“The need of the hour is to seek a more effective approach to further mutual understanding.”

Religion, in a generic sense, covers both the articles of faith or creed and a set of rituals emanating from them. The two are connected but not synonymous. Furthermore, all systems of faith also promulgate certain universal values and principles of human conduct that are similar to each other. On a metaphysical plain thinking about Creator, the Purpose of Creation, and the relationship between the Creator and the Created often tends to run along parallel lines and reaches proximate conclusions. Once that level is reached, commonalities prevail:

Hum muwahhid hain hamara kaish hai tark-e-rusoom

Millatain jab mit ga-een ajzaa-e-eeman ho ga-een

The first, and unquestionably the most important in the Indian context, is the contact between Islam and Hinduism. This was not a single point happening in space and time and response patterns were not uniform. In southern India Islam as a faith came through traders and had little difficulty in being accommodated. The story was different elsewhere in the Sub-continent where Islam was often identified with rulers; here too, however, response patterns varied and their homogenization does no service either to history or to proper understanding.

It is true that all social orders are impacted upon by belief systems as well as by politics. In order therefore to comprehend the interaction between the two, it is essential to distinguish between (a) a religious action that is politically relevant or conditioned and (b) a political action that is religiously relevant or conditioned. A good many examples in both categories can be found in history as well as in current practices.

An early example of Muslim perception of Hinduism is to be found in the Central Asian scholar Abu Rehan Alberuni’s account written in the early years of the 11th century. He candidly admitted the dissimilarities between the adherents of the two faiths, highlighted “the deeply rooted hatred” resulting from the invasion of Mahmud of Ghazna, and then wen ton to dwell on the essence of Hinduism:

“The Hindus believe with regard to God that he is one, eternal, without beginning and end, acting by free will, almighty, all-wise, living, giving life, ruling, preserving: one who in his sovereignty is unique, beyond all likeness and unlikeness, and that he does not resemble anything nor does anything resemble him.”

In a similar vein Amir Khusro in the 14th century said the Hindus are among those good people who believe in God who is omnipotent and omniscient and is “pure Truth and Inimitable Reality.”

Another example of this approach was Dara Shikoh’s Majmaul Bahrain wherein he concluded, with regard to Indian monotheism, that “he did not find any difference, except verbal, in the way they sought and comprehended Truth.” (Juz ikhtilaaf-e-lafzi dar daryaaft o shenaakht-e-Haq, tafaawati na deed).

In the 20th century, Muhammad Iqbal went even further in a popular poem, Hindustani Bachon Ka Qaumi Geet:

Wahdat ki lai suni thi dunya ne jis makaan se

Mir-e-Arab ko aai thandi hawa jahaan se

Mera watan wahi hai, mera watan wahi hai

These should have signaled a mutual appreciation of two systems of belief. The Mughal Emperor Akbar and his Prime Minister Abul-Fadl came close to such an appreciation. However, compulsions of statecraft directed the majority of rulers in an opposite direction. As a result, identities were principally sustained through the cultivation of prejudices rather than through spiritual and social values. Politics contributed to it in great measure. Rulers were motivated by political and economic considerations; principles of their faith rarely guided their actions. The result of this approach was twofold: on one plane, the coming together of people in daily life impacted on habits and customs and induced acceptance of each other; on another, they lived together separately.

The chasm was sought to be bridged by the Sufis who, as one scholar put it, took religion from the classes to the masses; another described it as “a walking incarnation of inter-religious dialogue”. This achieved degree of success, had its imprint on the Bhakti movement, left some mark on perceptions but did not alter the wider picture. Over time, the negative perceptions congealed.

It is evident, therefore, that despite adequate knowledge and good intentions, misperceptions were allowed to prevail. Their impact on Indian society is in no need of commentary.

The need of the hour is to seek a more effective approach to further mutual understanding.

By Muhammad Hamid Ansari,

Vice President, India.

