Read the books
atmosphear added an entry about learn more about other religions:
I thought of posting this as a main article, so I rewrote the reply I wrote here.
—
Traditions mix up a lot the original ideas religions or philosophies have. E.g. Christianism cares nowadays very little of the original ideas of Jesus and throughout the mixture of especially Roman polytheistic customs (and of the countries originally invaded by Christian expansion, like France, Spain and Germany). Religions are often a lot less of the original ideas than customs (like Christmas which derives from Saturnalia which was so conveniently just replaced with purpose to serve a different religion) that have been adapted to local beliefs.
For example Taoism has very little to do with all of the burning of money in the New Year (Chinese, of course) instead of actually following the philosophy of Lao Tse and (my own favorite) Chuang-Tsu.
Buddhism doesn’t talk about reincarnation, but rebirth, which isn’t limited to death. “We”(* are born again every moment, and every moment brings a completely new existence, which turns again (and again and again) into completely new existence. Basically it’s the core of the Impermanence of Life.
I begun writing the original reply because of a person, who said that better than reading books would be to find a believer and speak with them. This is where I disagree: you can learn the customs and beliefs by interacting, but to get the more original idea it is best to read more objective analysis of the philosophy behind the religion. If you took an Indian from the jungles of Amazon and showed him that “this is how we celebrate Easter” (now what does the Easter (and where does the name come from) Bunny have to do with crusufication of Jesus or Jews celebrating end of their exile) he probably wouldn’t get any idea of what Jesus actually was trying to say.
I don’t say that interaction would be bad (just the opposite), but learning what common believers think is usually a bad thing. I wouldn’t trust an average Christian to teach me about Christianism or an average Hindu telling me of Hinduism. They would be more likely extremely inaccurate in explaining reasons of their beliefs than to hit the spot.
So, read the books (or e.g. Wikipedia to learn at least superficially). The second best would be to get to know people who have converted into some other religion than their original, cultural surroundings provide or talk with atheists (or agnostics like me who have already been learning).
Otherwise I would say that learning is very important. Tolerance is a controversial ideology (logically it can be torn down from a common problem of “tolerating the intolerance”, which is straight against its own beliefs), but I would start by this pattern:
- Learn why someone believes in a certain way, understanding is essential
- Think if you agree or disagree
More important would be to learn to be more critical with your own beliefs and to learn the core of your own religion (and possibly get rid of a lot of habits and superstitions that tagged along as the religion changed).
Every moment in life should be, in my opinion, a turning point (again, the impermanence of life): be critical of your actions (and the lack of actions) and beliefs and do dare to change your point of view. Universe is more often right than me.
—Footnotes
*) “The concept of the self, the ego, is a false concept. To define something is to make it constant. But surely, how would you define yourself? Well first of all, you have a name. You could define yourself as having a certain physical appearance, of course. And you could define yourself as a person who has certain opinions, and certain mental aspects. But look closer, through these things. Your name is letters, but only sounds, and holds no real meaning. How do you look? You won’t look like that in 10 years, nor did you 10 years before. If you were to wear different clothes, shave or not shave, get a new haircut, you would look different. You would look different, not constant. And of course your mentality has always been the same, right? You think exactly as you did at any other point in time, didn’t you? Of course you don’t. There is no “self”, for any way to define yourself would not be constant, and therefore be an illusion. But when you expand your view beyond this ego, you realize there is an entire world, and all is part of this single world.”
—Buddhism on Everything2