Random Thoughts on Religion

( I submitted this as a philosophy project at college - doesn't fit in with the passive poet tag, but just thought I'd share it)

When I saw the movie ‘No One Killed Jessica’, there was one scene that stayed on my mind and still disturbs me immensely. Jessica was a waitress who had been shot down by a minister’s son because she didn’t serve him a drink beyond a certain time at night in a bar. The boy got away with the murder for years because his father was in a position of authority in the government. The scene that still disturbs me is one where Jessica’s mother is battling for her life in the hospital, after suffering the pain of losing her daughter, while the boy who killed Jessica, along with his partners-in-crime, is in a temple in Vaishnodevi, wearing a holy scarf on his head, being anointed by the pundit.

This brings us to the question: Can religion and morality really go together? In the following essay, I am going to be exploring the relationship between religion and morality as well as the role religion plays in our society and whether the world can exist without it. I will also be looking at why religion can be seen as a threat to our society, with regard to the communal violence it has given rise to. I will try and explain what religion should really aim at doing and whether it benefits mankind at all or not.

The above incident from the movie ‘No One Killed Jessica’ may not be shocking, especially in India. It merely exposes an extremely ugly side of religion to society. In temples, those who give the largest sums of money as donation are the richest people of the country, some of whom are involved in most of the morally objectionable activities such as corruption, embezzlement, sometimes even murder. People also believe that bathing in the Ganga will absolve them of all sin. Such practices make it easier for the criminals to redeem themselves after committing crimes because any kind of religious penitence makes them feel guilt-free. In this way, religion provides the criminals with an easy means to rid them of guilt even after committing the worst kind of sin. By giving money to temples and helping in their building and construction or by pretending to care for the poor and distributing food every month or by sanctimoniously bathing in the Ganga, people cannot usually change who they are or what they have done, unless of course they go through a major reformatory process after such religious practices, which is rare.

I am not arguing against religion because I admit it plays a very important role in society by giving people hope and motivation in life. We know that it is sometimes with the help of prayers and religious books that a person is able to get through the roughest period in his/her life. It does give comfort to people, in that it makes them realise that the world is much larger than them and their problems start to seem small. In that case, if a person distributes food amongst the poor because he really empathises with them, or bathes in the Ganga to feel refreshed and calm, then there is nothing wrong with it. The problem is created when immoral acts are committed and protected under the cloak of religion. Religion is sometimes, intentionally or unintentionally, turned into a shelter for immorality as it becomes a safe haven for all – the ones who adhere to moral norms as well as the ones who go against it. Of course, morality is an inextricable part of religion, but the problem is created when religion is made to protect even the ones who go against basic moral principles.

In the article, ‘On the Internet: Nihilism on the Information Highway’ by Hubert L. Dreyfus, he mentions that when Kierkegaard realised that God treats the good and bad equally, he had a problem with God. If all the bad is forgiven and the good is treated the same as the bad, then what is the value of goodness? Does it have any value at all? And if religion is not meant to differentiate between the morally right or wrong and rather give shelter to all who seek it, then is religion really benefitting mankind? If so, in what way?

Let us look at the purpose served by religion in society. Is it meant to instill discipline amongst people? But then that purpose can also be served by law and order! Is it meant to take humans spiritually closer to the Divine? It can be argued that there are other means to attain spiritual enlightening too, such as concentration, meditation and yoga.

Or, is it meant to teach us certain basic ideas as love, friendship and brother-hood? Feelings as basic as love and friendship come from within us and do not necessarily need an external factor to develop. If we understand religion in terms of an institution propagating brother-hood, then it is shocking to see that most of the terrorism in our country arises out of religious differences. During my lifetime, I have seen incidents such as the Gujarat riots in 2002 and the terrorist attacks in Mumbai in November 2008, to name only a few. In 1984, Delhi faced the worst riots when, after Indira Gandhi was assassinated by her Sikh guard, the whole city turned against the Sikhs, killing almost 20,000 people and displacing up to 50,000 people from the Sikh-dominated areas in Delhi. These are micro examples of the disastrous results of religious differences, only in India. If we look at religious politics across the world, the holocaust in Germany during World War II resulted in an unprecedented number of lost lives. Even that was a result of people turning against one religious group, in this case, the Jews. It is these misinterpretations of religion that will ultimately make people lose their faith in the institution of religion itself.

The way that minority religious groups are treated, in terms of education and job opportunities, is still appalling. For instance, in Modern School, Barakhamba Road where I studied, there were not more than 5 Muslim students in a batch of 350 students. Inequality in the treatment of different religious groups can be seen in the problems that arise in relationships and friendships due to the various stereotypes associated to every religion, for example, the stereotype that all Muslims are fundamentalists or the belief that all Hindus are orthodox. These are stereotypes inherited by the younger generations also and they create a problem when it comes to friendship or more importantly, marriage. It is still considered taboo to marry someone who is not of the same religious faith as one’s own. Even if it has happened, it is usually accompanied with a lot of family issues and rejections. But ultimately, the marriage can only take place if the families or the society as a whole is open-minded. If the society is open to different customs and practices and celebrates them rather than creating an Other and thus creating differences, it can function better. Our country has always housed various religious groups together and this needs to be celebrated rather than it being turned into a source of communal violence. It has always thrived on the concept of ‘unity in diversity’ but that idea is breaking down due to communal violence taking place across the country.