SECULARISM AND NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

In the history of Independent India, the role of religion has come up as a major issue. It appears that the future of the country is linked with it. People have begun to wonder whether the adoption of secularism under the Indian Constitution was a right step. A great portion of national resources is being spent in containing the fire of communalism. A wall has arisen between communities which have been living like brothers for centuries. This has had adverse effects on the economic and social progress of the country. If this situation is not controlled soon, the very existence of the nation may be in danger.

Let us try to understand what is meant by religion. If the role of religion is considered rightly, all problems relating to it will be solved. The scriptures say that religion is something to guide one’s conduct in life. As a constitution is required for running an organisation or government, in the same way religion is necessary to live life harmoniously. ‘Thus religion may be called the constitution of life and is an internal need of man. The principles laid down in our scriptures are not the dictates of an individual person; they embody the experiences of elevated souls. Some of the principles were relevant in the periods when they were enunciated and now need amendment. It is like amendments in the constitution of a country from time to time as circumstances change. However, the preamble of the constitution remains the same. That is why different practices were advocated in different religions. The amendments were not due to there being anything wrong with the original principles. Human life is subject to change and therefore some principles of life also change. If this is not done, people will abandon religion and the very purpose of religion will be lost.

The basic principles of religion have been reinterpreted from time to time. This led to the birth of different religions. If we look upon various religions from this viewpoint, we will develop reverence for all of them. The principle of secularism was adopted in India keeping this in mind. The framers of the Constitution knew the realities of the country’s social structure. They felt that the principle of secularism was needed to meet the changing situation. What we should consider is where things have gone wrong and why the principle of secularism is being questioned. Our Constitution is only about 50 years old. In the history of a country, this is a short period. It is a matter of concern if an important basic principle of our Constitution is being questioned in such a short time.

In order to analyse the situation, we should examine the reasons why people misunderstand or misinterpret religion. We may classify them in four categories: scientific, economic, political and social.

We all are aware of the revolution that has come about all over the world in the field of science. Scientific progress in the past 50 years has been greater than in the previous 2000 years. This has affected human life. The change was so fast that man was not ready for it. Darwin’s Theory of Evolution tells us that internal change (physical and intellectual) in human beings takes place gradually in accordance with environment. lf external change is very fast, there occurs a gap between it and internal change. This is what has happened in present times. Internal change has not been able to keep pace with the change in the external environment. We may also say that religion has not been able to keep pace with the change in the field of science. This has led to the feeling that religion is a symbol of backwardness and that secularism is opposed to religion. The problem started from here.

For some time people did not realise the consequences of what was happening because the glamour of scientific progress diverted their attention from the fundamental principles of life. They felt that science had answers to all their problems of life. But when they realised the limitations of science, they again turned to the fundamental principles of life which we call religion. Unfortunately, during this period propagation of religion had gone into the hands of people who could not interpret religion in a scientific manner, and people were not prepared to accept the traditional approach. This gave rise to conflict between science and religion. The common man thought it to be a limitation of religion.

The economic revolution all over the world has also affected religion. Religion emphasises the need to reduce one’s desires and practise sacrifice. But economic progress implies multiplication of needs. Today the scale of progress of a nation is judged by its consumption level. For this, per capita consumption of items like paper, plastic, energy, etc., is compared. Economic development is also viewed from parameters like Gross National Income or Per Capita Income. To raise the poor above the poverty line is considered an important economic programme. For this, various schemes are formulated and targets fixed. All this gives the impression that there is a conflict between economic development and religion, because if the principles of religion are adopted, there would be no need of economic development. In reality, it is not so and there is need to remove this impression. Preachers of religion did not do this, which created a wrong impression about religion.

Changes in the field of politics have also affected religion greatly. Under the Constitution, we have accepted a democratic structure. As long as there was no degradation of political values, religion was not misused in politics. However, as votes are becoming important, religion is being exploited politically. This is being done in several ways. At times it is done by giving undue liberty to a particular community and sometimes by instigating one community against another. Both the situations are unfortunate. This has created a narrow approach to religion.

