Unity of religions: certainly no confusion

Executive Director of the Planetary Development Institute


Единство религий или путаницаIn polyconfessional dialogs around the world, there is recognition of the common moral principle and the values ??of kindness, mercy, mutual assistance, but there is also recognition of a multitude of differences, especially regarding the metaphysical principles of different faiths and spiritual systems. Therefore, it is worth proclaiming non-equality of religions, and freedom of religion. A truly free and tolerant social order should be based on respect for all people and respect for all life. This means respect for the individual and refusal to impose on her the idea of ??the correctness of a particular religion. We must recognize the equality of people in the unity of the human species, despite the fact that the religions of the world can have as many differences as there are similarities. The correct principle of a truly free society is not equality of religions, but freedom from religious monopoly. This means that everyone can be free to follow any religion or put her dogmas into question at his own discretion. Religion is no more than any other aspect of human life. The task of the state is not to criticize religion, but to provide an unhindered opportunity for their critical reflection in society.

Единство религий или путаницаHowever, political tolerance to all religious views does not mean that people should take all religious views as true or encouraged. In a free society, you can be an atheist or an agnostic or profess any religion. Does this mean that we should respect atheism, as well as religion, in order to truly practice Sarva Dharma Sambhava? In Western democracies, the recognition of a multi-confessional and multicultural society is growing. But there is no idea that all religions or all cultures are the same, as if, for example, there was no difference between Christianity and Hinduism.

Unity of religions or confusion In the modern world, no one people can already consider their language or culture to be exceptional, the highest. Therefore, any religion in search of truth can only go deep into its own depths, like science, and not assert itself, displacing other points of view and systems of outlook. Such a position requires that, in observing the boundaries of religion and belief, we consider all religions as a worthy subject of in-depth study. In this regard, a new Hindu critique of religion is necessary for the expansion of religious views represented in the modern world. This is the real Sarva-Dharma, the monopoly possession of which no group can claim. Probably, only those religions that will be ready to undergo radical transformation will survive. They are waiting for a change in the direction of empirical spirituality, in which people independently acquire the experience of God or truth, what becomes for them the most important thing, and religious dogma and institutionalism, at best, will be in the background. A respectable but honest study of other religions by Hindus or any other believers is important for establishing a balance of views today. It is necessary to return to the Dharma or the principles of universal truth, and not just to respect all the religions that exist today, and often abuse their dogmas in order to manipulate the mass consciousness. It is necessary to strive to maintain the Dharma, even if all historically held religious constructions run the risk of being broken. It's time for religions to bow to the Dharma, and not try to fit Dharma into the narrow confines of individual religious institutions. Hinduism as a religion of Dharma, not dogma, should lead this spiritual revolution, which also means clarifying the adharma that can be found among Hindus today. Unfortunately, the superficial universalism of the new Sarva-Dharma Sambhava serves only to create a smokescreen for the religious beliefs and dogmas to perpetuate themselves. You can draw an analogy. This justice does not mean that all governments are good regardless of whether they are democratic, fascist or communist.