Having a closer look at John Hick’s pluralistic hypothesis I’ve realized I generally share them. This agreement comes, somehow, not as much from my cultural tradition or being not a fundamentally religious person, but from me being a modern person, so modern tendencies have a great influence on my views and my lifestyle as they do to the most of other living humans. The globalization process is ongoing, and it’s too powerful for any cultural tradition to stop it, so different philosophies and religions are penetrating in one’s conciseness and to say that one is absolutely able to protect himself from such an influence means to say he/she is able to protect himself/herself from the modern world. In such circumstances to stay religiously (like a part of the culture) intolerant seams not only inhumane but also, old fashioned. 

For the modern world where appear to be a lot of different religions, there’re things from each of them to take for the general mankind’s sake. In the article “The Buddha's 'Undetermined Questions' and the Religions” John Hick says: “Those of us who are not Buddhists should nevertheless be open to benefiting from the Buddha's very challenging insights” (Hick). What are the main reasons for that? And how Buddhism can help all religions to live in a safer world?

“The political saint”

As the world is ruled in the model of a social contract, it’s the leader of the country or the church who represents main ideas shared by its followers. Dalai Lama is the one who speaks on behalf of the Tibetan Buddhists as their spiritual leader, but also the temporal leader of Tibet. In his book “Toward a True Kinship of Faiths” Dalai Lama XIV says, his temporal duties are on the third place for him, because firstly he’s concerned about common world’s problems, nevertheless, the political situation in Tibet is quite strained these days. And in the first place for him always will be the world’s peace and the general human happiness caused by maintaining the basic human rights and values. On the second place for him is his promotional work on a religious field in order to make all religions come to harmony and understanding (Dalai Lama). Such a position seems the most appropriate for the modern situation. The world faces global problems like global warming, overpopulation and the leak of natural resources, yet most of the leaders continue to consider national interests like the most important. Priorities are invalid, and Dalai Lama now is the one who’s trying to point on that.

Talking about Mahatma Gandhi, another ideological and political leader coming from Eastern religious tradition John Hick says, Western and other world’s politics can’t bear in power person with the “saint” political reputation. “One of the things about Gandhi that I want to stress is that whilst he had basic convictions about which he never wavered, yet within this rock-like consistency of conviction his approach to life was always one of openness to new experiences and new insights, willing to admit mistakes, always ready to grow into a different and fuller understanding” (Hick). The idea of a thinking leader, philosophers as governors was firstly suggested by Plato and now seems necessary to overcome global problems of the modern age. Dalai Lama says, “each of us must learn to work not just for his or her own self, family or nation, but for the benefit of all mankind” in order to share “the universal responsibility” (Dalai Lama). Words those sound very timely. Dalai Lama is well-known as a peacemaker. And according to his priorities, he stands on the religious pluralism nevertheless he’s “a head of the Church”. 

Such a position though comes not only from Dalai Lama being a modern philosopher but also from Buddhism as “the Church” itself. 

Buddhism and the age of globalization

Another reason to be open to the benefits of Buddhism is that this religion is more likely to be considered as a philosophy, and though its main goal is unchangeable (“We all desire happiness and do not want to suffer” (Dalai Lama)) and main principals of goal’s achievement stays the same, Buddhism’s dogmas are quite tolerant and suits well for multicultural society, because Buddhism itself has a quite different discourse to worry about, then to deny other cultures and other religions’ dogmas (Hick). On the contrary from Abrahamic religions, Buddhism deals well with uncertainty.

The modern world is abscessed with a reason and scientific-technical progress because of which world is changing so fast. The idea of Buddhism - an ongoing mental development through the spiritual practice (meditation) of two kinds (analytical and stabilizing) sounds a lot like science research, and partly it really is. Rather than counterpoise science to the religion as Abrahamic religions do Buddhism doesn’t abandon scientific development, and in case something is scientifically approved, takes the new approved thing into the account. “The sciences, then, are left to do their own legitimate work of finding out what the physical universe is composed of, and how it works, without its conclusions affecting, either way, the dharma, the saving religious truth” (Hick). But as science does, Buddhism itself never searches on purpose for the experimental improvement and is wholly concentrated on its religious duties. Buddhists’ world view is made in such a way that some important advances in the understanding of the world’s existence won’t hurt the main idea – liberation from suffering. Answering some questions scientifically, according to Buddhism, one will better complete the picture then ruin it. 

There also some questions of the spiritual kind in Buddhism without answers. In his article “The Buddha's 'Undetermined Questions' and the Religions” John Hick discuss five important questions on which Buddhism give no clear answers. All of them are of the eternal kind (like “is the world eternal” and “what goes after death”) and for all of those questions, Abrahamic religions have dogmatic answers. That’s why they’re so “afraid” of a science. Buddhism says, there’re things we might research and never found or found something we never searched for, but that’s not the point. Of course, it seems eternal questions are important and necessary to answer, but while looking for such an answer one “will die before his thirst for knowledge is satisfied” (Hick). And also, you will suffer from your inability to find the answer to this question. 

In the modern world abscessed with material success Buddhism teaches that all material things are limited (Dalai Lama). So much suffering one can avoid by acceptance of the Buddha’s idea that it’s normal to feel lost and bewildered, and ignorance doesn’t cause the impossibility of salvation.

Another thing that makes Buddhism a tolerant religion, there’s no one God and Buddha are considered as the Great Teacher, so there’re no possibilities for the religious war. “Buddhist tradition does not exactly deny the existence of the creator, but it is not really interested to know who created the universe” (Hick). Because the answer to this question doesn’t help to get free from suffering.

All mentioned characteristics of Buddhism I think to make it the most pluralistic from all of the world’s most popular religions and ideas Dalai Lama expresses confirm that. Now it’s left to answer, why religious tolerance is most important nowadays.

Except for mentioned globalization and inevitable penetration process for different world’s cultures, there’re two opposite religious tendencies rising at the same time: people becoming atheistic and people becoming religiously fundamental. “In the early 21st century we are seeing a reversion towards fundamentalism all around the world, within Islam and Hinduism as well as Christianity” (Hick). Becoming more atheistic there’s a danger of not leading a spiritual life at all. Surely, our modern material world gives all the credits and possibilities for that. Mass culture is easy and not philosophically deep. Its function is to entertain, not to concentrate the mankind on important problems of the modern age, and progressing consumers’ society stirs up the desire of the momentary pleasure.   

Religious fundamentalism tendency is even more dangerous, and the world had already faced its most extremist form – religious terrorism. The Dalai Lama stresses on how delicate is the line between exclusivism and fundamentalism; between fundamentalism and extremism in such circumstances. Also, he says, though in history there are a lot of examples of conflicts on the religious field, extremism never had such powerful technical equipment to threaten and to question whole mankind peaceful future as it has now (Dalai Lama).

It seems necessary nowadays to learn something from Buddhism and to listen to what Dalai Lama’s saying. Though he’s talking about very serious things, in his predictions he stays optimistic and says, there’s no necessary a coming clash on the religious field if the mankind will be able to come to the consensus based on common values all people share (Dalai Lama).