|
Understanding the essence of religious traditions in the contemporary world
By Mohammad Nejatullah Siddiqi
Ever since the human race was
launched on earth it was
destined to live together. That
was an added challenge to the
challenge of coming to terms
with the environment and with
life itself—the inevitable
questions of why, wherefrom and
whereto. Religion came to help
mankind in facing all the three
challenges. Broadly speaking it
did so by connecting men and
women to God and reassuring
mankind that the environment too
owed its existence to Him.
Religion thus became a source of
harmony protecting from
schizophrenia, depression and
conflict.
What about the contemporary
world? Instant communication,
fast dissemination of
information, shrinking of space
and removal of many barriers,
has elevated ‘living together’
from the status of a metaphor to
that of description of reality.
Cultures intermix, dress codes
change and cuisines
cross-fertilize. Gone are the
days of living in exclusive
communities, comprising one’s
coreligionists only. Living
spaces are now increasingly
shared by individuals and
families who belong to different
ethnic groups and speak
different languages. Added to
these needs for adjustments are
some new worries.
Expanding markets create new
opportunities but individuals
and groups face new risks and
uncertainties. The strong find
new weapons while the weak seek
new alliances to defend
themselves against hegemonic
designs. Anxieties increase,
depression deepens, conflicts
multiply. But the system itself
fails to reverse these
destructive trends or release
forces that could successfully
counterbalance them. National
governments as well as supra
national organizations, instead
of solving the problem
increasingly appear as part of
the problem. The need for a
harmonizer was never greater.
Could recourse to the religious
traditions serve humanity at
this critical juncture? Could
religion play, once again, the
positive role it played at the
dawn of human society?
Some demur, saying: Never again!
They see religion as a divisive
force, pitching individuals
against individuals, groups
against groups. Some feel
religion robs men and women of
their reason, their independence
of mind, their freedoms, in
effect enslaving them to other
humans claiming to be their
guides and mentors. Religions,
certain about the truths they
bear, lack tolerance for others,
eventually making their
adherents fanatics. Religion,
they claim, is by nature
paternalistic and authoritarian,
discouraging creativity,
innovations and experimentation
that have been sources of
progress. They find religion in
history entertaining hegemonic
designs serving easily as tools
in the hand of colonizers and
imperial powers. Many a war has
been fought in the name of
religion spilling innocent
blood, they assert.
Spokes-persons from every
religion have come forward to
ward off these allegations and
defend their positions. Mistakes
of the past should not stand in
the way of realizing potentials
for the future, they rightly
suggest. Focus on the essence of
the religious traditions rather
than being bogged down by the
details, many of which might
well turn out to be transient or
space-bound, they argue. They
are being heard. They have to
be, as the dominant paradigm
fails to prove it can correct
itself. There is nothing in the
secular tradition to restrain
greed, limit hegemony or replace
exploitation by fair
distribution of wealth and
income. Materialistic
philosophies provide no credible
basis for justice and equity,
without which there can be no
peace. Pragmatism was always a
tool of the strong and
resourceful, justifying their
exploitation of the weak and the
poor.
As a student of Islam it will be
my endeavor to explain how Islam
answers the needs of
contemporary humanity. I will
also argue that the Islamic
approach is not essentially
different from the other
religious traditions so that
forging a common platform is
very much possible. A common
minimum agenda for the rescue of
contemporary humanity evolved
jointly by religions could also
accommodate the aspirations of
any and all that would still
like to keep away from
religions. That kind of
non-confrontational,
accommodative platform would not
only be the right venue for
dialogue between civilizations.
It could well be the harbinger
of a new era of peace and
prosperity, free of tyranny and
destitution. But all that
requires a fresh understanding
of the essence of religious
traditions. The crucial question
is, who will do that?
Islam as essential religion
Man-God relation defines as well
as shapes all other relations in
Islam—relations between man and
man as well as relation between
man and environment, for
example. Since man-God relation
is based on choice free of
coercion, freedom and
non-coercion becomes the prior
most essential tradition. The
fact that man-to- man relations
are under the umbrella of
man-God relation inculcates a
sense of equality and shared
dignity. Environment as God’s
gift to accountable-equals,
sharing the God-given space
becomes a partner in the art of
living together. Conflicts
arising at any level in any one
of these relationships should be
regarded as inappropriate and
disruptive of good life. The
method of conflict resolution
befitting moral equals would be
democratic and none else. Islam
links peace with faith and
avoidance of inappropriate
behavior:
“Those who believed and did not
mix their faith with
inappropriate behavior, they are
the ones who have peace and who
are on the right course.”( 6:82)
The Quranic word translated
above as ‘inappropriate
behavior’ is zulm.
