• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Dalai Lama and Religious Pluralism

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Multiculturalism in the twenty first century forces peoples of different cultures, races, nations and religions to interact, work together, cooperate and associate closely with one another as never before. To what extent is religious pluralism healthy and when does it become contradictory and unhealthy?

When asked, "Don’t all religions teach the same thing? Is it possible to unify them?" the Dalai Lama said:

People from different traditions should keep their own, rather than change. However, some Tibetan may prefer Islam, so he can follow it. Some Spanish prefer Buddhism; so follow it. But think about it carefully. Don’t do it for fashion. Some people start Christian, follow Islam, then Buddhism, then nothing.

In the United States I have seen people who embrace Buddhism and change their clothes! Like the New Age. They take something Hindu, something Buddhist, something, something… That is not healthy.

For individual practitioners, having one truth, one religion, is very important. Several truths, several religions, is contradictory.

I am Buddhist. Therefore, Buddhism is the only truth for me, the only religion. To my Christian friend, Christianity is the only truth, the only religion. To my Muslim friend, [Islam] is the only truth, the only religion. In the meantime, I respect and admire my Christian friend and my Muslim friend. If by unifying you mean mixing, that is impossible; useless.


Religious pluralism - Wikipedia

What is your approach to religious pluralism? Do you like to associate closely with people that are very different from you? Can we avoid diversity in our lives? Would we be better to embrace it?
 

Eddi

Agnostic
Premium Member
I went to an inner-city high school where 95% of the pupils were Pakistani Moslems

I got on much better with the Pakistani Moslems than I did with any of the English kids, the Pakistani Moslems treated me better

So my experience with religious pluralism has been positive

I think it's good to have friends who are of different religions to you

But I think it should happen within a secular context
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
Do you like to associate closely with people that are very different from you?

It depends on the context.

For friends, I like anyone.

For mentors, it'd have to be someone similar to my beliefs. Otherwise we have indoctrination/discipleship into a religion, in a sense.

For a relationship, I kind of hope to find someone Democrat and more similar to me. Secular or not very conservative.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Multiculturalism in the twenty first century forces peoples of different cultures, races, nations and religions to interact, work together, cooperate and associate closely with one another as never before. To what extent is religious pluralism healthy and when does it become contradictory and unhealthy?

When asked, "Don’t all religions teach the same thing? Is it possible to unify them?" the Dalai Lama said:

People from different traditions should keep their own, rather than change. However, some Tibetan may prefer Islam, so he can follow it. Some Spanish prefer Buddhism; so follow it. But think about it carefully. Don’t do it for fashion. Some people start Christian, follow Islam, then Buddhism, then nothing.

In the United States I have seen people who embrace Buddhism and change their clothes! Like the New Age. They take something Hindu, something Buddhist, something, something… That is not healthy.

For individual practitioners, having one truth, one religion, is very important. Several truths, several religions, is contradictory.

I am Buddhist. Therefore, Buddhism is the only truth for me, the only religion. To my Christian friend, Christianity is the only truth, the only religion. To my Muslim friend, [Islam] is the only truth, the only religion. In the meantime, I respect and admire my Christian friend and my Muslim friend. If by unifying you mean mixing, that is impossible; useless.


Religious pluralism - Wikipedia

What is your approach to religious pluralism? Do you like to associate closely with people that are very different from you? Can we avoid diversity in our lives? Would we be better to embrace it?
I am completely of the Dalai Lama mindset on it. One person, one religion. It avoids confusion.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
My cultural religion: Mercuræn
My political religion: Pastafarianism
My psychological religion: Zen Buddhism
Different tools in my tool box.

~If a doctrine preaches or propagates greed, hatred, or delusion, reject it, as it leads to long term harm. If a doctrine teaches a lack of greed, hatred, and delusion, accept it, as it leads toward long-term benefit.~paraphrased from The Kalama Sutta.
 
Last edited:

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Multiculturalism in the twenty first century forces peoples of different cultures, races, nations and religions to interact, work together, cooperate and associate closely with one another as never before. To what extent is religious pluralism healthy and when does it become contradictory and unhealthy?

