|
Add to Interest Profile
Edit Interest Profile
Email This Message
Search
| Related Articles: Religion And Society...Part 1 http://sikhnet.com/sikhnet/discussion.nsf/3d8d6eacce83bad8872564280070c2b3/6cb7438fab31461d872568ab006e5974!OpenDocument Religion And Society...Part 2 http://sikhnet.com/sikhnet/discussion.nsf/3d8d6eacce83bad8872564280070c2b3/D3D5C55163DA1D4B872568AF000B10E1?OpenDocument ***************************************************************** Mounting number of divorces, broken homes, drug addiction, alcoholism, and individualism have created such a situation in North America, which made the Christian Church raise a strong voice saying that secularism was a common danger and needed to be eliminated as a social force and that Christianity should seek the cooperation of other religions to combat its influence. Christianity had given to the empirical life in the West its cohesion, strength and elan; the divorce of religion from politics and the empirical life, has left secularism a barren institution without any hope of a creative future. This is the tragedy of both communism and capitalism. It is a tragedy with its dark future that the North American Churches wanted to avoid. But in the temper of the times, the voice of sanity was drowned in an exhibition of suicidal egoism of the European Churches who felt that: "Secularization, not secularism, is the primary process. It is a process in which some of the values of Christian faith have been put into a secular framework, bringing about a powerful force, which is destroying all old ideas. Hence, secularization is an ally, because it will destroy Hinduism, Islam and other forms of what they considered to be superstition. So, we should ally ourselves with secularization and see it as work of God."[42] Later it was again repeated: "We do not feel that we have anything lacking. And so we are opposed to dialogue unless it is for the sake of testifying to Jesus Christ." They then passed a resolution saying that under no circumstances should multi-religious dialogue be undertaken because multi-religious dialogue puts Christianity on the same level as other religions and this is unacceptable. So, because the European Christians had that point of view, the World Council of Churches has not been able to engage in multi-religious dialogue for quite some time. Islam is a religious system and culture, which is, in many respects, more comprehensive and unified than the parochial culture of the city states of Greece. The Qur'an says: "Allah is One, all things depend upon Him; He begetteth not, and He is not begotten; and there is none like unto Him."[43] The Qur'an reiterates: (i) man is the chosen of God (ii) he is His representative on earth (iii) he is the trustee of a free personality accepted by Him (iv) he has the capacity of having the vision of God "God will not change the condition of men, till they change what is in themselves."[44] Islam preaches brotherhood of man. The lives of Umar Ali, Usman and Abu Bakar, the original leaders of Islam, set the highest and most enlightened standard of human conduct.[45] Equality, solidarity and freedom are the foundations of life. Distribution of wealth to the orphans is recommended. The State is the instrument for realizing the spiritual in the human organization. This is a big contribution of Islam specially because early Christianity completely accepted the political authority of the Romans and took virtually to a monastic life.[46] The fear of God and prayers to Him are the two important instruments to raise the spiritual level of man. The Prophet had a clear call to preach His mission. The Qur'an is a revealed message. Despite its emphasis on moral and righteous living, Islam denies full equality to women. The Qur'an states: "Men are the managers of the affairs of women because Allah has preferred men over women and women were expended of their right."[47] "Women have such honorable rights and obligations, but men have a (single) degree above them."[48] "Men your wives are your tillage. Go into your tillage anyway you want." The value of a woman is half that of man. In the old Islamic law, the worth of a man's life is equal to the market value of 100 camels or 200 cows and that of a woman is equal to half of man's. A woman's testimony in court is worth half that of man. In Islam, there is the concept of God's wrath and operative factor[49] in the nexus between one's disobedient act and its recompense. Says the Qur'an: "And on whosoever My wrath comes down, He indeed falls down to the depth." But the position in Sikhism is different. There is, on the other hand, in Sikh religion the concept of causation whereby the positive or the negative reward, that is, the