Lexicographers render it as
placing things in wrong
positions ( wad ‘ al-shay’ e fi
ghair e mahallihi).It is also
rendered as transgression or
oppression, depending on the
context. One example of zulm
would be denying dignity to any
human being as according to
Quran dignity belongs to humans
qua humans (17:70).This, along
with the nature of life on earth
as a test (67:2) and the
principle of non coercion
(2:256), firmly places a
Muslim’s relation with the
non-Muslim humanity as that of
equals in being God’s people
whose right to choose is
recognized, without an error in
choice affecting his or her
dignity as a human being.
I hope I will not be
misunderstood when I say that a
person’s right to choose
necessarily implies another
person’s right to disagree from
him or her. We the fraternity of
religious people should not
flinch in accepting that idea.
The conviction that one is
right, with the corollary that
someone else is wrong, is
nothing to be embarrassed about.
It is not bigotry. It does not
necessarily lead to fanaticism.
What corrupts society and
destroys peace is the desire of
some to lord over others, to
deprive them of their right to
choose, to violate their dignity
by coercing them into a way of
life they did not choose. Islam
rejects that approach and so do
all religions worth the name. So
let freedom with dignity be the
first plank of our common
agenda.
A Common Agenda
Social equality, democratic
decision-making and economic
justice tempered with equity are
in line, next to freedom. Each
one of these can be supported by
the sacred texts of Islam. I am
sure the same would be true of
all world religions represented
here. Instead of taking your
time by producing references and
cross-references, I proceed to
note that these are also the
core values required for meeting
the aspirations of human beings
the world over in the wake of
globalization. But,
unfortunately these are the very
values large masses of humanity
are being persistently denied.
Further to lament is the fact
that these are the masses that
declare allegiance to religion.
What went wrong? Does the blame
lie entirely on the ‘other’, the
former colonizers and/or the
hegemonic superpower? Or, did
religion as shaped by layers of
corrupting influences over
centuries fail to sustain these
values in practice? Why and how
do hegemonies persist despite
being out of tune with the will
of humanity at large? Why and
how do religious communities
fail to cleanse themselves of
the unwanted accretions that
submerge their core values under
a morass of rites and rituals?
Analysis and soul- searching
leading to light rather than
unproductive heat and
self-destructive rage are what
we owe to ourselves and to
posterity.
Meanwhile I humbly submit that
no system of core values bereft
of a spiritual basis can sustain
itself. Rational agendas
collapse when under attack by
racist or fascist forces. It is
only faith in a just God that
can sustain morality that is
universal in its scope,
unqualified by nationality,
ethnicity, religion, color or
caste. Social equality,
democratic decision-making and
economic justice, tempered with
equity, are not sustainable by
mere slogans or pragmatic
platforms. These values must be
internalized by individuals
before they can be actualized in
institutions and organizations.
They must come to them
naturally, as they would in the
wake of faith and
accountability. They are the
values unbiased nature of man
cherishes, before one is
(falsely, I think) led to
believe that one’s survival
or/and progress requires one to
tolerate inequality, allow
exploitation of some, deny
democracy to others and opt for
double standards in dealing with
the ‘other’. Once that fallacy
is exposed, and an appeal to the
good sense of men and women is
made from their counterparts in
all and every religious group,
we can expect positive response
from all quarters, including
those benefiting from the status
quo.
I will be the last person to
entertain a utopian dream of
moral appeals bringing down
empires and ushering in a regime
of fair distribution of wealth
and power across the globe. A
struggle may well ensue. But the
strength required to win in that
struggle can come only from a
clear moral stand, universal in
its appeal, unfettered by the
past baggage many of us are
carrying.
Responding to the Challenge
That, I think, is the challenge
religions are facing. Steering
clear of the blame game and
cutting across the web of
conspiracy theories, can we
reach the hearts and minds of
contemporary men and women to
inculcate in them the above
mentioned core values by
reconnecting them with the
source of all value? It is no
small order as it calls for a
measure of humility and
self-sacrifice not very visible
in our ranks, the ranks of the
advocates of great religions.
Deliverance lies in suppressing
the ego and effacing the self.
