Lecture delivered by Prof Dr. Chandra Muzaffar at the Centre for the Study of World Religions(CSWR), Harvard University on 1st October 2009. The Lecture is the first in the series entitled “Ecologies of Human Flourishing.”
The world is faced with multiple crises. We shall begin by offering our reflections on them and attempt to probe their underlying causes. These causes will prompt us to ask: Is religion the answer to the crises that challenge us? We shall argue that if religion is to play an effective role it will have to undergo a profound transformation. This will be followed by some discussion on the nature of this transformation before the presentation concludes on the assuring note that there are signs of hope on the horizon.
The Crises
We shall focus upon seven inter-related crises. Their significance cannot be emphasised enough. However, with the exception of the first two—the environmental crisis and the economic crisis — many people may not even acknowledge the rest as crises. Nonetheless, if a ‘crisis’ is defined as “ a time of danger or great difficulty”, there is no reason why they cannot be classified as such.
The Environmental Crisis
An important segment of the human family has awoken to the environmental crisis. The dire consequences of global warming are registered on the radar screens of not just environmentalists but also politicians, economic planners and media practitioners. How global warming affects climate change, vegetation, agricultural patterns, and human habitats, has been the subject of numerous studies. However, efforts at curbing carbon emissions that cause global warming at both national and global levels have been rather weak and feeble. It appears that our planet is too deeply mired in an economic and industrial system that is over dependent upon the burning of fossil fuels.(1)
This in turn is linked to yet another dimension of the environmental crisis: the rapid depletion of non-renewable resources. The view that is gaining currency is that “known and likely reserves of readily accessible oil and natural gas will last a few more decades” (2). What happens to our civilization when we run out of these resources— resources which have helped to sustain us? Add to this the rate at which we are destroying genetic diversity and wild species and losing soil fertility and we have an idea of the catastrophe that awaits future generations, unless present trends are reversed.
The Economic Crisis
The environmental crisis cannot be separated from the economic crisis since the manner in which renewable and non-renewable resources are utilised and consumed is related to an economic system that is clearly biased towards the upper echelons of society. The widening chasm between those who have a lot and those who have a little within nation-states and across the globe is one of the gravest challenges facing humankind today. It has been estimated that the “ top 10 percent of the world’s people possess 84 percent of the world’s wealth, while the rest are left with the remaining 16 percent.” (3) More than 3 billion people “live on less than $ 2.50 a day. Of these, about 44 percent survive on less than $ 1.25 a day, according to a new World Bank report issued on 2 September 2008. Everyday, more than 30,000 people die of malnutrition, avoidable diseases and hunger. Some 85 percent of them are children under the age of 5.” (4).
If the chasm between the have-a-lot and the have-a-little has become even wider in recent years and if abject poverty continues to cripple the lives of millions and millions of human beings especially in the Global South, it is partly because there has been much more emphasis upon the liberalisation of financial markets, the deregulation of economies and the privatisation of public goods since the mid-eighties. This trend in global and national economies, euphemistically described as neo-liberal capitalism, clearly benefits the few at the expense of the many. Neo-liberal capitalism can be traced back to the abrogation of the Bretton Woods system by the United States in 1971 and the decision to leave the determination of exchange rates to the markets in 1973. This led to increased market volatility which in turn opened the door to massive speculation, accelerated no doubt by the ever expanding reservoir of capital from the eighties onwards, and the computer revolution.
What this means is that there is a powerful speculative — more precisely, casino— dimension to contemporary capitalism. (5) More than 90 percent of global financial transactions are linked, in one way or another, to speculative capital. Speculation has triggered off the rapid exit of capital from markets, ruined many an economy and left millions of people destitute. In recent years we have witnessed the pain and suffering it has caused to the poor in countries such as Indonesia and Argentina.
Even the “sub-prime mortgage crack in the US housing market during the summer of 2007” which led to “the collapse of major banking institutions, precipitous falls on stock markets across the world and a credit freeze” (6) was a consequence of rampant speculation in capital and currency markets that had its roots in banking deregulation and excessive liquidity creation. Tens of thousands of Americans who have lost their jobs have now become the latest victims of unfettered, casino capitalism. It is cruel, inhuman, unjust capitalism of this sort, often pandering to the greed of a few, that convinces men and women of conscience that there has to be an alternative to the present economic system.
