"God is Not One" shows how different religions are

A few days ago I was drawn to buy "God is Not One" by Stephen Prothero after seeing Stephen Colbert interview him in Colbert's always entertaining fashion. Prothero gives his take on the interview here, and you can watch it below.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Stephen Prothero
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Fox News

I liked how Prothero emphasized how different are the problems religions attempt to solve. Christianity is all about being saved from sin; Buddhism aims to eliminate suffering; Hinduism seeks freedom from reincarnation's rounds of birth and death; Daoism teaches how to live life naturally and freely.

(If you're curious about what other four religions are discussed in the book, they're Islam, Confucianism, Judaism, and Yoruba, which I'd never heard of before.)

I've only read the introduction to "God is Not One." So far, I don't find much to disagree with. Here's some cobbled-together quotes that summarize Prothero's basic thesis.

At least since the first petals of the counterculture bloomed across Europe and the United States in the 1960s, it has been fashionable to affirm that all religions are beautiful and all are true...The most popular metaphor for this view portrays the great religions as different paths up the same mountain.

...This is a lovely sentiment but it is dangerous, disrespectful, and untrue. For more than a generation we have followed scholars and sages down the rabbit hole into a fantasy world in which all gods are one.

...The world's religious rivals do converge when it comes to ethics, but they diverge sharply on doctrine, ritual, mythology, experience, and law. These differences may not matter to mystics or philosophers of religion, but they matter to ordinary religious people.

...One of the most common misconceptions about the world's religions is that they plumb the same depths, ask the same questions. They do not. Only religions that see God as all good ask how a good God can allow millions to die in tsunamis. Only religions that believe in souls ask whether your soul exists before you are born and what happens to it after you die.

And only religions that think we have one soul ask after "the soul" in the singular. Every religion, however, asks after the human condition. Here we are in these human bodies. What now? What next? What are we to become?

Well, here's one thing in the introduction that I do question -- the implication that mystics agree about what God or ultimate reality is like.

I used to consider that there was a lot of commonality in mystical experiences. But now I see that I was ignoring the differences, focusing almost entirely on mystics who appeared to be seeking the sort of elevated consciousness that I was hoping to attain myself at the time.

Some mystics experience glorious visions of celestial sound and light. Others see this world just as it is, yet in a fresher, clearer way. So I doubt that mysticism leads to a conclusion that God is one any more than religions do.

All in all, I'm pretty sure that the rest of Prothero's book is going to appeal to me. He's already helped me to better understand the source of a lot of disagreements and misunderstandings on this blog, as well as the world at large.

Namely: people who favor a certain faith assume that others with a different religious preference still share their goal -- the problem their faith sets out to solve.

So, for example, frequently I'll get comments on a blog post that talk about how disappointed I must be to never have succeeded in rising to higher spiritual regions of consciousness through my meditation practice.

But this assumes that such regions exist. And that it is a worthy goal to attempt to detach my awareness from material reality and experience non-physical realms of the cosmos.

Similarly, some people are deeply concerned with "saving their soul." They can't understand why others aren't passionately devoted to religious practices that claim to absolve sin, or karma, which keep the soul weighted down and unable to return to God.

But this assumes that souls exist. And that God can save them. As Prothero points out, Buddhism doesn't agree with this assumption. So the notion of salvation is foreign to Buddhist practice, while it is central to Christian belief.

Here's a short description of "God is Not One" that I found on Prothero's website. As above, he talks about the claim of mystics that religions differ only in the inessentials, citing Lao Tzu and Rumi as some exemplars of this mystical premise.

Being familiar with Lao Tzu's and Rumi's teachings, I really don't think that if they were able to sit down and chat with each other, they'd agree on what life is all about to the extent Prothero seems to feel they would.

Comments

[Roger]

I would think that Lao Tzu and Rumi, if allowed to sit down and chat, could find a way to agree and disagree about what dualistic "Life" is all about. That is dualistic knowns and unknowns. Likewise, they could sit down and agree about non-dualistic life, and not chat so much. A sort of non-knowable non-conceptual kind of chat.

[Ron Krumpos]

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.

[Dogribb]

Saw him on Book TV last week.He really couldn't hold my attention and nothing that he said engaged my interest.

More problem, solution ,problem ,solution

There's an early feminist writer who I remember saying.

"There are only a few basic human problems and they go on repeating themselves like they never happened before"

[Roger]

Ron,

You mentioned,

"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."

--What would be a good example of a "direct" experience and a "divine" revelation? These are all good, however, could you specifically describe some examples of such?
Thanks Roger

[Ron Krumpos]

Roger,

Sorry, I missed your reply. Those terms can't be summarized in a blog post. Read my e-book. It's only 100 pages and it's free.