recompense, is the effect the cause of which is one's own action. There is no room for the mediation of divine pleasure or displeasure in this causality, except when God grants redemption to man as a token of His grace ("nadar"). Sikh religion envisions God as benevolent and not malevolent. Even when man fails or falters in his allegiance to God, in his observance of Divine Commandments, the punishment that he gets is not of the type of divine displeasure (condemning him to hell, etc), but is of temporal nature at the hands of temporal authority, implying thereby that man's relationship to God has bearing on his relationship to state and society. Says Guru Gobind Singh: The spiritual state (House of Baba Nanak) and the temporal state (symbolically as the House of Babur) are both a priori institutions (as creations of God). Those who do not abide by their allegiance to God (and defying Him turn to the worldly state instead), suffer at the hands of the worldly state itself. As history of religious thought shows there appears at the earlier, lower stage the concept of divine displeasure and God's wrath, serving as a deterrent to keep man on the righteous path. At the higher stage, the stress is on arousing moral consciousness in man. Awakened moral consciousness, inwardly binding on man, takes the place of external deterrence in the form of divine displeasure and wrath. In Sikhism, which is one of the higher religions, there is no concept of a revengeful, wrathful God. Man is persuaded onto righteous path of goodness not out of fear (say of hell), or temptation (say, of heaven), but out of awakening of moral consciousness. Even when one falters in the religious allegiance to God (House of Nanak), the punishment is not in terms of divine displeasure, or God's anger. By turning his back to the House of Nanak (spiritual state) man suffers, ironically, at the hands of the worldly state itself. Here again the stress is on a moral state of consciousness in which man realizes that loyalty to the worldly state at the cost of the spiritual state in the end proves self-destructive. There is no question of administering punishment, as that would bring by the back door, the concept of a revengeful God who administers justice in a tit-for-tat manner in a hidden way-by proxy. The political ascendancy[50] of Islam went hand in hand with Islamic theological orthodoxy; the theological formalism with stress on rigid observance of the shariat became an ideological tool of political Islam which became oriented towards totalitarianism. It was a response and reaction to these causes that mystical trends arose within Islamic praxis. The common denominator of these Sufi trends, which gradually developed into institutionalized Orders (silsilas) was the stress on the experimental immediacy in direct communion with God whose unmediated Presence was felt through different stages from the sensuous to the supra-sensory. Whereas Islam emphasizes worldliness, Sufism encourages other-worldliness. The mystic quietism and other-worldliness of the Sufis appeared during the time of later Caliphs. It has happened in the case of Judaism and Islam, both whole-life religions, that in times when religiously sensitive souls found it difficult to face the social or socio-political challenges, they withdrew themselves into the shell of quietism, otherworldliness, monasticism and asceticism. The feel of the Divine presence in Sufi thought and practice, that is, Islamic mysticism, is cognized within the basic Islamic doctrine, despite extraneous influences imbibed by Sufism. The metaphysical basis of the Divine Presence - direct communion and experimental immediacy - is distinct from pantheism as also from the Vedantic conception of the immanence of Brahman. The world of time and space (khalq) is deemed to be creation of God (Khaliq). The Islamic idea of creation - which is different from the Christian as well as the Sikh conception - has deeply influenced certain significant Sufi postulates. Islamic ontology takes creation to be of discrete, atomistic character; it is not invested with internal causality (hukam) and the principles of dynamism, which, in Sikh philosophy, makes the universe autonomous in its state of becoming and development. Consequently for Islamic speculative thinking, the universe for its existence is characterized by continual, moment to moment, dependence upon God. This ontological dependence was turned into the Sufi idea of 'raza' connoting submission and resignation of the individual to the Absolute Will; political Islam used it as an ideological instrument for claiming willing obedience. The Wajudiyyah school of Sufi mystics stressed the absolute, monistic identity of essence and existence (hama