I agree. In the aftermath of our terrorist attack I have attended some interfaith events, which have mostly been “talking about the weather” in the sense of expressing sympathy and solidarity.
Kindness, generosity, and tolerance are embedded in most sensible religions (of course not all practitioners live up to those ideals…) so there is actually plenty to agree on. More technical issues are actually not so relevant to successful interaction.
See this old article by Bhikkhu Bodhi. “Tolerance and Diversity”. https://www.bps.lk/olib/nl/nl024.pdf
If we have non-Buddhist visitors to our local Thai Monastery I sometimes find myself talking to them. I find that if I answer questions about what we do along the lines of the Dhammapada verse:
To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to cleanse one’s mind—this is the teaching of the Buddhas. SuttaCentral
I think we can make a case that getting to know the other can reduce our hate for the other who we don’t understand. When we’re standing on “opposite sides of the street” all the time, the tendency is to build up narratives (most of which negative) that have no chance of being addressed or even contradicted. We can’t see the full humanity in the other person, the good and the bad. If we’re practicing friendship to reduce hate and increase amicable social relations, we can say interacting with the religious other (while not a required orthodox practice described in the suttas for followers) doesn’t run contrary to the principles of the dhamma, and just might help a person develop spiritually. But I can see that not everyone is open to this. That’s my two cents.
I am all for these ideas like interfaith dialog, racial harmoney, sex discrimination etc.
What I see is all these are just a patch up work or just lip services without addressing the main issue.
Which is Mana.
People who promote interfaith do not have the samy sympathy for the sexsual discrimination.
Sri Lankan Buddhist monks who promote interfaith dialog turn their blind eye to the cast discrimination within their own Sangha order.
I don’t know a single movement address the toatal discrimination.
Well I don’t know who it is that you are talking about. However none of us are perfect. Our imperfections unite us. Lip service is better than no service IMO , and maybe it is best to approach others without any preconceived notions of what they are like or what they think, as there is likely to be a wide variation in outlooks.
I find it’s good occasionally to spend time with people who don’t share my path/views/practices. Stepping outside my comfort zone, sometimes getting a bigger perspective.
I loved the answer by @Khemarato.bhikkhu but I would like to add that one of the recurring themes that I have noticed when talking to Buddhist teachers is a certain style that they often seem to advocate when approaching a challenging aspect of the dhamma such as “rebirth”. What they say to their students is something like: “If you can’t accept it, just put it to one side for the moment and come back to it later.” Maybe this approach would be good? Focusing on the aspects of the others doctrine we can accept first - i.e. those compatible with, or closer to our current world view, then taking on the more challenging aspects later.
This is not globally true. In your context, I’d venture a guess that many people do care about discrimination, but they’re limited in terms of what they can say by social factors. Ultimately, Buddhism gives no reason for anyone to hate anyone, and certainly not to institutionalize that hatred.
i think it should be put aside at times but if ie a new monk is in training and has doubt about the doctrine, it is often much better to dispel the doubt and establish agreement with due reasoning where there is an opening because pondering and coming to agreement based on understanding is essential for arousal of desire for the exertion and development according to one’s understanding.
, and maybe it is best to approach others without any preconceived notions of what they are like or what they think, as there is likely to be a wide variation in outlooks.