
religious anubhava of neighbours of
other faiths?”[21] In another place he argues that “our
neighbours too have their answers to the mystery of life and the tragedy of
suffering.”[22]
In the analysis of Samartha there is no reason to consider other faith
traditions as inferior. This is vivid when he says “in terms of spiritual
depth, intellectual power, cultural richness, and social solidarity they do not
regard themselves in any way inferior to Christians.”[23]
Samartha also
expresses the wishes of people adhering to other faith-tradition as “neighbours
of other faiths also ask humbly and sometimes not so humbly: what about our
centers and our names?”[24]
Therefore,
there is a necessity to consider newer understanding of religion/God, in the
context of many faith-traditions. T. Swami Raju maintains “in our re-visioning
of God, we have to reiterate strongly that ‘God is impartial’ in dealing with
human beings irrespective of their class, race, nation or religion.”[25]
This
perspective and proposal are helpful in the Indian texture as it unambiguously
calls for cooperation and not conflict among different faith-traditions. The
realistic acceptance of the credibility of other faith-traditions can prompt
and lead to the vision of sustainable contributions for which they were
originally committed.
1.5
India
In India
There is also not much distinction
between religion and philosophy in India
At this juncture, now the nonwestern
scholars’ study and reflection of their own religion and others are amply
available.[30] One thing can authentically be said that the
present generation of scholars in the field of religions has devoted their life
and works for generating, nurturing and strengthening inter-religious
relations. They also indicate the danger of communal hatred and the possibility
and necessity of taking the plural context seriously.
T. Swami Raju categorically asserts
that “no theological education will be of much help, if we do not take into
account the religious and communal conflicts that are destroying the very
foundations of “integrity in diversity” and “unity in plurality” of our
national community and harmonious life among the people of different faiths.”[31]
In the context of political parties
exploiting religiously sentimental issues to gain mileage, the new approach
needs to take into serious consideration many living religions, plurality of
faith-traditions, danger of communalism and the possibility of working together
for a sustainable existence. It also needs to ask the serious question that
whether we want freedom of religion or the extra-constitutional right to
convert others.
1.6 Integration of
Theology and Religion
At the initial
stage of the founding of the department for the scientific study of religions
the main objective was to separate this department from theology. But now
things have changed completely. From the point of theology, Indian theology
cannot ignore the rich and variety of religious resources. Against the original
wishes now there is more possibility for creative integration between theology
and the study of religions.[32] This possibility is promising.[33]
The main issue is to theologically consider the insights gained from the study
of other faith-traditions.
It is not for
mere theological interpretation of other religious principles or concepts. But
it is to take the plurality of religion seriously and formulate theologies
addressing to the plurality of faith-traditions. Or in other words our
theologies cannot miss even a fraction of the fact that there are many
faith-traditions and their significance, contribution and willingness to
promote sustainable life. Such considerations should find place in our theological
language.
Wilfred
Cantwell Smith suggested that it is time we shift from the
teaching of religion to the study of religion.[34] That is to avoid teaching religions with a
set of agenda or motive and to begin to study and understand other faith-traditions
to cooperate with them and work with them towards the possibility of promoting
sustainable life.
Still further
we also come across the acknowledgment that “religious pluralism has been
established today not only as an irreversible historical fact but also as a
theological principle.”[35]
In approaching other faith-traditions the above concerns can no longer be
sidelined.
T.
Swami Raju substantially underlined the necessity of the integration of
theology and religion in India as “keeping the changing contexts of our days in
mind, we need to reconsider or review or re-vision our Christian theologies
afresh making them relevant in our contemporary context, since the concept of
God has become one of the major problems in multi-faith relations.”[36]
Not
just God alone, but any concern that becomes the barrier for co-operation and
working together. It is not debating theological strengths and weaknesses but
looking for ways and means to accept the differences on the one hand and at the
same time proceeding further towards the goal.
