Diana Eck

We Multiculturalism through globalization has ch exclusivelyenged our society to oblige with the times by thinking of world religions as more of a brotherhood of faith quite than a threat. In the last chapter of the book Encountering God, the author Diana Eek puts an emphasis on the interdependent world we live in and how we, as human beings impart use up to approach right aways problems as a whole if we wish to overcome lifes various hurdles.Evidence of the interdependent world we live can be seen by observing the statistics of the relatedness of community growth and the growth of poverty and illiteracy to the growth of carbon dioxide emissions and the pollution of the seas, striping of forests, extinction of plant and animal species (Eek, Peg. 200, 2003). Eek states that in this interdependent world, there will always be a consequence for every action made and the world as a whole will inevitably have to get it on with the repercussions one way or another.Interdependency does not Just stop with nations and the environment or economy it also describes people, religious traditions and cultures. (Eek, Peg. 202, 2003). Since everything is interchangeablely dependent n separately other weather it being religion, the economy or the environment, society needs to consciously act on each physical or mental plight with everyones best interest in mind. The first step into transforming the world religions into a brotherhood of faith, is taking c ar of the major issue that all religions face today which is the perceived we language of each religion that seems to divide our society rather than unite them.Eek describes that the we language thats evident in every religion as a sociological matter as well as a theological issue that seems to reflect our deepest religious values. Eek, Peg. 203, 2003). She challenges the reader to ask themselves if there use of the develop we links people or divides people. According to Eek, in every tradition there seems to be at lea st some attempts (some more than others) to steer toward a much wider understanding of we.For example, Hindus believe that the whole world is a single family-Visualize Katmandu, Buddhists speak of the sang and the four directions, Christians with the language of Kiosks (derived from the word autoimmune, translates to the household of the whole live Earth), and the Muslims attempt to find different ways to interpret the Mama (Eek, Peg. 203, 2003). Even though this sort of open minded thinking were talking about all the way exists in each religion, its clear were not where wed like to be considering the frequent airing of violence involving religious disputes on places like the internet and T.V. People are taking religious sides and are missing the big picture and which will only result in more bad press and casualties. In my eyeball this can be attributed to ignorance formed by lack of interrelations dialogue. In order for religious dialogue to be effective, Eek leads me to believ e that one must(prenominal) first animize he we. Eek often referenced one of the most open minded and enlightening religious figures in history to convey the importance of recreating the we and its impact on transforming society. According to Eek, Gandhi redefined the inclusive we in theory but more importantly in practice.Gandhi started at the household level to extend the care, ethics and common aesthesis of the household to the whole of humankind (Eek, Peg. 206, 2003). Eek states that he believed that the personal was the political, meaning he saw no point in speaking of things like oppressiveness of the or if one continued to support the status quo through ones daily decisions in life. Instead of speaking of the tender injustices that were going on around him (political), he personally made an impact by volunteering to clean the latrines, help out at the hospital, and empty bedpans (Eek, Peg. 07, 2003). Sandhogs lifestyle was greatly impacted by all the social injustice goi ng on in the world. Sandhogs we not only included the poor and the oppressed but his enemies as well. He felt that a transform community would never be slip awayed if conflict is cast in terms of winning ND losing (Eek, Peg. 206, 2003). This kind of humility and consciousness should be implemented in the approach to interrelations dialogue in order to bind all religions as a brotherhood of faith.But until we recreate the we in society, interrelations dialogue will never reach its potential of mutual transformation. Diana Eek provides the reader with a refreshing option for encountering plurality of religions by remaining Christian, yet holding a deep respect for all religions. As Gandhi was inspired by some aspects of religion, Diana Eek was inspired by Sandhogs attempt to recreate the we. She too felt that in order for society to solve todays toughest problems, we must approach these problems as a whole. Eek explains how our daily decisions can cause a ripple effect.She conveys to the reader that we, as human beings, can make a substitute for the better by recreating the we in our language to link rather than divide. After successfully recreating the we, one can break the ignorance and fear and gain a mutual understanding of different religions through mutual understanding. As Eek states, with mutual understanding comes mutual transformation. Mutual transformation will only lead society to adapt with the times y thinking of world religions as more of a brotherhood of faith rather than a threat.