Similarly, changes in social values have affected religion adversely. In today’s society, achievement of success means everything. Be it in the field of education, trade, science or industry, means have become secondary to goals. Whatever means lead to goals quickly are considered acceptable. Even harming others is not considered bad if it is found helpful. In this rat race people think of only self-interest. But religion tells us to think only of the welfare of others. So much so even harming oneself for the sake of others is advocated. Thus there is a conflict between the prevailing norms of society and the principles of religion.

Thus a common man today takes a very narrow view of religion and instead of considering it something essential he believes that it is hurdle. Therefore, there is need to define and propagate religion properly. In present times, religion will have to be defined scientifically to show that it is an essential need and not a hurdle in the economic, social and political fields. It is not that religion has not been defined in this manner. Many have worked and many more are working in this direction. But unfortunately their message is not being spread sufficiently. Today people raise questions to which religion must provide suitable answers. Otherwise they will have a false view of religion and they cannot be blamed for this. For this, those people are to be blamed who consider themselves to be guardians of religion.

Today science has no conflict with religion. Even in ancient time, scientific progress had reached great heights and using scientific facilities was not considered anti-religion. In fact, proper use of such facilities helps in leading a religious life. Today we are able to do many things much more conveniently which was not possible in earlier times. Religion is, however, against too much dependence on scientific facilities because this could be harmful. That is to say, it is essential to have control over oneself so that one does not become a slave of the products of science. Otherwise science may become a cause of misery. Religion and science are complementary to each other and whenever proper coordination is kept between them, life becomes more pleasurable, at the individual and social levels.

Similarly, there is no conflict between economic development and religion. Every religion advocates that the basic needs of man should be met first, because the mind cannot be healthy unless the body is healthy. Taking proper care of the body is a religious act. However, today economic development is considered to be consuming more resources than needed. This is improper at the individual and social levels. The mind of a man who consumes more than what is required can never be at peace! It affects himself and society adversely. The earth has enough resources to meet the needs, but not the greed of all. Programmes of eradication of poverty point towards the fact that the distribution of resources should be uniform as it is in a family for the whole world is itself a family. Will this lead to economic stagnation? The answer is a clear no. When all members of a society get an opportunity to lead a life which enables them to meet their essential needs, economic development will be very fast. Today the majority of people in the world are poor. This has affected economic development adversely and given rise to tensions due to income disparities. Religion advocates reduction of desires because the earth’s resources meet only the essential needs. Today’s man may use these resources beyond his needs for a limited period but he will be creating problems for future generations. Excessive use of resources is against nature and creates problems of pollution. Therefore, it becomes clear that there is no conflict between religion and economic development. In fact, economic development will accelerate if we follow the principles of religion.

In the field of politics, use of religion has become a controversial issue. We know that in ancient times, kings used to honour spiritual masters and also acted upon their advice. It shows that religion has always had a role in politics. Gandhiji believed that it is not possible to separate religion from politics. But what kind of religion are we talking about? A religion which has been distorted should have no place in politics. Selfish people who interfere in politics in the name of religion also should have no role to play in this field. Religion can have a place in politics only when these two factors are not there. Gandhiji used to talk about synthesis between religion and politics in this light. We all know that whenever there has been proper coordination between religion and politics society has remained harmonious. But if selfish elements drag religion into politics, it is natural to question the role of religion in politics.

Today several evils have crept into society affecting life adversely. Most people feel that religion is incapable of removing these evils. Whether it is the caste system, untouchability or the dowry tradition, the fact is that there was a rational for them. However, religious leaders did not try to explain the reasons behind these practices nor did they amend them in changing social conditions. On the other hand, these practices took an ugly shape and the people hold religion responsible for it. The truth of the matter is that no religion supports these social evils and there is no place for them in religious conduct. Religion cannot be held responsible for them. The same can be said about the rituals propagated by religion. These also had a scientific basis, though they were not properly explained or amended. For this reason there has been difficulty in understanding religion.

Today there is a need to place religion in its right perspective. Discussion on the principle of secularism can be fruitful only when we understand the correct definition of religion. This work cannot be left to the preachers of religion; every responsible section of society will have to come forward for this purpose. Religion is not something which can be understood only by reading books or talking about it at religious places. Religion is something which has to be adopted every moment in daily life. On the surface different religions may look different but their fundamental principles are the same and they tell us the way to lead a meaningful life.

