--- In buddhist_dialogue_group@yahoogroups.com, "vorotyntsev"
<vorotyntsev@y...> wrote:
>
> --- In buddhist_dialogue_group@yahoogroups.com, "Richard W. Torgerson"
> <RTorgerson@a...> wrote:
> >
> > Once again it is useful to differentiate the cultural artifacts of
> > certain geographic areas (middle east in particular) from the religion
> > itself. As Ali says: "If you want to integrate migrants and
> > especially Muslims, then you will have to address cultural issues,"
> > When Ali says "'Yes, there must be something in Islam that's not
> > compatible with democracy. And yes, some migrants do have some
> > cultural traits that are not compatible with modernity, that
> > are not compatible with a society based on universal human rights
> > principles.', the term 'Islam' is used 'Christendom' would be used.
> >
> > As we see by the abominable pronouncements of Pat Robertson and his
> > ilk, one can say that 'Christendom' is in deep doo doo without dissing
> > Christianity itself.
> >
> > The Lotus Sutra teaches us of the multiplicity of the Buddha's
> > teachings, each one of which is a mere expedient means to get across
> > the truth. Do not denigrate the truth contained within Islam's
> > 'expedient means' designed for a culture barely surviving an
> > inhospitable desert existence.
>
> What truth is that?
>
> You say we must differentiate cultural artifacts of certain
geographic areas from the
> religion itself.. then say the religion was designed for surviving a
desert existence.
> Doesn't make much sense.
>
> Vanya
>

If you look carefully enough, you can find teachings of cause and
effect, universal salvation, and the inherent Buddha nature of each
person contained within every religion. I look at it as the
documentary evidence of the truth of Shakyamuni's claims of preaching
the dharma via expedient means countless times and places.

To me, this means I should fundamentally respect every religion with
such characteristics, all the while rejecting the elements that are
clearly 'expedient means' or cultural artificaes, taught along with
the truth to try to get people to accept those teachings.

It also seems to me that a severely rigid and patriarchal society such
as the pre-Islamic middle east would carry that rigidity over into
their religion. I'm not an anthropologist, but I believe that we find
that rigidity of a society's mores correlate with the difficulty for
individuals to survive alone in their environment.

YMMV

Kind Regards,
Richard