Values, not rituals
are essence of religion
by
Asghar Ali Engineer
What is religion? In
actual practice religion consists of
beliefs, dogmas, traditions, practices and
rituals. A believer born in a religious
tradition inherits all this and takes
everything for granted and believes every
thing he/she has inherited is an essential
and integral part of religion. For him
rituals are as important and integral as the
values. However, while rituals are performed
regularly, values are either violated,
neglected or practiced mere symbolically.
Rituals are, however, observed more
meticulously.
There is another trend, which is more
modern comparatively. It began with
colonialism in nineteenth century i.e.
treating religion not merely as a faith but
as an ideology, particularly political
ideology. These ideologues insist that
religion is not merely a spiritual
experience but also a political system. For
them political system is much more important
than the spiritual aspects of religion.
They insist on establishing a state based
on religious ideology and then insist that
even new legislation is not permissible. It
is all perfected in the past – during med
review or even pre-med review period. These
laws are perfect and God-sent and hence no
re-thinking is permissible. Anyone who does,
commits a serious crime. Change is deviation
and deviation is sin against God. Thus a
religious state should not only implement
these laws rigorously but also punish
severely all those who advocate change. It
does not matter even if such a rigorous
application of laws injures the core-values
of religion. For these ideologues of
religion all that matters is a political
system. They not only build a political
system but also set up a political party. No
opposition to such a party is entertained as
it is projected as the party of God and how
can there be opposition to the party of God?
Needless to say such a party based on
religious ideology ultimately leads to
authoritarianism of the worst kind.
For philosophers religion can be divided
into four categories: 1) Ritual system; 2)
institutional system; 3) Value system and 4)
Thought system. Some philosophers of
religion maintain that what is permanent in
religion is firstly the ritual system and
secondly the value system. Institutional
system and thought system could and should
undergo change with the time as such a
change would not injure the spirit of
religion.
According to these philosophers the
institutional and thought systems are highly
influenced by the circumstances of their
origin. In fact they do not belong to
religious thought as such but reflect the
observations, beliefs, traditions, practices
and mental development of the time. For
example, in the course of time the Greek
philosophy and Greek sciences became
integral part of thought system of
Christianity and Islam and soon they
acquired the status of holy dogmas in these
religions. The dogma that earth is flat and
that it is at the centre of universe and
that sun goes round it was acquired from
Greek thinkers and philosophers. However,
this became integral part of Christian and
Islamic doctrines. Anyone challenging it was
held to be sinner. When Gallileo challenged
this dogma he was punished and made to
recant.
Thus it will be seen that thought system
is often acquired from alien sources but
over a period of time it becomes an integral
part of one's faith and any deviation from
it is considered an irreligious act.
Thousands of people in various religious
categories were severely persecuted in the
history of religion for challenging the
thought system evolved or acquired from
other sources.
What is called theology or `Ilm-e-Ilahi
or kalam in Islam was evolved by human
beings or Christian and Muslim scholars but
these human thoughts were elevated to the
status of immutable dogmas and doctrines. In
fact it acquired the status of revealed
scriptures. These human opinions became as
sacred as the revealed scriptures
themselves. All new scientific discoveries
and new social and political institutions
were fiercely opposed by the religious
authorities in the name of religion and
their votaries persecuted.
Such dogmas also had political
implications. For example most of the
Muslims believed in the dogma of non-createdness
of the Qur’an but the Mu`tazila, a
rationalist sect of Islam, developed the
dogma of createdness of the Qur’an. Since
the Abbasids aligned with them this dogma
acquired an ‘official Islamic’ status and
anyone opposing it was seen as an enemy of
the regime, apart from being the enemy of
Islam. Even prominent ‘Ulama like Imam Abu
Hanifa were persecuted by the Abbasids for
their refusal to accept the dogma of
createdness of the Qur’an.
Similarly fierce controversies raged
during the Umayyad period between the
jabriyas and qadriyas (i.e. between those
believing human beings being determined and
those believing they are free to act). This
controversy was also political rather than
strictly religious in nature. The Umayyads
openly encouraged those who believed in jabr
and persecuted those believing in qadr.
Those who believed in determination argued
that the Umayyad regime is divinely
determined and hence must be accepted while
those who believed in freedom of action
argued that the Muslims are free to
overthrow the Umayyad regime and replace it
with more just and benevolent one. This
political controversy had, however, acquired
religious overtones and believer in either
doctrine thought it is integral part of
religious belief.
