THE current virus threat has led many to assume the underlying causes. Overall, three ‘assumptions’ can be debated towards better understanding the pandemic.

a) Deliberately caused: This is often called a conspiracy theory; it argues that the virus was engineered deliberately by certain powers to damage others;

b) Accidental: It was the outcome of human error through experiments;

c) Punishment or fatalists’ theory: The virus is a result of our sins and is punishment from the heavenly powers — an idea generally promoted by faith-driven beliefs. The fatalists believe if it is in our kismet it will be there; otherwise, no matter what we do or don’t do, nothing will happen to us.

As for the first approach, these conspiracy theories always get a lease of life through gossip and conjecture, again rooted in other conspiracies, not necessarily based on facts, but certainly on popular stories. It is difficult to find actual facts responsible. These conspiracy theories have no lasting basis; they can be countered by facts, so we leave them here.

A fatalistic approach does not lead us to a solution of the problem.

As for the second assumption, that the virus resulted from sheer human error due to certain scientific experiments or lack of knowledge, with greater safety mechanisms and stricter SOPs the damage can be controlled. Even if the virus had something to do with human and animal interaction, its spread could be controlled through greater knowledge and expertise, and careful handling.

The last assumption is that the virus is a result of our sins and a manifestation of divine wrath. Such arguments have been mentioned in religious literature. In taking them literally, though, we would face the problem of never being able to know if a calamity is truly divine punishment or human folly. So, we cannot have any strong basis to confirm or deny in either case.

These interpretations are reminiscent of our ancient histories where humans attributed all phenomena — good or bad — to divine manifestations of power, such as rain and thunder, earthquakes and epidemics, and gave supernatural explanations for their occurrences as they had little knowledge of cosmology or epidemiology through tools and instruments. However, with time, humans were able to explain these in terms of natural phenomena, of cause and effect working in nature which resulted in making them less dependent on human sins or pleasing the divine, as natural occurrences in terms of natural laws are independent of human actions good or bad.

The most problematic issue with the fatalistic approach of interpretation is that it does not lead us to a solution of the problem except repentance, fear of God — or according to religious tradition, committing to greater worship and making more sacrifices. Other than these, it does not tell us anything about the coping strategies when they do occur. In today’s world of multiple faiths, and even with the prevalence of so many non-believers in any faith, human societies cannot be built on only faith-based interpretations. We need to be more realistic and find ways and means of protecting ourselves as did our ancient forefathers to save themselves in primitive times.

In a worldly sense, many nations have today found ways of preventing losses from disasters such as earthquakes. Even many faith-based societies have tried to make critical buildings earthquake-proof to avoid massive destruction. When the devastating 2005 earthquake in Pakistan caused enormous destruction, I read in a newspaper that in Azad Kashmir, only one school building had remained intact thanks to the fact that its foundations were strong, while most government and private school buildings were devastated due to faulty construction.

Even if we take the approach that one’s belief says this is due to our sins, can we still suggest a practical way to mitigate the losses and save lives, besides saying ‘astaghfar’ (seeking forgiveness) and more prayers and reposing trust in God?

These matters need to be dealt with on a material plane as well, without forsaking our spiritual humility and while seeking divine forgiveness or help even if it is God’s wrath. Let us not resist what are the most common sensible steps to be taken to avoid mass infections. The impact of such calamities could be minimised by pre-emptive planning, synergy, capacity building and training human resources, besides seeking up-to-date knowledge and resources available anywhere in the world.

It is reassuring that most faith-based communities are realising this, and are following the guidelines given by experts and governing bodies. The sooner we adopt these measures, the safer will we be, inshaAllah.

The writer is an educationist with an interest in the study of religion and philosophy.

Published in Dawn, April 17th, 2020