Andreas Grünschloß
Der eigene und der fremde Glaube
Studien zur interreligiösen Fremdwahrnehmung in Islam,
Hinduismus, Buddhismus und Christentum
(HUTh 37) Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1999 (pp.316--318)
Summary
This
book is focused on the structure of interreligious hermeneutics. Religious
traditions have always emerged from specific religio-cultural contexts, and
they reflect these diverse religious environments in various ways. In the light
of system-theory (N.Luhmann), religious reconstructions of other faiths can be
understood as instances of "self-reference". This study is historical and
systematic in perspective and it starts with the working hypothesis that the
great variety of these different modes of self-referential interreligious
relations can be arranged and reduced typologically. Since the topic is of
common interest to
Religionswissenschaft
and Christian theology, it has been attempted to respect both the religious
studies perspective on the subject as well as the theological one -- without
blurring the different approaches in an illegitimate way.
(Ch.1)
In religious studies and theology, the
tripartite
scheme
of exclusivism, inclusivism and pluralism is already a well-known analytic tool
for the evaluation of interreligious conceptions. It has even been argued that
this tripartite scheme is comprehensive and logically sufficient. During the
systematic and formal analysis in this chapter, however, the tripartite scheme
of exclusivism, inclusivism and pluralism is differentiated further (e.g. by
the categories of "exoticism"/"inferiorism" and pure "modality") and then
gradually transcended by a more
complex
model of interreligious perception and hermeneutics
.
This model is partly derived from U.Berner's syncretism-paradigm and gives
awareness to the fact that religious relations to other faiths can be
formulated either on the level of total systems or on the level of smaller
elements thereof (or in a highly complex combination of both modes). In the
closer analysis, religious reconstructions of other faiths can therefore even
appear to be inclusivistic, exclusivistic and pluralistic at the same time.
The
formal model with its
etic
categories is then used as an heuristic tool for the analysis of the following
emic
representations of interreligious hermeneutics.
(Ch.2)
The first case study is devoted to the formation of early Islam in the qur'anic
period. The early Muslim community evolved within a context of religious
plurality, and this fact is reflected throughout the documents. During distinct
phases, the relationship to the "people of the book" changed dramatically on
the conceptual level and on the material level, following a set of constructive
hermeneutic principles. Starting with a harmonizing outlook in the early
Meccanic era, the interreligious perception switched to a distanced and even
hostile relationship during the time in Medina; finally, a rather complex
mixture of several superiority claims is adopted, leaving the
ahl
al-kitâb
in a state of legal and soteriological ambiguity (potentially faithful
and
potentially unfaithful). Identity and superiority of the Muslim faith are thus
reconstructed in a self-referential way. Until today, depending on the actual
context of interreligious encounter, Muslims can either rely more on the rather
harmonizing or on the more exclusive parts of their scripture.
(Ch.3)
Inclusivism is said to be a decisive feature of Indian religious traditions.
After sketching the indological debate on this so-called "Indian Inclusivism",
the attention is drawn to the most prominent text of classical Hinduism: the
Bhagavad Gîtâ. After a long period of growth the text finally
presents itself as an encyclopedia of religious knowledge: disparate (and
sometimes conflicting) components like kshatriya-ethics, samkhya,
yoga-techniques, ascetic world-renouncing, Veda-criticism and Upanishadic
monism, presented in a quite harmonious arrangement, are amalgamated under the
overarching hermeneutical dominance of theistic
bhakti.
Most of these incorporated elements are adapted, reinterpreted and transformed
in multifarious ways to serve the Gîtâ's message. In the end,
explicit religio-theological conceptualizations (cf. BhG 7 & 9) reconstruct
other faiths 'inclusively' as representations of an 'anonymous Krishnaism'. And
in modern times, Radhakrishnan and Prabhupâda can be viewed as two
opposite interpreters of the Gîtâ: the first emphasizing the
harmonizing, 'tolerant' strand of monism, and the other concentrating on
theistic exclusivism.