1.7 Strugglers of Life
All the above mentioned insights form
the study of other faith traditions are informative and enlightening. The most
significant consideration to approach other-faith traditions is the fact that
the data from the study of faith-traditions is suggestive of the possibly
enhanced contribution the religions could make if ‘struggle for sustainable
life’ is accepted as a common ground to work together. According to Radha
Krishnan, in the context of growing threats to life religion has wider and
significant role to bring people together and engage them in common concerns.[37]
In our times
studying religion means studying life.[38]
The problem of religion would become vastly complicated if it were to be
discretely separated from the problem of people because it has neither essence
nor existence nor any kind of being whatsoever apart from people.[39] Hence focus upon “Life” should become key to
the understanding of religious phenomena in India
S. J. Samartha
states the need for cooperation among religions. In his words “it is agreed
that the most helpful relationship between persons of different faiths in the
world today must be one of co-operation in pursuing common purposes like
justice, peace and human rights.”[41]
In the words
of Paul F. Knitter “religions must speak and act together because only so can
they make their crucially important contribution to removing the oppression
that contaminates our globe.”[42] He also suggested that, the “world of
suffering, which provides the context or Kairos for dialogue, is all around
us.”[43] In another place he says “… peace can and
must become a common commitment and a common ground for conversation and
action.”[44] Another insight he provides is that, as the
world is facing suffering and want of peace, the world needs salvation i.e. not
only in the spiritual sense, but in its comprehensive sense. For this he
proposed soterio-centric approach. But
later he said “working for eco-human justice becomes a common context in which
we find ourselves using our different religious stories and symbols.”[45] Therefore he suggested the functioning
together of liberation theology and theology of religions. He writes “their encounter, may be even their
marriage, can bear much fruit for the Christian Churches
Aloysius
Pieris proposed a new paradigm for the Asian context for the religions to work
together. It includes three
aspects. In his words “the first is the
acknowledgement of a third magisterium, namely, that of the poor; the second is
the liberational thrust that defines
our theology of religions; and finally, the social location of this theology is
the Basic Human Communities (BHC).”[48]
S. J. Samartha goes deeper into the aspect of social responsibility of the
enlightened and writes “unless the Hindu-Christian quest for truth is related
to the ongoing life of the community, to the life of people who are struggling,
suffering, and dying in the world today, it will remain isolated.”[49] These ideas are shared by Paul F. Knitter
too. He writes that “there is today a
growing awareness among religious persons that their religious identity must
somehow be related to those common experiences of suffering and global threat.”[50] It is to be appreciated that the concern for
the poor, among many other significant concerns, has been the key thrust of
almost all the contemporary thinkers. And the solution is to be sought from all
faith-orientations.
In participating
with the struggles of life in order to achieve“Life Sustaining” vision
spirituality is the fundamental source of inspiration. Every individual must be
rooted and filled with the Sakti or spirit of that particular faith-tradition
to which he/she belonged. It is a long process.
It is called
in the Indian tradition as the state of “Jivan Mukta”. This ideal of Jivanmukta
is to help others to come over from their own narrow outlook. The Jivanmuktas
consider the world as one i.e. Vasudevakudumbam. Coming to this stage is a
process. The person who has rooted in a particular spiritual foundation can
uphold dharma towards people, creatures, and the cosmos as a whole.
This
realization naturally dawns to a Christian because of his/her intensive
commitment to the principles of Jesus. Irrespective of the faith-traditions to
which one belonged, every one may have to ask a question-as a human being
adhering to a particular faith-tradition, what is distinct in me? Or what is
distinct about me? A close observation of life of the people of different
faith-traditions can help us learn that every human being is striving to live,
rather better life. A better life is what every one aspires for. In this stark
struggle for life, no individual is better placed because of his/her religious
identity. Our endeavor in working for the friendliness of religions is to
strengthen life.
This argument
can be substantiated with the feeling of a contemporary, humble religions
scholar. He writes “today’s dire need of our country is not demolishing and
constructing temples/mosques/shrines to God- “the ultimate reality,” but to
reconstruct healthier and better relations between various human communities.
It is not imperative of any religion either to prove which “God” or “deity” is
true and authoritative, or whose religion is superior or highly valuable, but
how to restore “human dignity” and “peaceful relations” in the midst of a
diversity of faiths, oppressive structures, inhuman attitudes and how to meet
the basic needs of humankind.”[51] Again he states “the dire need of our country
today is not demolishing and constructing temples for “God” in the name of
either “religious” or “cultural” nationalism, but rather to help human beings –
the “image of God,” in their basic needs of day-to-day life.”[52]
The force of the point is clear. But the stand point requires much more
inclusive and comprehensive expression.
