From my presentation of Schuon's argument, it is clear how any charge of inclusivism against this author is misplaced. Rather, his position and worries are probably closer to the pluralism endorsed in The Myth of Christian Uniqueness than the authors of the latter suspect. Schuon cannot be in anyway considered an inclusivist, insofar as in his view no religion can exhaust the totality of truth. However, the discussion of a particular religious tradition in relationship to the universal metaphysics underlying it, must be conducted by someone himself religiously committed. I believe this to be the reason why thinkers like Driver fail to acknowledge the nature of Schuon's thought. The former seem to conceive their being embedded in a religious