(Ch.4)
Buddhism has been widely perceived as a tolerant and modest religion. However,
most of the Pâli discourses contain a very critical perception of other
mendicants, brahmans or ascetics, and they make it crystal clear that there is
no real soteriological alternative apart from the Buddha's dhamma: there is no
salvation outside the noble eightfold path. This is reflected in the fact that
many dialogues with religious 'others' are composed in the standardized form of
conversion stories, the dialogue partners finally taking refuge to the Buddha,
his teaching and his community. Other "views" (
ditthi)
are regularly represented as leading down into death and rebirth; other
ascetics, brahmans and gurus are ridiculed, portrayed as "ignorant" and
"blind", and they are contrasted with the uncomparable enlightenment of the
Buddha; even the Vedic gods must bow to his achievement. At the same time,
however, the Buddha recommends a spiritually 'controlled' attitude to people of
other faiths, which is rooted in his soteriocentric pragmatism. In
Mahâyâna-Buddhism, finally, the distinction between
relative
and
absolute
truth as well as the trikâya-doctrine can serve as new hermeneutic
paradigms for religious self-reference in the light of religious otherness. And
within the context of Hinduism, the Buddha is again absorbed into the cognitive
map as an
Avatâra
of Vishnu (although with 'negative' implications).
Apart
from the dominant conceptual claims to epistemological and soteriological
superiority, it becomes clear in the course of these case studies that
ambiguities, uncertainties and seemingly contradictory conceptualizations in
the face of other faiths are common among religious traditions. They must be
viewed not simply as erratic or incoherent cognitions, but they seem to be
evolutionary achievements in the struggle of religious systems to construct a
relevant set of guiding principles and differences for their ongoing
self-referential contact with the surrounding world.
(Ch.5)
This leads to a phenomenological conclusion. Religious encounters with
other
religious systems most commonly lead to competitive superiority claims and to
predominantly
self-preserving
and
allergic
representations of 'otherness'. Religious systems can strengthen their identity
in difference to other systems (1) by an
intensification
of their own immanent elements, or (2) by an
extensification,
be it (a complex set of) conceptual
relationships
towards
the other or (3) selective
material
inclusions of
the other. All three modes of self-reference can be combined in simple or
complex ways. For example, adaption and transformation of 'other elements' into
the 'own' system need not necessarily be accompanied by positive (harmonizing)
conceptual relationships; they can take place even in the context of genetic or
evaluative distancing. However, antipathy, polemic degrading and apologetic
reaction are more dominant (e.g. the construction of a
homo
religiosus perversus
),
whereas elaborate religious xenologies are extremely seldom. Based on the
formal (etic) model of interreligious perception developed in the first chapter
and the empirical (emic) findings of the case studies, several dominant types
of interreligious hermeneutics can be outlined phenomenologically during the
course of this chapter, which is concluded with a prospect on the
phenomenology
of religious alterity
.
In most cases, encounter with religious otherness is mastered with by means of
an interpretative
Gleichschaltung
(unification),
which appears as a mode of self-reproduction and which leaves only preconceived
'homelands' for a -- false or even monstuous --
alter
ego
.
Immanent capacities for self-relativization, tolerance of ambiguity and certain
reservations of insecurity can therefore be seen as important prerogatives for
sensitive religious xenologies which are needed in the context of religiously
plural societies today.
(Ch.6)
The final chapter is devoted to a theological conclusion. It starts with a
short demonstration of the model's heuristic usefulness in the context of
Christian "theology of religions".
Pluralist
theologies of religion, for example, can appear as
meta-inclusivistic
reconstructions of other religions since, hermeneutically, they do not escape
the problem of interpretative unification to their authors' leading conceptual
horizons. The main question then is: How can faithful participation in one's
'own' tradition be combined with a sensitive mode of interreligious
hermeneutics, doing justice to the continuing otherness of the 'other'? How can
basic "misunderstanding" (Schleiermacher) and conflict, common to all
interpretative efforts, gradually be overcome? -- In the attempt to deal with
these issues, biblical and systematic-theological insights are combined with a
set of helpful
meta-constraints
upon interpretation (Lenk, Collin) and guiding principles for a Christian
hermeneutics of the 'Other'. From a Christian perspective, any
genuine
attempt to understand another religious perspective must lead to a
contradictory and almost 'aporetic' situation: continuity with the 'own' faith
is to be maintained
as
well as
an hermeneutic openness towards a non-definable 'Other' -- and: the 'Other'
must not be (ab)used as a secret path toward pious self-immunization. But
hermeneutically, a kind of interpretative 'inclusivism' can never be evaded.
All the more important are self-critical assessments of antipathies and
hermeneutical conflicts. According to the constructive principles of Christian
self-reference, any conceptual reconstruction of other faith must be seen as
being doxological in nature and it can be attempted only with severe
eschatological reservation.