The Hindu : Religions in dialogue

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Jun 17, 2003

Opinion

Opinion - Leader Page Articles

Religions in dialogue

By Mushirul Hasan

At a time when most of us live in multicultural and multireligious societies, it is important to reiterate faith in shared values and the commonality of religious tradition.

IN THE wake of the growing use of religion to exacerbate violence, can faith traditions offer resources for peace? How do religious identities impact conflict resolution processes? How might various actors — conflict transformation practitioners, political elites, trauma counsellors et al — act in unison with religious leaders and prevent ethno-religious violence? Recently in Delhi, students and researchers from the South Asian region discussed and debated these questions.

Let me add to this list another question: Can we put an end to persistent and negative perceptions, images and stereotypes of Islam in the West, and of Judaism and Christianity in the Muslim countries? Doubtless, we belong to different faiths, follow different religious traditions and worship according to different rites. Still, we can and should develop a civilised framework for disagreement.

The terrible events of September 2001 have exposed how religion can be used to fuel mindless violence and aggression. But it has also created solidarity among nations to counter terrorism, to strengthen the democratic spirit vis-a-vis theocratic rule, and to find solutions to long-standing disputes that breed anger and hatred. At a time when the geographical boundaries separating the followers of different religions are fast becoming more imaginary than real, we need to cultivate a deep sense of inter-faith trust. At a time when most of us live in multicultural and multireligious societies, it is important to reiterate faith in shared values and the commonality of religious tradition.

The obstacles are far too numerous to be enumerated here. Yet, historically, there has been no lack of interest in dialogue between adherents of different faiths. Indian civilisation has been in continuous relationships with other religions, cultures and civilisations. Nineteenth century reformers in Bengal and elsewhere underlined the high degree of spiritual affinity with other religions, a tradition exemplified in the writings of Rabindranath Tagore. Likewise, Muslims have come into contact with many religions, including Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism, Hinduism and Buddhism, not to speak of Christianity and Judaism inside and outside the Middle East. Sure enough, in the course of their encounters, they discovered the congruence of the basic tenets of all religions.

Listen to what the 18th century Urdu poet, Mir Taqi Mir, had to say in the couplet, "it is the power of His beauty that fills the world with light/Be it the Kaaba's candle or the light that lights Somnath." Listen, too, to what Urdu's outstanding 19th century poet, Mirza Ghalib, stated: "Faith stops me, if impiety pulls me towards itself/Kaaba is behind me, the church is in front of me."

Ghalib did not write for a Muslim audience or an exclusively Urdu-speaking readership. These distinctions did not matter to him. He was ill at ease with religious dogmas or traditionalism, and paid scant regard to Islam's outward observances. In fact, he respected Hinduism, admired Hindu practices, and commended the Hindu sites to his readers. In October 1827, he set out for Calcutta. Part of the way he travelled by river; the final stage, from Banaras to Calcutta, he did on horseback. Banaras enchanted him; hence the lyrical Persian poem of 108 couplets. The beauties of Banaras have "their coquetry in a rose garden intoxicated and brim-full of blandishment; their graceful walking embraces the hundred turmoils of Judgment Day."

In another poem, Ghalib says that a country's special customs must be preserved. Rejecting infidelity was very well, but not the Divine Bounty. "Negation without affirmation is nothing but error"; indeed, one cannot affirm God and deny His signs. "If Ganga hadn't rubbed its forehead at the feet of Banaras, it wouldn't be pure. And if the sun hadn't sailed through its nooks and corners, it wouldn't be so bright."

More than 30 years later, Ghalib still remembered his stay in Banaras with utmost pleasure: "What praise is too high for Banaras? Where else is there a city to equal it? The days of my youth were almost over when I went there. Had I been young in those days I would have settled down there and never come back this way."

Ghalib offered no programme of reform and change, and produced no student with clear-cut philosophies of life. As a poet, he simply disrupted prejudice wherever he found it. He wore no sectarian badge, no sectarian colour. "I hold mankind to be my kin," he told Hargopal Tufta, a devotee of Persian poetry, "and look upon all men — Muslim, Hindu and Christian — as my brothers, no matter what others may think".

Once while gazing at the sky, he was struck by the apparent chaos in the distribution of the stars. And he proclaimed: "there is no rhyme or reason in anything the self-willed do. Just look at the stars scattered in complete disorder. No proportion, no system, no sense, and no pattern. But their King has absolute power, and no one can breathe a word against Him".

Let me offer a few more examples from 19th-century India. Some form of inter-faith dialogue started at the College in Aligarh towards the end of the 19th century. Muhammad Ali, a student, perceived a need for Muslims to enter into conversation with Christian scholars so that the two groups might better understand their common history. The brief history of Islam that he outlines in his book shows us something of how he believed India's Muslims should think about their historical relationship with Christianity.

But it was Sayyid Ahmad, founder of the Aligarh Muslim University, who launched the project of strengthening mutual knowledge and respect between Muslims and Christians. He bought a substantial number of books on the Christian faith, read them systematically, and compared its tenets with the principle enjoined in the Koran. He wrote a commentary on the Bible to make it known to the Muslim public, and completed a commentary on Genesis 1 to II and on Mathew 1 to 5.

Having discovered close similarities between the two religions, he argued strongly for a closer understanding between Muslims and Christians. Traditions of tolerance, dissent and camaraderie, he argued, served as the perfect antidote to a mode of thinking that accentuated difference, religious in this case.

The dialogue initiated by these men proved to be only a brief flicker of light across the religious and cultural divide. Their initiatives were on a small and chiefly individual scale. Effective inter-religious dialogue was confined to a specific intellectual elite, in comparison with other Muslims whose views are only partially known to us. Today, there is an urgent necessity for renewing and revitalising dialogue between religions. The only alternative to dialogue is more dialogue.

What we need is an expanded tolerance in our approach to different religions and our understanding of the Muslim, Hindu and Christian ways. "No statement about a religion is valid unless it can be acknowledged by that religion's believers," stated W. C. Smith, a powerful proponent of dialogue among religions. In these radically changed circumstances, old rivalries cannot be renewed and the past battles cannot be fought on a modern turf. The point has certainly been reached when the religious `crusaders' should be told "enough is enough".

The immediate urgency is to celebrate the variety in religious expressions and to reject the agenda of the Christian right, the Zionists, the Islamists, and the votaries of Hindutva.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Need now is for restraint

Ban corporal punishment

Religions in dialogue

Atrocities on Adivasis — II

Maoists' bid to allay India's fears

German unity in peace and freedom