Abstract
In considering the possibilities of differing models of the relation between the various major religious traditions, we had better ask: From what point of view are we doing the modeling? Are we thinking to be neutral somehow? Or are we standing within a tradition? Or, more nebulously, are we occupying a certain religious position, though not precisely identifying with one tradition? Moreover, are there models which work with some pair or group of religions but do not work with others? And again, are there models which function across religions, but only in relation to sub-traditions within them?
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
John Hick, An Interpretation of Religion (London: Macmillan, 1989), esp. chap. 14.
Rudolf Otto, The Idea of the Holy (Oxford: OUP, 1936).
W. T. Stace, Mysticism and Philosophy (New York: Humanities, 1960).
N. Smart, Worldviews (New York: Scribner, 1983).
Aldous Huxley, The Perennial Philosophy (New York: Ayer, 1945).
J. N. Farquhar, the Crown of Hinduism (New York: OUP, 1920).
Or really Brunnerian: see H. Kraemer The Christian Message in a Non-Christian World (Tambaram, 1938).
For example D. Z. Phillips, The Concept of Prayer (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965).
A view reminiscent of R. C. Zaehner in his Concordant Discord (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970).
Copyright information
© 1993 The Claremont Graduate School
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Smart, N. (1993). Models for Understanding the Relations between Religions. In: Inter-Religious Models and Criteria. Library of Philosophy and Religion Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-23017-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-23017-4_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-23019-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-23017-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)