Comments for The Comparative Study of Religion http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com Arvind Sharma Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:06:31 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on 12.) Religious Freedom by Gregory Baum http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/2009/08/25/religious-freedom/#comment-37 Gregory Baum Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:06:31 +0000 http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/?p=61#comment-37 Judaism, Christianity and Islam demand exclusive fidelity to their own religious tradition. The modern response to this, as you suggest, has been to demand the freedom to change from one religion to another, if one so wishes It seems to me that this is not the whole story. In the creation of Europe after the collapse of the Roman Empire, the Catholic religion became an essential element of the feudal order, and later Islam also become an essential dimension of the civilisation created through its influence. In both cases there was no clear distinction between religion and culture: they were insolubly interwoven, ─ similar to the Indian situation. In Catholicism and Islam, abandoning one’s faith was seen as a betrayal of one’s society and was most cruelly punished. In the Middle Ages Catholics burnt heretics because they were thought to undermine the bond that held society together. Even the Reformation did not change the situation significantly. Following the Peace of Westphalia of 1648, the religion of the prince determined the religion of his people. Heresy continued to be punished in Catholic and Protestant lands. The distinction between culture and religion, I think, has been the product of modernity. Now societies were increasingly defined in secular terms. Because these societies embraced citizens of different religions, the common culture was not fully identified with any of them. An effort was gradually made to respect religious pluralism. It eventually became possible to change from one religion to another within the same culture. In the 19th century the papacy resisted the emerging secular culture: they continued to look at faith as an essential dimension of society and condemned the very idea of religious liberty. They did not win. In modern society, religion became increasingly seen as a person choice. Changing one’s religion did not challenge the common culture. (The present difficulty for many Europeans today is that the new Muslim citizens do challenge the common culture.) It seems to me, therefore, that the Western definition of religious liberty as the freedom to change one’s religion is not so much a reaction to the exclusive claims made by the Abrahamic religions as it is a product of modern society that resisted the inherited feudal order with its religious gounding and increasingly looked upon religion as a personal choice with no impact on the common culture. Judaism, Christianity and Islam demand exclusive fidelity to their own religious tradition. The modern response to this, as you suggest, has been to demand the freedom to change from one religion to another, if one so wishes It seems to me that this is not the whole story.
In the creation of Europe after the collapse of the Roman Empire, the Catholic religion became an essential element of the feudal order, and later Islam also become an essential dimension of the civilisation created through its influence. In both cases there was no clear distinction between religion and culture: they were insolubly interwoven, ─ similar to the Indian situation. In Catholicism and Islam, abandoning one’s faith was seen as a betrayal of one’s society and was most cruelly punished. In the Middle Ages Catholics burnt heretics because they were thought to undermine the bond that held society together. Even the Reformation did not change the situation significantly. Following the Peace of Westphalia of 1648, the religion of the prince determined the religion of his people. Heresy continued to be punished in Catholic and Protestant lands.
The distinction between culture and religion, I think, has been the product of modernity. Now societies were increasingly defined in secular terms. Because these societies embraced citizens of different religions, the common culture was not fully identified with any of them. An effort was gradually made to respect religious pluralism. It eventually became possible to change from one religion to another within the same culture. In the 19th century the papacy resisted the emerging secular culture: they continued to look at faith as an essential dimension of society and condemned the very idea of religious liberty. They did not win. In modern society, religion became increasingly seen as a person choice. Changing one’s religion did not challenge the common culture. (The present difficulty for many Europeans today is that the new Muslim citizens do challenge the common culture.)
It seems to me, therefore, that the Western definition of religious liberty as the freedom to change one’s religion is not so much a reaction to the exclusive claims made by the Abrahamic religions as it is a product of modern society that resisted the inherited feudal order with its religious gounding and increasingly looked upon religion as a personal choice with no impact on the common culture.

]]> Comment on 12.) Religious Freedom by haslina ibrahim http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/2009/08/25/religious-freedom/#comment-36 haslina ibrahim Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:57:34 +0000 http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/?p=61#comment-36 how free are we. of course there is limit to everything in this world. or are we acting god here that we know for sure every bite of good and bad in our decision. freedom differentiate us from anything else in god's creation. the exercise of freedom may lifted our position above anything or demoted to the lowest low of an ugliest beast in the world. it doesnt matter where we are, in the west of in the east. our freedom should be dictated by a guided conscientious. how free are we. of course there is limit to everything in this world. or are we acting god here that we know for sure every bite of good and bad in our decision. freedom differentiate us from anything else in god’s creation. the exercise of freedom may lifted our position above anything or demoted to the lowest low of an ugliest beast in the world. it doesnt matter where we are, in the west of in the east. our freedom should be dictated by a guided conscientious.

