What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet
Juliet in William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet
I have been struck many times of the confluence of the really important ideas in all the world's great traditions. If something is very important, it seems the idea arises in different places over time in different cultural guise. This is so clearly with ethics. The "golden rule"—do to others what you would have them do to you—is everywhere present as a foundational, and practical, way of living. Love, too, as compassion, kindness, ahimsa (no harm), or benevolence is a common theme. Whatever it is called, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. It is not the words we use about the rose, but the experience we have of the rose that counts. I think this is much the position that philosopher of religion John Hick suggests. There is the "Ultimately Real," known only by experience, that defies categories. Our wordy attempts are OK just so long as we realize that the Real is beyond our attempts at explanation. That is why we have so many different explanations of the Real in the different traditions.
At this point the cry usually aries, "Relativism! If all is relative, then nothing is absolute and we can know nothing about anything with any certainty!"
This is partly true. For myself, I have abandoned any search for absolute knowledge. But, that is not the only game in the playground. I prefer to play a pluralist game. If absolutism says "We have the truth and you don't!" and relativism proclaims "There is no such thing as truth!" pluralism says, "Let's see if by dialogue we can all approach the Real!" When plural positions make contact, though the words differ, the rose smells the same, if you have a nose for it. I am convinced (as convinced as a pluralist can be) that this is the case in ethics.
It is true also in other areas.
In the Lindisfarne Community we have a number of good bloggers. In a recent post to the blog Celtic Odyssey my good friend, and member of our community, Jack+ draws attention to "centering prayer." This is a form of contemplative inner silence, a "resting in God." In this iteration it was the genius of Fr. Thomas Keating from the 1960s onward, who, through his writings, gave this practice to the world. Of course, Keating was only one among many and there were other bright lights, notably Thomas Merton and Basil Pennington, who discovered the same.
Perhaps, I should more correctly have said "rediscovered," for the practice of inner silence is an ancient one and one shared by all the great spiritual traditions of the world. It has gone by the names "meditation," "contemplation," "silence," "stillness" and in practice has sitting, and standing and walking, and moving forms. It has Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Doaist and secular forms. There are different explanations of what goes on psychologically or metaphysically or physiologically. My suspicion is that all the traditions have discovered the same thing. There is a way to the Ultimately Real and the Way feels much the same. It's only a suspicion based on smelling the rose in different traditions. I confess to never having tried kabalistic meditation, or sufi dance, of tantric yoga. I have experienced Buddhist meditation (zazen sitting and walking), Doaist meditation (qigong, taiji) and Christian contemplation and centering prayer. Tentative conclusion? Smells like a rose to me.
You might like to read Jack's blog and get in touch with the literature, and through it get in touch with the Great Silence. Cheers Jack+!
+Ab. Andy