Journal of religious culture = Journal für Religionskultur
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of Periodical (61)
Language
- English (61) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (61) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (61)
Keywords
- Central Asia (1)
- Islam (1)
- Mahmud II (1)
- Ottomans reforms (1)
- Soviet Islam (1)
- Soviet Ulama (1)
- Westernization (1)
- modernization (1)
- the ulama (1)
Institute
- Institut für Wissenschaftliche Irenik (61) (remove)
6
The Christian culture experienced a deep-going change with the uprising of the Civil Society ("Bürgerliche Gesellschaft"), the industrialization of economic production, the urbanization of life-style and the individualization of religiosity in the 19th century. The Christian formation of inner- and outer-world in those days became obsolete. From this conflict the civil or modern Christianity origi-nated. In a painful changing process most of the people of this new society have newly interpreted religion, moral and ritual of traditional Christianity and cre-ated to their new conditions of life new institutional forms of transmission and realization of Christian cultural heritage. Under the recourse of the Reformato-rian heritage the modern Christianity developed the religious-moral doctrine: A true Christian is before all a citizen who is living in the midst of the world self-determinate and socially engaged fulfilling all his worldly duties; the modern Christian has to get this motivation for a world-oriented existence on his own responsibility because religion is not restricted anymore. ...
15 b
The Hindu Buddha according to the theology of the Bengali Vaishnava Acharya Bhaktivedanta Swami
(1999)
In the broad Indian religious culture we find two basic concepts of the inner structure of the Holy. The Advaita religion believes in the 'not-two' will say absolute 'oneness' of the ultimate reality. The Dvaita religion yet believes in 'two' will say the dual structure of the whole. Nevertheless, the latter one is no radical dualism because it recognises nothing to be outside the last reality. It is a kind of 'dualist monism' and insofar fundamentally different to West Asian and European moderate or radical dualism. The Dvaita religion experiences the inner structure of the Holy as everlasting dynamic relation of the whole and its parts. As a rule, the representation of the whole is the personal God, mostly called Bhagavan. The representations of the parts are the soul or jivas. Mostly following the idea the whole being a personal God the Dvaita religion is something like theism; yet, it is an Indian or Hindu theism teaching that the Godhead comprises within herself souls and matter, too. By the way, many of the jivas aren't conscious of their role within the Holy. They erroneously take themselves for empty monads and believe that they would get their realisation only by implementing themselves with 'matter'. Experiencing in this concern the uselessness of matter, the maya energy of the Godhead, they can get the true consciousness of their role as divine co-players in the inner divine play or lila. ...
44
The people of Braj1 are attracted by the Holy in many ways. But nowhere is its attraction per-ceived as strongly as in the public performances of the lilas of Krisna – the lilanukaranas. Although by their aesthetic constitution these dramatic performances are a mixture of song, theater and dance, they do not belong to the genre of folkloric entertainment, for in their very essence they are revelations of the Holy. Thus in Braj the Holy is not at all considered a nirguna entity concealing itself from the world. On the contrary, it reveals itself plainly and unmistakably. This revelation is fully authentic because in its essence the Holy is saguna, i.e. possessed of form. This, however, further means that the lilanukarana do not present something mundane as sacred, nor do they present a 'substitute religion' – for they offer the experience of the Holy moving among and with the lilanukarana, as their equal, freely and naturally, without fear of touch by the creature. And this unconcern for possible worldly contamination allows the Brajbasis to meet the Holy without fear, and in intimate friendship.
23
The popularity of St. Francis (1182/3-1226) in our days is overwhelming. He has become a modern hero - not only of Catholics but also of Protestants, non-Christians and even atheists. Nevertheless, the question may be raised whether the modern portrayals of St. Francis do justice to the historical person. In order to get a more solid answer we will analyze various documents which were ap-proximately known to and approved by St. Francis himself, particularly his Tes-timony, his Song of Brother Sun, the Unapproved Rule, the Approved Rule, the Admonitions, and the Letter to the Faithful Ones I.[1] We will not even use the legendary reports of his disciples. From the very beginning the devotees of St. Francis made of him a typical convert. This biographic mutilation has remained en vogue until today.[2] - In his Testimony he tells his real story in a few brief words: "While I was in sins it appeared to me extremely bitter to look at the lep-ers. And the Lord himself brought me among them and I gave alms to them. When I was leaving them that what appeared bitter to me was to me exchanged for (converted into) sweetness of the soul and the body. And afterwards I stopped for a moment and then I left the world."[3] Therefore, his life can be divided into three periods: 1) the life in 'sin' or the 'world'; 2) the short period of the conversion, of a short stopping and of the leaving the 'world'; and 3) his exis-tence outside the 'world'. ...