II Mission
The above discussions from the point of religions are
leading to the conclusion that working for religious cooperation is essential
in India
It is
indispensable to note that this concern has captured the attention of
missiological paradigm as well. The missiologists agree that new reading or
rereading of the bible and its dynamic is necessary for newer directions. It
may not be a surprise that ecological dimensions are emerging from the great
commission (Mark 16:15). Sam Amirtham
points out that “the Gospel will offer God’s grace to transform not only human
nature and human history, but also the whole of nature and all of creation.”[53]
Similarly a re-reading or new reading of bible can offer
many more useful insights even to facilitate religious cooperation to work
towards sustainable existence.
The bold
declaration of Russell Chandran is significant here. He writes “there is no
mission programme which can be copied for all situations. One has to be
sensitive to discern what the Holy Spirit tells us about Christ’s mission in
different contexts.”[54]
Such bold visions are found to be
materialized in the modern missiological writings. For example Jesudason Baskar
Jeyaraj writes “Missiological education should relate not merely to one sector
of the world but to all the segments including the people of other faiths. The
people of other faiths are also partners in the missio Die.”[55]
The mission of
the church has a substantial role to play in matters of many faith-traditions.
Russell Chandran maintained that, “the church’s mission does have a role in
relation to the quest for communal harmony and peace and the safeguarding of
the secular character of the state in which people of all faiths can live
together, enjoying equal rights and without fear of any discrimination.”[56]
Although
missiology has accepted the significance of inter-religious co-operation it is
the traditional frame of mind and thought that obstruct progress. S. Wesley
Ariaraja affirms, “our encounter with religions and cultures over several
decades has indeed produced new wine. But we have a missiology that cannot take
it. New wine needs new wineskins.”[57]
This is what to be considered while approaching other religious traditions in India
While
missiology comes forward with wider facets it is not free from certain
challenges. P. S. Jacob writes “the crucial question for missiologists today is
whether Christianity can offer a quality of transformation which is not being
offered by other religions.”[58] This challenge can be overcome by the
conviction that all faith-traditions have some thing concrete to contribute to
inter-religious relations for the sake of pursuing a life sustaining vision.
III
Secularism
It is also
significant to remember that the secular principle of our nation is in tune
with relation between faith-traditions as against the obvious notion of
non-religious or irreligious nature of the state. Neera Chandhoke writes, “it
is not surprising that secularism in the Indian polity, as a response to our
conditions and mode of thought, came to be conceptualized as sarva dharma
sambhava, or equality of all religions.”[59]
The fact that in the Indian constitution the word secular is used to stress the
neutrality of the state in relation to religions is further emphasized as
“ironically, it is often forgotten that secularism in India
This notion is
capturing attention as modern scholars are grouping secularism as a faith, in
order, not to miss any valuable contribution towards sustainable existence
launched from the launch-pad of struggles of life. While classifying the
various religions as Indian religions, foreign religions, folk religions, T. Swami Raju makes reference to
“Other Faiths: Apart from these ‘religions,’ there are people who have faith in
secular visions, and political ideologies like Gandhism, Marxism, Leninism,
Maoism, Naxalism and so on.”[61]
Such an
enthralling attitude from the modern scholars have noteworthy purpose. For
example S. J. Samartha writes “future of Christianity in India
J. Russell
Chandran maintained that “Churches should find ways of co-operating with
organizations and agencies working for secularism, democracy and communal
harmony.”[63]
The churches
and theological educators need to recognize the importance of secular ideology
and take special efforts to incorporate those ideals in to ours in the process
of obeying to the call of God. We also need to learn to work with such
ideologies. This is the demand of the context. This is vivid in the statement
that “intolerance has manifested itself in the activities of communal political
parties which are clearly antagonistic to the entire spirit of the secular
State.”[64]
IV Jesus is Life-Centered
With the above insights drawn largely
from the study of faith-traditions and graphically from Missiology and
Secularism we can be sure in our persuasion of theology for the sake of
sustainable existence that we need to be always open to the available resources
and challenges. In this direction Christians can creatively draw a paradigm
form the life and teachings of Jesus Christ.
