A fundamental principle of any such dialogue, in any real sense, is that it is nonsense to suggest that one religion abandon its doctrine or tenets to find common ground with another.
Thus, the quest for a 'synthetic' religion, most evident in many New Age compotes - a palatable and self-serving 'pick n mix' spirituality determined mostly by ego and sentimentalism, is metaphysically insupportable.
A Christian will never abandon the Three Persons of the Trinity in discussion with a Muslim who professes there is but One God. If he does he ceases to profess Christianity.
Likewise a Buddhist need accept that the Asiatic standpoint of an apparently non-theistic Objectivity is just one perspective, as the 'personal god' theism of a Divine Subjectivity in the West is another.
Such a dialogue can only occur when all participants accept the difference of their standpoints, and that 'degrees of difference' mark nothing more than the arc of a circle, at the centre of which lies that axis of their own and every other belief.
Thus, the quest for a 'synthetic' religion, most evident in many New Age compotes - a palatable and self-serving 'pick n mix' spirituality determined mostly by ego and sentimentalism, is metaphysically insupportable.
A Christian will never abandon the Three Persons of the Trinity in discussion with a Muslim who professes there is but One God. If he does he ceases to profess Christianity.
Likewise a Buddhist need accept that the Asiatic standpoint of an apparently non-theistic Objectivity is just one perspective, as the 'personal god' theism of a Divine Subjectivity in the West is another.
Such a dialogue can only occur when all participants accept the difference of their standpoints, and that 'degrees of difference' mark nothing more than the arc of a circle, at the centre of which lies that axis of their own and every other belief.