Let individuals reconnect to the
divine. Let them do it on their
own without imposing on them our
dated interpretations of the
sacred texts. Trust them. Make
them aware of the stakes. Tell
them nothing less than the very
survival of human race is
involved. Encourage them to rise
above the parochial and the
transient and target the
universal and the durable, but
do not dictate recipes out of
secondary texts long outdated.
Give them time to think, discuss
and experiment..
Can we rise to this challenge?
Need we?
We do, for two reasons. Firstly,
the energy that is released by
one’s drawing inspiration from
God through His revelation and
worship cannot come from
following guides and mentors
themselves as far removed from
divinity as any other seeker. We
need the maximum possible
level of spiritual strength and
moral conviction in religious
communities for successfully
resisting the onslaught of
secular materialist
globalization. We also need it
for building a new world order
based on spirituality, morality,
equality, democratic decision
making and economic justice
tempered with equity. As we
noted above, such conviction and
moral strength can come only
from direct approach to divine
revelations. The selflessness
that comes out of direct
allegiance to God eludes those
who must connect with Him
through intermediaries no better
than themselves. The humility
needed to prevent chauvinism
taking over the global project
for reconstruction eludes those
whose heads are not permanently
lowered in His presence that is
always around.
Yet other reason every man and
woman must be encouraged to seek
guidance directly from the
source is the novelty of the
situation in which we find
ourselves. Nothing similar ever
occurred in history. We need
unfettered exercise of human
ingenuity. We need untutored
reading of the sacred texts. For
these two are the only sources
of fresh ideas and new guidance
suited to meet the challenges of
change: the word of God and the
human capacity to think,
observe, imagine and
intuit…Religious mentors who
deny these sources to the common
man, claiming a monopoly of
these sources, commit the
gravest of all sins. They have
no right to do so. They do not
have a divine mandate for
appropriating the role of
interpreting God .Nor can they
justify their claim that they
are better equipped for
intellection and intuition than
other people. The question then
is, why do they do so?
I think they are afraid. They
think people will make mistakes.
Men and women will err in
reading and understanding the
sacred texts and they will err
in thinking about their new
problems and arriving at correct
solutions. Different people will
come up with different
interpretations and suggest
different solutions. There will
be chaos. Chaos is bad enough
but chaos in the name of
religion is unacceptable as it
may destroy the very credibility
of religion, they fear.
I will submit two points for
consideration in this regard.
Firstly, these fears are ill
founded and exaggerated, without
any basis in history. And,
secondly, the alternative course
of action they are adopting
bears no promise of redeeming
the situation.
Taking the first point first, I
would remind all concerned that
it is God Himself Who invited
His people to read the text, or
listen to it being read to them,
ponder over it and be guided by
it. He also urged them to think,
observe, travel, dialogue,
introspect…and draw lessons.[1]
God knows His people better than
we might ever know ourselves. We
must resign ourselves to His
ways and trust men and women in
seeking guidance directly from
the sacred texts. We must not
deter them from thinking
independently on the problems
facing them. The fresh
understanding of religious
traditions needed at this hour
need not be a prerogative of the
elite in religion. It will
simply not do. In order to be
really effective it has to come
from the grass roots and
encompass all.
It should also be expected that
in their independent pursuit of
guidance men and women will
adopt all the ways and means
available, such as exchange of
views, analytical survey of
experiments past and present,
researches, simulations, etc.,
etc. They are expected to avail
themselves of the services of
their religious guides if and
when they need them. But these
services should not be imposed
on them. All that religious
guides and mentors need do is
try keeping their followers
focused on the main project: a
world order characterized by
morality, equality, democratic
decision-making and justice.
There is no alternative. No
religious establishment has so
far been able to launch such a
project. No religion has been
able to initiate a mass movement
against the onslaught of
secular, materialist hegemonic
globalization. The probability
that any one of them may be able
to do so in future is
accompanied by the certainty
that its appeal will be confined
to its own followers, unable to
cut across the religious
divisions. What we need is
universal focus on a spiritually
defined order that affords all
religious traditions equal
opportunity of contributing.
Going back to the grass roots
and seeking guidance directly
from whatever is recognizably
divine in human heritage, in the
full glare of the light given by
reason and intellect aided by
intuition, imagination and all
kinds of inspirations……, is the
only course of action with some
chance of success. Let us
mobilize all our resources in
favor of such an agenda. God
willing, we shall succeed.
[1] I
can quote only from
Quran See
96:1;34:46;16:44;22:46;
6:98;7:185
.;12:109;28:72;35:29;2:121,
among other verses.(The
first number refers to
chapters and the second
to verses).
|