Thus a thought system in religion and
theology should not be treated as essential
part of religious beliefs. It can and should
change over period of time. Many ahadith
also reflected the spirit of time rather
than the spirit of Islam. No wonder than
they clashed with the Qur’anic injunctions
which are truly divine in nature. These
ahadith were fabricated by those who wanted
their own ideas to be established as divine
ideas.
Similarly many prevailing traditions and
practices in society wherein Islam
originated or whereto Islam spread later
were assimilated and sanctified in the name
of religion. They even became part of
Islamic ritual system. And no opposition to
it could be entertained. Even superstitions
of worst kind were sanctified by religious
authorities and any opposition to these
superstitious beliefs was characterised as
heresy. It is important to note that what is
‘heresy’ and what is ‘pure doctrine’ is
determined, not by religious but by worldly
or even political considerations. If the
heretics did not have their way and if they
had not faced persecution nothing would have
changed in this world.
A religious dogma (of course there are
secular dogmas as well) is an authoritative
assertion of certain belief and no
opposition to such a belief is entertained.
Only difference between a religious and a
secular dogma is that while one can oppose
secular dogmas it is very difficult to
oppose religious ones. Religious dogmas are
imposed in the name of God, the supreme
authority. How can one challenge ‘divine’
authority. All religions, long after the
demise of their founders, developed such
dogmas and theologians, formulating these
dogmas, imposed their own authority. Through
these dogmas they assumed their own
‘divinity’.
Each religion, be it Semitic or
non-Semitic one, challenged the oppressive
and exploitative establishment of their own
time and provided their followers with
enlightening beliefs and human values,
liberating philosophies and oppressive
traditions. Every religion provided a great
liberating experience by emphasising certain
values be it Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity
or Islam. Later Sikkhism, Kabir Panth and
Bahaism also showed new enlightening paths
for their believers.
However, each religion was soon turned
into a powerful establishment by some of its
followers negating the very spirit of
founding moment – a defining moment – of
that religion. Once a religion was turned
into an establishment certain rituals and
dogmas became more important than the
liberating values. No major religion has
escaped this fate. Once a religion is turned
into a powerful establishment lifeless
dogmas and newly invented doctrines become
central to that religion. Further tragedy is
that when this happens reform movements
arise trying to restore original spirit of
the religion but the reform movements, if
‘successful’ themselves become another
powerful establishment and original values
are once again lost sight of. Some reformist
dogmas rule the roast at the cost of those
fundamental values.
The followers of a religion,
unfortunately, cannot, or are not allowed to
acquire knowledge of their faith in depth by
those who control the religious
establishment. Or those who are allowed,
must submit to the authority of those who
control religious establishment. Thus every
religious establishment develops its own
politics which becomes much more central to
that establishment. The establishment,
needless to say, depends on certain dogmas
and these dogmas then cannot be challenged.
Any challenge to these dogmas will be
considered subversive to the establishment.
Christianity subverted the powerful Jewish
establishment of its own time and remained
religion of the oppressed for nearly four
centuries. But once Roman Empire adopted it,
it became a powerful establishment and
developed its own dogmas, which did not
allow any opposition. Thus the religion of
the oppressed soon became religion of the
oppressors.
Islam was a great liberating religion. It
challenged the powerful establishment of
rich Meccan traders and gave a great sense
of dignity to the most oppressed of the
system. The most marginalised sections of
the Meccan society were black slaves, women
and the poor (orphans and widows included).
They had no rights in that society. Islam
not only treated them as equal human beings
but gave them a sense of dignity and
proclaimed the most liberating doctrine of
equal honour for all children of Adam. Thus
all the weaker sections of Meccan society –
slaves, poor, women and the youth aspiring
for change, rallied round the Messenger of
Islam as his doctrines were found to be most
liberating of all for them.
Thus Islam laid stress on justice and
equality; justice for all weaker sections of
society and equality among all including
between men and women. Islam also stresses
on other values, apart from these two
seminal values. Christianity, on the other
hand, lays great stress on love and
forgiveness, which are very essential for
smooth human relationship. Judaism too lays
emphasis on justice, being Abrahamic
religion. Among Indic religions, Hinduism,
stresses Universalism and tolerance, Jainism
non-violence and Buddhism compassion.
Bahaism, comparatively young religion, lays
emphasis on equality of all human beings.
And truthfulness is, of course, a common
value in all religions.
Thus we see that there are seven most
fundamental values in all religions put
together: 1)Truth; 2) Non-violence; 3)
Justice; 4) Equality; 5) Compassion; 6) Love
and 7) Tolerance. If any human being
practices these seven values he/she can be
most religious and finest of human beings.