Whenever society has followed religion in its right form there has been prosperity and happiness. The talk of Ram Rajya hints towards this fact. Here Ram should not be taken as a particular person but should be related to his moral principles and these principles are not the property of any particular person or religion. All religions have accepted them fundamentally. The essential nature of man is religious. But due to the ill-effects of the external environment, society has misunderstood it. There is need of correcting the environment and this can be done only when religion is put before society in practical shape. Then only shall we be able to say that religion is not something to be imposed but that a meaningful life cannot be imagined without religion.

Having cleared the ground, we can now discuss the principles of secularism. Keeping in view the diversity of Indian society the framers of our Constitnution adopted the principle of secularism. It was not only an immediate need but a long-term goal. Its purpose was to give religious freedom to every citizen of the country; the state was not to interfere in this freedom. Gradually, the definition of secularism has acquired the meaning of “No Religion” instead of “Any Religion”. This situation is unfortunate. The main reason for it is the narrowness of preachers of religion and misuse of religion by selfish elements. The majority of our countrymen are illiterate. It is easy to play with their sentiments in the name of religion. This has been fully exploited by selfish elements. This has been particularly done in the field of politics. Most communal riots have resulted from it. Thus the selfish elements have harmed the cause of religion, resulting in a fragmentation of the country. Followers of every religion feel that their religion is being neglected whether they belong to a minority community or the majority community. This has killed the spirit expressed in our Constitution.

Now the time has come when the principle of secularism should be defined in a new perspective. First of all, society has to accept the need for religion which should be defined scientifically. Secularism should mean 'any religion’ insted of ’no religion’. Rational thinkers of every religion should be encouraged to define their religion scientifically and to establish harmony with other religions. Today the means of communication are so developed that the message can be spread very easily. The state may even consider using the media at its disposal to propagate the fundamental principles of different religions. This will remove the misunderstandings between different religions. However, this should be done impartially. No doubt it is a difficult thing but it will have a good effect in the long run. No religion should be given so much liberty that it harms the nation or any other religion. On the basis of past experience it can be said that impartial and judicial decisions are never opposed by the people at large. But if a decision does not meet this criteria, it has an adverse effect even on those who are thought to be favoured by it. Any policy of appeasement should be opposed right away. If we don’t understand this fact now, it may be too late.

In the present set-up, it is natural for the minority communities to experience a sense of insecurity. Fortunately, in this country the roots of the religion of the majority community are so deep that there should be no fear of any harm coming from it. Its religion is liberal and narrowness has no place in it. If there is any narrowness, it is mainly due to internal weaknesses which should be removed. However, if the majority community is worried about its religion, it indicates that the principle of secularism has not been followed in the right spirit. To that extent its grievances should be taken seriously. If assured of this, its narrowness will go away automatically. It understands the social reality and knows that there is no alternative but to live with people of all religions. If the division of country at the time of independence could not solve this problem, how can any further division do so? Mahatma Gandhi understood this fact very well and opposed division. Therefore there is no alternative to the principle of secularism for our country.

Is secularism only a social compulsion or is it necessary for national development also? The experiences of our own as well as of other nations show that whenever the rulers followed the principle of secularism, development of the countries was fast. If we study ancient history, we learn that the principle of secularism was followed in its true sense. We do not find mention of any religious disputes during the time of Ashoka, Chandragupta, Harsha, etc., which are known for economic and social prosperity. Even in the medieval period we can compare the rules of Akbar and Aurangzeb from this viewpoint. Akbar followed the principle of secularism and propounded Din-e-llahi. The reign of Akbar is known for its prosperity. However, the rule of the Mughals came to an end due to the bigotry of Aurangzeb. Most of Aurangzeb’s energy was spent in struggling with other religions. In modern times, countries following the policy of bigotry are lagging from the economic and social viewpoints.