The economic and environmental crises should be understood in the larger context of other crises that also raise fundamental questions about priorities and policies, on the one hand, and values and worldviews, on the other. One such crisis is related to politics and power.
Politics and Power
There is an intimate nexus between politics and power and economic and environmental issues since it is political elites who more often than not determine priorities and formulate policies that impact directly or indirectly upon the economy and the environment. In most cases, their priorities and policies reflect the prevailing power structures which embody the interests of the upper echelons of society rather than those of the weaker, poorer sections of the populace, in spite of the spread of democracy and elections in recent times. (7). This implies that while it may be a little easier to hold political leaders accountable today than two decades ago, it does not follow that the interests of the upper echelons — specifically the elites— do not preponderate over the rest of society.
It is partly because political elites and their interests continue to dominate the landscape that abuse of power and corruption remain formidable challenges in many parts of the world. Even in Britain, the ‘mother of democracies’, there have been revelations of late of abuse and misuse of power among cabinet ministers and legislators (8). It underscores once again the importance of ethics in public life.
At the global level, the situation is infinitely much worse. In the name of promoting democracy, the US elite has for a long while abused its power by invading and occupying other lands, usurping their resources, and killing millions of people who stand in the way of the elite’s pursuit of global hegemony. Needless to say, this hegemonic power has often flouted international law, denigrated international institutions and ignored global public opinion with impunity.(9) If it has got away with such arrogant behaviour, it is mainly because democracy has not been institutionalised in international affairs. Might rules over right in global politics.
Military Might and Security
This dictum is mirrored in the US’s global military power. Hundreds of US military bases gird the globe. (10) Its military power extends from the depths of the ocean to the outer reaches of space. There has never been a military power like the US in the entire history of the human race.
It should come as no surprise therefore that the US accounted for 58 percent of the global increase in military expenditure between 1999 and 2008. Worldwide military expenditure in 2008 stood at an estimated 1.46 trillion US dollars. This represents a 4 percent increase in real terms compared to 2007 and a 45 percent increase since 1999. Apart from the US, China, Russia, India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel, Brazil, South Korea, Algeria and Britain have all increased their military expenditure over the last decade. (11).
Burgeoning military budgets have not brought about more security. Military conflicts continue unabated in many parts of the world. Terrorism, which is used as the justification for expanding military expenditure in many instances, remains a major threat to the human family. In fact, military strikes by the US and its allies appear to have spawned more terrorist operations in places like Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. (12).
Media and Popular Consciousness
If the truth about escalating military expenditure and how it contrasts with the neglect of the world’s poor is not widely known, it is largely because it has not been highlighted in the mainstream print and electronic media. In a sense this is understandable since the media is after all part and parcel of the power structure and has a crucial role in preserving and perpetuating its influence and impact. (13) The emergence of cyber media — a small section of which challenges global hegemony— has not changed the overall pattern of power.
Instead of consciously developing a new awareness about the danger of global hegemony with all its ramifications, and its relationship to other global crises, the media everywhere appears to be encouraging the growth of a shallow, superficial sensate culture that glorifies personalities from the world of sports, entertainment and politics. At the crux of this sensate culture is of course the culture of conspicuous consumption. The media, which derives so much of its revenue from advertisements placed by companies promoting their goods and services, is at the forefront of the dissemination of a global culture of consumerism that spans oceans and continents.
The Culture of Consumerism
Consumerism, it has been said, is the religion of our time. It has to be clarified at the outset that by consumerism one does not mean the fundamental human need to consume in order to survive, and indeed to flourish. One appreciates that consumption goes beyond the rudimentary necessities of life and would encompass legitimate wants and desires that bring joy and happiness to the human being.
By consumerism we mean excessive, unrestrained consumption of goods and services which transgresses the norms of moderate spending that is cognizant of the well-being of the general public. In concrete language, possessing two or three pairs of shoes is not a problem. But why should one own twenty or thirty pairs of shoes at one time? A two hundred dollar wrist watch may not raise eyebrows; but a twenty thousand dollar watch is certainly an example of conspicuous consumption. It is the obsession with buying and buying and buying, which is disturbing. Our concern, it should be apparent, is with extravagance and opulence, with lifestyles which have jettisoned restraint and moderation and other such virtues.
