When it comes to religions, many people think that each of the major world religions see a part of religious truth, but none can see the whole truth. They often quote a well-worn Buddhist analogy involving blind guides and elephants. This is how the analogy normally goes: six blind guides were told to inspect an elephant and describe what they felt. The first touched the elephant’s head and said it was like a pot. Another touched the leg and said it was like a pillar, another touched the tail and said it was like a brush, and so on and so on. Then an argument broke out until the Buddha from his high position compared the blind men to religious teachers, saying that each saw only one side of the thing, yet each argued that his view was correct and quarrelled with the others.
From this analogy people will say that each of the major world religions sees one aspect of the whole picture, the whole spiritual reality, but none of them see it all. Therefore, they are all right in what they teach from one perspective, but none teach the whole picture, so none can claim to be the only way.
The problem with making this point from the elephant analogy is that you can only say that a person (or a religion) sees a part of the truth (but not the whole) if you can see the whole truth yourself. But this is exactly what the blind guides (who represent religious teachers) are condemned for, claiming that they can see the whole picture. In other words, how can you possibly know that no religion can see the whole truth unless you can see the whole truth yourself; but you have just said that no religion or religious teacher can do that. Or from another angle, how can you claim to see the whole picture (the true picture) when you are blasting Christianity (or any other religion for that matter) for claiming to have the one true view of the whole spiritual picture. This argument, and the elephant analogy, looks humble but in reality is arrogant and hypocritical.