[Buddha-l] Re: buddha-l Digest, Vol 18, Issue 41

[Vicente Gonzalez]

Malcolm wrote:

> A Buddhist approach, I would suggest, denies essentialism and
> recognizes the acts and mental states related together as
> characteristics of various religions and schools of thought - and sees
> that these relationships or characteristics appear and re-appear in
> new configurations throughout human history. We can then consider
> their achievements and results.

it's a good and scientific view. Although I wonder if finally one
will be forced to consider those achievements and results in moral
terms: authentic-false, good-bad, etc....

MD> I think we see the confusion in rather desperate attempts to
MD> distinguish and divorce a  "mainline" Islam from a "jihadi" Islam,
MD> while forgetting the bloody history of European religion and its many
MD> crusades and internal jihads. Either we recognize the whole phenomenon
MD> of religion, or we choose an essentialist (in my view, illusory)
MD> rendition of religious history by artificially deleting what we view
MD> as "pseudo," "political," or "tribal."

I don't know really. At one side, Religion is something rooted in the
human nature. Social structures (organizations, doctrines,
hierarchies, etc) all them can be considered additional things to that
first meaning, and their sense can be to serve individuals giving
access and success to canalize their religious feeling.
If the utility of these structures is that, then there is a logical
space for a moral criteria in establishing what can be authentic or
false. In fact, people makes the effort to establish the difference
between Islam and jihadi Islam using moral reasons more than
scientific ones.


br,