Eastern and Western Religions ... So in time the two shall meet.

I feel that the two most compatible religious traditions on Earth may be the Hindu-Buddhist and the Judaeo-Christian. While their central paradigms may seem to be at odds, their ultimate aims can be construed as not interfering with each other. Although the strict monotheism of Judaism contrasts with the laissez-faire polytheism of Hinduism, the first restricts only its own people, while the other allows the possibility of other people having their own way of worship.

It is the later evolution of both that leads them apart, and achieves their final agreement. Together, they comprise a complete world-view. If one believes in Deity, one may choose a favorite, and devote one's life to service, with the distinction of a disciple. If not, one may follow the path of logic and humanity, cultivating compassion and non-attached serenity. In point of fact, Buddhism does not deny the existence of God, but merely does not posit his being as necessarily involved with this world.

The desired end or afterlife is clear and assured. If one is devoted enough to one's chosen path, they are achievable, either by effort or the grace of God. The Buddhist will not be disappointed to be finally extinguished, nor will the Christian be sorry to see Heaven. And the alternative conditions of bodily reincarnation will be accurately interpreted by each, as a Christian to try to live a life of faith, hope and morality, or as a Buddhist to cultivate detachment and show compassion in a world of suffering.

Surely a compassionate and truly merciful God cannot be so cruel as to inflict everlasting torture on anyone, even if he chose evil and defiance. Kindness would insist on extinction and oblivion. While the recognition of good will and effort, even if inadequate, would suggest another opportunity, perhaps to be viewed as purgative of self-interest and attachments. In any case, one gets what one expects, or if there is no afterlife, extinguishment and oblivion await us all, and there will be no suffering to be feared.

Yet still, one is allowed Pascal's wager: to choose faith, to believe in God so that if He is there, one shall not miss the reward offered for hope and deciding to follow Him. Whereas, if He is not, then oblivion represents nothing lost to us. Faith then becomes a kind of spiritual  "fire insurance," with the premiums paid in moral behavior for the greater good of society.

The cultures developed by faith in these disparate perspectives are also compatible, insofar as they both teach compassion, patience and kindness, and respect for a life of faith and devotion. They both recognize that truth, freedom, love and wisdom are ideals by which to develop civilization, and prefer the way of non-violence, at least in theory. They can each respect the devoted practitioners of the other path, and respond with friendship and dignity. Thus, there is no good reason that they should not be able to get along, and share the world in peace.

One could say that they both believe in a Divine Trinity, even though their basic interpretations are different, and the persons are called by other names.

Judaeo-Christian:
    One God
       - creator, philosophical origin of all
       - greater than the greatest thought
       - Three in One
           - Adonai, Father
           - Yeshua, Jesus
           - Ruach haKodesh, Holy Spirit
       - the antagonist is Satan, damnation
       - there are many angels
           - good & bad
   Salvation by forgiveness through faith and devotion to the One God.

Hindu:
   Brahman
       - dreaming of play & illusion
       - passive universal Being
       - source of all divinity
           - Brahma
           - Vishnu
           - Shiva
       - the antagonist is Kali, death
       - there are many little gods
           - friendly or scary
   Salvation by erasure of bad karma and devotion to one's chosen god.

This appears to be essentially the same story, except for the basic definition of what is divine, and who is a God. The insistence on a monotheistic perspective is based on the insight that the God you worship is the one whom you will tend to emulate, modeling your behavior and values on those preferred by the Deity you have chosen. And that is why choosing the right God is so important. Who will you become, and what kind of world does He intend for you to build?

If one analyzes the basic religious views of the world, it becomes apparent that there are four different foundational ways that our various cultures approach the question of what the Cosmos is, and why we are here:

1. Theistic: Constructed Scenario.
   Judaeo-Christian, God created a world.
   - this is all a purposeful artifice.
   - pottery, carpentry, clocks, computers.

2. Cyclic: Drama on the Stage.
   Hindu, God is getting lost in the story.
   - imagining division & limitations.
   - being characters with relationships.

3. Non-theistic: Emerging Life.
   Chinese, flow, balance & growth.
   - the proper society is well organized.
   - trying to minimize suffering.

4. Atheist: Matter, Energy & Chance.
   Science, empirical observation.
   - a lucky series of random events.
   - star dust becoming self-aware.

Each of these worldviews poses its own set of philosophical questions:
1. In what sense am I real?
2. How am I related to it all?
3. What do I want?
4. How can I get what I want?
5. What is my ultimate concern?
6. Is there an objective moral order?
7. Is there a meaning of life?
8. Are we being tested for something?
       - morality & character
       - puzzle solving & intuition
       - intelligence & wisdom,
       - adaptability & self-discipline

The Values that We Pursue:
Spiritual (ultimate)
   - Truth
   - Freedom
   - Love
   - Wisdom
   - Knowledge
   - Enthusiasm
Worldly (proximate)
   - Power
   - Wealth
   - Progeny
   - Health
   - Novelty
   - Fun

But, is the game worth the candle?
I.e., Is the opportunity, struggle and triumph of winning at life worth all the effort, trouble and suffering? Why does it not seem as if we all get a fair chance? Some seem to struggle more, with less fortune, while others find it easy to do whatever they want. And still others will take whatever advantage they can get. But if you cheat, doesn't it ruin the game? You will only get the proximate goods. The ultimate goods must be won honestly.

Sometimes, it seems humans are not quite yet what we should be, and so we struggle with moral issues, and practical cultural problems as well. We don't always have the ability to take the long view, of decades and centuries, that we need to make sound decisions about our relations to our planet, or the kind of future we should pursue. We focus too much on the proximate ends, and forget that they only resemble the ultimate aims that lead us forward. We need an outside standpoint from which to view our progress, and our orientation. This is the purpose served by the religions we use to guide our societies. And the more moral ... more idealistic and devoted to the ultimate values of Spirit, and to the God who teaches us to be gentle, tolerant and inclusive, the better.

And if that sounds like too much emphasis on adapting to civilized society and transforming this earthly existence, the critique is fair enough. Both Christianity and Buddhism eschew active engagement in worldly affairs, seeking to transcend the mundane entrapment that leads us to disregard the quest for our salvation. Materialism is viewed as shortsighted, a deception that twists one's values, leading one to be mired ever more deeply in pointless toil and disrespect for others. As a result, both have evolved an aspect of reverence for the monastic life and vows of renunciation.

We may wonder if, someday, the scientific atheistic materialist empiricists may also come to a similar conclusion. Will they eventually realize that the attempt to succeed and "make something of oneself" in our un-reflecting society is only a pointless game of chasing after dross, going around and around, and arguing about who is winning? We have to create our own meanings and purposes for this life, so that we are telling the kind of story that we would be happy to be a part of.

That is why the equation of Heaven with Space is essentially liberating. It gives us the opportunity to reinterpret the stories and mythologies that have gotten us this far, and led us into so much trouble. The endeavor of trying to establish a foothold in space, and on other worlds, tells us that we have to rethink what is essential, and use our reasoning and imagination to create the cultures that we would really want to live in. If Heaven is the promise of bliss, then we are tasked with the challenges of creating a Heaven that we can reach.