JOIN USBatting for religious supremacy
There is a cathedral in Canterbury, England, where you make your way down to an underground crypt in which the mortal remains of Christianity’s most misunderstood martyr, Thomas Becket, lie entombed. His slain body is a permanent testimony to religious violence — just as the self-inflicted lashings of the man who ordered his killing exposes the sordid underbelly of religious institutions. If Pope Francis is now exhorting Muslims around the world to say “no” to violence in the name of god, he should first examine his own backyard.
The Roman Catholic church, like all other institutionalised religious orders, is replete with acts of violence since its inception. As a matter of fact, it was born out of violence when a peace loving man was nailed to a cross and left there to die of dehydration and pain.
Starting with this example of inhuman brutality, the Christian church has seen different forms of violence that even include the cruel abuse of innocent children. It has engaged in “holy” wars where popes themselves have donned military armour to fight enemies of the church. Right from the first Crusade in the 11th century when Christian knights went to war against Muslims to reclaim the holy land of Jerusalem, violence has marched hand in hand with spirituality.
True, recent events of religious extremism has prompted the pope to speak out. The Islamic jihad today has, unfortunately, become a war against non-believers although its true followers consider it a battle between good and evil forces.
Just like the violence in Christian churches that are ruled by popes and prelates, jihad is a religious concept of warfare envisaged by the so-called defenders of the faith. While Islam by itself is a religion that advocates peace, love and harmony, the followers of jihad feel that their religion needs to be protected by the sword.
This is probably true of all religions which are grossly misrepresented by their interpreters. Whether it is the priest in a church, the mullah in a mosque or the archaka in a temple, the final outcome remains the same; misguided violence to protect the sanctity of something that is sacred enough to survive on its own strength without their intervention.
Pope Francis’ recent appeal to Muslims to eschew violence raises many questions. Is there a religion that is totally free of violence? Hinduism is no exception. As a matter of fact, it was nearly wiped out from our country for its cruel practices until Buddhism took over.
The arcane rituals of Hinduism practiced by Brahmin priests who assumed the role of interpreters of ancient Hindu scriptures spoke less of spirituality and more of meaningless cruelty. The gruesome sacrifice of animals during yagnas — which are practiced even today in many temples during festivals — is violence in its worst form. The irony of it all is that society accepts such meaningless rituals in a very matter of fact way.
We see goats, lambs or even birds offered as sacrifices in temples during certain festivals. We torture bulls despite our reverence for cows. We are cruel to the very snake that we worship in the name of religion. It is only now that animal activists have stepped in to prevent these practices, although with little success.
‘Brides of Jesus’
Violence can also take many other forms. It can covert violence like gently manipulating young women to enter the nunnery by calling them the “brides of Jesus.” Or, making them sell their bodies in temples to become “devadasis” of god.
It can be as subtle as offering blankets to the poor along with a copy of the Bible. Or, branding devotees with Vishnu’s own weapons — the shankha (conch) and “chakra” (wheel) to gain entry into the privileged portals of Sri Vaishnavism.
Or, even tempting people into a casteless, classless society through conversion, as practiced by that least violent of all religions, Buddhism. These ingenuous methods of religious coercion may be common to other religions. I believe conversion is the worst form of violence because of its restraint and cleverness.
Perhaps,Swami Vivekananda’s address to the World Parliament of Religions in America more than a 100 years ago has greater relevance today than ever. An ardent admirer of Prophet Mohammed’s teachings, he did not preach or advise any religious group to eschew violence. He merely interpreted religion in these stirring words.
“Every religion has a soul behind it, and that soul may differ from the soul of another religion, but are they contradictory? They are not, they are supplementary.
“Each religion takes up one part of the great universal truth, and spends its whole force in embodying and typifying that part of the great truth. It is, therefore, addition, not exclusion.”
What better message to warring religions?