Jesus came to
do the will of God. He came to enrich life. He wanted to obliterate all the
religious systems and practices which worked against life. To give life to the
needy, Jesus broke away many traditional laws. If laws and practices are not in
consonant with the necessities of life, they should be avoided. His main fight
was against the ‘religions’ which functioned at the cost of life and suffering.
He was always of the view that religion is for life and life is not for
religion.
Jesus wanted religions and religious practices to be life
sustaining and not life destroying.
Whoever, or whichever faith tradition, is involved in fulfilling the
will of God was in the company of Jesus.
He said whoever does the will of my father is my brothers and sisters.[65]
Even if such
deeds took place, in an unexpected environment, Jesus appreciated. He appreciated the faith of the centurion and
said even in Israel
For Jesus the neighbor[68]
is one who involves in life saving activity.
That is why, he had to say men would come from east and west, and from
north and south, and sit at table in the kingdom of God
Another
important aspect to note is that “Jesus was definitely opposed to
proselitization in the sense of conversion from one religion to another
religion, when he said, “Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you
traverse sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a
proselyte you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.”[72]
[Matthew 23:15]
Jesus’
concern for the needy is outstanding.
His selection of people for the reward was on the basis of the amount of
service they did to the needy.[73] This is declared in the ‘Nazareth
Jesus’ main enemies were people who used religion as mere
ceremonial observance, as means of oppression and as means to escape from the
responsibilities.[76] He wanted to restore Sabbath as a source of
life for the needy. He said Sabbath is
for man and man is not for Sabbath.[77]
A taunting question he faced was whether
to save or destroy life on Sabbath.[78] He proved in his life that, saving the life
of the needy (any) is the chief concern of people who are committed to the
ultimate Reality, of course, in manifold forms.
The life sustaining persuasion is based on two main
convictions. One is the conviction that, all are committed to the ultimate
through diverse channels. And the other
is that commitment demands that life is strengthened in all possible ways to
achieve, harmony, peace, Justice and equality for all. S.J. Samartha writes,
“for Christians the fight against all that destroys true community, the quest
for spiritual resources to under grid all efforts to build community, and the
search for the ultimate meaning of truly human existence in community cannot be
separated from faith in Jesus Christ.”[79]
Above all faith in Jesus is the key to our theological
agenda. As we look to Jesus for inspiration let us try to apply the principles
of Jesus as he interpreted them in his life time. This paradigm shall be
relevant, in conformity with our faith and it shall be life sustaining.
At the same
time as a Christian community, we need to acknowledge a purposeful fact that
“every religion wishes to show a path to “realize” reality, and reality is
whole. But every person and every religion participates in, enjoys, arrives at,
lives in that whole in a limited way. Nobody has a monopoly on the whole, and
no one can completely satisfy the human thirst for the infinite and content
herself with a part of the whole.”[80]
This helps us to construct positive and wider understanding about all the
faith-traditions in the process of relating with others and working with others
towards a sustainable existence while unshakably committed to the Jesus-paradigm.
Conclusion
At the face of living communal tensions triggered by
terrorizing activities, for one or other purpose, as a theological community we
have a responsible role to play as we learn from others and educate others for
the challenging tasks ahead in a pluralistic context like India.
The specific call for such a responsible role is emerging
from the reality of many faith-traditions that are some time conflicting but at
the same time dynamic and willing to relate with the other and work with the
other towards an all inclusive sustainable goal.
In this process we need to constantly strive to discern
the really religious concerns from the other accidental or incidental
accumulations for the sake of cooperation and working together towards life
sustaining vision and mission. This will be further strengthened if we can
recognize the unity of real purpose that underlies all the religions in spite
of the obvious differences. Once this recognition is achieved we can move
forward in establishing mutual sharing or substantial relationship with other
faith-traditions for the sake of committing ourselves to struggle for a
sustainable existence.
As we progress in this direction we need to be humble
about our own faith affirmations which are ultimate and absolute to us, while
accepting the possibility of ultimate and absolute faith affirmations, may be
in different forms than ours, in other faith-traditions as well. This bold
challenge is indispensable to avoid the destructive utility of the power of
religions. This is looking beyond the set proposals to approach other
faith-traditions in order to address the currently emerging threats to
establishing a sustainable existence.
