| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
01 Jun 2005 01:27:06 AM |
| Object: |
Talking Of Desecration ... |
[Only recently Saudi authorities raided a private residence and
penalised some Hindus who had congregated to worship according to their
faith and tradition. Pakistani Christians have also been meted out
harsh treatment by the Saudis for privately and peacefully worshipping
in their homes. Permitting non-Muslims to build churches and temples is
out of the question]
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=3Dstory_31-5-2005_pg3_2
The Daily Times, Lahore, Pakistan
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
Respect for religion - what Bulleh Shah says
By Ishtiaq Ahmed
Ishtiaq.Ahmed@statsvet.su.se
The desecration of the Quran at the notorious US Guant=E1namo detention
centre, where alleged criminals connected with the terrorist attack of
9/11 are kept, resulted in demonstrations in Afghanistan, Pakistan and
the Gaza strip. Some lives were lost in Afghanistan. Protests were
lodged with the US government by Saudi Arabia and other Muslim states.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made a public statement that the
incident will be properly investigated and the culprits punished
according to the law. She also underlined that the freedom of religion
was a fundamental tenet of the American constitution, and disparaging
the Islamic religion, or any other religion, was not the policy of her
government or of any other US government. These assurances are very
welcome indeed.
Having said that, I feel it is important that we frankly and honestly
discuss why respect for a religion is a duty of all civilised human
beings and the institutions and authorities that represent them. It is
not at all self-evident that I must respect the religious beliefs of
others. I need to be persuaded that doing so is rationally and morally
right.
In one sense, respect for the holy book of another religion cannot be
expected as a natural attitude because only those who believe in the
sacredness of a particular text can be expected to shower devotion on
it and hold it in adulation. The historical record shows that insofar
as monotheistic religions are concerned they are not theologically
attuned to acknowledging any other truth than the one sanctioned by
their own faith. Consequently Jews dismiss the claims of Jesus being
the Messiah and the Son of God. Similarly Christians are unable to
accept that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was the last
messenger of God, because according to their faith Jesus Christ is the
Saviour and the Son of God. In a similar manner, Muslims cannot claim
that the Prophet (pbuh) was the final messenger of God unless they
allege that Jews and Christians have expunged from the Bible the
passages that attest to his coming.
If we take all these conflicting claims literally and categorically
then indeed there should be no peace in the world until all Jews become
Christians, or Jews and Christians become Muslims, or Jews and Muslims
become Christians and, indeed, until no non-believer remains.
From an extreme monotheistic point of view there is no place for
Hinduism, Buddhism and other such religions because their belief
systems vary considerably from the Middle Eastern notion of an
All-Powerful and All-Knowing God. Indeed before the world was divided
on the basis of nationalism, wars of religion, and later sects, were
all too common and millions of human beings were slaughtered through
the centuries in the name of true faith.
Where does the respect for religion then find its rational and moral
justification? I believe it can only be justified if we recognise that
in spite of the existence of different religions and cultures all human
beings share a common humanity and that factor alone is of greater
value than the differences of religion or sect. It is when we begin
with the human person as the centre of all moral and philosophical
reflection that we begin to recognise the self-evident right for human
beings to claim respect for themselves and for their cultures and
beliefs. Immanuel Kant has presented this idea as the Categorical
Imperative. According to him, respect for the individual should be a
matter of duty rather than convenience. It is reasonable that if I want
to be respected by others I should respect them too.
It is a matter of historical experience that down the ages oppressive
regimes have used their brute power to persecute minorities, deviant
sects and non-conformist individuals by branding them as infidels and
heretics. Consequently, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(1948) and related conventions lay down unambiguously that the beliefs
of others are not a matter for us to question or condemn and as
civilised human beings we should accept the plurality of religious and
spiritual systems.
However, such a commitment does not include respect for beliefs and
dogmas that offend my conscience and violate human rights. I am under
no obligation to respect the Hindu caste system. Similarly, I am under
no obligation to respect the belief of rightwing Zionists that the land
of Israel is reserved only for them, or the Catholic ruling that the
use of contraceptives - even by married couples - is a sin. Within
the community of Islam I am under no obligation to respect the patently
reactionary position that women cannot go out in public without a veil
or a male escort, or, that, a court cannot convict a rapist without the
presence of four pious male witnesses.
On the contrary we should strive for religious reforms that make
possible for pious believers of all religions to pursue their higher
spiritual and moral yearnings with respect for non-discriminatory and
equal rights of citizenship of others. This means challenging dogmatism
and fanaticism in all forms. Surely if God is All Merciful -
something the diehard fundamentalist loathes admitting - then the use
of force and violence in His name cannot be correct. The call for
reform should be based on such an axiom.
Therefore I feel duty bound to demand that the Muslim world adopt clear
and unequivocal policy to show respect for the holy scriptures of other
religions and allow their adherents to freely profess and practise
their faith. The hypocrisy of the Saudi government cannot be
overemphasised. Only recently Saudi authorities raided a private
residence and penalised some Hindus who had congregated to worship
according to their faith and tradition. Pakistani Christians have also
been meted out harsh treatment by the Saudis for privately and
peacefully worshipping in their homes. Permitting non-Muslims to build
churches and temples is out of the question. In Pakistan the blasphemy
laws incessantly terrorise non-Muslims. All this is absurd and
reprehensible.
The Punjabi rebel Sufi, Bulleh Shah (1680-1758), presents this idea
much more powerfully. He writes:
Gal samajh laee te raolaa keeh
eyh Raam, Raheem te Maulaa keeh?
Why all this commotion if you claim understanding?
Why this fuss about calling Him Ram, Rahim or Moula?
(Ram is a Hindu god; Rahim and Moula are designations for Allah)
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