The conspicuous consumption of the upper class and a segment of the middle class in both the Global North and the Global South is obscene. It is greed, plain and simple. (14) It is a manifestation of narcissism, of the ego, of self-centredness.
The public as a whole does not realize that the prevailing culture of consumerism is partly responsible for the environmental crisis, that it is linked to the unequal distribution of economic and political power in society, that it skews the allocation of resources against the poor and powerless. In fact, the conspicuous consumption of the upper echelons of American and British societies is one of the reasons why their elites seek to control oil and other resources belonging to other people, as well as strategic sea-routes far away from their own countries. In other words, the global culture of consumerism also helps to explain global hegemony.
Relations between Cultures, Religions and Civilisations
Global hegemony is one of the barriers to harmonious relations between cultures, religions and civilisations. This is especially true in the interface between the centres of power in the West and the Muslim world. (15) Because of attempts, notably by the US elite, to control and dominate the Middle East— the region is the world’s biggest exporter of oil—a lot of Muslims are unhappy with US foreign policy in the region. The invasion and occupation of Iraq, helmed by the US, was one of those episodes which exacerbated relations between the US and Muslims. More than the fact of occupation, it is — as we have mentioned—the killing of people, especially women and children which has intensified negative feelings towards the US elite.
Of course, it is not just Iraq, or Lebanon, or Somalia or Afghanistan— all countries which have witnessed American military involvement in one form or another— that has created so much bad blood between the US and the Muslim world. For many Muslims the deepest wound inflicted upon the Muslim body politic remains the Israeli occupation of Palestine and the consequent dispossession of the Palestinian people. Since the US and the West in general provide material and moral support and patronage to Israel, there is a widespread perception in the Muslim world that the US is biased against the Palestinians and Muslims.
What has aggravated further West-Muslim ties is the reaction of a fringe within the Muslim world to the injustices perpetrated by the US elite. We have alluded to the acts of terror committed by this fringe. The terrorist network called Al-Qaeda whose tentacles seem to stretch from Indonesia and Pakistan to Germany and Morocco has distorted Islamic teachings to legitimise its nefarious agenda of murder and mayhem. Its activities have reinforced the image of the Muslim as a terrorist in the eyes of the ordinary American or European.
Of course, equating Muslims and Islam with violence and terror has a long history behind it. It is part of the deep-seated, prejudiced stereotyping of the religion and its adherents in Western Christian circles which dates back to a thousand years. Muslim conquest of parts of the West from the 8th century onwards, the European crusades against Muslims from the 11th to the 13th centuries, and Western colonialism, have all contributed to this. Negative stereotypes about the West and sweeping generalisations about Christians and Jews are also rife in the Muslim world. They are more pervasive today than in the past. Given this background, it is not difficult to comprehend why there is a profound crisis in the relations between the centres of power in the West and the Muslim world.
There are other crises of some import — apart from the seven analysed here— that we will not be able to examine in any detail. Formal education today for instance gives much less emphasis to character development and the assimilation of values compared to schools of yesteryear.(16) At the same time, higher education has become more profit oriented. Similarly, health care systems in a number of countries have embraced the magic of the market and appear to be less concerned about the welfare of the patient. This raises fundamental ethical questions about the role and responsibility of the medical professional.(17) The other institution that has undergone significant change is the family. The family—the basic unit of society—has lost some of its cohesiveness. The demands of the market and the rise of individualism have impacted negatively upon intra-family ties. What this implies is that the family is no longer an effective conduit for the transmission of moral values from one generation to another. (18).
From the various crises that we have examined, it is apparent that there are certain fundamental causes behind them. What are these causes? We have identified four causes which are presented below.
Fundamental Causes
Global Hegemony
Global hegemony is undoubtedly one of the fundamental causes responsible for the various crises that we have looked at. In an increasingly globalised world, it would be foolish to ignore or to downplay its significance. (19)
It is partly because of global hegemony that there have been wars and death and destruction. Global hegemony is linked to overwhelming global military power with all its catastrophic consequences for humankind. Global terrorism is one such consequence since it is to a large extent a reaction to occupation which is a manifestation of hegemony. Global hegemony has thwarted the emergence of global democracy and accountability. It has a mutually reinforcing relationship with the mainstream global media. It is the media which has made hegemony appear normal and natural. Because of the economic forces behind global hegemony and the vested interests related to them, disparities in wealth and income between the global ‘have-a-lot’ and the global ‘have-a-little’ have widened considerably. Casino capitalism for instance is a product of global hegemony. Even the culture of consumerism, as we have seen, has become pervasive because of global hegemony. Consumerism, in turn, impacts upon finite resources and our environment. Global hegemony is a barrier to inter-civilisational understanding and harmony.