One of the basic signs of embarking on this hard terrain
in accordance with our faith commitment to God which, we inherited from the
faith in the life and work of Jesus Christ is to instill these acknowledged
challenges in our theological formulations which, of course is the
interpretation of our faith relevant to the contextual realities. It is not
mere Indian Christian theology, but theology resulting from the realistic
existence of many faith-traditions. The culmination principle of this process,
at least at our times, is the confluence of religious resources towards
hammering a paradigm to address the struggles of life in order to seek and
establish a sustainable existence.
Creating and involving (in) such a paradigm has become
the trend emerging in the present missiological considerations. Although this
consideration is not free from challenges, an open approach free from
traditional ones to include the other as well, in our study and application,
can lead us further.
Positively
considering the other and cooperating with the other and working together with
the other towards sustainable existence is not only a religious affair, it is
not only the missiological consideration of Christians. It is also the inherent
and implicit expectation of secularism, at least from the point of Indian
constitution, in India
It is not at all surprising that all the
afore maintained appeals are the reality of the life and work of Jesus, which
inspire and embolden all of us to advance further in our commitment to serve
God purposefully in the given context.
At the end,
in our approach to other faith-traditions we should not fail to recognize the
basic principles that all are committed to the ultimate through diverse
channels and life needs to be strengthened towards sustainable existence. Above
all, faith in Jesus is the key to our theological agenda, as we open ourselves
to the truth that there are other faith-traditions as well. The relevant method
to approach other faith-traditions, in our context, is “Life Sustaining” based
on the “Struggles for Life”, which helps crossing the boundaries with purpose
and at the same time necessitate safe return and relaxation in one’s own
faith-tradition. The kinds of struggle and contents of sustainable life are
kept open-ended so as to be always open to the newer possibilities.
Religion and Dialogue
American Academy Calcutta Oxford University
[1] F. Max Muller, Theosophy
or Psychological Religion, Collected Works of F. Max Muller,
Asian
Educational Service, New Delhi
[2] L. W. Grensted, The
Psychology of Religion, Oxford University Press, New York
p.109.
[3] Gustan Mensching, Structures
and Patterns of Religion, Translated by F. Klimkeit and V.
Srinivasa
Sarma, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi
[4] T. Swami Raju,
“Re-Visioning Theologies: A Multi-Faith Perspective,” The SATHRI Journal
Vol.2, No.1 (May, 2008), p. 146.
[5] S.J. Samartha,
“Commitment and Tolerance in a Pluralist Society”, NCC Review, Vol. CVI,
No.
2, (February 1986), p. 76.
[6] D. S. Sharma, Hinduism Through the Ages (Bombay:
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1967), p.
122.
[7] D. S. Sharma, Hinduism Through the Ages (Bombay:
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1967), p.
136.
[8] Nirmal Minz, Mahatma Gandhi and Hindu – Christian
Dialogue (Madras: CLS, 1970), p. 12.
[9] D. S. Sharma, Hinduism Through the Ages (Bombay:
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1967), p.
122.
[10]John Hick ed., The Myth of God Incarnate Seventh Impression
(London
1985). p. 180.
[11] Paul F. Knitter, No other Name? op. cit., p. 6.
[12]
Jesudason Baskar Jeyaraj, “Nation building with the People of other Faiths: A
Need for new
Models of Missiological Education,” Mission TodayVol. X (2008), p. 244.
193-134.
[14] Mahatma Gandhi, Fellowship of Faiths and Unity of Religions,
ed., by Abdul Majid Khan
(Madras
[15] Madhukar, “The Role
of Religions in Ensuring the Welfare of the People”, Religion and
Soeity, Vol. 42. No. 3
(September 1995), p. 13.
[16] Wilfred Cantwell
Smith, “The Christian in a Religiously Plural World”, Christianity and other
Religions, op. cit., p. 95.
[17] S. Radhakrishnan, East
and West in Religion, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London
p.26.
