On this first day of our conference, we heard the lectures of five of our seven plenary speakers. To synthesize them I will first review the highlights of these lectures and then I will identify some insights that they more or less share.
Our first speaker was Bro. Karl Gaspar whose lecture was entitled “Dayalog Sa Kinabuhi Ug Pagtotoo: Theories and Practices of Interfaith Dialogue in the Mindanao Setting”. Bro. Gaspar shared with us his first-hand experiences of the application of interfaith dialogue in Mindanao as envisioned by Bishop Bienvenido Tudtud, which Bro Gaspar fondly referred to as Tatay Bido. His experiences were a witness to and an affirmation of the workability and importance of interfaith dialogue in the Philippines. Furthermore, Tatay Bido’s “Dialogue of Life and Faith”, which was how Tatay Bido’s interfaith program was called, was given a theoretical grounding by Bro. Karl. He showed that such program is also sound and coherent as a theory. Accordingly, its four aspects, namely the dialogue of life, action, theological exchange and religious experience, could be shown to be consistent with contemporary and influential philosophical, sociological, and anthropological theories. Consequently, Tatay Bido’s “Dialogue of Life and Faith” can be universalized so as to be applicable in other contexts or countries, and can be a subject of academic research. Bro. Karl likewise emphasized that interfaith dialogue need not just be among scholars, religious or academic, in formal conferences; for it could also be done, in fact even more meaningfully, by people in ordinary situations or as they go about their day to day life.
Our second speaker was Dr. and Dean Guru Hadji Mashur Bin-Ghalib Jundam whose lecture was entitled “I.N.T.E.R.F.A.I.T.H.: The Dialogue of all Dialogues”. Dr. Jundam basically showed how Islam views interfaith dialogue, with special focus on how such dialogue could transpire among Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. He began his lecture with an enlightening idea that it is not really God’s scriptures that are different but the people who received them, implying that God’s decrees to all of mankind are essentially the same and that religious differences are merely the makings of humans. Certain similarities among these three great religions were then identified by Dr. Jundam. Among them are their belief in one God, their belief that man was created in the best stature and from God’s own breath, and their common kinship, being all descendents of Adam and Eve. In addition, Dr. Jundam pointed out that in all these religions the highest kind of love for humans is their love of God, whose highest kind of expression is their love for one another regardless of their differences. In this connection, Dr. Jundam clarified that these religions taboo the so-called “religious wars”. Dr. Jundam concluded his talk by giving every letter of the word “interfaith” a corresponding value or virtue (Integrity, Nobility, Tolerance, Enthusiast, Respect, Frankness, Affability, Intelligent, Trust, and Humility), which constitute the necessary conditions for the success of any interfaith dialogue.
Ang ating ikatlong tagapagsalita ay si Dr. Susan Reyes. Ang kanyang panayam, na pinamagatang “Kalooban at Dayalogo: Culturally-Rooted Contemplative Education and Dialogue,” ay isang diskurso sa pagkamakahulugan ng isang dayalogo. Pinatunayan sa panayam na ito ang katotohanan ng ideya na ang ating pakikipagdayalogo, maging ito man ay sa ating kapwa o sa Diyos, ay makabuluhan lamang kung tayo ay may malinis na kalooban. At ito ay totoo sa iba’t ibang antas ng pakikipagdayalogo, na ipinakita ni Dr. Reyes sa pamamagitan ng kanyang mga personal na karanasan. Una, bilang isang ordinaryong mamamayan, isinalaysay ni Dr. Reyes ang kanyang pakikisalamuha sa isang “healer” sa isang bus na nasakyan niya. Ikalawa, bilang isang mag-aaral at mananaliksik, isinalaysay naman niya ang kanyang pakikisalamuha at pakikipamuhay sa mga mistiko sa Banahaw. At ikatlo, bilang isang propesor at administrador, ibinihagi niya ang kanyang kasalukuyang proyekto kasama ang mga Buddhists sa pagtatayo ng isang Interfaith Retreat Center. Sa lahat ng mga ito, lumilitaw ang katotohanan ng nasabing ideya: ang isang healer ay kailangang may malinis na kalooban upang maging isang ganap na daluyan ng kapangyarihang manggamot, ang mga mistiko ay naniniwala na ang kalinisan ng kalooban ang siyang tunay na daan patungo sa ispritwalidad, at ang proyektong magtayo ng isang interfaith retreat center ay maisasakatupuran lamang kung malilinis ang mga kalooban ng mga taong sangkot dito. At para mas maunawaan ang konsepto ng malinis na kalooban, ibinahagi rin ni Dr. Reyes ang kanyang pagbabalangkas sa kalikasan ng kalooban ng tao, na bunga na rin ng kanyang mga pananaliksik at karanasan.