The Bias towards the Powerful and the Wealthy
But it is not just because of global hegemony that the world is in crisis. In the governance of most states there is a bias towards the powerful and the wealthy. This has happened right through history. It is this bias that is partly responsible for environmental degradation and resource depletion. Often, the interests represented by the powerful and the wealthy prevent the enforcement of effective solutions to the environmental crisis. If social and economic disparities within nation-states have increased, the wealthy and the powerful cannot be exonerated from blame. We have shown that their dominance persists within the political arena— in spite of electoral democracy— and is often mirrored in the media. It is the elite from among the powerful and the wealthy who decide to expand the military budget of the state, often at the expense of the well-being of the people. Needless to say, the powerful and the wealthy are part of the culture of conspicuous consumption and have a direct stake in perpetuating it.
Failure to adhere to Moral Values and Principles
Apart from the bias towards the powerful and the wealthy within the nation-state, and global hegemony, the failure of humankind as a whole— or more precisely, specific groups of people— to adhere to essential moral values and principles may also explain the multiple crises we face today. In every crisis without exception, it is the non-adherence to certain values that appears to be one of the fundamental causes. For instance, in the case of the environment, both a lack of a sense of justice and a lack of restraint are partly responsible for the mess the world is in. A lack of a sense of justice would also be a principal reason for the current economic crisis which reveals how little compassion the rich have for the poor. The abuse of power and the prevalence of corruption which we had alluded to in our analysis indicate a lack of integrity and honesty on the part the political elite. Likewise, the wanton display of military might, like the terrorist response to it, prove that both parties have scant respect for life. By the same token, the media that sidelines glaring facts about military expenditure or hegemony at the global level, or ignores revelations about corruption and incompetence within the domestic sphere, betrays its professional responsibility to tell the truth to the public. Similarly, the culture of consumerism is, as we have noted, reflective of a mentality that eschews moderation just as negative stereotyping of, and prejudices against, ‘the other’ suggests an utter lack of respect for cultural, religious and civilisational diversity.
So far we have looked at how the dearth of certain moral values and principles is partly responsible for various crises. In many instances, it is more than the lack of certain moral values; it is the active presence of disvalues, of vices that aggravates the crisis. The environmental and the economic crises, like the crisis of consumerism, expose the pernicious, pervasive danger of greed. In politics, both at the national and the global level, there is a great deal of self-centredness which descends quite easily into self- aggrandizement. Indeed, there is an intimate nexus between self-aggrandizement and the push for global hegemony which invariably embodies a degree of arrogance.
Self-centredness as a behavioral trait is also promoted and disseminated by the media. The media, as we have hinted, massages the egos of celebrities. In a sense, in the tensions between cultures, religions and civilisations, one can also trace the insidious influence of the ego, the collective cultural or religious or even civilisational ego.
Worldview?
This brings us to the last of the fundamental causes. Unlike the other causes, this is not readily obvious from our analysis of the various crises. It is best understood by asking some searching questions about each of the seven crises that we have examined.
Would the environmental crisis have occurred if the dominant perspective on nature and its resources had been different— if we saw nature as part of that divine creation to which we belong, if we appreciated that transcendent link between humankind and the environment? (20) Would we have adopted such a rapacious attitude towards our finite resources if we viewed them as a temporary gift given to us in trust during our brief sojourn on earth? In other words, isn’t the environmental crisis a product— to some extent at least— of a worldview that emerged from the European Enlightenment of the eighteenth century that saw nature as an object distinct from the human being that had to be conquered by the latter for his own narrow benefit?
Turning to the economic crisis, would humankind have allowed such huge disparities to develop between the have-a lot and the have-a- little if it viewed the human family as a single entity anchored in divine unity? To achieve that unity within the human family, isn’t it true that justice and equality would have been the vital prerequisites? Would the global economy become a casino driven by speculative capital if it was guided by a vision that eschewed gambling and the unrestrained accumulation of wealth and profits?
