The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum

Not sure where to put this. I understand the question to be a philosophical one. Not one of practicing religion.

from http://www.arcamax.com/religionandspirituality/religiousnews/s-1219082-727701

Oct 17, 2012 The Kansas City Star

VOICES OF FAITH: IS IT CORRECT TO SAY THAT ALL RELIGIONS HAVE THE SAME GOAL?

ALL PATHS LEAD TO A SUPREME BEING

A.M. Bhattacharyya, an active member of the Hindu community: From the perspective of Hindu faith, the answer is "yes." Let us explore the purpose of a religion in our lives.
(snip)
The real purpose of religion is to raise our spiritual awareness, which helps build compassion, kindness, purity, self-control and a sense of service to fellow humans, and it takes us to a higher and higher level of spiritual wisdom, ultimately to the realization of divinity within.
(snip).

Thoughts, comments?

 
I agree with the snippet, except I think this interpretation of all the religions is a bit more succinct: "Don't be a d-k and have yourself a meaningful life."

Thoughts, comments?

 
It seems to me that the only way to have all religions have the same goal is to remove all specifics from the purported goal.  (My problems with the concept of "goal" in religion aside, here.)

I'm not a big fan of vague generalities.  If the "goal" thing is stated as something like, "Have a good and meaningful life for yourself and your people", something as simple as "does 'your people' mean your family/clan/tribe/nation, or does 'your people' mean 'all of humanity', or does 'your people' mean 'all living things of this planet'?" is still a huge difference.

And that's not going into the complicated range of things, like "what is a good life?", "what is a meaningful life?", "what is an appropriate way to behave in order to have a meaningful life?"

I'm just not willing to suggest that a religion that considers asceticism and/or self-denial is the path to godliness to have the same goal as a religion that considers full and enthusiastic engagement with the material world as critical to reaching the divine, even if they might both be summarised as having the "goal" to approach the godhead or infuse life with deeper meaning or whatever.  What the goal actually is in real, practical terms matters.

It seems to me that the only way to have all religions have the same goal is to remove all specifics from the purported goal.  (My problems with the concept of "goal" in religion aside, here.)

I'm not a big fan of vague generalities.  If the "goal" thing is stated as something like, "Have a good and meaningful life for yourself and your people", something as simple as "does 'your people' mean your family/clan/tribe/nation, or does 'your people' mean 'all of humanity', or does 'your people' mean 'all living things of this planet'?" is still a huge difference.

And that's not going into the complicated range of things, like "what is a good life?", "what is a meaningful life?", "what is an appropriate way to behave in order to have a meaningful life?"

I'm just not willing to suggest that a religion that considers asceticism and/or self-denial is the path to godliness to have the same goal as a religion that considers full and enthusiastic engagement with the material world as critical to reaching the divine, even if they might both be summarised as having the "goal" to approach the godhead or infuse life with deeper meaning or whatever.  What the goal actually is in real, practical terms matters.

 
I'll just go stand over here beside Darkhawk.  (Fancy that:).)

Sunflower

Gonna have to go with a nooooope nope nope on that. Don't you (generic you, not mir52) tell me why I do religion any more than tell me why I do art and music. I can come up with those explanations myself, thanks kindly.

I understand that English is not a precise language with pronouns.

I especially have kneejerk reactions against "spiritual awareness," "purity," "spiritual wisdom" and "divinity within." Sounds awfully... upper class? Stuck in the clouds? Exchanging the realities of earth for warm fuzzy thoughts of heaven?

 
Warm fuzzy thoughts of heaven?  I always imaged it to be a cold, sterile, and lifeless place.   I have been to hell it was/is a cold lifeless place. Purgatory is more my speed.

That statement is an example of why all religions probably do not really have the same goal. Some religions lack a supreme being and have a number of less than supreme beings as deities. Some religion lack a deity (let alone a "supreme being" deity) at all, Buddhism for example.

 
I guess if you twisted the term "supreme being" to be more general, it could work. But at some point, a term gets too generalized so as to be useless.

If we were looking for a "unifying theory of religious goals", I think it would probably be better to focus on more mundane, social things. Or even deeply personal things. Human things. Even then, a unified theory would still look a bit, say, disheveled? Pieces and fragments jutting out everywhere for the exceptions.

VOICES OF FAITH: IS IT CORRECT TO SAY THAT ALL RELIGIONS HAVE THE SAME GOAL?

ALL PATHS LEAD TO A SUPREME BEING

Thoughts, comments?

 

I do not know where all paths lead and am a bit wary of those that purport to know.

Even if the "supreme being" in the end is the higher self, who is to say when that is reached, and if it is, then what?

Some have it that we are closest to being perfect supreme beings when we are born and it goes downhill fairly quickly after that. When I think of this I know I have on my WTF face. I can feel it. Who would do that to someone? So mean. And I have friends who talk of ascended masters and I imagine it being the most boring dinner party ever if they were all to get together. I further imagine a game of Risk being played and it all ends in sketch comedy.

Some concepts are so broad and vague that if they must be used for something, I think it should be comedy. All paths lead to a supreme being, hit the head before you set out, there's not another exit for 50 miles at least. Mind the gap.

So far, with religions, I think they might be a red herring if one is seeking beings of supreme natures inside or out. They seem to have other great purposes, but I do not think they are necessary for everyone in order to reach a supreme being or a higher self.

IS IT CORRECT TO SAY THAT ALL RELIGIONS HAVE THE SAME GOAL?

ALL PATHS LEAD TO A SUPREME BEING

No.
And hell, no.

Next.