What is the common ground that unites Christian and non–Christian monasticism? What are the points of contact in the search for the absolute and where are the differences? One answer to these questions is given by the Trappist Francis Mahieu (of Scourmont) in the monastery of Kurisumala in India; since 1958, his community has been seeking to combine the Trappist ideal with Hindu elements. Father Bede Griffiths has been going even farther at Shantivanam since 1969.

The Benedictine communities of Asia are seeking other forms of dialogue and inculturation. The meeting at Bangalore (1973) and in Kandy (Sri Lanka–1980) showed clearly the progress made in the formation of consciousness. It is clear however, that the few Benedictines in Asia cannot solve the questions before them by themselves; they need the help and assistance of the whole Benedictine Confederation. Therefore, the AIM Secretariat organized a special section of interreligious dialogue: the DIM (Dialogue Inter–Monasteres) in Europe and the NABEWD (North American Board for East–West Dialogue) in North America.

Our task is limited to the dialogue between Catholic monasticism and non–Christian monks. Monks are in fact challenged and called upon to collaborate. “The DIM/NABEWD subcommissions should limit themselves to the concrete questions which flow from contacts with a non–Christian monasticism in the area where the monastery is located” (cf. AIM Bulletin #27, pp. 44f, English edition). Within this framework we have an important and specific contribution to make in the dialogue with other religions.

The primary task of DIM and NABEWD must be to help our Benedictine brothers and sisters in Asia in their dialogue with non–Christian monks, to prepare them for this important task and to provide the necessary scientific formation. Workshops are one excellent way of fostering this dialogue. . . . We must also show how the Rule of St. Benedict can be an inspiration for non–Christian monks: Most Asiatic monks live by begging rather than manual work (Rule of Benedict, 48.8): “Then they are true monks, when they live by the work of their hands.” In Hindu monasticism the caste system still plays an important role (Rule of Benedict 2.20): “Whether slave or free, we are all one in Christ and carry an equal burden of service in the army of the same Lord.” The community plays a subordinate role in Oriental monasticism; for St. Benedict it is central. Could not these and similar values exercise a positive influence on non–Christian monasticism?

For an authentic encounter, it is useful not only for Christians to go to Asia and to the monasteries there, but also for Buddhist, Shinto and Hindu monks to have the opportunity to become acquainted with the Catholic monasteries of Europe and the United States. This will make it possible to have a responsible dialogue based on adequate knowledge. Positive and encouraging efforts have been made in this area in recent years, providing time for conversation, mutual exchange and for getting acquainted as well as participating fully in the monastic life. In the words of the late Cardinal Sergio Pignedoli, then President of the Secretariat for non–Christians (1974): “If we were to present ourselves to Buddhism and Hinduism, not to mention other religions, without the monastic experience, we should hardly be credible as religious men in their eyes.”

We are only at the beginning of a long road in getting to know each other and in searching for the common ground in our quest for the absolute. But faced with the common threat of atheistic materialism, that is no small thing.