When asked, "Don’t all religions teach the same thing? Is it possible to unify them?" the Dalai Lama said:

People from different traditions should keep their own, rather than change. However, some Tibetan may prefer Islam, so he can follow it. Some Spanish prefer Buddhism; so follow it. But think about it carefully. Don’t do it for fashion. Some people start Christian, follow Islam, then Buddhism, then nothing.

In the United States I have seen people who embrace Buddhism and change their clothes! Like the New Age. They take something Hindu, something Buddhist, something, something… That is not healthy.

For individual practitioners, having one truth, one religion, is very important. Several truths, several religions, is contradictory.

I am Buddhist. Therefore, Buddhism is the only truth for me, the only religion. To my Christian friend, Christianity is the only truth, the only religion. To my Muslim friend, [Islam] is the only truth, the only religion. In the meantime, I respect and admire my Christian friend and my Muslim friend. If by unifying you mean mixing, that is impossible; useless.


Religious pluralism - Wikipedia

What is your approach to religious pluralism? Do you like to associate closely with people that are very different from you? Can we avoid diversity in our lives? Would we be better to embrace it?
I support Dalai Lama's views 100%. And I am very comfortable associating with people of different religions socially.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
Multiculturalism in the twenty first century forces peoples of different cultures, races, nations and religions to interact, work together, cooperate and associate closely with one another as never before. To what extent is religious pluralism healthy and when does it become contradictory and unhealthy?

When asked, "Don’t all religions teach the same thing? Is it possible to unify them?" the Dalai Lama said:

People from different traditions should keep their own, rather than change. However, some Tibetan may prefer Islam, so he can follow it. Some Spanish prefer Buddhism; so follow it. But think about it carefully. Don’t do it for fashion. Some people start Christian, follow Islam, then Buddhism, then nothing.

In the United States I have seen people who embrace Buddhism and change their clothes! Like the New Age. They take something Hindu, something Buddhist, something, something… That is not healthy.

For individual practitioners, having one truth, one religion, is very important. Several truths, several religions, is contradictory.

I am Buddhist. Therefore, Buddhism is the only truth for me, the only religion. To my Christian friend, Christianity is the only truth, the only religion. To my Muslim friend, [Islam] is the only truth, the only religion. In the meantime, I respect and admire my Christian friend and my Muslim friend. If by unifying you mean mixing, that is impossible; useless.


Religious pluralism - Wikipedia

What is your approach to religious pluralism? Do you like to associate closely with people that are very different from you? Can we avoid diversity in our lives? Would we be better to embrace it?
Good topic! The Dalai Lama is right in the sense that contradictory claims cannot simultaneously be true and trying to pretend they can creates confusion and cognitive dissonance. The point of religious pluralism, though, is to say 1) different religions can co-exist peacefully without agreeing on everything, and 2) there may be things people of different traditions can learn from one another or even agree on.

The Dalai Lama seems to have a problem with syncretism, or combining multiple elements of different religions into one. It's weird that he thinks that's some new American thing though. Religious syncretism has existed for millennia. Every major religion, including Buddhism, has inherited and integrated elements from cultures and religions surrounding it as it developed.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
What is your approach to religious pluralism? Do you like to associate closely with people that are very different from you? Can we avoid diversity in our lives? Would we be better to embrace it?
Not only do my wife and I embrace it, we brought up our kids and now our grandkids to experience different denominations and religions. As a result, we have never argued against any religion, plus we observe each others religious celebrations. .
 

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
Multiculturalism in the twenty first century forces peoples of different cultures, races, nations and religions to interact, work together, cooperate and associate closely with one another as never before. To what extent is religious pluralism healthy and when does it become contradictory and unhealthy?

When asked, "Don’t all religions teach the same thing? Is it possible to unify them?" the Dalai Lama said:

People from different traditions should keep their own, rather than change. However, some Tibetan may prefer Islam, so he can follow it. Some Spanish prefer Buddhism; so follow it. But think about it carefully. Don’t do it for fashion. Some people start Christian, follow Islam, then Buddhism, then nothing.

In the United States I have seen people who embrace Buddhism and change their clothes! Like the New Age. They take something Hindu, something Buddhist, something, something… That is not healthy.

For individual practitioners, having one truth, one religion, is very important. Several truths, several religions, is contradictory.