16
Martin Luther (1483 - 1546) and Vishvambhara Mishra (1486 - 1533), known as Shri Krishna Caitanya, have been the outstanding representatives of the great west-eastern religious revolution which shattered the hearts of their societies in the 16th century. They were the spiritual revolutionaries of the modern times. The question may very well be raised if and how these two religious reformers on the edge of modern age share theological commonness, even though they lived wide apart and certainly did not know of each other. We will see: Both Martin Luther and Shri Krishna Caitanya have taught the un-conditioned, Free Love viz. Bhakti. Even if they did it in the tradition of the theological context they were born in they produced a new common setting of religion: the destruction of meritoricly bound religion and its substitution by free religion. The worship of God or charity were no more a mean for but the final state of salvation. Their interpretation of this revolutionary religion has lost nothing of its existen-tial meaning, even though having been twisted often enough to indiscernibility or even to the complete opposite - up to the present day. ...
4
Many religious people believe that the integration of world society is of the greatest importance for mankind. They think that the religions of the world should strive to attain this goal through multi-religious agreement, through inter-religious dialogue, even through the merger of their organisations. Religious unification is supposed to be an effective instrument to encourage world society and to guarantee social peace. Religious differentiation, however, is dubious to these people. It would lead to social splintering and would ultimately be anti-social and extremely dangerous, especially to the economic unification of the world. The people who advocate religious unification look upon the progressing cultural, political and economic unification of the world as a model for religious unity. Therefore, many religious people believe that a unified global religion, or at least a union of world religions, should be implemented today. Options of this kind, however, are utopian in the extreme - confronting the ever-expanding conflicts between the established international religious organisations. Pragmatists who espouse the doctrine of religious unification therefore propagate the following fundamental tenets: 1. All religious people believe in the same god or whatever the ultimate reality may be called. 2. Each religion may believe in the ultimate reality in its own way. 3. No religious community is allowed to make converts. 4. Everybody should remain in his original religious community forever. These tenets are in reality nothing but a kind of a cartel agreement. And this agreement should establish an inter-religious combine, which had to stop competition between the religious organisations and to prevent the individual to leave his original religion. The basic supposition of this concept, however, is that religion today has mainly to be seen as an organised, congregational and institutionalised one. And because of this historical error they are only interested to keep the status quo of the established religious organisations. The propagation of that cartel agreement is rooted in the fear, that the established religions wouldn't survive the radical religious revolution at the end of the 20th century.
5 b
Modern Hindus use the term 'Hindu' in a positive sense. It is no more a derogatory appellation used by foreigners and oppressors, but a powerful self chosen name. The historically most valid ideologue of that positive Hindu understanding is Narendra Nath Datta (1863-1902). This highly talented son of a regarded lawyer family in Calcutta became disciple of Ramakrishna, the flaming son and priest of the goddess Kali and greatest religious virtuoso in the 19th century. Becoming a sannyasin Narendra received the title and name Swami Vivekananda; after the death of his master he set up the famous Ramakrishna Order. ...