]]> Comment on 3.) Religion and Human Rights by daysofmb.com http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/3-religion-and-human-rights/#comment-35 daysofmb.com Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:01:49 +0000 http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/?p=10#comment-35 Family represents people living together by ties of marriage, blood or adaptation, thus representing a single household Family represents people living together by ties of marriage, blood or adaptation, thus representing a single household

]]> Comment on 12.) Religious Freedom by Richard E. Hennessey http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/2009/08/25/religious-freedom/#comment-34 Richard E. Hennessey Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:02:55 +0000 http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/?p=61#comment-34 I would have thought that the first affirmation of the article, that “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion,” is sufficient in itself. A blanket statement, it surely includes more than the freedom to change one’s religion from one religion to another. The “right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion” surely also affirms both the freedom to have more than one religion, on the one hand, and the freedom to have no religion at all. I would have been nice, though, if the statement of what was included had made it clear that the freedoms listed were not to taken as exhaustive. Your statement, “Thus in the Eastern cultural context, freedom of religion means that the person is left free to explore his or her religious life without being challenged to change his or her religion,” left me pondering. I agree and take it as a given that, with all the givens that should be given, a person should be “left free to explore his or her religious life without being challenged to change his or her religion.” Should, however, the person wish his or her religious beliefs to be true, then in some cases he or she will find himself or herself challenged by logic itself, for two contradictory beliefs cannot both be true. Let us take, then, a situation like the one about which Gandi was questioned and spell out more fully the Christian thesis at hand. It affirms: there is at least one savior and there is at most one savior and that savior is the person Jesus of Nazareth. That is a conjunction of three theses. This is inconsistent with a thesis holding that there is no savior, with one holding that there is not just one but two or more savior, and with one that there is at least one savior and there is at most one savior, but that savior is other than the person Jesus of Nazareth. One holding that any one of these last theses is true must logically hold that the Christian thesis is false. And, of course, vice versa. I would have thought that the first affirmation of the article, that “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion,” is sufficient in itself. A blanket statement, it surely includes more than the freedom to change one’s religion from one religion to another. The “right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion” surely also affirms both the freedom to have more than one religion, on the one hand, and the freedom to have no religion at all. I would have been nice, though, if the statement of what was included had made it clear that the freedoms listed were not to taken as exhaustive.

Your statement, “Thus in the Eastern cultural context, freedom of religion means that the person is left free to explore his or her religious life without being challenged to change his or her religion,” left me pondering. I agree and take it as a given that, with all the givens that should be given, a person should be “left free to explore his or her religious life without being challenged to change his or her religion.” Should, however, the person wish his or her religious beliefs to be true, then in some cases he or she will find himself or herself challenged by logic itself, for two contradictory beliefs cannot both be true. Let us take, then, a situation like the one about which Gandi was questioned and spell out more fully the Christian thesis at hand. It affirms: there is at least one savior and there is at most one savior and that savior is the person Jesus of Nazareth. That is a conjunction of three theses. This is inconsistent with a thesis holding that there is no savior, with one holding that there is not just one but two or more savior, and with one that there is at least one savior and there is at most one savior, but that savior is other than the person Jesus of Nazareth. One holding that any one of these last theses is true must logically hold that the Christian thesis is false. And, of course, vice versa.

]]> Comment on 11.) Do the Great Religions Stand for Small Families? by Vedhyas Divya http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/2009/07/17/do-the-great-religions-stand-for-small-families/#comment-33 Vedhyas Divya Sat, 15 Aug 2009 11:54:47 +0000 http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/?p=58#comment-33 I particularly appreciate this passage: "Moreover, a religious tradition always possesses a quality over and above its contents, a fact one is likely to overlook if one looks only at the existing contents." It seems to be the same idea put forward by His Holiness the Lord HAMSAH MANARAH when he says that "religions are ONE is essence". This is why the Hexamid symbol reflects the various religions of the world aiming at the Absolute which is represented in this symbol by the OM (AUM) over them all including AUMISM which lies at its base but which is also transcended by the Absolute. AUMISM is meant there to show the path to UNITY. See HAMSAH MANARAH, S., "AUMISM, the Doctrine of Golden Age", edited by Le Mandarom, La-Baume-de-Castellane, 1991, 360 pages. I particularly appreciate this passage: “Moreover, a religious tradition always possesses a quality over and above its contents, a fact one is likely to overlook if one looks only at the existing contents.”