Would there be so much abuse of power in both national and global politics if politics were guided by a vision of service and sacrifice, if politicians regarded their power as a trust that has to be used judiciously in accordance with the loftiest standards of morality? Would a political leader flaunt his power if he were deeply conscious of how puny and transient his power was in relation to the Omnipotent Power of the Almighty? (21)
Would the President or Prime Minister of a country abuse his power to conquer other lands and dominate other people, to kill and to maim innocent children and women, if he genuinely believes in the sacredness of life, of all life? Shouldn’t we expect a person who values the sacredness of life to subscribe to that spiritual gem in Judaism and Islam that states that if you killed a single human being — without cause—it is as if you have killed the whole of humankind and that if you saved a single human being it is as if you have saved the whole of humankind?
Likewise, media practitioners who are deeply conscious of their moral responsibilities and are attached to a transcendent view of life that goes beyond themselves, will be averse to lying, distorting and exaggerating through their media outlets. They would see their written or spoken word as a sacred bond between them and their audience.
If the dominant worldview acknowledged the importance of limits to consumption especially within the upper echelons of society, if restraint and moderation were essential attributes of one’s lifestyle, would we be confronted by the challenge of a culture of consumerism today? If our worldview were not centred upon continuously enhancing materialistic comforts, would there be greater sharing and giving in a culture that is profoundly cognizant of a larger spiritual purpose and meaning to life?
Would a different worldview that celebrates religious and cultural diversity and respects the other have succeeded in minimizing tensions between different cultures, religions and civilizations? Isn’t it because the current worldview is uneasy with the religious and cultural other, and often seeks to dominate the other, that it has not been able to forge unity out of diversity?
Even if we reflected on the other three crises that we referred to briefly, connected to education, health care and the family, it is possible to argue that the accompanying worldview is part of the problem. If the worldview were different, it is quite conceivable that character building through the absorption of moral values would be the main mission of education rather than preparing the young solely for the market. Similarly, health care would be seen as the divine art of healing, not another business enterprise! By the same token, the spiritual and moral ties that bind a family together would come to the fore within a different worldview that is less susceptible to pressures from the market and the culture of individualism.
Our fourth fundamental cause which asks whether our dominant worldview on the environment, the economy, politics and so on is one of the reasons why the world is in crisis, brings us directly into the realm of religion. For the alternative worldview that we have put forward here in very general terms is a worldview that is enshrined in most religions.( 22). It will be discussed in greater detail in the course of this analysis. For now let us see how religion will be able to respond to the four fundamental causes of the seven crises that we have examined.
Is Religion the Answer?
The fourth cause— worldview — we have already dealt with. We have shown how a worldview that inter alia, appreciates the profound relationship between the human being and his environment, the sacredness of life, the primacy of truth, unity within the human family, respect for the other as part of the divine gift of diversity, justice and equality as divine values, the limits of power, and the nobler purpose of life beyond consumerism, may have been able to avert the multiple crises facing humankind. We shall now turn to the other three causes in ascending order.
It goes without saying that moral values such as justice and compassion, integrity and moderation, respect and restraint, so vital for overcoming the various crises, are fundamental to the various religions. Those vices which are partly responsible for the crises — greed, self-centredness, arrogance— are also condemned in the different religions. This persuades us to suggest that if the vices identified by religion can be curbed and the values embodied in it can be harnessed, we may be able to overcome the crises of our time.
If the economic, environmental and other related crises are caused partly by a systemic bias towards those who command wealth and power, then religion is an antidote of sorts. Most religions, at the level of ideas and philosophy, are not inclined towards the powerful and the wealthy. They take to task those who abuse power and oppress people. In Christianity and Judaism, as in Islam and Buddhism, there is denunciation of those who are obsessed with the untrammeled accumulation of wealth. Many religions express support, sympathy and solidarity with the poor and powerless. Indeed, the lives of all the founders of the established religions, and the biographies of the prophets and great sages bear testimony to their love and compassion for the marginalised and the poor. These were simple, honest men, with meagre material possessions who had no desire for the glitter and the lustre of power and wealth.
