I realized:
- It matters little what you believe unless you believe in it fully.
- Two very differnt cultures in contact generally cause less friction than two similar ones.
- Fight against injustice and fight for justice are not the same thing.
I ELABORATE:
1. Any attempt to explain can dilute the statement.
2. Because similar cultures becomes threat to one-another. For example the Christians (many of them, not all ) have a lot against the Muslims. On the other hand, they are more receptive and curious about Hinduism and Buddhism, both of whom are far removed from their religion/culture.
3. Example: Terrorism. Fight against injustice, but not fight for justice; it itself is based on injustice.
(Update: 1Feb )(The first one is credited to anonymous. 
The second one is due to Muhammad Asad (in Road to Mecca). The third one occured to yours faithfully.)
Great notes, I agree with 1 & 3, and partially with 2. As for your elaboration with 2, I think the conflict with Christians and Muslims should only be restricted to the differences in scripture, and both sides should seek the higher truth and stand by their conscience according to their faith in God. As a Christian I absolutely believe that the Bible is the holy word of God, true and faithful. A Muslim would not agree with me. I would not hold a grudge and such a thing would not stop me from embracing him or her as a friend. In fact I have some muslim friends who knew me when I was an atheist, tried to teach me about God, and held their heads in despair when I received Jesus Christ… but we remain friends. I think a better example about similar cultures coming into conflict would be Protestants and Catholics. Or Christians who do not belong to any denomination (like me) and others who believe that there are teachings additional to the Bible which are essential to one’s faith. Friction lies there for sure… but not from my end. lol.
If 2 is true, Islam should be receptive to Hinduism and Buddhism and vice versa. On the other hand, Hinduism and Buddhism should have enough friction with one another. Historically they had, but today that’s not the case.
Let me express my understanding. What you’ve said is true, if they are only present in level-playing field. But, if today atheists come and start challenging the lead Christianity and Islam have (major share of World Population belongs to these two faiths), won’t Islam get support from Judaism and Christianity? Actually, although the friction between similar faiths are aparent, they can also quickly unite once a third new party comes.
Others I agree with.
Interesting points you raise. especially 2. I agree completely. The examples given have been religious, but I think that holds true in other walks of life as well. Similarity leads to comparison, an attempt to prove one the better among other things. I’m not saying that this won’t happen in a case of dis-similarity, but that it can become extremely pronounced in the case of the former. After all, one can only argue if one has some common ground that both sides agree upon..
Diana
Your views are quite liberal. Only if everybody thought that way…
Diganta
Your question requires detailed answer. I will try to answer you in some time.
Hinduism and Buddhism has little cultural exchange now-a-days. How can you expect a conflict now? When there was cultural exchange, there was conflict.
Islam and Hinduism was not at war (exceptions were there, but they were exceptions) until the british came. It was due to divide and rule that we started fighting each other.
To this there are a lot of caveats. For example the two communities apparently never had a lot of cultural exchanges. Hindus liked to retain their culture. Muslims never attempted an inquisition. So that was that, on a large scale.
Sporadic
So far only one vote for 2.
I agree with you. But under certain circumstances 2 may not hold true. For example when political aims play a role.
If only everybody thought I was liberal.. LOL
Actually I would name myself a fundamentalist and not liberal. The fundamentals of Christianity keep me from imposing my faith on another person, or divorcing myself from them on the basis of their rejection of my faith. Freedom of choice and conscience to the individual, my job remains to express as I seek. So I remain a fundamentalist if I stick to those ideals, and then the ones who are more rigid and refuse to get along with different faiths.. they must be the liberals
lol. Ignore all that, I’m just playing.
Diana
Okay. Actually it depends on what you mean by liberal. If liberal means ‘everything is okay’, nobody’s liberal; not even the liberalest ones.
I meant by liberal one who can live with others being different.
The Quarantine in Islam!
Please read and comment..
http://khour.ir/webnotes
Diganta, on a rethink, Hindus and Buddhists have a lot of contact at one place: Srilanka; and definitely they are not in best terms there.
Sorry, they are at their best terms there. There are no Hindu-Buddhist problem there. All problem are between Sinhalese-Tamil.
“70% of Sri Lankans are Theravada Buddhists, 15% are Hindus, and 7.5% are Muslims and Christians.” Nowhere a person is persecuted if he’s a Hindu or a Buddhist – only language and ethnicity matters. Srilanka is in fact more secular than India. LTTE doesn’t follow Hinduism also, they follow Tamil cultures – for instance, Hindus traditionally cremate their dead, but LTTE fighters are buried, according to the ancient Tamil custom of burying the warriors.
Most importantly, there are Hindus living all over the country, but no riots are reported due to tensions in the North.
The other place is Nepal where there are no religious conflict between these two.
The LTTE and Tamil Movement is similar to Kashmiri Movement in India. It’s a regional and ethnicity question and not the religious question. I found Malaysia also has significant Hindus and Buddhists and never having Hindu-Buddhist conflict.
Diganta,
Do you think the communalism problem is because of religion in India? The history of every country serves as a dictator of the future and so it does in India. And then there are politicians who never let this issue die down, the kindle religious passions to woo voters. I wonder whether RSS or the VHP would be so popular if India wouldn’t have been a democracy.
No, it’s because of dirty politics.
Diganta
Haha, you can’t be sorry that they are in best terms
Jokes apart, as far as I understand you are saying that the Hindu-Buddhist is not the identity that’s crucial there, rather, according to you, it is language and ethnicity that matters.
Isn’t it that religion often becomes a identity? I think it is often a sort of ethnicity. But I can’t substantiate my claim that relgion is what is crucial in Sri Lanka. I need more information. I could be wrong.
But when you claim that they bury their dead, and that proves that they are not Hindu, I beg to differ. The dominant in a group imposes what is theirs as common practice. Among the Hindus, there is a huge diversity. You are ending up promoting your culture as Hindu culture.
Take cow, for example. Many dalits and tribals eat cows and pigs. They too are counted as Hindus. What confroms to Hinduness and what does not are very often set by the upper caste north Indians.
There is nothing called a Hinduism, rather, there are Hinduisms
Interesting – especially point 2. Never ever thought about that…you made my braincells spark!
Good for them to have occassional sparks!
But when you claim that they bury their dead, and that proves that they are not Hindu, I beg to differ. – I didnot claim that. I claim they ‘do not preach’ of freedom as a Hindu Nation, but as a Tamil nation.
Isn’t it that religion often becomes a identity? – True, but how a lot of people in LTTE are Christians. How do they view their participation? Only because they speak Tamil. You could look at Bangladesh liberation war, where the split were between Bengali speaking and Urdu speaking people. It was simply not a identity of religion.
I would really be sorry if **Sinhalese Hindus and Sinhalese Buddhists** are not at best of the terms. But I am yet to hear anything same of that sort. Sinhalese Hindus do not support LTTE either. LTTE is a terrorist organization – so I don’t take their action as legitimate – be them Hindus or Christians.
For your information – among 15% of Hindus living in Srilanka, 7% are in the Northern Province but the rest 8% are within the other provinces. Also, the Northern Provinces has 54% Hindus, i.e., people belonging to other religions are also joining LTTE as they speak Tamil.
[...] Jump to Comments A few days ago I posted an opinion that two cultures, close enough, cause more friction than two far apart. Diganta [...]