ost i.e. All is God). Here essence and existence were seen as one in substantial unity. The other school, Shuhudiyyah, believed in the relative unity of essence and existence - a kind of ideational unity in which the distinctiveness of the two is treated as true and real (hama az ost i.e. All is from God). Here Sufistic 'fana' does not mean self-extinction; it, rather, means self-aspect of the self into its essential aspect into which it abidingly subsists as an idea in the mind of God. Credit goes to Imam Ghazali who taught at Nizamiyah Academy in Baghdad, for providing to Sufi mysticism systematic schemata and bringing orthodox Sufism into Sunni theology. Islam is against the idea of incarnation of God. But, the doctrine of "Logos" or "Idea of Mohammad" was accepted by Al Ghazali. He reconciles a Transcendent God with a theistic God. The aim of man is the achieve union with the "Idea of Mohammad" which was in pre-eternity as His likeness, in so far as anything can be His likeness. The goal is to lead mankind back to Him. Ibnal Farid in some of his poems claims union with the idea of Mohammad. In other poems he is claiming unity with God which would expose him to the charge of pantheism; eg., "All men are sons of Adam," but, "I alone amongst my brethren have attained to the sobriety of union." Sufi sects never posed a challenge to the oppression and misrule of Muslim emperors or kings. In this respect, the Jewish prophets were quite bold in their criticism of Jewish rulers, included David and Solomon. It is very significant, and shows the lofty spiritual status of the Sikh Gurus and the basic ideological affinity between the two religions, that a Sufi saint like Pir Buddhu Shah fought and sacrificed two of his sons for the cause of Guru Gobind Singh.[51] But it was the Sikh Gurus and not the Sufis who challenged the growing Mughal tyranny. Some scholars like Iqbal and Abdus Salam believe that like the otherworldliness of the Christians, as in the case of the Roman Empire, Sufis also became a significant cause of the decline of the Muslim cultural supremacy in the world. For, there is considerable truth in Mohammad Iqbal's couplet: "Whether it be the facade of a great republic, or the domain of a glorious empire, if its polity is divorced of the religious component, the system is reduced to sheer Changezian barbarity and tyranny." Buddha appeared in 6th century BC when Jainism was already a prevalent religion. On the full-moon day of Vaisakh, Gautama sat under the Bodhi tree not to rise till he had attained enlightenment. The conflict between human passions and the spiritual powers was finally resolved during the night. The human passions were symbolized by mara (darkness or ignorance) and spiritual powers symbolized by Bodhi (Enlightenment or Wisdom). Gautama ascended, one by one, the four stages of trance (dhyana). The last stage of dhyana is marked by pure consciousness and equanimity. It was in this stage of perfection that the bodhisattava perceived those truths that awakened and enlightened him. He had now become a Buddha, the Omniscient (knower of all things). The Buddha gave his first sermon at Saranatha near Varanasi. The five Brahmin ascetics, who were his companions became his first disciples. Gradually the number of his followers increased. The community (sangha) of the Buddhists included monks (bhikshus) and nuns (bhikshunis), kings and queens, and others from all the castes. The Buddhist faith has its three gems - triratna. They are the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha. They are called the three refuges (trisharana). The Buddha is the teacher and the revealer of the Truth. He showed the path to Nirvana. The truth is timeless (akaliko dhammo). When a Buddhist says, buddham sharanam gacchami (I take refuge in the Buddha), he means this timeless and absolute Buddha. Dharma is the doctrine and discipline taught by Buddha. It also means virtue, piety and religious life. One of the basic teachings of Buddhism is the doctrine of three marks (lakshanatraya). These are: (i) all conditioned things are impermanent (anitya); (ii) all conditioned things are suffering (dukha); (iii) all conditioned things are not-self (anatma). Thus impermanence, suffering and substancelessness are the three characteristics of our daily experience. The phrase 'conditioned things' means that things are conditioned or caused ie., they are dependent on causes and conditions. In his first sermon, at Saranatha, the Buddha taught what is called the middle way (madhymamamarga). This way is also called the eightfold way (ashtanga -marga). It consists of: (i) Right view (samyak drishti) (ii) Right intention (samyak sankalpa) (iii) Right speech (samyak vak) (iv) Right action (samyak karma) (v) Right livelihood (samyak ajiva) (vi) Right effort (samyak vyayama) (vii) Right mindfulness (samyak smriti) (viii) Right concentration (samyak samadhi) Buddha's is a monastic system for those who want liberation.