Document Type : Research Paper

Author

• Qodratollah Qorbani

Associate Professor of Philosophy, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

One of the logical requirements of welcoming to rational dialogue between religious traditions is, at least, avoiding of exclusivism towards own religious tradition. Since the logical requirement regarding confronting with other religions’ facts and realities is to desacralize own religious teachings, accept the possibility of some realities in other religious traditions and some mistakes in our religious tradition. Religious exclusivism, but, is as the most significant obstacle concerning such rational impetuously action. Because the crucial religious presupposition of exclusivism is restricting of truthness and salvation in our religious tradition, and other religious tradition were/are deviated from them. Such thinking has trained its followers needless to recognize rationally other religions and independence of listening to their realities and has persuaded its believers to invite others, as unbelievers, to own religion through using some software methods, like religious missionaries or hardware methods like sacred war. So religious exclusivist has no ear to listen and no eye to see other religions realities. Hence, based on religious exclusivism, logical and rational dialogue between religious traditions is impossible. The strategy for exiting of this crises is leaving exclusivism and to desacralize of our religious teachings and welcoming to some truths that maybe exist in other religions, as well as our religious tradition. 

Highlights

Relation between Exclusivism and Criteria of Rationality of Religious Traditions Dialogue

Qodratullah Qorbani

Associate Professor of Philosophy, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran, E-mail: qorbani48@gmail.com

Abstract

One of the logical requirements of welcoming to rational dialogue between religious traditions is, at least, avoiding of exclusivism towards own religious tradition. Since the logical requirement regarding confronting with other religions’ facts and realities is to desacralize own religious teachings, accept the possibility of some realities in other religious traditions and some mistakes in our religious tradition. Religious exclusivism, but, is as the most significant obstacle concerning such rational impetuously action. Because the crucial religious presupposition of exclusivism is restricting of truthness and salvation in our religious tradition, and other religious tradition were/are deviated from them. Such thinking has trained its followers needless to recognize rationally other religions and independence of listening to their realities and has persuaded its believers to invite others, as unbelievers, to own religion through using some software methods, like religious missionaries or hardware methods like sacred war. So religious exclusivist has no ear to listen and no eye to see other religions realities. Hence, based on religious exclusivism, logical and rational dialogue between religious traditions is impossible. The strategy for exiting of this crises is leaving exclusivism and to desacralize of our religious teachings and welcoming to some truths that maybe exist in other religions, as well as our religious tradition. 

Keywords: Religious Exclusivism, Religious Dialogue, Desacralizing, Truthness, Salvation.

Introduction

Religious exclusivism is one of the most significant causes regarding conflicts of nations and extending violence and wars. Such exclusivism claims about its religious exclusive participation of truthness and considers the real salvation is restricted to only its believers and thinks that other religious and sectarian followers are as misguided people who will go to hell if they are no guided. Such kind of exclusivism has no ear for listening to other religion’s realities, and no will to welcome to interfaith dialogue. Hence, religious exclusivism is as the biggest problem for the contemporary world, based on it, everyone considers their own understanding of religion as the only exclusive real and correct understanding of this religion, and believes that others’ understanding are incorrect and deviation from real religion. Such exclusivism, sometimes, attracts ethnic and national virtues, so that its adherents claim that their ethnic and national understanding of religion is as the best understanding, and others have to obey their thoughts. The duty of such exclusivism is to invite others to own sect and to fight against them if they don’t accept such a faithful invitation. According to such religious exclusivism, there have been made hardware structures between us and the followers of other religions, so that has been generally separated us from them, structures like we are good/they are bad, we are gracious/they are egoist, we know the truth/they assume that know the truth, we have recognized God/they have gone away of God, and such claims that have made unremovable gaps between us and them.

Religious exclusivism has suffered from three main problems, the first is about claiming truth, the second is about restricting the salvation of its followers only, and the third is about the satire of listening to other religions that makes interfaith dialogue impossible. We need to add the fourth problem that concerns ethnic and national understanding and interpretation of religion.

The most significant way for passing problems ahead of contemporary believers is to welcome to interfaith dialogue. Fulfilling such dialogue, they need to accept some main teachings, as follows: 1. Our understanding of religion is not the only real and complete understanding, but all people have the right to have their own understanding regarding their religion, 2. The way of salvation is open to all people, and also for all theists and good human beings, 3. We always need to listen to other realities which are explained by religious others, since we never are complete concerning our perceptions of religion. Believing in these teachings and practical obligation to them is shown the necessity of interfaith dialogue for contemporary believers. Such dialogue teaches us that we need to common understand from each other and rely on common beliefs and global ethics. My mean of common understanding is concentration on humanity that it before accepting religion has its value and priority. My understanding of reliance on global ethics is those of moral teachings that have perpetual and global values for all human beings or most of them regardless of their religion, race, nationality, ethnicity, gender and so on. We can consider samples like loving justice and freedom, peacebuilding, oppressed friendship, philanthropy, truthfulness, and so on as global ethics teachings that have more roles regarding establishing an interfaith dialogue.

By taking care of these teachings, welcoming to interfaith dialogue has led to increased tolerance of others, a global and rational tendency to our and others' beliefs, acceptance of some mistakes in our religious tradition and attempts to reform them, desacralizing our religious teachings, decreasing religious conflicts and religious violence, accepting people's participation in divine grace and salvation and guidance. Interfaith dialogue also takes us out of the small and restricted island of our exclusive religious and sectarian beliefs, and invites the vast ocean of Muslim believers and theists and even the horizon of all good human beings.

Conclusion 

As a result of interfaith dialogue, we can forget our superficial and exclusive approach to our religion, and see all the believers and human beings as God's servants who have benefited from divine grace and who, based on their own capacity, have gradually participated in divine truth and salvation. Interfaith dialogue also eliminates national and ethnic boundaries and takes them all in the light of Towhid, by inviting them to theistic life and avoiding ethnic and national interpretation, calls for mutual understanding and mundane and spiritual happiness.

References

-      Basset, J.C. (1993) Christliche Theologie und interreligioses Gesprach, Zeitschrift fur Mission, No. 17, pp. 95-104.

-      Baumann, Gred (2004) Grammars of Idendity/Alterity: A Structural Approach, in: G. Baumann and A. Gingrich (ed), New York, Berghahn Books, pp.18-50.

-      Dupuis, J (2004) Renewal of Christian through Interreligious Dialogue, Bijdragen: International Journal in Philosophy and Theology, No.65, Pp. 131-143.

-      Knitter, P.F. (1995) One Earth Many Religions: Multifaith Dialogue and Global Resposibility, New York, Orbis.

-      Moyaert, Marianne (2011) Fragile Identities: Towards a Theology of Interreligious Hospitality, Amsterdam, New York: Rodopi.

-      Mutahhari, Morteza (2005) Divine Justice, Tehran, Sadra Press [In Persian].

-      Swidler, Leonard (2014) Dialogue for Interreligious Understanding, New York, Palgrave, Macmillan.

-      Tabatabaee, Seyyed Muhammad Hossein (1973) Almizan, Qom, Ismaeilian Press [In Persian].

Keywords

• Religious Exclusivism
• Religious Dialogue
• Desacralizing
• Truthness
• Salvation