Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00424)

Jan 27 2004

Dear Friends:

Re: Similarities found in all Religions


A recent inquiry asked about similarities and truths common to many
religions.

Here is a report on a talk covering this subject::

-----------------------

RELIGIONS – POINTS OF AGREEMENT IN ALL



POINTS OF AGREEMENT IN ALL RELIGIONS

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: Let me read you a few verses from
some of the ancient Scriptures of the world, from the old Indian books
held sacred by the Brahmans of Hindustan.(1)

“What room for doubt and what room for sorrow is there in him
who knows that all spiritual beings are the same in kind and only differ
from each other in degree?

The sun does not shine there, nor the moon and the stars, nor
these lightnings and much less this fire. When He shines, everything
shines after Him; by His light all this is lighted.

Lead me from the unreal to the real!
Lead me from darkness to light!
Lead me from death to immortality!

Seeking for refuge, I go to that God who is the light of His own
thoughts; He who first creates Brahman and delivers the Vedas to him;
who is without parts, without actions, tranquil, without fault, the
highest bridge to immortality, like a fire that has consumed its fuel.”
- Mundaka Upanishad.


Such are some of the verses, out of many thousands, which are enshrined
in the ancient Hindu Vedas beloved by those we have called "heathen";
those are the sentiments of the people we have called idolaters only.

As the representative of the Theosophical movement I am glad to be here,
and to be assigned to speak on what are the points of agreement in all
religions. I am glad because Theosophy is to be found in all religions
and all sciences. 
We, as members of the Theosophical Society, endorse to the fullest
extent those remarks of your chairman in opening, when he said, in
effect, that a theology which stayed in one spot without advancing was
not a true theology, but that we had advanced to where theology should
include a study of man. Such a study must embrace his various religions,
both dead and living. 

And pushing that study into those regions we must conclude that man is
greatly his own reveler, has revealed religion to himself, and therefore
that all religions must include and contain truth; that no one religion
is entitled to a patent or exclusive claim upon truth or revelation, or
is the only one that God has given to man, or the only road along which
man can walk to salvation. If this be not true, then your Religious
Parliament is no Parliament, but only a body of men admiring themselves
and their religion. 

But the very existence of this Parliament proclaims the truth of what I
have said, and shows the need which the Theosophical Society has for
nineteen years been asserting, of a dutiful, careful, and brotherly
inquiry into all the religions of the world, for the purpose of
discovering what the central truths are upon which each and every
religion rests, and what the original fountain from which they have
come. This careful and tolerant inquiry is what we are here for today;
for that the Theosophical Society stands and has stood: for toleration,
for unity, for the final and irrevocable death of all dogmatism.

But if you say that religion must have been revealed, then surely God
did not wait for several millions of years before giving it to those
poor beings called men. He did not, surely, wait until He found one poor
Semitic tribe to whom He might give it late in the life of the race?
Hence He must have given it in the very beginning, and therefore all
present religions must arise from one fount.
What are the great religions of the world and from whence have they
come? 

They are Christianity, Brahmanism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Judaism,
Zoroastrianism, and Mohammedanism. The first named is the youngest, with
all its warring sects, with Mormonism as an offshoot and with Roman
Catholicism boldly claiming sole precedence and truth.

Brahmanism is the old and hoary religion of India, a grown-up,
fully-developed system long before either Buddhism or Christianity was
born. It extends back to the night of time, and throws the history of
religion far, far beyond any place where modern investigators were once
willing to place even the beginning of religious thought. Almost the
ancient of ancients, it stands in far-off India, holding its holy Vedas
in its hands, calmly waiting until the newer West shall find time out of
the pursuit of material wealth to examine the treasures it contains.

Buddhism, the religion of Ceylon, of parts of China, of Burmah and Japan
and Tibet, comes after its parent Brahmanism. It is historically older
than Christianity and contains the same ethics as the latter, the same
laws and the same examples, similar saints and identical fables and
tales relating to Lord Buddha, the Saviour of Men. It embraces today,
after some twenty-five hundred years of life, more people than any other
religion, for two-thirds of the human family profess it.

Zoroastrianism also fades into the darkness of the past. It too teaches
ethics such as we know. Much of its ritual and philosophy is not
understood, but the law of brotherly love is not absent from it; it
teaches justice and truth, charity and faith in God, together with
immortality. In these it agrees with all, but it differs from
Christianity in not admitting a vicarious salvation, which it says is
not possible.
Christianity of today is modern Judaism, but the Christianity of Jesus
is something different. 

He taught forgiveness, Moses taught retaliation, and that is the law
today in Christian State and Church. "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for
a tooth" is still the recognized rule, but Jesus taught the opposite. He
fully agreed with Buddha, who, preaching 500 years before the birth of
the Jewish reformer, said we must love one another and forgive our
enemies. So modern Christianity is not the religion of Jesus, but
Buddhism and the religion of Jesus accord with one another in calling
for charity, complete tolerance, perfect non-resistance, absolute
self-abnegation.

