THE issues of intolerance, prejudice and discrimination worldwide are now so profound that they are threatening to disrupt collective efforts to promote peace and development in the new century. This was the unanimous observation of the panelists at a recent UN conference that discussed new perspectives and old menaces regarding Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and racism.
In their discussion, the panelists noted that while the three were distinct phenomena with many different manifestations, they shared common roots that grow out of ignorance, poverty, violence and the irrational fear of the other.
Even a society as literate and prosperous as the United States is not an exception on this count, and the ‘irrational fear of the other’ is very much there, and hate crimes and xenophobia are rampant. The post-9/11 with-us-or-with-them proclamation by US President George Bush only caused a change for the worse in the attitudes of the Americans, who have become much more intractable.
Driven by the propaganda machines of the religious right, zealots like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and others have managed to poison the minds of the mainstream Christian communities against Islam, and there are many who now believe that it is their duty to protect the religious and social values from ‘external influences”. In such a scenario, behavioural tolerance, naturally, has become the first casualty.
Author Bill Ellis says he understands exactly why so many Americans believe that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were working together, “despite the lack of any factual evidence”. The key, he claims, lies in the popularity of evangelical Christianity, which sees the devil as a real, ever-present and ever-scheming entity.
At this point, one would recall a recent encounter with a religious group to highlight the change in the attitude and mindset of many Americans since 9/11. Every Saturday, the Follower of Jehovah Witnesses, a Christian sect, spans out across several parts of the US — from California to New York — and visits homes, apartments, hospitals and nursing homes in an effort to convince people that in accepting Jesus as their saviour lies their salvation in the life hereafter. Armed with booklets and Bible, they strive to convince people that “our way is the righteous way”.
But during a recent discussion, when asked about their position on the salvation of the mass of humanity spreading from China, who are Buddhists, or in India, the followers of the Ram, or Muslims in the Middle East and Asia, or the followers of Judaism, they insisted that the people “who do not accept Jesus Christ as their saviour will surely burn in the fires of purgatory.”
When pressed to define their understanding of other religions, they refused to be drawn into any discussion, saying, in essence, “our way is the right way, the rest be damned!”
In an article, Dialogue with Religions of Asia, written for the Bishops of Asia, Edmund Chia, a Catholic priest, has profoundly tackled the issue of ‘our-way-or-else’ mindset .
Says Chia: “Each religious tradition or vehicle has its own means or routes for reaching the destination. Each has its own description for the journey. Each gives a different name to this final destiny ... Various scriptures point out that ‘Truth is only One, but the sages call it by different names’. Moreover, the models and make of each vehicle differ as do their functions and efficiencies.
“In other words, the individual differences across the various religious traditions are as different as the types and makes of motor-vehicles on the highways. Some vehicles may be better able to perform certain functions, but not so good in other areas. For instance, one vehicle may be better at negotiating winding roads, but not so good at climbing hills or on slippery ground. Another vehicle may have more comfortable seats, but may not have the best pricing or physical appearance.
“It would be difficult, therefore, to see how anyone can claim to be the ‘best’ vehicle, since the criterion for evaluating that is yet unclear. Is it the speed, the comfort, the aesthetics, or the size of the vehicle which make for what is ‘best’? If the criterion is the amount one has contributed to society, can any community say with certainty that their vehicle has outshone the others?
“Would it not seem a little strange then, when one hears of claims to being the ‘one and only’ true vehicle for this journey, as if all the others were false, untrue or demonic? Likewise, claims to being the ‘final’ or ‘absolute’ vehicle by which passengers of all other vehicles would eventually find their fulfilment are also difficult to understand,” Chia says.
“Would it not be better to look at all as still being on the ‘way’, and, therefore, none ought to be assuming a sense of superiority over the others? While some may fight and argue over this, ultimately it would probably be realized that reaching the final destination is more important than what happens along the way.
“Vehicles which can facilitate that ought to have as much right to existence and respect as one’s own. Rumi has this to say: ‘Once they have arrived there, that disputation and war and diversity touching the roads — this man saying to that man, ‘You are false, you are an infidel,’ and the other replying in kind — once they have arrived at the Ka’aba, it is realized that the warfare was concerning the roads only, that their goal was one,” notes Chia.
Unfortunately, however, there are not many in the US these days who are convinced by such reasoning.
