Introduction

Comparative theology forms an integral part of every religious and theological tradition. Throughout history, religions have developed their beliefs, practices, and overall sense of identity through a process of borrowing, refuting, and reinterpreting elements from other religious traditions. Any new religion builds on the materials of prior religions through a play of adoption and rejection that remains profoundly indebted to the other. And in the course of history, religions continue to consciously or unconsciously absorb ideas and practices of other religions even as they clash with one another or coexist in the same cultural sphere. As such, the reality of religious growth and change through engaging the teachings and practices of other religions is as old as the history of religions.

What is new about the modern discipline of comparative theology is the conscious, open, and systematic engagement of other religions in the process of theological development. While religious borrowing traditionally happened unwittingly or without revealing its source, comparative theology openly acknowledges and credits other religions as a possible repository for constructive theological insight and inspiration. This attitude of humility and generosity toward other religions is the result of both historical and theological developments, and of the remarkable scholarly advances in the study of religions in the course of the past century.

A synthesis of religious studies and theology, comparative theology draws from the methods of both disciplines. From the history and the comparative study of religions, it has inherited not only a vast amount of scholarly material, but also an understanding of the complexity and diversity of religious tradition and of the need to focus on particular texts, teachings or practices. It has also gained a keen awareness of the challenges and instability of applying "what the one thing shows me to the case of two things"1 and of the fact that comparing religions is, as Kimberley Patton puts it, "like juggling torches; either we mishandle them and they will burn and wither us, or else our faces will begin to glow."2 Comparative theologians are thus expected to engage in an in-depth study of another religion, of its languages and history in order to understand a particular religious text in its own historical and cultural context and in order to perform relevant and fruitful comparisons. Like theology, on the other hand, comparative theology is oriented to gaining not only greater understanding of a particular religious phenomenon, but of the ultimate reality and truth itself. It is thus an explicitly normative discipline that involves the comparison of religions from a faith perspective and/or for the purpose of advancing theological understanding.

Though the term theology may be seen to suggest a focus on teachings, texts, and purely speculative or philosophical understanding, comparative theology may be applied to ritual practices, ethical principles, spiritual practices, and institutional and artistic forms.3 The absorption of elements from other religions on a popular level indeed generally occurs in the area of ritual practices, leaving speculative theology to the level of second order reflection. And artists are often at the forefront of comparative theological activity, expressing through sculptures, paintings or architecture a vision of reality which includes inspiration from various religious traditions and which may in turn become the basis for further reflection. To be sure, sacred texts form a relatively stable and accessible component of religious traditions, and often contain a blueprint or record of other forms of religious expression. They also tend to be more hermeneutically flexible and thus open to different interpretations within and across religious traditions. While it is thus not surprising that comparative theology often focuses on texts, it may involve any dimension of religions.

Though a relatively new discipline, comparative theology has taken different forms. Not only is there a natural diversity depending on the religions involved and the topics addressed, but even within one and the same religion, theologians have developed different conceptions of the nature and goal of the discipline. This is already reflected in the various definitions of comparative theology. While some emphasize the tradition-based or confessional origin and goal of comparative theology, others present it as a transreligious or meta-confessional discipline. David Tracy defines comparative theology as "any explicitly intellectual interpretation of a religious tradition that affords a central place to the fact of religious pluralism in the tradition's self-interpretation."4 This broad definition attempts to avoid the particularity of the term "theology" while also including internal religious reflection on the very fact of religious plurality (often called "theology of religions"). Focusing more specifically on the actual process of comparison, Francis Clooney defines comparative theology as:

acts of faith seeking understanding which are rooted in a particular faith tradition but which, from that foundation, venture into learning from one or more other faith traditions. This learning is done for the sake of fresh theological insights that are indebted to the newly encountered tradition/s as well as the home tradition.5

This classical definition emphasizes the confessional nature of comparative theology while pointing to the possibility for theological change and growth through learning from other religious traditions. The constructive dimension is also in evidence in James Fredericks's definition of comparative theology as "not only a revisionist but also a constructive project in which theologians interpret the meaning and truth of one tradition by making critical correlations with the classics of another religious tradition."6

While these definitions thus approach comparative theology from within the self-understanding of a particular religion, others seek to move beyond the boundaries of any particular religion. John Thatamanil describes comparative theology as engaging "specific texts, motifs and claims of particular traditions not only to understand better these traditions but also to determine the truth of theological matters through conversation and collaboration."7 Whereas confessional comparative theologians might seek to elucidate the truth of their own traditions, religious truth is here considered more open-ended, to be determined in the process of comparative theological engagement. Thatamanil still emphasizes the relationship between theological reflection and practice when he states that "Comparative theology in its constructive dimension seeks to do what theology has done always and everywhere: guide and orient faithful practice, especially when practice assumes forms heretofore unseen."8 Here, however, faithful practice may or may not be understood in terms of traditional religious communities.

Keith Ward draws a sharp contrast between confessional theology as "the exploration of a given revelation by one who wholly accepts that revelation and lives by it" and comparative theology as "theology not as a form of apologetics for a particular faith but as an intellectual discipline which enquires into ideas of the ultimate value and goal of human life, as they have been perceived and expressed in a variety of religious traditions."9 Here, comparative theology thus draws from the teachings of various religious traditions without privileging or assuming the perspective of any one in particular. Perry Schmidt-Leukel speaks of interreligious theology as a process of reflecting on one's own tradition "in order to see what possible contribution might be made to the issues on the agenda of a global interreligious inquiry." He believes that "theology, instead of being an essentially denominational enterprise, will become increasingly interreligious."10 In the same universalizing vein, Ram-Prasad Chakravarthi similarly conceives of comparative theology as "a global discourse beyond cultural hegemonies."11 Though these comparative theologians still acknowledge a home tradition, and draw from the material of various religions, they thus seek to move beyond the confines of any particular tradition. Chapter 1 elaborates on this basic distinction between confessional and meta-confessional approaches to comparative theology.

There is an ongoing debate - at least among Christian comparative theologians - about the relationship between comparative theology and theology of religions, the latter referring to the religious conceptions of the status of other religions. While some argue that comparative theology should be conducted without prejudices as to the presence of truth in other religions, others insist that the very engagement with other religions already reflects an implicit theology of religions.12 In Chapter 2, I will discuss various religious views of the status of other religions and their direct impact on the ways in which comparative theology is conducted.

Though comparative theology, like comparative religion, presupposes in-depth study of the other religion and an effort to understand the religious other on its own terms, it also is particularly attuned to the historical and cultural shaping of all understanding across religious and cultural borders, and to...