|
There are four classes of Idols, which beset men's minds. To these
for distinction's sake I have assigned names-calling the first class,
Idols of the Tribe; the second, Idols of the Cave; the third, Idols
of the Market-Place; the fourth, Idols of the Theater - Francis
Bacon. (1561-1626).
Bacon created analogies for various myths that had emanated from different
origins, and which confused rational thinking in men. His major contribution
to philosophy was his application of induction, the approach used
by modern science, rather than the a priori method of medieval scholasticism.
If Francis Bacon were to be here today, he would add another category
of idols to his list - the idols of the mosque. There are some myths
about religion that exist without any scrutiny. The reason for this
is the mullah's belligerency that has been fostered on a naive policy
of appeasement, and our intellectuals' moral cowardice to stand up
for truths. Religious issues are made sacrosanct by unwillingness
of the intelligentsia to challenge the arbitrary signs of "no
trespassing" posted by an illiterate clergy. These are some myths
about religion that need dispelling.
There is a myth that religion and morality are synonymous. Nothing
can be farther from the truth. In practice, religion and morality
are neither synonymous nor mutually exclusive. You may have a religious
person who is not 'moral' - he simply follows articles of faith ceremoniously.
On the other hand, you may have an irreligious person who is very
moral. Vice-versa can also be possible. This myth gives rise to a
belief that morality can only exist within a framework of faith or
that lack of a religious framework breeds immorality. A little observation
of life around you will show that there is no truth in this supposition.
On the contrary, it is considerably easier to mask immorality under
a veil of religious ceremoniousness.
There is another similar myth about religion and justice. The clergy
has made the common person develop a belief that if religious jurisprudence
were to be imposed, there would be perfect justice all around. This
is wrong too because providing justice is not the function of the
Law. Law is a passive instrument of concepts. Justice is delivered
by the executing agencies, the police and the judicial system. No
Law in itself can guarantee justice if the executing machinery is
ineffective or corrupt. Executing and delivering justice is more to
do with administrative ability than conceptual or ideological rectitude.
There is an illusion that faith, or religion, enshrines static, universal
and perpetual truths, that are unalterable. Whereas, life is a kinetic
process and nothing can be assumed to be static or universal. In reality,
all religions take on local flavour wherever they go. Christianity
and Islam, the two most popular faiths in the world, have adopted
immense diversity in concepts, ceremony and practice in different
parts of the world. A little traveling around will reveal to anyone
how much influence local culture has on religious forms. Let alone
distant cultures, Arabia and Persia adopted Islam differently in the
light of their own historical perceptions and yet only a small stretch
of water separates the two regions. Islam mutates into a soofi mold
when it comes to India. Universality of religious form is a myth.
There is a grave illusion that beleaguers the Muslims of the subcontinent.
It is that religion can form a basis for a modern Nation-State. In
India Wins Freedom, Maulana Abul Kalaam Azad wrote, "Mr. Jinnah
and his followers do not seem to realise that geography was against
them. Muslims in undivided India were distributed in a way, which
made it impossible to form a separate state in a consolidated area.
The Muslim majority areas were in the North-West and in the North-East.
These two areas have no point of physical contact. People in these
areas are completely different from one another in every respect except
only in religion. It is one of the greatest frauds on the people to
suggest that religious affinity can unite areas, which are geographically,
economically, linguistically and culturally different. It is true
that Islam sought to establish a society, which transcends racial,
linguistic, economic and political frontiers. History has, however,
proved that after the first few decades, or at the most after the
first century, Islam was not able to unite all the Muslim countries
into one state on the basis of Islam alone." Time has proven
the Maulana correct. Pakistan desperately needs to redefine its existence,
aside from religion, before the centrifugal forces working on it shatter
the religious bind that is supposed to be holding it together.
General Zia reinforced the myth that Pakistan cannot exist without
religious motifs, and contemporary politicians dare not tread on that
sacred domain. It is true that most people in Pakistan would uphold
the notion of an Islamic order in the country but there is a subtle
symbolism here that escapes general observation. The common person
in Pakistan is frustrated with the 'system', which has let him down
in terms of economic, social and legal security. He pines for these
securities and for that, his point of reference is Islamic history,
not western democracy. He is not familiar with the concepts of Locke
or Rousseau, or the contribution of John Adam, Lincoln and the likes
in the evolution of democratic systems. He relates social justice
to Caliph Hazrat Omar, Caliph Hazrat Ali, Allaudin Khilji because
that is what he is familiar with. So the common man in Pakistan, in
effect, is not endorsing a theocratic order. He is simply expressing
a need for relief from the uncertain misery of his existence. His
psychological need lends itself readily for the 'salesmen of the religious
supermarkets' to con him into a myth that a religious order will deliver
prosperity and justice.
Finally, there is that lethal and debilitating myth aggressively held
by the clergy that imposition of religion (or a particular brand of
it) is an end in itself, above all else. It need not be measured in
terms of human betterment or service. It is ordained from the heavens
and that that is it. Then they take it upon themselves to become the
executioners of God's will in the imposition of a tyrannical order
that is neither efficient nor kind. They forget that all religions
and particularly Islam were revolutions in their own times, descended
to relieve human misery and elevate society to a higher plateau of
civilisation. If religion cannot deliver these basic objectives, it
is a mockery of faith. Faith cannot be an end in itself.
"Enlightened moderation' doesn't challenge these myths at a perceptual
level; in fact endorses them and therefore will never take roots in
public psyche, especially without the tangible support of equity,
security and justice in society. General Musharraf will need much
more than syllogisms at rallies to contain the hold of religious extremism
in the society.
Iqbal
Mustafa
email: mustafa@hujra.com
Archives available at www.hujra.com
1140words
19 March 2005
|
