Epistemology of interreligious debate

Simonthepilgrim

Over the years we have enjoyed (?!?) many a thread in which differing religious views are debated. The most obvious ones are where 'Abrahamic' (essentially Christian) and Buddhist beliefs come head to head, but I would maintain that the encounter between different Buddhist sects partake of the same epistemological nature.

If anyone is interested in varying understandings of this type of debate, the following link is to an excellent (if occasionally technical) article from the Heythrop Journal:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-2265.2009.00542.x/full

compassionate_warrior

What's your question, Simon?

aHappyNihilist

I think he's just givin us a nice linky link

Spock

Sheeesh!
Simon, I would be interested in understanding the debate more thoroughly, but after 3 pages I am more confused

But seriously, many "religions" have commonalities but Buddhism, as I practice it, does not rely on faith in a deity or any particular dogmatic perspective.

My Sangha is a member of a particular order, but I chose it because I can get to it easily from work and I can catch my last train home, rather than because of the perspective the order takes on Buddhism.

Whilst debates such as those discussed in the paper are academically interesting for some, its not really relevant to Buddhism as I understand it. I'm not sure that Buddhists that cling to a specific order or sect are on the right path but only they can make a judgement on that.

Am I making sense?

compassionate_warrior

I've noticed on this site that sometimes Vajrayana ends up being the odd man out, due to belief in reincarnation, elements of magic, etc. There seems to be a fair amount of disapproval by those in other schools of Buddhism.

Spock

But is disapproving of Vajrayana's well intentioned beliefs not off the mark?

compassionate_warrior

I think disapproval of one or another Buddhist tradition is inappropriate on a Buddhist forum; I don't really understand it.

Joshua

I think the disapproval of any dharmayana (though I have my doubts about Pure Land) is a clear demonstration of a person's lack of scholarship. Vajrayana has odd tenets, indeed, but it also houses many great minds (who aren't afraid of secular science). A fact which must never be forgotten, a fact which can operate as an initial motivational tool for deeper study even when one's perception is clouded. Though I fear my choice in saying 'I think' leaves this analysis circumspect.

Simon, I've never seen you start a thread. I trust in its depth! I'll lend it some gandering later.

federica

I for one have never closed a thread because I disagreed or disapproved of the tradition being discussed. I have on occasions closed a thread involving such discussion (like the NKT thread, for example) to pre-empt and prevent discord and disharmony developing or going further.
But nobody can ever, or will ever, find me guilty of tradition-prejudice.

compassionate_warrior

Who sank the thread on "Buddhism as regards to Magic"? It was a fascinating discussion. An older thread on the same subject gave scriptural quotes regarding the role of magic in the dharma, also fascinating. But there seems to be a prejudice against "magic" (much of which, IMO, is a scientific discovery waiting to happen, or in some cases, simply waiting to make it into science textbooks) on this site. Magic is certainly part of Vajrayana.

Dazzle

. Magic is certainly part of Vajrayana.

Are you an offline Vajrayana practitioner, compassionate_warrior?

compassionate_warrior

I'm not sure what "offline practitioner" means, but yes, I'm a practitioner/student.

The Tibetan State Oracle is an example of institutionalized "magic" in Vajrayana.

Dazzle

Ok thanks, I was just interested. By 'offline practitioner' I meant attending an offline Tibetan Buddhist centre and having face-to -face instruction from a teacher.

federica

I don't think it was me, frankly. Or if it was sunk by me, it would not have been because of the subject matter. it might have been due to some 'unskilful posting'....

compassionate_warrior

Ok thanks, I was just interested. By 'offline practitioner' I meant attending an offline Tibetan Buddhist centre and having face-to -face instruction from a teacher.

Well, I realize that teachers in Buddhist centers don't teach magic. But I think that in the Himalayas the line between Buddhism and shamanism can blur. We don't see that side of it in our studies. I guess we get a more "pure" form in dharma centers.

Dakini

Well, I'm not sure what this has to do with epistemology, but since one of my favorite subjects has been raised, I'm in. There's a big difference between Vajrayana as taught in the West, and Vajrayana as manifested in Inner Asia. Though most people in the Tibeto-Mongol regions consider themselves Buddhists, they routinely seek out "oracles" (shamans or clairvoyants) and hands-on healers. Among some Tibetans, astrologers have replaced "oracles", but there are still practicing oracles (mostly women) in some of the Tibetan regions. And then there are the prayers (defined on the "Magic" thread as a type of spell) that lamas use for all manner of things, including saving the world from environmental disaster, healing the sick, etc. Well, I could go on, but I should give Simon back his thread. Sorry, I couldn't resist this digression.

[DeletedUser]

I think he's just givin us a nice linky link

So, what is his epistemological stance :vimp:

Simonthepilgrim

@Wilfred Thank you for asking.

I found the article interesting and useful. Within its criteria, I perceive my own stance as "naturalized" (sic). Many of the teachers whom I admire appear to teach this position and to engage in interreligious friendships which result in both greater depth in their own practice and faith, and a more generous and open attitude towards difference. As examples, I would cite, Thomas Merton and Brother David from the Christian 'families' together with HHDL, Thich Nhat Hanh and Masao Abe from the Buddhist. My first encounter, though, was through the life and works of the Christian priest Charles de Foucauld and the way in which he interacted with his Moslem neighbours in North Africa. It seemed admirable to me - and conducive to peace despite his accidental death by shooting. The story also taught me to question some assumptions about what I meant by a successful life.

I can't say whether or not this epistemological stance has aided or hindered what I describe as my pilgrimage through a cloud of unknowing.

The more I understand what the writer is saying, the more I realise that there is some two-dimensionality in the models proposed. Looking back at my own direct experience of such dialogue, across the Net, by letter and face-to-face, I see that both my interlocutors and I have a tendency to move through the three 'positions'. As ever, an epistemological model opens our minds, if we let it, to a greater understanding of ourselves, and, as Eihei Dogen is quoted as saying:
To study the way is to study the self;
to study the self is to forget the self;
to forget the self is to be enlightened by the ten thousand things.