Dharmic and Abrahamic overlap Venn diagram

[Vinayaka]

If we're talking about the faiths themselves, the number would probably be quite low, with Sikhs likely having the largest portion of the overlap.

If we're talking about followers of these faiths, the overlap would likely be greater as this would incorporate sycretics.

It would be an interesting exercise though, creating a Venn diagram with not only the Abrahamic and Dharmic views, but Pagan and Non-theistic as well. I would have to think through how we could accomplish this on a forum format.

I hope you could. You need a template with 3 or 4 movable circles. It's been done for a lot of other religions, and overlaps, as I discovered with google.

 

[Martin]

I hope you could. You need a template with 3 or 4 movable circles. It's been done for a lot of other religions, and overlaps, as I discovered with google.

Nah, just stick 'em all in one big circle.

 

[Martin]

Technically, it is, but with a lower case 'p,' if one uses the dictionary definition: "heathen: a follower of a polytheistic religion."

Definition of PAGAN

But unfortunately, many conflate the term 'pagan' with 'Pagan,' as in Neo-pagan religion such as Druidry, Wicca, Heathenry, Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, etc.

I do wonder about the usefulness of classifications like this.
I don't imagine Hindus would describe themselves as "heathens" or "hedonists", and the people I know would probably describe themselves as "modern" Pagans, rather than as neo-Pagans. And so on.

More generally, this whole business of religious classification seems like a can of worms to me.

 

[Jainarayan]

Personally, I go at 10% overlap. I think the recent thread indicated that we share very few CORE beliefs. Lots of minor beliefs though, mostly ethics common to mankind.

Not much more than 10-15%. My reasons may be slightly different. The only overlapping/commonality I see is

• Belief in a higher/superior power that may have personal attributes, call it God for convenience.
• Creation was kickstarted by a divine source.
  
• Some sort of maintenance of the universe.
  
• Our true nature is spiritual, not physical.
• Belief in an afterlife and some sort of release/relief from material life.
• Devotion to that God.

It’s the hows and whys of these that I think have no commonality. The basic ethics are common to most of humanity and don’t require divine laws or commandments.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Indeed. "Hinduism" refers to a large collection of diverse traditions, sitting inside an even larger set of diverse traditions labelled "Dharmic". There are many different schools, and sub-schools. Many different teachers.
"Abrahamic" also refers to a collection of traditions, and those traditions each contain different sects.

So it's never clear what is being compared with what. Personally I think it's a pointless exercise anyway.

There certainly is diversity within the Abrahamic faiths too, but not to the same extent as Hinduism. Buddhism and Sikhism as part of the Dharmic Faiths are significantly different again. Sikhism interesting was in part an effort to reconcile Hindu and Islamic beliefs so is monotheistic. In comparing Abrahamic and Dharmic faiths, the similarities and differences we see are in part projections of our selves. If we want to see commonality there will certainly be some overlap. If we want to view differences there are certainly aspects such as non-dualist conceptions of Brahman within Adviata Vedanta that appear irreconcilable with any Abrahamc Faith. The Dharmic Faiths offer theistic and nontheistic approaches to life for those who are disaffected by Christianity in the West. It does seem like a major step to completely reject the traditions that have been inherent in our culture for many centuries though.

Not much more than 10-15%. My reasons may be slightly different. The only overlapping/commonality I see is

• Belief in a higher/superior power that may have personal attributes, call it God for convenience.
• Creation was kickstarted by a divine source.
  
• Some sort of maintenance of the universe.
  
• Our true nature is spiritual, not physical.
• Belief in an afterlife and some sort of release/relief from material life.
• Devotion to that God.

It’s the hows and whys of these that I think have no commonality. The basic ethics are common to most of humanity and don’t require divine laws or commandments.

Those are all major areas of commonality listed but 'the devil is in the detail' as the saying goes. For me, the most important part of a religion is the promotion of good values and ethics. So in practical terms if faith enables us to be better people and more at peace with ourselves, with others and the Divine it is of value. In that sense we are all human and it is the working through of our faith on a day to day basis that really counts. A key focus of the discussion between Lord Krishna and Arjuna was the working through of a moral dilemma: Should Arjuna perform his duty and fight in the Kurukshetra war despite having to fight against his relatives or should he desist? The options were explored along with the consequences of action or inaction. So in that sense there is dharma, karma and consequences in both this world and the next. In other words laws (Dharma), judgement (consequences through karma) and Divine exhortation (through Krishna) to do the right thing. Whether we're reincarnated into this life or another world beyond this one, most of us can not say with certainty.

 

[Cassandra]

If one circle represents the entirety of Dharmic faiths paradigm, and the other represents Abrahamic paradigm, what number would you put in the middle, overlapping part, given the totality of each circle is 100?

If I may ask, what would be the use of that?

 

[Clara Tea]

If one circle represents the entirety of Dharmic faiths paradigm, and the other represents Abrahamic paradigm, what number would you put in the middle, overlapping part, given the totality of each circle is 100?

We are all God's children. All have heard one aspect of God's laws. The part of their religion that is not a part of ours is the part that we must learn (because that, too, is the command of God).

God didn't just give instructions to some tiny portion of the world. He gave instructions to the whole world.

Thus, there is 100% overlap between all religions, but most don't know that they are supposed to learn about other religions.

Christians tend to be bigots, and claim that non-Christian religions are heathen or false, and that they worship false Gods, Baals, and icons.

When Christians overcome their bigotry, they can see God more clearly.

 

[Vinayaka]

If I may ask, what would be the use of that?

It was a continuation of a previous discussion, looking for what degree of overlap people thought. No real purpose, I suppose, other than discussion, and to get to know what others think.

 

[Jainarayan]

We are all God's children. All have heard one aspect of God's laws. The part of their religion that is not a part of ours is the part that we must learn (because that, too, is the command of God).

However, Hindus have no concept of divine commandments or laws, or transgressions of those commandments or laws. In our beliefs, and as varied and vast as Hinduism I think I can speak for 99% of Hindus, God just doesn’t work that way. The idea of commandments and laws is rooted in a completely different mindset and philosophical outlook between east and west. From the Indian subcontinent eastward the philosophies are not legalistic in nature. It may be because the religions and philosophies of the East have no central authorities and are largely polytheistic in nature. Who or what is there to give commandments? And of course, while we may believe he exists, we don’t recognize the authority of the Abrahamic God. In my own opinion, he is just another deity in another pantheon, in no position to command or govern all mankind.