Click the image to view the Amazon entry for this book
Back on Monday’s Colbert Report, the visitor was Stephen Prothero. He’s authored a new book entitled God is Not One: The Eight Rival Religions That Run the World – and Why Their Differences Matter.
His quick visit to the show found him weaving around Colbert’s sometimes-irritating (but always entertaining) persona; he did his best to get his point across in spite of the attempts to derail him. His interview was interesting, so why not learn more?
Religious differences trouble us, since they seem to portend, if not war itself, then at least rumors thereof. But as I researched and wrote this book I came to appreciate how opening our eyes to religious differences can help us appreciate the unique beauty of each of the great religions–the radical freedom of the Daoist wanderer, the contemplative way into death of the Buddhist monk, and the joy in the face of the divine life of the Sufi shopkeeper. (Excerpt from Prothero’s letter to Amazon)
Antidote to Impotent Anger
My youth was spent immersed in the Fundamentalist Christian Evangelical Movement. The end of my adolescence found me fervently removing myself from that environment. I then deposited myself to other religious thought. By the end of my meanderings, I ditched god.
But I’ve always been fascinated by god because, to my mind, god is an attempt to bring order to a soulless universe. The search for purpose is powerful and has merit – even if I disagree with so many of the conclusions.
In my estimation, the best take-away from that interview is that religions are social technologies. Their intent is to address the perceived ills of society. They aim to bring purpose to those that would otherwise put a gun to their heads and end it. It’s much too glib to lump all religions into a bucket and label it nonsense. It’s not my sense, but it’s sense of a sort. We do ourselves a disservice to dismiss something that’s been such a powerful force in human civilization.
But that’s my reflection in my more rational moments. I have certainly played the part of dismissive atheist; I’ll do so again. But the hope is to check myself and put my own reasoning into perspective. That doesn’t mean I have to accept this stuff, but I should try to understand it.
So now I have another book to add to a list of must-reads that may never happen. If only I could quit my job, read, and write – and not go broke. That would be sweet.
Orthodox, institutional religions are quite different, but their mystics have much in common. A quote from the chapter “Mystic Viewpoints” in my e-book at http://www.suprarational.org on comparative mysticism:
Ritual and Symbols. The inner meanings of the scriptures, the spiritual teachings of the prophets and those personal searchings which can lead to divine union were often given lesser importance than outward rituals, symbolism and ceremony in many institutional religions. Observances, reading scriptures, prescribed acts, and following orthodox beliefs cannot replace your personal dedication, contemplation, activities, and direct experience. Preaching is too seldom teaching. For true mystics, every day is a holy day. Divine revelation is here and now, not limited to their sacred scriptures.
Conflicts in Conventional Religion. “What’s in a Word?” outlined some primary differences between religions and within each faith. The many divisions in large religions disagreed, sometimes bitterly. The succession of authority, interpretations of scriptures, doctrines, organization, terminology, and other disputes have often caused resentment. The customs, worship, practices, and behavior within the mainstream of religions frequently conflicted. Many leaders of any religion had only united when confronted by someone outside their faith, or by agnostics or atheists. Few mystics have believed divine oneness is exclusive to their religion or is restricted to any people.
Note: This is just a consensus to indicate some differences between the approaches of mystics and that of their institutional religion. These statements do not represent all schools of mysticism or every division of faith. Whether mystical experiences vary in their cultural context, or are similar for all true mystics, is less important than that they transform each one’s sense of being to a transpersonal outlook on all life.
Thanks so much for adding such additional substance to this post. I really appreciate it. My background in matters of faith is extremely limited (and quite dated now), but I'm quite certain that I will revisit it in further detail some day. I'll have to give your ebook a read when I do so.
I deeply appreciate the added perspective.
T.S. Eliot's “still point of the turning world” might be common to all religions, but it seems to me that it would not be a part of any. Rather, something that they try to reach. And as often as not fail–Eliot, for instance, was something of an asshole.
T.S. Eliot's “still point of the turning world” might be common to all religions, but it seems to me that it would not be a part of any. Rather, something that they try to reach. And as often as not fail–Eliot, for instance, was something of an asshole.