Author’s note
To understand this conclusion, it is best to read the following three-part humorous series. The conclusion is presented first because it brings the three articles together.
Part One: Easy to Send Someone to Hell
Part Two: Which Hell Won? There Was No NOTA
Which Hell Won? There Was No NOTA
Part Three: Can I Choose My Heaven Without Taking Your Hell?
Conclusion
Perhaps that is the real difficulty with interfaith dialogue.
The theologians may leave the discussion satisfied that they have explained their respective traditions more clearly. They may even have discovered points of agreement where they once saw only differences. But the ordinary person who has been listening patiently may be forgiven for wondering whether anything has actually become clearer.
He came with one simple question: How should I live my life?
Instead, he has been given several theologies of salvation, competing definitions of faith, different understandings of God, sin, grace, karma, rebirth, heaven and hell—and, finally, several perfectly respectable reasons why everyone else may still be wrong.
Perhaps interfaith dialogue is valuable precisely because it teaches us to listen to one another. But if, after all the listening, the common man is left more confused about how to live than when he arrived, something important has been missed.
For ordinary people, religion need not always settle the question of which theology wins. It should at least help answer the more immediate question: How can I live this life without making hell for myself or for others?
Because when religions that are supposed to bring unity and peace among people have already made life on earth a kind of hell, then even if one has to go to some hell after death, perhaps one can manage it better there than going to a heaven where there is still division and separation—only now justified as “Unity but not Uniformity.”
And that, perhaps, is a question on which the theologians might actually agree.
If religions sometimes divide people more than they bring them together, as the familiar saying goes, “doctrine divides,” and if theology can sometimes produce more confusion than clarity, why not allow the ordinary person his own modest, layman’s theology: the freedom to choose one heaven rather than another hell?
After all, the scriptures themselves have not succeeded in presenting every doctrine without internal controversies and disagreements. No scripture or theology can empirically predict what heaven or hell will actually be like. No one has returned from either place to give us a firsthand account. Much of what we are told about the afterlife therefore remains an interpretation of texts, traditions and theological convictions.
That does not make scriptures, faith or theology meaningless. But it may give the ordinary person a legitimate reason not to live in anxiety over competing claims about what awaits him after death.
Perhaps, then, it is better for a lay person to live with a little theological ignorance than with the anxiety produced by competing certainties about heaven and hell.
If we cannot agree on which heaven awaits us, perhaps we can at least agree on one thing: let us not make this earth a hell for one another while arguing about who will get to which heaven.
That may not settle the question of salvation.
But it might at least help us learn how to live.
Can I Choose My Heaven Without Taking Your Hell?
The voting was over.
The Hindu Hell had won with a comfortable two-thirds majority. To everyone’s surprise, several of the panellists themselves had voted for it.
One Christian panellist was particularly intrigued by the result. He requested a private conversation with the ordinary man whose question had started the whole debate.
They sat down together.
The Christian Panellist (CP) came straight to the point.
CP: “Let me ask you something. If you had to choose one Heaven from among the different Heavens described by different faiths, which one would you choose?”
The Audience Dialogue Partner (ADP) thought for a moment.
ADP: “The Christian Heaven.”
The CP looked pleased.
Then the ADP added:
“But I would choose the Hindu Hell.”
The CP nearly fell off his chair.
CP: “No, no! You cannot do that. If you choose the Christian Heaven, you have to accept the Christian Hell as well.”
ADP: “Why?”
CP: “Because Heaven and Hell belong to the same theological system.”
ADP: “Oh. I didn’t know they came as a package.”
The CP looked slightly uncomfortable.
ADP: “Anyway, let me explain why I chose the Christian Heaven.” He continued:
“From what I have understood, it is not simply a matter of going somewhere in the sky and sitting there forever. There is the promise of a New Heaven and a New Earth. God comes to dwell with humanity. There is a transformed creation. People from different parts of the world can be there. There is still some kind of created reality, but transformed. That sounds much more attractive to me than a completely disembodied existence.”
The CP nodded approvingly.
ADP: “And there is another important advantage.”
CP: “What is that?”
ADP: “No more marriage.”
The CP paused.
ADP: “As a person who prefers to remain single and live quietly, I find that particularly attractive.”
The CP smiled.
CP: “Very well. But if you like the Christian understanding of Heaven so much, why not become a Christian?”
ADP: “Because I still have a problem with the Hell.”
CP: “But the fear of Hell should keep you spiritually alert. Scripture itself speaks about working out your salvation with fear and trembling.”
ADP: “I understand. But that is precisely why I am cautious. I don’t want to spend this life worrying about whether I have correctly chosen the right interpretation, only to discover after death that I chose the wrong Hell.”
The CP looked puzzled.
ADP: “Let me put it another way. I am perfectly happy to consider your Heaven. But I don’t want to take the Hell that comes with it.”
CP: “That is not how theology works.”
ADP: “Perhaps. But I am not doing theology. I am trying to plan my afterlife.”
The CP had no immediate answer.
The ADP continued:
“If your New Heaven and New Earth allow diversity, different identities and different ways of living, perhaps I could remain who I am while enjoying the larger reality. I could even imagine creating my own little corner of Heaven.”
CP: “Within the Christian Heaven?”
ADP: “Yes.”
CP: “And you still want your Hindu identity?”
ADP: “Certainly. Why should I give up my birth identity merely because I have crossed the boundary between Earth and Heaven?”
The CP thought for a moment.
CP: “But you cannot have your own private version of everything. There must be some unity.”
ADP: “Unity without uniformity?”
The CP smiled.
CP: “Exactly.”
ADP: “Wonderful. Then perhaps we can have the same principle in Hell.”
The CP’s smile disappeared.
CP: “No. Hell is different.”
ADP: “Why?”
CP: “There is only one Hell.”
ADP: “Only one?”
CP: “Yes.”
ADP: “But Heaven can have diversity, different identities and unity without uniformity, while Hell has to be one-size-fits-all?”
The CP was silent.
The ADP continued:
“And what if another Christian denomination understands Hell differently? Which Christian Hell am I supposed to choose?”
The CP began to explain the differences between theological traditions.
The ADP listened patiently.
Then he said: “I’m beginning to understand the problem.”
CP: “What problem?”
ADP: “There are many interpretations of Heaven, many interpretations of Hell, many interpretations of salvation and many interpretations of who gets where.” He paused. “Yet I am expected to make one correct choice in this life and somehow know which interpretation God will accept after I die.”
The CP looked at him.
The ADP smiled.
“Perhaps that is why I prefer the first election. At least there we were allowed to vote.”
The CP laughed despite himself.
“But seriously,” he continued, “I am not trying to reject your faith. I am only saying that, for an ordinary person, all these competing theological explanations can become very confusing.”
He paused again.
“If Heaven is so difficult to understand, and Hell is even more difficult, perhaps the safest thing is to concentrate on how we live here.”
The CP looked thoughtful.
Then the ADP added:
“Of course, if there is a facility for choosing my own Heaven and Hell after death, please let me know. I would like to reserve my place early.”
The CP finally laughed.
“All right,” he said. “You may have your Christian Heaven.”
The ADP smiled.
“And my Hindu Hell?”
The CP hesitated.
“Let us discuss that separately.”
And that, perhaps, was the only agreement they reached that evening.
Ashram, August, 18, 2026
Leave a Reply