I am Buddhist. Therefore, Buddhism is the only truth for me, the only religion. To my Christian friend, Christianity is the only truth, the only religion. To my Muslim friend, [Islam] is the only truth, the only religion. In the meantime, I respect and admire my Christian friend and my Muslim friend. If by unifying you mean mixing, that is impossible; useless.


Religious pluralism - Wikipedia

What is your approach to religious pluralism? Do you like to associate closely with people that are very different from you? Can we avoid diversity in our lives? Would we be better to embrace it?

I agree 100% with the Dalai Lama! This is what I have been saying; what the New Age is doing by taking bits and pieces of various religions isn't good.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
Good topic! The Dalai Lama is right in the sense that contradictory claims cannot simultaneously be true and trying to pretend they can creates confusion and cognitive dissonance.
Carl Jung says that holding the tension of opposites (cognative dissonance) will evoke the transcendent function, which is the core of psychological growth and individuation. Becoming aware of unconscious material that does not jive with consciously held beliefs is this "tension of opposites."
The point of religious pluralism, though, is to say 1) different religions can co-exist peacefully without agreeing on everything, and 2) there may be things people of different traditions can learn from one another or even agree on.
Loving kindness, compassion, empathetic joy, and evenness of mind (equanimity) will transcend any differences.

The Dalai Lama seems to have a problem with syncretism, or combining multiple elements of different religions into one. It's weird that he thinks that's some new American thing though. Religious syncretism has existed for millennia. Every major religion, including Buddhism, has inherited and integrated elements from cultures and religions surrounding it as it developed.
I'm wondering if what he is saying is to actually create this cognative dissonance and resulting transcendent function, as one of the Bodhisattva vows is,

Dharma gates are beyond-measure
I vow to learn them all.
The Dalai Lama is pretty smart. This admonishment may affect different beings in different manners to either end their suffering (of cognative dissonance) or to stimulate their development (of learning all the Dharma-gates.)
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
Wrestling with a good Zen koan will create this cognative dissonance (screaming monkey mind,) followed by the transcendent function (quiet mind.)
I'm sure you can create the same effect using the Christian trinity to create cognative dissonance, followed by the transcendent function.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
Carl Jung says that holding the tension of opposites (cognative dissonance) will evoke the transcendent function, which is the core of psychological growth and individuation. Becoming aware of unconscious material that does not jive with consciously held beliefs is this "tension of opposites."
Interesting. I am fascinated by Jung's ideas, but haven't seen much empirical support for the theoretical framework he advocated (all psychoanalytic/psychodynamic approaches suffer this problem).

That said, there is a fine line sometimes between contradiction and paradox. If a person is benefitted by integrating multiple worldviews together, I'm all for it.

Loving kindness, compassion, empathetic joy, and evenness of mind (equanimity) will transcend any differences.
I certainly hope so. :)

I'm wondering if what he is saying is to actually create this cognative dissonance and resulting transcendent function, as one of the Bodhisattva vows is,

Dharma gates are beyond-measure
I vow to learn them all.

Does this quote indicate a kind of universalism? That all roads lead to enlightenment?
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
Does this quote indicate a kind of universalism? That all roads lead to enlightenment?
No, it just means that there are innumerable ways to overcome your psychological hang-ups, especially since each person has their own unique set of psychological hang ups.

The normal procedure in Buddhism is:
Identify the dukkha/suffering/hang-up.
Observe how it arises, how it fades (meditation is handy for this.)
Develop a path of practice based on your observations that will resolve the problem.
Rinse and repeat.

Simsapa Sutta: The Simsapa Leaves
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
No, it just means that there are innumerable ways to overcome your psychological hang-ups, especially since each person has their own unique set of psychological hang ups.

The normal procedure in Buddhism is:
Identify the dukkha/suffering/hang-up.
Observe how it arises, how it fades (meditation is handy for this.)
Develop a path of practice based on your observations that will resolve the problem.
Rinse and repeat.

Simsapa Sutta: The Simsapa Leaves

I appreciate Buddhism's emphasis on pragmatism and simplicity. So much less theological/metaphysical baggage than other traditions! Meditation has definitely helped me focus and maintain calm when I've done it consistently. I haven't kept it up recently though. :(:dizzy:
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
Multiculturalism in the twenty first century forces peoples of different cultures, races, nations and religions to interact, work together, cooperate and associate closely with one another as never before. To what extent is religious pluralism healthy and when does it become contradictory and unhealthy?