[52] Salvation can be achieved only through his system. For nirvana, withdrawal from life is essential. Naturally, it encourages renunciation and asceticism. The best life is that of the wanderer or bhikshu. The homeless wandering ascetic is both a teacher and a pupil. Unchastity is a cardinal sin.[53] In Mahayana compassion is called Bodhi-chitta. It is in harmony with Nirvana. Daily meditations lead to heaven or Brahm-loka. The Buddhist bhikhshu is a reversion of one step from the Upanishadic hermit. The wanderer has to help others. They organize a Bhikhshu Sangha. The wanderers are its members. They live in an ascetic form and take vows of celibacy and poverty (non-possession). They beg for their food. Only eight items of property are allowed. Nobody should denounce others. But, "void are the systems of other teachers, void of true saints," says Gautama.[54] In early Buddhism there is not much sympathy for women. This is a sign of all monastic life everywhere in the world. Woman is a temptress. Buddha felt women were soon angered. They were stupid, passionate and comparatively sensuous. "Shun gaze of women, Ananda", says Buddha, "or watch when you speak to them." Buddha wanted all monks to be celibate. He had no duty towards the race. He had only compassion for the fallen who could not be celibate and were entrapped in their own infatuation.[55] Buddha was originally reluctant to admit women to the Sangha. For he deemed it to be a mistake to do so. Later he admitted them. But by their admission to the Sangha he felt that his religion would endure only for five hundred years instead of the anticipated one thousand. The sisters appointed in the Sangha were junior to their brothers. A male bhikhshu is not supposed to touch and rescue a drowning woman, even if she were his mother.[56] A story tells of how Buddha's step-mother Mahaprajapati, on the death of her husband, shaved off her hair and appeared before the Buddha in yellow robes of the Order. Buddha refused again and again but on Bhikhshu Ananada's insistence agreed to meet with her. Buddha's attitude towards women is clearly shown in his last conversation with Ananda: How are we to conduct ourselves, Lord, with regard to women? Do not see them Ananda! But if we should see them, what are we to do? Abstain from speech! But if they speak to us, Lord, what are we to do? Keep wide awake, Ananda. Harnam Singh[57] writes: The tragedy of Buddhism is that within the compasses of its earth and heaven, the natural and the supernatural, the mundane and the transcendental mutually exclude each other, never to intersect at any point. So long as you're on earth, you shall not deal with the supernatural; and as soon as you've phased into the state of nirvana, it is, by that state's very nature, impossible to think of the world. A philosophy that creates watertight compartments between the physical and the meta-physical and is born of dread of pain soon begins to hang heavy on the heads of its adherents. Men and women have minds and bodies whose needs they have to cater to and this is not possible unless heaven and earth interplay. Does not man want heaven to smile on the earth and to illuminate it with the warmth of its glow? Is there no heavenly touch about the flower that blossoms on its stem, the face of the son so fascinating to the mother and the warm embrace in which two souls interlock? The difficulty with Buddha is that in the stream of life everything is helplessly drifting away without a place to land or a foothold to stand on. He pays no attention to the perennial source that stands behind as its sustained power and the identity of the current that makes it what it is. This is why Dr Radha Krishnana, in his widely read History of Indian Philosophy, so aptly remarked that Shankar killed Buddhism by a fraternal embrace. The fraternity lies in this that both systems cry down the world of appearance as an influx of sensations and a creation of the mind. But whereas Shankar believed in the existence of Brahman as the substratum of this universe, Buddhism finds itself centered upon nothingness. This was the inherent weakness of the thought structure of Buddhism which made its exponents shift and alter its position from time to time and ultimately suffer defeat at the hands of Shankar who challenged it to face the verdict of logic. And it is because of this that we find Buddhism prevailing nowhere in its original form. |
 | Sikhism - " Religion And ... (Preet Mohan S Ahluwalia - 6.Apr.00) |