Secularism is all the more important for the development of a nation like India. Our social structure is such that people of different religions are related to one another in several ways. Whenever attempts were made to separate them on any issue, the nation had to pay a heavy price and it slid back on the path of development. The problems facing the nation are so complex that raising disputes in the name of religion will be suicidal. We all are aware of the price being paid by us on account of religious disputes. The hidden price of such disputes is much more than what is visible. Our international image also suffers. This affects national development adversely. Economically we have gone back so much that the situation will not improve in the near future. Our narrowness in following the principle of secularism is greatly responsible for this situation. The tragedy is that those who want to take advantage of this narrowness end up becoming its victims.

Does all this mean that our nation has no future? This is not so at all. The roots of Indian society are very strong. Today every responsible section of society is worried over the communal problem. This is an indication of the fact that we want to set things right. To think that people of different religions cannot live together in this country is not true. The problem which looks so gigantic exists only among few people who are exploited by selfish elements. The majority of people of different religions live together in a congenial environment. Therefore, to think that the principle of secularism cannot succeed in this country is wrong. However, it can be followed in right spirit only when the nation is strong and the rulers give up the policy of appeasement. There is need to deal harshly with people who are engaged in selfish ends in the garb of religion. It should not matter to which religion they belong. Thus, while the principle of secularism is necessary for the development of a nation only a developed and strong nation can become truly secular. The common man understands this very well and this is why the future is hopeful.

Rakesh Kumar Mittal, IAS

Try turning the senses inward

One of the great neurologists, W. Grey Walter of Bristol, in his book ‘The Living Brain’ refers to this fact that all the animals, pre-human species, have been there for millions of years, they have not altered their environment; they have been shaped by their environment. Only the human being has a capacity to alter the environment, alter it for good or for bad, later it even to destroy it and destroy himself. Man alone has that capacity because man is still conditioned by the external world by only sensory knowledge and information. He is often turning to destroying the environment or even destroying himself. That is man today.

This is because we have not tried turning the senses inwards as yet. Like in animals, the senses go out; we eat and rink and handle the world, and we think ourselves also as part of that world: that we are an object. The Katha Upanishad gives a profound description to this situation:

‘The self-existent (God) has rendered the senses (so) defective that they go outward, and hence man sees the external and the internal self. (Only, perchance) some wise man desirous of immortality turns his eyes in, and beholds the Atman.”

The whole of Vedanta says that right during the course of human life, in the course of our work, in the course of human interactions in society, we can develop that inward penetration. We need not do it separately. In the midst of life and work, this inward penetration can go on by training the mind, making it purer.

Vedanta says, mind exist in two forms – the impure and the pure. The impure is when it is subject to the pressures of the sensory system. The pure is when it is released form the pressure of the sensory system.

If you achieve this, you are in for a tremendous experience. This is what Buddha achieved on that blessed night. You discover your own true dimension; you discover your own infinite nature.

This is the truth that is waiting to be understood and implemented by man in this modern age. If he does so, there will be peace and co-existence, all around!

Swami Rangathananda, Sri Ramakrishna Math, Mylapore, Chennai

True spirituality

True spirituality alone can rescue mankind from the distress that the world is being subjected to by the greed and selfishness of man. Religion alone, if understood and practiced rightly, is capable of moulding the moral fibre of man.

A life of virtue, goodness, forbearance, sacrifice, tolerance and live is the only assurance of peace and happiness to both the individual and the world at large. This must be understood by everyone. Religiosity is not spirituality. One may be formally religious and yet possess a negative character. Therefore, the practice of spirituality in the right sense of the term is of great importance.

Pray: “May we all work together harmoniously in peace, with the spirit of self-sacrifice for the well-being and solidarity of the world! May we all possess an understanding and forgiving heart, broad tolerance and adaptability! Grant us that eye with which we will behold the Self everywhere.”

Swami Sivananda, The Divine Life Society, PO Shivanandanagar, Distt. Tehri-Garhwal, Uttranchal.

One Caste, One Religion, One God

One Caste, One Religion, One God

There is only one caste - the caste of humanity.

