A Postcolonial Philosophy of Religion and Interreligious Polylogue

WILLY PFÄNDTNER A postcolonial philosophy of religion and interreligious polylogue n this article, an agenda for the development of a phi- very theorizing itself is an expression of a Christian losophy of religion which is informed by the challeng- theology that is characterized by Western pre-Kant- Ies and possibilities of religious plurality is suggested. ian metaphysics. And it is implicitly, or even explicit- It is argued that the philosophy of religion as an aca- ly, apologetic in nature. It is thus more precisely a demic discipline is in need of a kind of reconstruction if Christian theology of religions, where the position it is to maintain its relevance and connection to actual of the dialogue partner is preconceived in terms of religious phenomena as they present themselves glob- someone holding truth claims akin to one’s own, al- ally. The problem originates in the fact that the modern beit incomplete or plainly false ones. concept of religions has a distorting effect when applied Interreligious dialogue in the version described to non-western traditions. above is religiously motivated, with the aim of devel- The article focuses on a way to understand religious oping one’s own theology. However, the call for dia- diversity by using aspects of Heidegger’s fundamental logue in the political and social context is generally ontology to illuminate different ways of being religious not theoretically motivated in that sense. The focus is within the same tradition and also to find similar reli- rather to improve the social and political situation by gious dispositions across traditions. It is argued that this can inform interreligious dialogue so that this dia- developing tolerance and openness. The need to en- logue—or rather, polylogue—itself can serve as a tool hance understanding and cooperate in the attempt to to develop a postcolonial existential philosophy of re- overcome religiously motivated conflicts and develop ligion. peaceful coexistence is urgent in societies where re- Part of this project would be to find and apply con- ligious plurality is a conspicuous fact. To be sure, a cepts and categories by reading religious traditions and certain kind of religiousness, characterized by meta- subtraditions through each other. The article ends with physical realism, may impinge negatively on the so- a few suggestions on how this can be done, in this case cial and political situation, due to the universalistic by drawing on traditions from India. and philosophically problematic nature of its theor- etical stand. Therefore, some theological positions may be very problematic when tolerance and open- Introduction: conceptions of interreligious dialogue ness are the desired outcomes. The questions of what interreligious dialogue is and Apart from contexts where religions are seen to how it should be conducted are, of course, depend- cause problems, there is also a potential threat oper- ent on the question of why it is carried out and what ating in today’s world where religious traditions outcome is desired or expected. All this is dependent could be helpful in contributing to a positive change. upon which context the dialogue is carried out in. I am referring to the ecological crisis; environmental Theorizing about interreligious dialogue must there- catastrophes and climate changes caused by extreme fore also be put into a context. There is no neutral exploitation of nature and polluting activities. Since philosophy of religion that can form the basis of such a Western consumerist way of life is now spreading theorizing. When for example Paul Griffiths (1991) rapidly all over the world, this threat is becoming im- and Keith Yandell (1974: 185–6) theorize about the manent. I think there is some weight in the words of logic of and criteria for interreligious dialogue, that Philip Goodchild when he says that Approaching Religion • Vol. 1 • May 2011 33 [i]n order to survive the ecological threat, The modern concept of religion dominant powers will have to undergo un- Many postcolonial thinkers have recently seriously paralleled transformations of social, cultural, questioned the modern concept of religion, especially political, economic and ecological practice and when applied to Eastern religious phenomena. I am consciousness. Indeed, for such a conversion very much in agreement with this criticism. For the to gain sufficient power, religious motives may sake of convenience, I will retain the term ‘religion’ have to come into play to replace a system based but only in its most general sense, as a human phe- on greed and consumption. (Goodchild 2002: nomenon, different from other human phenomena viii.) such as art and economics. Richard King has the fol- lowing to say about the modern concept of religion: Many ways of being religious, independent of tradition, do not sanction the present exploitation of The concept of ‘religion’ is the product of the nature (Nasr 1997), and if these religious existential culturally specific discursive processes of Chris- dispositions come to the fore, they may inspire major tian history in the West and has been forged changes in life styles. In order for this to come about in the crucible of inter-religious conflict and interreligious dialogue may be an important tool for interaction. The term thus implies a pluralistic bringing mutual inspiration and influence to bear on context. As Balagangadhara points out, Chris- the public sphere. tianity has generally served as the prototypical What is obvious here is that we cannot be con- example of a religion and thus as the fundamen- cerned only with the Western part of the world. It tal yardstick or paradigm-case for the study of is a global problem and if we are to involve religion, ‘other religions’. This being the case, one should we have to do it globally. For practical and moral acknowledge that the comparative study of reasons , we have to accept that the fact of religion is religion remains founded upon a conceptual the fact of religious plurality. I claim that there is a framework that is unmistakably theological and plur ality of ways of being human and in understand- Christian in orientation. (King 2002: 40.) ings of what it means to be a human being. By this I want to say that there is no one religion or worldview As Wilfred Cantwell Smith has pointed out, the term that can be shared by all human beings. Indeed, due ‘religion’ actually stands for several different concepts to the indecisiveness of the question of what it means (Smith 1963: 48–9), one of which King here refers to be human, there should not be any attempt to pol- to, and which I prefer to call ‘the modern concept itically reinforce any one such understanding. I am of religion’. I very much share the postcolonial cri- well aware that our history shows ample examples tique of this concept as presented by thinkers such as of such attempts, and that they are not only historic- Timothy Fitzgerald (2010) and S. N. Balagangadhara al, but quite conspicuous in today’s world. There are (1994). Balagangadhara gives an extensive argument religious fundamentalists with such views. There in his book, ‘The Heathen in His Blindness’: Asia, the are those with political ideologies. There are repre- West and the Dynamics of Religion, to the effect that sentatives of a scientistic position. I do not believe India, traditionally, has a culture without ‘religion’ in any such utopian dreams. In fact, I think they are and without ‘worldview’ in the Western sense of the unwanted. I shall argue that they represent a certain terms. existential disposition, characterized by a control- My concern in this paper is to stress the distinc- ling mood. I claim that what can unite people is not a tion between ‘religiousness’ and ‘religion’ and to cat- shared worldview, but a shared acceptance and toler- egorize different kinds of religiousness. Although al- ance of each other’s differences. most half a century has passed since Wilfred Cantwell To understand and conceptualize differences, Smith in his book The Meaning and End of Religion then, becomes a quest for an existential philosophy of (1963) convincingly argued for an abandonment of religion, where interreligious dialogue, or polylogue the modern concept of religion, this very concept is as I would like to call it, becomes a contributing fac- still the cause of much confusion, misrepresentation tor. If we want to understand religious phenomena and even oppression. I argue that this is due to the globally, I am of the opinion that certain concep- fact that those who adhere to the concept represent tions of religion must be put into question, or at least only a certain kind of religiousness, which they ex- stripped of their universal pretensions. trapolate to religious phenomena in general. Smith 34 Approaching Religion • Vol. 1 • May 2011 expresses it in this way: ogy that saw the human being primarily as a need- fulfilling agent became the tacit point of departure I have become strongly convinced that the when studying human behaviour globally. There was vitality of personal faith, on the one hand, and, an idea that all human behaviour could be explained on the other hand (quite separately), pro- from this perspective, in roughly the same way as gress in understanding—even at the academic the workings of nature could be explained by refer- level—the traditions of other people throughout ring to basic natural laws. This came to inform the history and throughout the world, are both first attempts to build theories of religion. Thus, for seriously blocked by our attempt to conceptual- example, James George Frazer assumed that the ac- ize what is involved in each case in terms of (a) tivities of local (what he called primitive) people were religion (Smith 1963: 50).

Load more