If the hypothetical question arises whether people would have still been disciplined in the absence of religion, then the answer can also be merely hypothetical as we ourselves have never seen a society without religion. It can only be imagined that if there was no religion, and society was ruled by laws and civil authorities, along with people having faith in themselves and maybe a Higher Power which would give them strength during difficult times and something to hold on to, the world could function normally in every aspect that can be imagined. What would be absent are the problems created due to religious differences, or hatred between two religious communities or power politics between various religions within one country, as is the case due to the existence of different religions in India. Moral acts would be governed by laws, and love, brother-hood and friendship would still exist in this world, as it is an innate part of human existence.

Of course this is a Utopian situation and it cannot be assumed that without religion, all the problems in the world would vanish. Man will definitely err and there would exist in this world all sorts of problems even without religion, such as social, economic or political problems. There is no universal solution to any of these problems as they are inevitable; man is, after all, a social animal. But what I am trying to say is that the concept of religion is not indispensable. It is not a vital part of human living and a world without religion can be imagined.

I believe the word religion means ‘to bind people together’ as suggested by the origin of the word, religare (Latin for the verb ‘to bind’). If that is what we should understand by the word ‘religion’, then having different religions with various kinds of belief systems only defeats the purpose of religion, as it leads to one set of people with the same religious beliefs turning against the other with different religious faiths. Just like Ashoka tried to create one religion for all the people across his vast empire, there should exist in the world only one kind of Faith that holds people together, propagates love and harmony and also ‘binds’ them together. The existence of such a universal faith would truly give meaning to the word ‘religion’.

The problematic idea of God also comes into the picture and is of course an important part of religion. Again, God is most of the times reduced to an entity that creates fear in the mind of people against doing anything ‘wrong’. Every religion has its own God, in fact Hinduism has various Gods. What it does is only concretise the ideas that the faith is meant to propagate through the creation of a ‘God’ who would approve of certain acts and disapprove of certain others. The concept of Heaven and Hell, which is common to most of the religions, plays on the fear of the after-life in every individual so that they adhere to moral norms in order for their soul to be in peace later. I personally believe that there is an innate sense of morality in every human being, which guides our behavior and constantly tells us what is right and wrong. Even if the voice of sense does not prevail over our behaviour, that voice manifests itself into feelings of guilt that accompany any act that goes against our reason. It is similar to Freud’s concept of id, ego and superego. The superego, or the voice of reason, will always let us know whether we are right or wrong, but ultimately it is whether we give into our instinctual needs or not that influences our behaviour.

In terms of a greater focus on human beings, Buddhism stands apart from the other religions. The uniqueness of Buddhism lies in the fact that it gives highest importance to human beings. It is unlike other religions where Gods are of supreme importance and humans are mere mortals who will ultimately perish on Earth, only to join God. What distinguishes Buddhism is the fact that it is more a school of philosophy than a religion for only a certain group of people. It believes in certain ideals and the people who follow it believe in them strongly too. It is unlike most of the people following Hinduism, who practice rites and rituals, hold havans in their homes, go to the temple regularly and sing prayer songs; but the same people also demolish the holy shrine of the Muslims – the Babri Masjid. When religion reaches the point of fanaticism, it becomes a farce because the aim of religion to ‘bind’ people collapses, paving the way for unnecessary violence.

There must a reason for why religion has proved to be so popular for centuries. For the world as a whole, there is, of course, no escape from it either. It has always existed and will continue to exist. The only thing we can do as individuals is realise that religion can bring people together as one large community, and not be used to create unnecessary differences. What has happened in the past cannot be changed but the new generation can redefine religion. Religion can be turned into a positive influence on our lives if we understand the essence of it and live a disciplined, harmonious life. It will also benefit the world at large, in terms of globalisation and integration of different nations. For instance, the differences between India and Pakistan have arisen mainly due to religion, as the basis of the partition was also religion. It creates a constant fear in the mind of the people of both countries, spoils international relations with other countries (as India and Pakistan are constantly under the threat of terrorism) as well as hampers any kind of friendship between these neighbouring countries. If people do not give in to fanaticism or fundamentalism of any kind, that is, if they do not start centering their lives on their own religion and start killing others to defend their faith and people, the problems that have existed till today because of such violent tendencies will not surface again. It is not an immediate process, nor is it an easy one. Every religion promotes peace and those who fight and kill to defend their religion actually work against their religion as they are destroying peace, harmony and brother-hood in the world. Until this is realised, I will continue to see religion almost as a threat to society because it has led to communal violence and also because it has been used by people to live a life of double standards.

Hence, I believe that religion is necessary in society as long as it benefits people in terms of spiritual and mental development and gives them a sense of hope in life. But I also believe that religion should not be used by people to commit immoral acts, knowing that religious practices can rid them of the guilt of committing the crime. Again, religion should not be taken as the absolute authority for moral behaviour because morality exists within us and religion is not required to tell us what is morally acceptable or objectionable. When religion becomes the reason for communal violence and people from two different religious faiths turn against each other, thus hampering the development of a society or country, it becomes a threat to society. Another problem is created when religion is used by political parties to remain in power. Minority group parties use their status as minority groups in society to get privileges, and even votes, by playing on people’s sympathy. The people in our country who are involved in various morally objectionable activities and are ostensibly extremely religious, also use religion as a cloak under which they believe they can commit every crime and come back to the safe haven of the temple. Religion can work if it is a school of philosophy which people believe in and that comforts the people; not if it becomes something that people protect and defend with their lives, thus creating problems between people and countries.