[18] S. Radhakrishnan, Religion
and Society, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London
[19] F. Max Muller, Introduction
to the Science of Religions, New Edition, London
[20] S.J. Samartha, The Lordship of Jesus Christ and Religious
Pluralism (Madras
Christian
Literature Society, 1981), p. 23.
[21] S.J. Samartha, Between Two Cultures (India: Asian
Trading Corporation, 1997), p. 151.
[22] S.J. Samartha, The Lordship of Jesus Christ and Religious
Pluralism (Madras
Christian Literature Society, 1981), p. 2.
[23] S.J. Samartha, The Lordship of Jesus Christ and Religious
Pluralism (Madras
Christian
Literature Society, 1981), p. 3.
[24] S. J. Samartha, One Christ Many Religions, op. cit., p.
18.
[25] T. Swami Raju,
“Re-Visioning Theologies: A Multi-Faith Perspective,” The SATHRI Journal
Vol.2, No.1 (May, 2008), p. 145.
[26] S. Radhakrishnan, The
Hindu of Life, Third Indian Reprint, Blackie & Son Publishers Pvt.
Ltd.,
Blackie House, Bombay
[27] Eric J. Lott, “The
Science of Religion in an Indian Theological Context”, Bangalore
Theological
Forum, Vol.XIII,
No.4, Oct-Dec., 1985, p.1.
[28] Frank Whaling, “The
Study of Religions in a Global Context”, Contemporary Approaches to
the
Study of Religion in 2 Volumes, edited by Frank Whaling, Volume I: The
Humanities, Mouton Publishers, Berlin
[29] Eric J. Lott,
“Approaching Religious Tradition”, Religious Traditions of India
Theological
Library, 1988, p.29.
[30] Frank Whaling, “The
Study of Religions in a Global Context”, Contemporary Approaches to
the
Study of Religion in 2 Volumes, edited by Frank Whaling, Volume I: The
Humanities, Mouton Publishers, Berlin
[31] T. Swami Raju,
“Re-Visioning Theologies: A Multi-Faith Perspective,” The SATHRI Journal
Vol.2, No.1 (May, 2008), p. 141.
[32] S.
Israel , “An integral approach to the study of Religion: Insights
from an Indian Christian
perspective”,
Bangalore Theological Forum, Vol.XIX, No.2, April-June, 1987, p.104.
[33] Eric J. Lott, “The
Science of Religion in an Indian Theological Context”, Bangalore
Theological
Forum,
Vol. XVII, No.4, October-December, 1985, p.3.
[34] Wilfred Cantwell
Smith, “The Study of Religion and the Study of the Bible”, Journal of the
[35] Kuncheria Pathil,
“Christian Approach to other faiths: A Historical Perspective”, NCC
Review,
Vol. CX, No. 2 (February 1990),
p. 67
[36] T. Swami Raju,
“Re-Visioning Theologies: A Multi-Faith Perspective,” The SATHRI Journal
Vol.2, No.1 (May, 2008), p.138.
[37] S. Radhakrishnan, Religion
and Society, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London
[38] L. W. Grensted, The
Psychology of Religion, Oxford University Press, New York
p.15.
[39] J. G. Arapura, Religions
as Anxiety and Tranquility, An Essay in Comparative
Phenomenology
of the Spirit, Mouton
& Co., Netherlands
[40] K. P. Aleaz, Harmony
of Religions: The Relevance of Swami Vivekananda, Punthipustak,
[41] S. J. Samartha, Courage for Dialogue: Ecumenical Issues in
Inter-religious Relationships
(Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1981), p.
30.
[42] Paul F. Knitter,
“Toward a Liberation Theology of Religions”, The Myth of Christian
Uniqueness, op. cit., p. 181
[43]Paul F. Knitter, One Earth Many Religions, Mutlifatith
Dialogue and Global Responsibility
(New York: ORBIS, 1996), p. 58.
[44]Ibid., p. 66.
[45] Ibid., p. 113.
[46] Paul F. Knitter,
“Religion and Liberation in Defense of a Pluralistic Theology of Religions”,
NCC Review, Vol. CXII, No. 4
(April 1992), p. 229.
[47] Paul F. Knitter, One
Earth Many Religions, op. cit., p. 11.