If we compare Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism together on the
points of ritual, dogmas, and doctrines, we find not only agreement but
a marvellous similarity as well, which looks like an imitation on the
part of the younger Christianity. Did the more modern copy the ancient?
It would seem probable. And some of the early Christian Fathers were in
the habit of saying, as we find in their writings, that Christianity
brought nothing new into the world, that it existed from all time.

If we turn to ritual, so fully exemplified in the Roman Catholic Church,
we find the same practices and even similar clothing and altar
arrangements in Buddhism, while many of the prescribed rules for the
altar and approaching or leaving it are mentioned very plainly in far
more ancient directions governing the Brahman when acting as priest. 

This similarity was so wonderful in the truthful account given by the
Catholic priest Abbé Huc that the alarmed Church first explained that
the devil, knowing that Christianity was coming, went ahead and invented
the whole thing for the Buddhists by a species of ante facto copying, so
as to confound innocent Catholics therewith; and then they burned poor
Abbé Huc's book. 

As to stations of the cross, now well known to us, or the rosary,
confession, convents, and the like, all these are in the older religion.
The rosary was long and anciently used in Japan, where they had over one
hundred and seventy-two sorts. And an examination of the mummies of old
Egypt reveals rosaries placed with them in the grave, many varieties
being used. Some of these I have seen. Could we call up the shades of
Babylon's priests, we should doubtless find the same rituals there.

Turning to doctrines, that of salvation by faith is well known in
Christianity. It was the cause of a stormy controversy in the time of
St. James. But very strangely, perhaps, for many Christians, the
doctrine is a very old Brahmanical one. They call it "The Bridge
Doctrine," as it is the great Bridge. But with them it does not mean a
faith in some particular emanation of God, but God is its aim. 
God is the means and the way, and God the end of the faith; by complete
faith in God, without an intermediary, God will save you. 

They also have a doctrine of salvation by faith in those great sons of
God, Krishna, Rama, and others; complete faith in either of those is for
them a way to heaven, a bridge for the crossing over all sins. Even
those who were killed by Krishna, in the great war detailed in the
Ramayana, went straight to heaven because they looked at him, as the
thief on the cross looking at Jesus went to Paradise. 

In Buddhism is the same doctrine of faith. The twelve great sects of
Buddhism in Japan have one called the Sect of the Pure Land. This
teaches that Amitabha vowed that any one who calls three times on his
name would be born into his pure Land of Bliss. He held that some men
may be strong enough to prevail against the enemy, but that most men are
not, and need some help from another. 

This help is found in the power of the vow of Amita Buddha, who will
help all those who call on his name. The doctrine is a modified form of
vicarious atonement, but it does not exclude the salvation by works
which the Christian St. James gives out.

Heaven and Hell are also common to Christianity, Buddhism, and
Brahmanism. The Brahman calls it Swarga; the Buddhist, Devachan; and we,
Heaven. Its opposite is Naraka and Avitchi. But names apart, the
descriptions are the same. Indeed, the hells of the Buddhists are very
terrible, long in duration and awful in effect. The difference is that
the heaven and hell of the Christian are eternal, while the others are
not. The others come to an end when the forces which cause them are
exhausted. In teaching of more than one heaven there is the same
likeness, for St. Paul spoke of more than a single heaven to one of
which he was rapt away, and the Buddhist tells of many, each being a
grade above or below some other. 

Brahman and Buddhist agree in saying that when heaven or hell is ended
for the soul, it descends again to rebirth. And that was taught by the
Jews. They held that the soul was originally pure, but sinned and had to
wander through rebirth until purified and fit to return to its source.

In priesthood and priestcraft there is a perfect agreement among all
religions, save that the Brahman instead of being ordained a priest is
so by birth. Buddha's priesthood began with those who were his friends
and disciples. After his death they met in council, and subsequently
many councils were held, all being attended by priests. Similar
questions arose among them as with the Christians, and identical splits
occurred, so that now there are Northern and southern Buddhism and the
twelve sects of Japan. During the life of Buddha the old query of
admitting women arose and caused much discussion. The power of the
Brahman and Buddhist priests is considerable, and they demand as great
privileges and rights as the Christian ones.

Hence we are bound to conclude that dogmatically and theologically these
religions all agree. Christianity stands out, however, as peculiarly
intolerant - and in using the word "intolerant" I but quote from some
priestly utterances regarding the World's Fair parliament - for it
claims to be the only true religion that God has seen fit to reveal to
man.

The great doctrine of a Savior who is the son of God - God himself - is
not an original one with Christianity. It is the same as the extremely
ancient one of the Hindus called the doctrine of the Avatar. An Avatar
is one who comes down to earth to save man. He is God incarnate. Such
was Krishna, and such even the Hindus admit was Buddha, for he is one of
the great ten Avatars. 