11
In Germany, theological studies on the Hindu religion of the International Soci-ety of Krishna Consciousness and its Vaishnava theology are still only just be-ginning. Previously this relevant task was left mostly to religio-political polemics, resulting in a politically highly problematic research deficit which seriously impeded the necessary social and clerical confrontation with these new religious impulses in the German society. But theological passiveness and polemic activ-ism actually reduce the chances for religiously relevant analyses and socially acceptable solutions of philosophical and spiritual problems. Ignorance rather than dialogue, and polemics inimical to dialogue, have directly or indirectly stabilised the destructive forces in the new religious communities for decades, and consequently favoured a diminution and isolation of reformative tendencies. Due to an increasing respect for the freedom of religion as a human right, the profane alliance of the aggressive forces of both sides has recently ended, and a public, and differentiating, discussion of participants and persons concerned has cautiously started, reinforcing a freer and more competent inter-civil dialogue about spiritual affairs. Clear signs may be seen, not only of a reform within the ISKCON religion, but also in the churches setting about discussing the multi-religious topic on a higher level. A so-called broader theological research, partly transcending the border-lines of Christianity, is developing in the universities, and the free science of religion in Germany is receiving a surprising impetus. It was the suppression of the science of religion that had been impeding a constructive discussion in society of the new religious situation in Germany. The rejection of an inter-civil dialogue of spiritual affairs, however, contradicts an effective democracy which subsists on the continuous confrontation of free citizens with their common culture, especially with the ultimate questions of human existence. But the success of this inter-civil confrontation is solely guaranteed if the participants in the dialogue respect their mutual freedom as citizens and take the mutual dialogue among citizens for granted. This is the only way to attain a reasonable range of solutions concerning the ends of our existence and its proper means. As a contribution to this inter-civil dialogue a theological analysis is to be made of the religious culture practised by citizens of this country engaged in the ISK-CON religion and from there desiring to exert an impact on our civil culture. I. Subject and Aim of Diacritical Theology Because of the diffuse understanding of theology it is necessary to explain what it is, where it should and should not be engaged. Theology is not a religious ideology of a particular community that argues the interests of social organisations, but a universal science. It is not limited to a certain religious culture or form of society but is committed to its specific subject (1). Such an autonomous theology has the task of discrimen inter legem et evangelium—the diacritical analysis of Law and Gospel according to the description of its function by Martin Luther. We will follow these basic categories of diacritical theology and explain them here (2).
68
As for the relation between Islam and pluralism, it seems a little bit complicated. There are some verses in The Koran for pluralism and at the same time we have some verses against. Among the sayings of Prophet Muhammad like the some Koranic verses, we came across with something good and bad for non-Muslims in special contexts. By another saying, we find both positive and negative statements for Jews and Christians in different circumstances. Muslim scholars the complexity still exists. We find both positive and negative stances. So it is difficult to see a standard or official view on this issue. However, we should point out that Islam recognizes all the sacred (Semitic) books and their messages. It accepts all prophets of that traditions. It defines itself as the last and perfect religion of Semitic tradition and states that no other religion will be accepted from anybody else other then itself. It criticizes both the Jews and Christians especially about their failure to uphold the Oneness of God, tawhid, and to preserve the authenticity of their scripture from interventions. This exclusivist aspect of Islam as many conservative scholars formed with putting together some evidences from the Koran is generally accepted by Muslims.
49
The origin of the religious experience, says Vivekananda, is man's instinctive urge to transcend the sensual world. He believes that man is a compound of two fundamental ele-ments: sense arid mind. While through the senses he receives impressions of the objective world, he cannot remain satisfied with his senses, simply because he wants to go beyond them. Therefore, through his mind, at certain moments he transcends the limitations of the senses. But he also transcends the power of reasoning. He then comes face to face with the facts which he could never have sensed, could never have reasoned out. According to Vivekananda, this fact is the main basis of all the religions of the world. ...
91
Our earth, which is a tiny in the infinity of the universe, is getting to be a difficult place to live in. Environmental problems such as pollution and global warming on one side and various disagreements and wars in every corner of the world on the other side, make most of the people unhappy and cause suffering. Everybody living in this world regardless of his or her ethnicity or religion has got share of responsibility to make this earth a place to live in peace and tranquillity. Within this framework, the most important thing in the world is that people with different languages and religious denominations should understand each other better to achieve the goal of creating more secure and peaceful environment for humanity. To make a contribution to this endeavour the Qur’anic guidelines which appear to open a sound way and strengthen the ground of a dialogue between celestial religions should be elucidated.