As a theological discipline dealing not only with death and afterlife, but also taking into account larger doctrinal contexts of salvation and human nature, eschatology as a whole is concerned with the ultimate end of human existence. The meaning of human existence in the present is often established by anticipating its final goal. Reflecting on ultimate matters exclusively from a confessional perspective would not pay justice to the universal nature of its subject matter. Therefore, in the context of religious plurality, the scope of eschatology needs to be expanded globally by constructively taking into account the experiences and reflections of all religious traditions. During the last years, scholars have become increasingly aware of the great potential of dialogical reflections on eschatology. This panel will explore challenges and opportunities of doing eschatology in the spearheading field of Comparative Theology from perspectives rooted in different religious backgrounds.
In this paper I shall discuss three contemporary Christian, Muslim, and Jewish eschatologies and their respective way of relating to the religious Other. However, the inner dynamics of these ‘exclusivistic’ eschatologies have different consequences with regard to the religious Other: the Christian theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg advocating an eschatological exclusivism, the Muslim scholar Ahmad Sakr developing a soteriological exclusivism, and the Jewish thinker Michael Wyschogrod representing a particularistic exclusivism. Comparing the respective sort of exclusivism in these three eschatologies, I will discuss the ways in which each of these eschatologies are not exclusive and map different levels of exclusion in eschatology. It is therefore not enough to ask if there is hope, but it is also of importance to deeper analyze what is the eschatological hope for the Other. Finally, I will highlight three non-exclusivistic traits in these eschatologies, providing challenges and contributions to eschatologies in interreligious contexts.
The application of a fresh lens on eschatology in light of plurality is an extraordinarily important theological question. The question that arises from the Hindu perspective, in light of such an eschatological question arising from Comparative Theology, is whether plurality’s interplay with the law of karma, in such a discourse, renders irrelevant certain aspects of doctrine related to dharma that is specific to age, class, gender, etc., which have traditionally been associated with the souls journey to liberation and eschatology in general. Contemplation on such considerations leaves a path to spiritual liberation—that telos of Hindu life—that is more just, expansive, compassionate, and aware of the interwoven nature of human existence.
This paper will compare the conceptions of the otherworld and of spiritual realization in the teachings of Ibn al-‘Arabī and Shinran Shonin. According to both, paradise or the Pure Land, respectively, are not simply otherworldly because simultaneously, they are immanent in the phenomenal world. This suggests that spiritual realization may take place twice, i.e. in this world and the next, reflected in Ibn al-‘Arabī’s vision of heavenly journeys or spiritual ascensions of the prophets and saints and in Shinran’s teaching of ōjō, birth in the Pure Land. I will further explore how Ibn al-‘Arabī and Shinran approach the prevailing Sufi and Buddhist view of an unsatisfactory physical world that needs to be relinquished. Furthermore, I will examine how the all-encompassing mercy of God or compassion of Amida relate to the denizens of hell or to a possible salvation of icchantikas, those lacking the seed of Buddhahood.
The doctrine of hell is an important contemporary challenge for Comparative Theology. In this paper, I will explore possibilities for overcoming doctrinal problems posed by eternal, punitive, and exclusivist conceptions of hell by comparing two alternative approaches from the Buddhist and Christian traditions. First, in Mahāyāna Buddhism, the hells (naraka/niraya) are conceived as temporary saṃsāric sojourns under the salvific influence of the bodhisattvas. Second, the controversial Christian thinker Origen of Alexandria has argued for a purgative interpretation of hell as part of a postmortem spiritual therapy eventually leading to the salvation of all (apokatastasis). Based on Buddhist-Christian comparison, I will argue that comparative eschatology sheds new light on doctrinal alternatives for traditional interpretations of hell, on the one hand suggesting a re-balancing of divine love and justice, on the other hand preparing the ground for an eschatological interpretation of religious plurality beyond the aporia of religious exclusivism.