There is only one religion – the religion of love.

There is only one righteousness – that is truthfulness.

There is only one law – the law of cause and effect.

There is only one God – the omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent Lord.

There is only one language – the language of the heart or the language of silence.

(Courtesy: The Divine Life Society)

Religion unites people’s hearts

Religious disharmony is a misnomer. Religion unites people’s hearts. No true follower of any religion will ever condemn other religions. He will, on the contrary, promote goodwill and understanding, peace and harmony.

What creates disharmony is the irreligious part of man, the animal quality in man. It is greed, lust, selfishness and egoism. They generate fear, and fear leads to wars. None of the religions of the world sanction these bestial qualities.

We are living in a new world. We are living in the atomic age. An immediate change of heart is inevitable. The strongest bond of love must unite the hearts of all. Bestial passions must be banished. Tis can be achieved only by the practice of religion.The second factor that creates disharmony is intellectual gymnastics. The true follower of any religion will busy himself with practicing its tenets. He will be conscious only of the need to perfect himself. But the intellect is fond of creating newer and newer theories and, therefore, greater and greater division. The intellect should yield to the heart; practice should take precedence over theory.

Swami Sivananda

See God in All

All life is sacred. Therefore, deal reverentially with all beings. All beings are repositories of the Divine, because He is the presence within. Recognise this presence. Conduct yourself in a lofty and sublime manner. Be kind to all. Be respectful and just to all. Honour the sanctity, purity and holiness of each and every living being. Be pure in thought, word and deed. Harbour good thoughts, noble, sublime thoughts, goodwill and good wishes towards all your fellow beings. Be polite and courteous in your day-to-day dealings with others. Do not bear ill will towards anyone. Do not bear a grudge towards anyone. Do not taunt anyone. Do not backbite or carry tales. All these go against the basic concept that God dwells in all people.

All people are derserving of our reverence, respect and goodwill. Honour the individuality of others. The living presence of God in all beings should be the basis of our attitude and behaviour towards others, our approach to the world.

Ask: What am I living for?

There should be the urge in you for self-improvement; there should be the urge for evolution in each one of your. The hallmark of an awakened and enlightened individual human soul is that there is a recognition that life is not meant for stagnation, that it is not meant for routine, humdrum repetition of the same monotonous activities, but that it is meant for achievement, for attainment. It is meant for moving towards a supreme goal, a lofty, sublime goal. It is meant for living for a noble ideal. Life is an ascent, an upward ascent.

Those who have bestowed thought on life soon begin to realize that life is not merely biological functioning; it is not merely psychological activity – a confusion of restless psychological activity. Rather, it is higher and a spiritual movemet, it is a higher and spiritual evolution. Once that is known, one has to constantly ask oneself, “Am I engaged in this upward movement of the Spirit towards regaining a state of perfection that is Its natural state, natural condition?

It is therefore, good to ask oneself, “What am I living for, with what objective, to what end, for what purpose?” so that gradually such repeated questioning begins to make your goal, your objective, clear-cut. In the course of time, slowly but steadily you become established in a firm conviction, “This is what I am living for. This is what I am striving to attain and achieve.”

“Life is meant for God-realisation. The goal of life is God-realisation.” That is very easy to say, and that may be your ultimate goal, but you have to live here, very much in this world amongst people and things – undergoing various experiences with different events occurring. So, in this environmental set-up, in this atmosphere, involved in this ever-changing process day after day, how are you to live your life?

Be like salt. Withotu salt everything will be insipid, nothing will be tasty. The great teacher of the Middle East, Jesus, told His followers: “You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, it is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out.” Therefore, we should be ever occupied in trying to make ourselves into such an element, such a factor, that it makes life livable for others, it helps make life worth living for others.

This, then, is the objective – to live in such a way that day by day we become a better and better person, more and more an ideal human individual, so that life is better off for our being in it. Not a killjoy, but a joy, not an element of disharmony and discord but an element of harmony, concord and sweetness.

Swami Chidananda in ‘Awake! Realise Your Destiny!’