However one rarely finds a Jew, a Christian,
a Hindu, a Muslim, a Buddhist or a Jain
practising most fundamental of these values.
They would stress rituals rather than the
values. The rituals require a priestcraft
and it is the priestcraft, which benefits
from insistence on religion. The religious
establishment is controlled, among others,
by priesthood.
We would like to throw some light here on
these fundamental values which make human
beings really religious in spirit. If we
follow these values there will be no
inter-religious conflict. Let us remember
that inter-religious conflict is not, as
many rationalists tend to think, inherent in
religious teachings; inter-religious
conflict, in fact, is result of too much
emphasis on rituals at the cost of values on
one hand, and misuse of religion for
political, economic and other personal
interests, on the other. It is not my
proposition that rituals have no importance
or do not play any part in religious
structure. They do have an important part to
play and have significance of their own.
It is rituals, which impart uniqueness to
each religion. Values are not unique to any
religion whereas rituals are. Rituals are
also important part of religious festivals
and festivals are important part of our
culture. These rituals and festivals enrich
our life and make it more colourful too. For
many people these rituals impart great sense
of fulfilment and become important
psychological support. They feel quite
uneasy if they do not perform these rituals.
But having said this I would like to
emphasise that rituals are not central to a
religion while values are. One often thinks
that by performing these rituals one has
fulfilled ones religious obligations. It is
not so. If one faithfully performs one’s
religious rituals but violates these
fundamental values or ignores them, one
cannot said to have fulfilled one’s
religious obligations.
A truly religious person is more
conscious of these fundamental values rather
than of rituals. Rituals can be neglected,
values cannot be. It is also to be noted
that rituals can be performed without
hurting ones selfish interests but values
demand great sacrifice from us. No wonder
then we stress rituals more than the values.
It is also interesting to note that while
priests stress rituals the Sufi and Bhakti
saints or mystics stress these values. While
priests thrive on these rituals the Sufi and
Bhakti saints live starkly simple life and
do everything possible to control their
desires. In any case one has to keep ones
selfish desires under control, if one wishes
to practice these values.
Let us discuss the nature and
significance of these values. The first and
foremost among these values is Truth. What
is truth? Truth is not mere conformity with
fact though it too is most essential. But
there is more to it than conformity with
fact. Truth embodies spiritual dimension
too. Being truthful requires being spiritual
and transcendent. A person who cherishes
Truth as a value would never be satisfied
with what is; he/she would always strive for
what should be. The present reality cannot
satisfy as it is imperfect. Thus Truth has a
spiritual dimension of perfectness; any
traces of imperfectness rob it of the
quality of truthfulness.
Thus a person who practices truthfulness
would never be satisfied with what is given
because what is given is far from being
perfect. God is Truth or Truth is God (in
Islamic tradition it is huwa’ al-Haq i.e. He
is Truth) precisely because He is Perfect.
Thus a person in search of Truth is in fact
is in search of moral and ethical
perfection. Anyone who is morally or
ethically imperfect has traces of untruth in
him/her. And a truly religious person keeps
on striving for moral perfection and remains
in search of truth, which also amounts for
search for higher knowledge. Thus there are
three important dimensions of truth:
conformity with fact, ethical and moral
perfection and search for higher knowledge.
I cannot think of any religion, which
does not lay stress of truth in these three
senses. Thus, it should be understood that
value-oriented religion has no potential for
conflict. It is all search for Truth,
striving for Truth, search for moral and
spiritual perfection and constant search for
higher knowledge. Search for Truth requires
involvement of ones inner being with all
sincerity, without any trace of
superficiality or any trace of falsehood or
pretension. If we become religious in this
sense neither there will be inter or intra
religious conflict and our world will become
an abode of peace.
Another important value is non-violence.
Since we have evolved from animal world from
monkey to human beings, we have inherited
strong aggressive instinct. It is this
strong aggressive tendency within us which
is store-house of violence within us. In the
animal world this aggression was needed for
survival and in human beings it assumes even
more lurid form – promoting ones selfish
desires and usurping others legitimate
rights. Hatred is another powerful engine
for violence. However, as human beings we
are also equipped by God with intelligence
and higher consciousness. Being a religious
person it is our duty to activate our higher
consciousness and curb our aggressive
violent tendencies. No religion can sanction
violence except strictly for defence.
Jainism advocates, among other religions,
highest degree of non-violence. It is an
ideal. In our world many forms of violence
exist in our society. In fact the very
unjust structures of society promote
selfishness and violence. Mere exhortation
will not do. We have to remove structural
injustices in order to make a non-violent
society possible. More injustices in society
more the violence.