When asked, "Don’t all religions teach the same thing? Is it possible to unify them?" the Dalai Lama said:

People from different traditions should keep their own, rather than change. However, some Tibetan may prefer Islam, so he can follow it. Some Spanish prefer Buddhism; so follow it. But think about it carefully. Don’t do it for fashion. Some people start Christian, follow Islam, then Buddhism, then nothing.

In the United States I have seen people who embrace Buddhism and change their clothes! Like the New Age. They take something Hindu, something Buddhist, something, something… That is not healthy.

For individual practitioners, having one truth, one religion, is very important. Several truths, several religions, is contradictory.

I am Buddhist. Therefore, Buddhism is the only truth for me, the only religion. To my Christian friend, Christianity is the only truth, the only religion. To my Muslim friend, [Islam] is the only truth, the only religion. In the meantime, I respect and admire my Christian friend and my Muslim friend. If by unifying you mean mixing, that is impossible; useless.


Religious pluralism - Wikipedia

What is your approach to religious pluralism? Do you like to associate closely with people that are very different from you? Can we avoid diversity in our lives? Would we be better to embrace it?
I mostly agree with him there. To me, religious pluralism is the view that there's many different paths to truth and tolerance for the views of others, in contrast to exclusively where only one view is permitted.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
It depends on the context.

For friends, I like anyone.

For mentors, it'd have to be someone similar to my beliefs. Otherwise we have indoctrination/discipleship into a religion, in a sense.

For a relationship, I kind of hope to find someone Democrat and more similar to me. Secular or not very conservative.

I suspect many would have similar views in regards who they would want a close relationship with. Interestingly you have reflected on similarities with political viewpoints rather than religious. That intrigues me enough to respond to your post.
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
I suspect many would have similar views in regards who they would want a close relationship with. Interestingly you have reflected on similarities with political viewpoints rather than religious. That intrigues me enough to respond to your post.

Yeah. I mean I could say something like "I want an atheist" but it takes me down a deep dark rabbit-hole where people ask "What about say, a Unitarian Universalist?" Or I could say "I want an atheist or Unitarian Universalist", but then someone will ask "What about someone of the New Age religion?" So it may be a mildly imperfect categorization, but I had to use the vocabulary available to me and such, to try to smooth out the points properly.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
I am completely of the Dalai Lama mindset on it. One person, one religion. It avoids confusion.

I support Dalai Lama's views 100%. And I am very comfortable associating with people of different religions socially.

I’m unable to agree completely. It is undeniable that both Islam and Christianity have drawn heavily from traditions of earlier religions. Some Hindus would see Buddha as being an avatar of Vishnu. I doubt if the Dalai Lama would have a problem with such an approach.

In regards those who try out aspects of different faiths like trying on different clothes, that’s simply part of the journey for many Westerners.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Good topic! The Dalai Lama is right in the sense that contradictory claims cannot simultaneously be true and trying to pretend they can creates confusion and cognitive dissonance. The point of religious pluralism, though, is to say 1) different religions can co-exist peacefully without agreeing on everything, and 2) there may be things people of different traditions can learn from one another or even agree on.

The Dalai Lama seems to have a problem with syncretism, or combining multiple elements of different religions into one. It's weird that he thinks that's some new American thing though. Religious syncretism has existed for millennia. Every major religion, including Buddhism, has inherited and integrated elements from cultures and religions surrounding it as it developed.

Your comments are astute and have helped me crystallise some thoughts. I’m now wondering if the Dalai Lama properly understands faith traditions beyond his own or Western culture.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
I agree 100% with the Dalai Lama! This is what I have been saying; what the New Age is doing by taking bits and pieces of various religions isn't good.
My encounters with practitioners of new age movements have left me feeling unsatisfied. Associations for me are with clairvoyance, astrology, taro readings, and healing with crystals. None of these are part of Abrahamic traditions and are generally discouraged by such religions. Meditation is universal. Chakras relate to Hinduism. Perhaps the Dalai Lama is alluding to practitioners of new age movements. If so, he may have a point.
 
Top