Our fourth speaker was Dr. Nagasura Madala. Dr. Madala shared with us his personal views on interfaith dialogue, which were partly influenced by the fact that he comes from a family with mixed religious backgrounds, and his reflections on the situation of Mindanao, where he has spent most of his life. He inquired into the real goal of interfaith dialogue: Is it at bottom a way to convert people of different religions to one’s own religion or is it a way to better understand people whose religious faiths are different from one’s own? While he believes in the ideals of interfaith dialogue, he, however, reminded the participants of such dialogue to be very careful because in entering such dialogue one is also entering, in his own words, a “realm of sensibilities”-implying that this kind of dialogue also concerns sensitive issue or convictions that some people are willing to die for.
Finally, our fifth speaker was Dr. Leni Garcia whose lecture was entitled “Narrating our Faiths Anew: New Myths for a Pluralistic Attitude toward Religion.” Dr. Leni argued that the best way to make interfaith dialogue a reality is to cultivate a pluralistic attitude toward religion. This could surely be done in a variety of ways but Dr. Leni’s focus was on the three following ones. The first is by means of exposing oneself to the various religious beliefs. In the academe, this can be done through the course Philosophy of Religion, where students get a chance to compare and contrast their own religious beliefs with those different from theirs. The second is through a re-examination of the various stories or “myths” through which the faiths of the different religions have been articulated. The idea is that these myths can be reinvented, not in ways that will eradicate religious differences, but in ways that these differences will no longer be causes of conflict and discrimination. And this in turn could be done by emphasizing common metaphors (for instance, the creation metaphor of cutting-up or opening up of beings in order to allow a creative act) and values (for instance, the universal value of compassion) among different myths. And the third is by studying the lives and thoughts of thinkers, philosophers, poets, and spiritual leaders, such as Marcel, Gandhi, Buber, Krishnamurti, Tagore, and Rumi, who transcended the limitations of their concrete situations in life in order to embrace a holistic attitude towards spirituality and life in general.
Now, the following are some of the insights that all these lectures more or less share. First, interfaith dialogue is necessary and urgent. Such dialogue is surely a way to resolve present social conflicts, both local and global. Second, interfaith dialogue works. It is not an ideal that one can only hope for. Some local experiences have already proven its workability. And here open-mindedness, purity of heart, and good will proved to be necessary virtues. Third, it is well grounded in theory. Theories in contemporary philosophy, anthropology, and sociology, lend credence to its goals and methods. Fourth, there are a variety of ways and levels through which it can be practiced. It is definitely not just a dialogue among religious or academic scholars in formal conferences but it is also a dialogue among ordinary people in ordinary situations in life. Fifth, much work still needs to be done. For it to fully realize its goals, further theorizing and field work need to be done. Finally, it has a clear universal message; namely, that we are all brothers and sisters, and our religious differences should not be a reason for discrimination, prejudices, and conflict. Inter-religious conflicts are not really caused by religious differences but rather by the failure to fully understand and practice the teachings of one’s own religious creeds. After all one’s love for his or her neighbor, regardless of one’s differences from him or her, constitutes the noblest expression of one’s love for God or the real path toward authentic religious spirituality.
