tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16761020.post4678568132900220387..comments2023-10-20T21:52:36.752+05:30Comments on Cross Connections: The Brotherhood of Hindu-Muslim ClericsFarzana Verseyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06891229615361937135noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16761020.post-59338716390013331042011-03-20T18:23:47.309+05:302011-03-20T18:23:47.309+05:30Eddie, let me respond to your detailed reply:
1. ...Eddie, let me respond to your detailed reply:<br /><br />1. Combined with the gullibility of the poor is the connivance of the rational religious segment. If you see the current discourses, most of the religious spokespersons seem to appeal to a cushy clique, and this subtly embeds itself in fractious attitudes. Evangelism in the West works in a similar manner. <br /><br />2. Ideally, Indian democracy was not intended to be a brand at all. Pluralism and secularism were to be practised alongside the different faith structures prevalent. It did not happen and largely due to socialistic modernisation that needed labels. When I say conservatives, I do not mean as an ideology but a state of mind. Same with liberals. Rationality on these subjects could well be lacking in the western construct as well, for the concept of conservatism is itself anti-rational, isn’t it?<br /><br />3. You are probably right about the seven deadly sins, but they are mentioned in Matthew’s Gospel as proverbs. I suppose idioms are not gospel truths!<br /><br />4. I personally do not believe in morality as is understood and prefer the term ‘ethics’, although that too would end up splitting hairs. However, I do not suggest that morality has to derive from religion, but that is how it has been in all religions. Humanism, too, for most people derives its basic idea from religion and scriptures are quoted as exemplary examples. For the Muslim, god is morality and the last word. For the Hindu, gods are a means to moral behaviour. For the Christian, morality is god and the son of god. <br /><br />Monotheistic faiths tend to be more rigid, therefore their morality is also more ‘upright’. <br /><br />5. Clerics, catholic priests or others, use sin to push the guilt formula. Forgiveness as a social idea is laudable, but as a moral one it just makes the ‘sinner’ a martyr. <br /><br />As for thoughtful stuff, I guess I have a lot of time and if effort is needed then it is not thoughtful but contrived in my opinion, so I wallow in being laidback. Many thanks for the enlightening discussion. <br /><br /> <br />Mahesh:<br /><br />Thanks for the “communal collaboration” and the ‘PS’. <br /><br />Happy Holi to you, too, and a colourful Monday ahead…hope you saw the larger moon...FVnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16761020.post-11867268286422224252011-03-20T15:41:14.406+05:302011-03-20T15:41:14.406+05:30Eddie,
At the outset let me say this - I don't...Eddie,<br />At the outset let me say this - I don't know your geographical and geosocial origin, but it defenitely betrays "non-orientalism" . Here is what the situation - as I , a Indian, - sees. At the very basic level a larger part of our (Indian) discourse has equated religiosity with communalism. Both are different. A larger part of the problem that we see with Muslim Clerics is they so much "over-step" their religious roles and step into being spokespersons for the community (stereotyped as "Indian Muslims" - while there are social evidences to punch holes in these stereotypes). The "Hindu side" of situation is equally curious. Historically, we have had similar roles dominating the public discourse during late eighties and early nineties - something that communal parties such as BJP (overtly) and Congress (covertly) used for their own electoral and (mostly , popularity) gains. IMHO, the market forces (aka, neo-liberal economic policies) have largely subjugated the majoritarian (aka Hindu ) communal forces to - well - historical legacy. A similar situation - probably - is un-folding in Indian muslims. My guess is - sans an visible overt animosity between communities - the clerics and their hindu couterparts may be putting their "best foot forward" resorting to communalism and stereotypes. And visibly putting forth a semblance of "communal collaboration".<br />Cheers,<br />Mahesh.<br />ps. for Farzana : Happy Holi (belatedly), a nicely ending weekend and a Good Weekstart forward.Maheshnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16761020.post-46223452658347147962011-03-20T01:34:39.178+05:302011-03-20T01:34:39.178+05:30Nice piece with an interesting mix of themes. I...Nice piece with an interesting mix of themes. I'll comment on a few.<br />1. Most of us are aware of clerical hypocrisy (whatever the religion) but the Hindu/Muslim ones can act more smugly because of the gullibility of a poor, illiterate, insecure population. <br />The clerics themselves are hardly better educated and have to depend on polemic and guile rather than reasoned argument to make am impact. Political patronage may embolden them to become more brazen and bigoted. Western televangelists too (like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson) have been highly politicised and peddled a particular brand of Christianity. They have drawn huge audiences but eventually some scandal (sex or money) has led to their downfall.<br />2. I can understand the term ‘fanatic’ you use, given Indian deficits in rationality and modernity; but you also speak of conservatives and liberals. These are western labels and I wonder what they could mean in the Indian context. Of course, India’s entire political apparatus has been filched from the British and we may well ask: what is the Indian brand of democracy or secularism? Or other imported concept?<br />3. The term ‘Satan’ is certainly an intrusion from the Bible but the ‘seven deadly sins’ is not Biblical in origin and does not appear in Matthew’s gospel. Proverbs (Old Testament) does refer to six things “the Lord hates” but differ from the seven. In the New Testament, St Paul makes mention of a set of a dozen sins. The favoured seven seems to have been started by a monk (4/5th century) and a later Pope stamped his authority on the set.<br />4. If I have understood right, you suggest that morality has to derive from religion. Well, it was so in the West until the Enlightenment arrived (18th century). Thereafter, a growing humanism developed its own tenets, based on the need for people to live in harmony and eschew violence. So today morality can be separated from religion. To Muslims, however, as far as I know, morality without God is unthinkable.<br />5. Yes the clerics have helped promote the idea of sin. It gave them power over the people. Christianity is all about sin and salvation. Catholics believe all are born in sin. And they need a redeemer (Christ) to rescue humanity. But he didn’t eradicate sin. Instead he established a Church with clerics to minister to the people, including forgiving their sins and prescribing penance.<br />Farzana, you do write thoughtful stuff but it needs time and effortEddienoreply@blogger.com