[48]Aloysius Pieris, Fire and Water, Basic Issues in Asian
Buddhism and Christianity (New
York
ORBIS
Books, 1996), p. 156.
[49] S. J. Samartha, Courage for Dialogue, op. cit., p. 156.
[50] Paul F. Knitter, One Earth Many Religions, op. cit., p.
57.
[51] T. Swami Raju,
“Re-Visioning Theologies: A Multi-Faith Perspective,” The SATHRI Journal
Vol.2, No.1 (May, 2008), p. 138.
[52] T. Swami Raju,
“Re-Visioning Theologies: A Multi-Faith Perspective,” The SATHRI Journal
Vol.2, No.1 (May, 2008), p. 145.
[53] Sam Amirtham, “Gospel
to all Creation,” in The Good News of
Jesus Christ in the Indian
setting,
edited
by Dayanandan Francis (Chennai: The Christian Literature Society, 2000), p.60.
[54]J. Russell Chandran,
“A Mission Theology for Tomorrow,” in The Good News of Jesus
Christ
in the Indian setting, edited by Dayanandan Francis (Chennai: The Christian
Literature Society, 2000), p. 107.
[55]
Jesudason Baskar Jeyaraj, “Nation building with the People of other Faiths: A
Need for
new Models of Missiological Education,” Mission TodayVol. X (2008), p. 235.
[56] J. Russell Chandran,
“A Mission Theology for Tomorrow,” in The Good News of Jesus
Christ
in the Indian setting, edited by Dayanandan Francis (Chennai: The Christian
Literature Society, 2000), p.108.
[57] S. Wesley Ariaraja, “Mission in the Context of Cultures and Religions,” in Mission Paradigm
in the
New Millennium, edited
by W.S. Milton Jeganathan (Delhi
[58] Plamthodathil S.
Jacob, “Hindu and Christian: Conversions and Transformations,” in
Conversion in a Pluralistic
Context: Perspectives and Perceptions,108
[59] Neera Chandhoke, Beyond
Secularism, the rights of Religious Minorities (New Delhi
[60] Neera Chandhoke, Beyond
Secularism, the rights of Religious Minorities, 47.
[61] T. Swami Raju,
“Re-Visioning Theologies: A Multi-Faith Perspective,” The SATHRI Journal
Vol.2, No.1 (May, 2008), p. 139.
[62] S. J. Samartha, Between Two Cultures, op. cit., p. 160.
[63] J. Russell Chandran,
“A Mission Theology for Tomorrow,” in The Good News of Jesus
Christ
in the Indian setting, edited by Dayanandan Francis (Chennai: The Christian
Literature Society, 2000), p.109
[64] E. C. Bhatty, “Religious Minorities and the Secular State
[65]Mark 3:35.
[66]Luke 7:9.
[67] J. Russell Chandran,
“A Mission Theology for Tomorrow,” in The Good News of Jesus
Christ
in the Indian setting, edited by Dayanandan Francis (Chennai: The Christian
Literature Society, 2000), p.108.
[68]Luke 10:29.
[69]Luke 13:29.
[70]
Jesudason Baskar Jeyaraj, “Nation building with the People of other Faiths: A
Need for new
Models of Missiological Education,” Mission TodayVol. X (2008), p. 236.
[71] T. Swami Raju,
“Re-Visioning Theologies: A Multi-Faith Perspective,” The SATHRI Journal
Vol.2, No.1 (May, 2008), p. 146
[72]Gnana Robinson, “Life
and Mission
Indian
setting, edited
by Dayanandan Francis (Chennai: The Christian Literature Society, 2000), p.121.
[73]Matthew 25:35.
[74]Luke 4:18-19.
[75]Mark 12:30&31.
[76]Matthew 9:13, 15:6,
& Mark 7:11 & Luke 11:42.
[77]Mark 2:27.
[78]Matthew 12:10, &
Mark 3:4, & Luke 6:9.
[79]S.J. Samartha,
“Dialogue as a Continuing Christian Concern”, Religion and Society, Vol.
XVIII,
No.1 (March 1971), p. 22.
[80] Raimon Panikkar, The Fullness of Man.
(Maryknoll: Orbis , 2006), p. 157.
Comments
Post a Comment