The similarity between Krishna or Cristna and Christ has been very often
remarked. He came 5,000 years ago to save and benefit man, and his birth
was in India, his teaching being Brahmanical. He, like Jesus, was hated
by the ruler, Kansa, who desired to destroy him in advance, and who
destroyed many sons of families in order to accomplish his end, but
failed. Krishna warred with the powers of darkness in his battles with
Ravana, whom he finally killed. 

The belief about him was that he was the incarnation of God. This is in
accord with the ancient doctrine that periodically the Great Being
assumes the form of man for the preservation of the just, the
establishment of virtue and order, and the punishment of the wicked.
Millions of man and women read every day of Krishna in the Ramayana of
Tulsi Das. His praises are sung each day and reiterated at their
festivals. Certainly it seems rather narrow and bigoted to assume that
but one tribe and one people are favored by the appearance among them of
an incarnation in greater measure of God.

Jesus taught a secret doctrine to his disciples. He said to them that he
taught the common people in stories of a simple sort, but that the
disciples could learn of the mysteries. And in the early age of
Christianity that secret teaching was known. In Buddhism is the same
thing, for Buddha began with one vehicle or doctrine, proceeded after to
two, and then to a third. 

He also taught a secret doctrine that doubtless agreed with the Brahmans
who had taught him at his father's court. He gave up the world, and
later gave up eternal peace in Nirvana, so that he might save men. In
this the story agrees with that of Jesus. And Buddha also resisted Mara,
or the Devil, in the wilderness. 
Jesus teaches that we must be as perfect as the Father, and that the
kingdom of heaven is within each. To be perfect as the Father we must be
equal with him, and hence here we have the ancient doctrine taught of
old by the Brahmins that each man is God and a part of God. This
supports the unity of humanity as a spiritual whole, one of the greatest
doctrines of the time prior to Christianity, and now also believed in
Brahmanism.

That the universe is spiritual in essence, that man is a spirit and
immortal, and that man may rise to perfection, are universal doctrines.
Even particular doctrines are common to all the religions. Reincarnation
is not alone in Hinduism or Buddhism. It was believed by the Jews, and
not only believed by Jesus but he also taught it. For he said that John
the Baptist was the reincarnation of Elias "who was for to come." Being
a Jew he must have had the doctrines of the Jews, and this was one of
them. 

And in Revelations we find the writer says: "Him that overcometh I will
make a pillar in the house of my God, and he shall go out no more." The
words "no more" infer a prior time of going out.

The perfectibility of man destroys the doctrine of original sin, and it
was taught by Jesus, as I said. Reincarnation is a necessity for the
evolution of this perfection, and through it at last are produced those
Saviors of the race of whom Jesus was one. He did not deny similar
privileges to others, but said to his disciples that they could do even
greater works than he did. So we find these great Sages and Saviors in
all religions. 

There are Moses and Abraham and Solomon, all Sages. And we are bound to
accept the Jewish idea that Moses and the rest were the reincarnations
of former persons. Moses was in their opinion Abel the son of Adam; and
their Messiah was to be a reincarnation of Adam himself who had already
come the second time in the person of David. We take the Messiah and
trace him up to David, but refuse, improperly, to accept the remainder
of their theory.

Descending to every-day-life doctrines, we find that of Karma, or that
we must account and receive for every act. This is the great explainer
of human life. It was taught by Jesus and Matthew and St. Paul. The
latter explicitly said:

"Brethren, be not deceived; God is not mocked; for whatsoever a
man soweth, that also shall he reap."

This is Karma of the Brahman and Buddhist, which teaches that each life
is the outcome of a former life or lives, and that every man in his
rebirths will have to account for every thought and receive measure for
the measure given by him before.

In ethics all these religions are the same, and no new ethic is given by
any. Jesus was the same as his predecessor, Buddha, and both taught the
law of love and forgiveness. A consideration of the religions of the
past and today from a Theosophical standpoint will support and confirm
ethics. 

We therefore cannot introduce a new code, but we strive by looking into
all religions to find a firm basis, not due to fear, favor, or
injustice, for the ethics common to all. This is what Theosophy is for
and what it will do. It is the reformer of religion, the unifier of
diverse systems, the restorer of justice to our theory of the universe.
It is our past, our present, and our future; it is our life, our death,
and our immortality.

PATH, July, 1894

-------------------------------------
 
An address delivered April 17th, 1894, before the Parliament of
Religions at San Francisco, Calif., by William Q. Judge.

The Midwinter Fair at San Francisco had annexed to it a Religious
parliament modeled after the first great one of 1893 at Chicago. Dr. J.
D. Buck and William Q. Judge, the latter as General Secretary American
Section, were officially invited to address the Parliament at one of its
sessions as representatives of the Theosophical movement. Time was so
short that all speakers were limited to thirty minutes each; for that
reason the address is not as full as it would be had more time been
granted. But the occasion once more showed the strength of the T.S.
movement. 


=====================

Best wishes,

Dallas