Those who believe the kinship of faiths should join the social network of the Parliament of the World's Religions. Look at http://www.peacenext.org/profile/RonKrumpos and I would be happy to be one of your first friends there.

[Think Feel Create]

Stephen Prothero makes it quite clear that he is not dealing so much with the spiritual oneness of god but with the differences occuring within each persons environment and hence tradition.

Obviously anyone praying to god, regardless of their name for god or their religious background will be praying to god. The big difference occurs when a group of people from different races, environments and different socio economic backgrounds isolated from each other for thousands of years create their own perceptions and traditions of god. Each of them claim that only their religion will provide salvation.

It is not the belief in god which is different, only the rules (traditions)created by man are different.

[Brian Hines]

Think Feel Create, no, you're wrong. The religions described in Prothero's book don't all believe in God. Buddhists don't believe in God. Taoists don't believe in God. Confucians don't believe in God. Many Jews don't believe in God. Hindus believe in many gods.

Neither Buddhists nor Taoists pray to God -- for the obvious reason that they don't believe in God. So I don't agree with you that anyone with a religious background "will be praying to god."

[Jonathan Elliot]

Without knowing much of the book or author, I agree. It doesn't take much to see that there are some religions that are completely incompatible in their basic tenets.

At some point i want to read this book.

Thanks for this. :)

Jonathan from Spritzophrenia

[Think Feel Create]

Blogger Brian. You have brought up the big question. What is GOD? He , she or it could be energy, spirit, cosmic consciousness, a big old man with white hair and beard, a feeling you get when you are at one with nature or simply an incling that their is something more to this relative world we live in. ( the Hindu's call it Maya, the grand illusion. To use your mind to connect with any of these feelings or perceptions is, for the purposes of this comment, GOD. God is just a word we use to describe any spiritual or super conscious connection. Again I stste that the word used is irrelevant. The traditions and perceptions are the things that create differences.

[tucson]

Did you hear that Brian?... "You have brought up the big question. What is GOD?"

Here's the answer...

[Roger]

"To use your mind to connect with any of these feelings or perceptions is, for the purposes of this comment, GOD. God is just a word we use to describe any spiritual or super conscious connection."

---So, my GOD, the girl holding the beer is a super conscious connection? This I would like very much. GOD is GREAT!!!!!!

[sajjad ali]

god is one only, in all religions as referred in the below verses.

(7)Oneness of God & Prohibition of Idol Worship:- VEDA: Yajur Veda 32:3, 40:8-9; Rig Veda 1:164:46, 6:45:16; UPANISHAD: Khandogya: 6:2:1, Shwetashvatara 6:9, 4:20; GEETA: 7:20, 10:3; BRAHMA SUTRA; //BIBLE: Leviticus 26:1; Exodus 20:4; //QURAN: 2:163, 2:255, 4:171, 7:191, 16:20, 25:3, 112:1-4.

refer the link below for the complete text of these verses and for other such points.

http://comparative-religion-points.blogspot.com

[tAo]

sajjad ali, you are mistaken. your references are incorrect.

i am extremely well acquainted with the entire Bhagavad Gita.

The Bhagavad Gita, chapter/verse 7.20 and 10.3, does not refer to or say that "god is one only".

The following is what Bhagavad Gita 7.20 and 10.3 says:

--------------------------------------------

Bhagavad Gita chapter 7, verse 20

Bhagavan Sri Krishna uvaca:

"kamais tais tair hrta-jnanah
prapadyante ’nya-devatah
tam tam niyamam asthaya
prakritya niyatah svaya"

"Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures."

--------------------------------------------

Bhagavad Gita chapter 10, verse 3

Bhagavan Sri Krishna uvaca:

"yo mam ajam anadim ca
vetti loka-maheshvaram
asammudhah sa martyesu
sarva-papaih pramucyate"

"He who knows Me as the unborn, as the beginningless, as the Supreme Lord of all the worlds — he only, undeluded among men, is freed from all sins."

--------------------------------------------

Read, listen to, and see the entire Bhagavad Gita at:
http://www.bhagavad-gita.us/

Bhagavad Gita - Introduction:
http://www.bhagavad-gita.us/articles/660/1/Introduction-to-Bhagavad-Gita/Page1.html

Bhagavad Gita - Summary:
http://www.bhagavad-gita.us/articles/684/1/Summary-of-the-Bhagavad-Gita/Page1.html

Bhagavad Gita in Picures:
http://www.bhagavad-gita.us/articles/687/1/The-Bhagavad-Gita-in-Pictures/Page1.html

Bhagavad Gita in Audio:
http://www.bhagavad-gita.us/articles/664/1/The-Bhagavad-Gita-In-Audio/Page1.html