It seems to be the same idea put forward by His Holiness the Lord HAMSAH MANARAH when he says that “religions are ONE is essence”. This is why the Hexamid symbol reflects the various religions of the world aiming at the Absolute which is represented in this symbol by the OM (AUM) over them all including AUMISM which lies at its base but which is also transcended by the Absolute. AUMISM is meant there to show the path to UNITY.

See HAMSAH MANARAH, S., “AUMISM, the Doctrine of Golden Age”, edited by Le Mandarom, La-Baume-de-Castellane, 1991, 360 pages.

]]> Comment on 10.) Is “Human” Dialogue Possible by Richard E. Hennessey http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/2009/03/30/10-is-%e2%80%9chuman%e2%80%9d-dialogue-possible/#comment-31 Richard E. Hennessey Wed, 29 Jul 2009 01:46:07 +0000 http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/?p=53#comment-31 While I ponder the main point of this post, I have what is perhaps but an incidental question. It bears on the view reported of Gandhi, that “he … was deeply convinced personally that all religions are true.” But how can it be true that “all religions are true”? Classical Christianity holds to the following thesis: at least one person and at most one person has been both human and divine and that person is Jesus of Nazareth. For all other religions, that conjunction is false in at least one of its conjoined parts and therefore as a whole. How then both classical Christianity and those other religions for whom that conjunction is false both be true on that particular point? While I ponder the main point of this post, I have what is perhaps but an incidental question. It bears on the view reported of Gandhi, that “he … was deeply convinced personally that all religions are true.” But how can it be true that “all religions are true”? Classical Christianity holds to the following thesis: at least one person and at most one person has been both human and divine and that person is Jesus of Nazareth. For all other religions, that conjunction is false in at least one of its conjoined parts and therefore as a whole. How then both classical Christianity and those other religions for whom that conjunction is false both be true on that particular point?

]]> Comment on 10.) Is “Human” Dialogue Possible by Anirudh Kumar Satsangi http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/2009/03/30/10-is-%e2%80%9chuman%e2%80%9d-dialogue-possible/#comment-29 Anirudh Kumar Satsangi Thu, 23 Jul 2009 06:05:28 +0000 http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/?p=53#comment-29 Gravitation Force is the Ultimate Creator, this paper I presented at the 1st Int. Conf. on Revival of Traditional Yoga, held at The Lonavla Yoga Institute (India), Lonavla, Pune in 2006. The Abstract of this paper is given below: The Universe includes everything that exists. In the Universe there are billions and billions of stars. These stars are distributed in the space in huge clusters. They are held together by gravitation and are known as galaxies. Sun is also a star. Various members of the solar system are bound to it by gravitation force. Gravitation force is the ultimate cause of birth and death of galaxy, star and planets etc. Gravitation can be considered as the cause of various forms of animate and inanimate existence. Human form is superior to all other forms. Withdrawal of gravitational wave from some plane of action is called the death of that form. It can be assumed that gravitation force is ultimate creator. Source of it is ‘God’. Gravitational Field is the supreme soul (consciousness) and its innumerable points of action may be called as individual soul (consciousness). It acts through body and mind. Body is physical entity. Mind can be defined as the function of autonomic nervous system. Electromagnetic waves are its agents through which it works. This can be realized through the practice of meditation and yoga under qualified meditation instruction. This can remove misunderstanding between science and religion and amongst various religions. This is the gist of all religious teachings – past, present and future. AND ‘In Scientific Terminology Source of Gravitational Wave is God’ I have presented this paper at the 2nd World Congress on Vedic Sciences held at Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi on February 9-11, 2007. The Abstract of this paper is given below: For Centuries, antagonism remained between science and religion. Science and spirituality require to be fused. An integrated philisophy is to be developed. It is written in the scriptures that entire creation is being maintained only through love or force of attraction. In Persian it is known as quvat-i-jaziba. It is on account of this force that the entire creation, which come into existence through the combination of small particles and atoms, is being maintained and sustained. The creation or universe includes everything that exists. In the universe there are billions and billions of stars. They are held together by gravitation and are known as galaxies. Sun is also a star. Various members of the solar system are bound to it by gravitation force. Gravitation force is the ultimate cause of birth and death of a galaxy, star and planet etc. and various forms of animate and inanimate existence. Gravitation force is the ultimate creator, sustainer and destroyer of the universe. These are the three attributes of God. Providence has located within the human body a spiritual faculty. When this faculty is developed like physical and mental faculties we find that Truth-the goal of science and God-the goal of religion are one and the same thing. Gravitation Force is the Ultimate Creator, this paper I presented at the 1st Int. Conf. on Revival of Traditional Yoga, held at The Lonavla Yoga Institute (India), Lonavla, Pune in 2006. The Abstract of this paper is given below:

The Universe includes everything that exists. In the Universe there are billions and billions of stars. These stars are distributed in the space in huge clusters. They are held together by gravitation and are known as galaxies. Sun is also a star. Various members of the solar system are bound to it by gravitation force. Gravitation force is the ultimate cause of birth and death of galaxy, star and planets etc. Gravitation can be considered as the cause of various forms of animate and inanimate existence. Human form is superior to all other forms. Withdrawal of gravitational wave from some plane of action is called the death of that form. It can be assumed that gravitation force is ultimate creator. Source of it is ‘God’. Gravitational Field is the supreme soul (consciousness) and its innumerable points of action may be called as individual soul (consciousness). It acts through body and mind. Body is physical entity. Mind can be defined as the function of autonomic nervous system. Electromagnetic waves are its agents through which it works. This can be realized through the practice of meditation and yoga under qualified meditation instruction. This can remove misunderstanding between science and religion and amongst various religions. This is the gist of all religious teachings – past, present and future.

AND

‘In Scientific Terminology Source of Gravitational Wave is God’ I have presented this paper at the 2nd World Congress on Vedic Sciences held at Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi on February 9-11, 2007. The Abstract of this paper is given below:

For Centuries, antagonism remained between science and religion. Science and spirituality require to be fused. An integrated philisophy is to be developed. It is written in the scriptures that entire creation is being maintained only through love or force of attraction. In Persian it is known as quvat-i-jaziba. It is on account of this force that the entire creation, which come into existence through the combination of small particles and atoms, is being maintained and sustained. The creation or universe includes everything that exists. In the universe there are billions and billions of stars. They are held together by gravitation and are known as galaxies. Sun is also a star. Various members of the solar system are bound to it by gravitation force. Gravitation force is the ultimate cause of birth and death of a galaxy, star and planet etc. and various forms of animate and inanimate existence. Gravitation force is the ultimate creator, sustainer and destroyer of the universe. These are the three attributes of God. Providence has located within the human body a spiritual faculty. When this faculty is developed like physical and mental faculties we find that Truth-the goal of science and God-the goal of religion are one and the same thing.

]]> Comment on 7.) The Universality of Reason by mercerd http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/2008/11/18/7-the-universality-of-reason/#comment-28 mercerd Fri, 17 Jul 2009 18:57:26 +0000 http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/?p=30#comment-28 interesting material, where do you find such topics? I will often go interesting material, where do you find such topics? I will often go

]]> Comment on 10.) Is “Human” Dialogue Possible by axolley http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/2009/03/30/10-is-%e2%80%9chuman%e2%80%9d-dialogue-possible/#comment-27 axolley Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:51:29 +0000 http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/?p=53#comment-27 formidable site this comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com formidable to see you have what I am actually looking for here and this this post is exactly what I am interested in. I shall be pleased to become a regular visitor :) formidable site this comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com formidable to see you have what I am actually looking for here and this this post is exactly what I am interested in. I shall be pleased to become a regular visitor :)

]]> Comment on 10.) Is “Human” Dialogue Possible by axolley http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/2009/03/30/10-is-%e2%80%9chuman%e2%80%9d-dialogue-possible/#comment-25 axolley Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:21:25 +0000 http://comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com/?p=53#comment-25 nice site this comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com rated to see you have what I am actually looking for here and this this post is exactly what I am interested in. I shall be pleased to become a regular visitor :) nice site this comparativestudyofreligion.wordpress.com rated to see you have what I am actually looking for here and this this post is exactly what I am interested in. I shall be pleased to become a regular visitor :)

]]>