Islam, since 9/11, has been portrayed as the evil and the single most important threat to the world order. Samuel Huntington through his book Clash of Civilizations also sold similar ideas. The beneficiaries of this are the academics who won the sole right and authority to explain various social phenomena. Once neglected as irrelevant, social and human sciences now are back in track and the role of intellectuals seems to be occupying a significant space in the world affairs and in directing the foreign policies of powerful states.
This portrayal of Islam as a violent religion with tendencies towards terrorism has urged intellectuals and students of social sciences to sit together and discuss the issues. Is it the religion that is violent or some people within the religion? Though religion has been a source of social cohesion among communities for generations, today in the twenty-first century, its violent aspects has been more manifested in the public spheres and has even created “terror in the mind of God”. Not only Islamic terrorism, but also Hindu, Jew and Christian fundamentalism has been manifested in many places. However, they have not been branded the same way Islam has been. Some might say that the magnitude and tendency of this violence is different. No religion is violent in nature. Islam does talk about love and peace.
To clarify the misunderstandings and to awaken the ignorant conscience are the roles of intellectuals in society. There were few points made in different places in past two days. Saba Mahmood (University of California, Berkeley) spoke about the role of American Empire in liberating Islam from the oppressive system through the liberation of its women. According to her the American foreign policy is guided by the argument that the violent nature of Islam is reflected in its oppression of women and the democratization project begins with the democratization and empowerment of women in the Islamic communities. The question one might ask is that such kinds of oppressive practices against women also exist in Hinduism and many other religion, why does the USA does not brand the other religions as violent? And the answer to this, according to Prof. Beng-Huat, would be the global spread of Islam where as Hinduism is still confined to India (and Nepal). This shows that it is not the oppression of women but the global spread of the religion that threatens the hegemony of the Christian West. And the motives behind branding Islam violent seem to me of more political than religious or social.
There was another discussion on Islam and the West: A Conversation between and beyond identities (cultures). The beauty of this discussion was the diversity of representation which carried the view points of Christianity, Islam, Judaism and often its reference to Hinduism. Many of the pertinent points came up here. Some of them are the commonality and the point of convergence between religions. We often understood cultures as “things” out there. But what we need to understand is that globality has become the reality in today’s world and the diverse cultures are no longer living in water tight compartmentalization or segregation but rather a form of interdependence. This brings the subjectivity of religion and globality of world order into the same platform. Religion, culture and identity constitute part of the whole and are not in competition with each other but complementary to each other. World Religions should be understood holistically. Other points also came up that emphasized the frankness of admitting the violent and undemocratic nature and elements present in our own religion. We always see the problems in other religions without paying any attention to the wrongs in our own. This frank and fearless admittance will help us understanding the religious hatred in today’s world. There was a reference made to Gandhi in this context who instead of accusing other religious groups started with reforming his own religion Hinduism. He emphasized that the untouchables are the children of God and be treated equally for which he call them harijans. Many also asked about the point of convergence of religions in today’s society? The answer again was referred to Hinduism through the concept of Brahma – the divine inner self/being.
Finally, how would the Muslims get rid of this wrong self image that has been imposed on them by the dominant powers of the day – the Americans and the Europeans through their war against terror? The consensus was through discussion and debate, academics writings and popular columns in the news daily and most importantly speaking to the public in their own language which will dispel the veil of ignorance about Islam.
This portrayal of Islam as a violent religion with tendencies towards terrorism has urged intellectuals and students of social sciences to sit together and discuss the issues. Is it the religion that is violent or some people within the religion? Though religion has been a source of social cohesion among communities for generations, today in the twenty-first century, its violent aspects has been more manifested in the public spheres and has even created “terror in the mind of God”. Not only Islamic terrorism, but also Hindu, Jew and Christian fundamentalism has been manifested in many places. However, they have not been branded the same way Islam has been. Some might say that the magnitude and tendency of this violence is different. No religion is violent in nature. Islam does talk about love and peace.
To clarify the misunderstandings and to awaken the ignorant conscience are the roles of intellectuals in society. There were few points made in different places in past two days. Saba Mahmood (University of California, Berkeley) spoke about the role of American Empire in liberating Islam from the oppressive system through the liberation of its women. According to her the American foreign policy is guided by the argument that the violent nature of Islam is reflected in its oppression of women and the democratization project begins with the democratization and empowerment of women in the Islamic communities. The question one might ask is that such kinds of oppressive practices against women also exist in Hinduism and many other religion, why does the USA does not brand the other religions as violent? And the answer to this, according to Prof. Beng-Huat, would be the global spread of Islam where as Hinduism is still confined to India (and Nepal). This shows that it is not the oppression of women but the global spread of the religion that threatens the hegemony of the Christian West. And the motives behind branding Islam violent seem to me of more political than religious or social.
There was another discussion on Islam and the West: A Conversation between and beyond identities (cultures). The beauty of this discussion was the diversity of representation which carried the view points of Christianity, Islam, Judaism and often its reference to Hinduism. Many of the pertinent points came up here. Some of them are the commonality and the point of convergence between religions. We often understood cultures as “things” out there. But what we need to understand is that globality has become the reality in today’s world and the diverse cultures are no longer living in water tight compartmentalization or segregation but rather a form of interdependence. This brings the subjectivity of religion and globality of world order into the same platform. Religion, culture and identity constitute part of the whole and are not in competition with each other but complementary to each other. World Religions should be understood holistically. Other points also came up that emphasized the frankness of admitting the violent and undemocratic nature and elements present in our own religion. We always see the problems in other religions without paying any attention to the wrongs in our own. This frank and fearless admittance will help us understanding the religious hatred in today’s world. There was a reference made to Gandhi in this context who instead of accusing other religious groups started with reforming his own religion Hinduism. He emphasized that the untouchables are the children of God and be treated equally for which he call them harijans. Many also asked about the point of convergence of religions in today’s society? The answer again was referred to Hinduism through the concept of Brahma – the divine inner self/being.
Finally, how would the Muslims get rid of this wrong self image that has been imposed on them by the dominant powers of the day – the Americans and the Europeans through their war against terror? The consensus was through discussion and debate, academics writings and popular columns in the news daily and most importantly speaking to the public in their own language which will dispel the veil of ignorance about Islam.
No comments:
Post a Comment