Thus it will be seen that only a just
society can be a non-violent society.
Justice, therefore, is another important
value. A truly religious person is just
person. What is justice? There is no
unanimity and it is a contentious concept.
It is also very subjective concept. The
mighty and powerful define justice in their
own way and the weak define it in their own
manner. Thus justice is as much spiritual as
material in nature. As long as there are
powerful and weak, exploiters and exploited,
central and marginalised in the society,
justice will remain very subjective concept.
A just society is possible only when
structural injustices are done away with and
a powerful inner spiritual urge is there to
do away with all forms of discrimination and
exploitation both in material and spiritual
sense. Though economic justice is very
important dimension of justice is not the
only dimension of justice.
There are other forms of justice as well.
There has to be cultural, social, regional
and racial dimensions. Any sense of
superiority – be it cultural, social or
racial would lead to a sense of injustice
and discrimination. All cultures, societies,
regions and races should have equal
opportunities to thrive and prosper. There
should be no trace of discrimination. Any
trace of superiority would lead to sense of
injustice and would sow the seeds of unrest
and conflict. Thus it would be seen that
justice is very much integrally related to
equality.
Thus equality is another important value
for a truly religious vision. Justice and
equality always go together. There cannot be
a just society without equality of all human
beings. A religious person would have an
integral sense of equality of all human
beings irrespective of their culture,
language, race or nationality. All human
beings have strictly equal worth. Any
discrimination between one human being and
another would be an irreligious act.
Religiosity cannot be based on any form of
discrimination, as all human beings are
creatures of one God. Thus equality of all
human beings is the very basis of true
religiosity. The very idea of ritual purity
and impurity as found in caste hierarchies
or of racial superiority as found among
whites, is an irreligious ideal. A truly
religious person will not entertain any
concept of superiority of one over the
other.
If all human beings are equal they must
be loved equally. There cannot be equal love
without equal respect. Thus love is another
value for a religious person. He/she will
love all equally. Again the question is what
is love? Is it mere instinct to possess? A
lover is often motivated by the desire to
possess the loved one. And such a passion to
possess the ‘loved’ one leads to jealousy
which is just opposite of love. Thus it is
this passion to possess makes us love our
own culture, our own race and our own
religion, among others. This leads to being
either indifferent or jealous of the other.
It is this passion to belong which creates
psychological categories of ‘we’ and
‘others’ and ‘us’ and ‘them’.
True love is not only non-possession of
the loved but also respect for its integrity
and autonomy. And love in this sense is not
possible unless we respect the right to
independence of the one we love. Thus
non-possession of the loved one and respect
for his/her integrity and independence would
lead to a real world of equality,
independence and love. Thus love in the
sense of non-possession and independence of
the loved one leads one to yet another value
– compassion.
Compassion is truly a spiritual quality
felt for the loved ones. And if we love
entire humanity we will have compassion for
all human beings irrespective of what
nation, race or culture they belong to.
Compassion is felt when fellow human being
suffers. Thus compassion is born through
sensitivity to others suffering. If we
develop this sensitivity to a high degree we
will have compassion for all those who
suffer and others will have compassion for
our suffering. There is no human being who
does not suffer. Thus it is through
compassion that all of us will be bound in a
most humane relationship. There cannot be
greater human quality than compassion as it
is a positive passion for removal of
suffering. Thus a religious person is
devoted above all to removal of sufferings
in all forms from earth. Everything else is
secondary to him/her. If we have compassion
for suffering we will not permit any
injustice, any discrimination, any inequity
and any hatred as all these lead to
suffering.
Tolerance is another value, which is
highly necessary for a society, which holds
compassion in high esteem. Absence of
compassion leads to hatred and tolerance and
hatred are each other’s opposite. All traces
of hatred can be removed only if we develop
a quality of tolerance. Hatred leads to
suffering and suffering can be removed
through compassion and tolerance. Where
there is no tolerance there will be hatred
and where there is hatred there will be no
compassion. Thus compassion and tolerance
are also integrally connected. Thus a
compassionate person is necessarily a
tolerant person too.
Thus a truly religious person is
truthful, non-violent, just, respects
equality, loves all, is compassionate and
tolerant whether she/he performs certain
designated rituals or not. In fact rituals
in symbolic sense are instruments for
realizing these values. But these rituals
become ends in themselves and hence religion
becomes dogmatic, static and indifferent to
human suffering and in some cases even cause
of suffering. We should strive to promote
value-oriented and not ritual-oriented
religion in the world. It will be a great
boon for humanity.
June 2001
|