It is equally significant that religions are opposed to hegemony, whether local, national or global. The underlying principle is that no human being or institution should control or dominate another. In Islam for instance it is through conscious, engaged surrender to God and God alone, that the human being liberates herself from the control and domination of other individuals or institutions or even oneself. It is because the idea of liberation is rooted in the Qur’an itself that Muslims have consistently stood up against colonialism. In this regard, it is important to observe that the first transnational movement against colonialism was initiated by an outstanding Muslim reformer, Syed Jamaluddin Assadabadi, also known as Syed Jamaluddin al-Afghani, in the latter part of the 19th century.( 23)
Islam, it should be emphasised, is not the only religion that rejects global hegemony. It is possible to interpret values and principles contained in the basic texts of most religions to show that they are averse to control and dominance by some external power. In this regard, there is an insightful passage from the illustrious Chinese philosopher, Lao Tzu (4th century b.c.e) that establishes the philosophical basis for opposition to hegemony. It reads, “Those who would take over the earth and shape it to their will Never, I notice succeed. The earth is like a vessel so sacred That at the mere approach of the profane It is marred. And when they reach out their fingers it is gone.” (24).
It is worth reiterating that there is, indisputably, a whole gamut of ideas, values and principles in the world’s religions that addresses the fundamental causes of the various crises that confront humankind. To put it differently, faith is a magnificent resource in our endeavour to overcome the multiple crises of our time. Besides, it is important to remind ourselves that for the vast majority of the human family, religion has always been a crucial point of reference in their attempt to make sense of the vicissitudes of life. Indeed, even in societies where religion seemed to have receded from the public square, there is a religious resurgence of sorts. (25).
Religion in Reality
While there are values and principles in the world’s religions that address our multiple crises, the critical question is this: do the millions and millions of followers of the different religions, and the religious elites that they listen to, focus upon these crises and the values and principles related to them?
Before we try to answer that question, it is important to clarify that my response will be conditioned to some extent by the fact that I am a Muslim and it is the realities obtaining in the Muslim world that I am most familiar with. Nonetheless, I have transcended religious boundaries and not only in the public square; even in my private space I have crossed religious lines and interacting with individuals of different religious persuasions has been so much a part of my own reality.
To return to the question, it is quite conceivable that a lot of practising Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, and people of other religions see their faith as the panacea to all the ills that have befallen the world. Among Muslims in particular, the rallying cry has been “Return to the Quran and Sunnah” which in many instances is augmented by the call to “Re-establish the Sharia”. (26) This, they feel, is the only way of overcoming the crises that confront humankind. For the advocates of a global Islamic Caliphate, the return to the Quran and the Sunnah (way of the Prophet Muhammad), and the implementation of the Sharia, have been the cornerstone of their ideology.
Since the Islamic Caliphate is a fuzzy idea, it would be more useful if we took a brief peep at how Muslims who see their religion as the panacea, address the various crises that we have analysed. We have already observed that it is the occupation of Muslim lands and the usurpation of their resources which lies at the root of the present inter-civilisational crisis between the West and the Muslim world— a crisis that has earned the wrath of Muslims everywhere. Muslim religious elites and a range of other Muslim groups have also been vehement in their condemnation of US helmed global hegemony in general; its hypocritical postures on democracy; the propagation of what is perceived as a Western ‘lifestyle’ and Western values; the global consumer culture; and biases in the global media, in that order. Global economic disparities, and, in recent times, the global financial crisis, have also been subjected to trenchant criticism. On the global environmental crisis however, Muslim religious elites have been less vocal.
In contrast to these elites, a number of Buddhist monks and nuns in Thailand, South Korea and Taiwan have demonstrated their commitment to the environment through various grassroots activities.(27) Among some Hindu activists in India, the crisis that has elicited a response of sorts is the penetrative, pervasive influence of Western culture and lifestyle among the nation’s middle and upper classes. Segments of Hindu society have also been reacting to alleged Christian proselytisation which is a dimension of the crisis between cultures, religions and civilisations in today’s world. There are individuals and groups within Christian Orders and among lay Christians in the Philippines, South Korea, Sri Lanka and Indonesia who are not only opposed to global military and economic hegemony but are also deeply concerned about the environmental crisis and the culture of consumerism. (28)
Though religious elites and religious people are concerned about the various crises that challenge us, it would be wrong to conclude that the global environment or the global economy or the global military structure is their main focus. They continue to be preoccupied with the rites and rituals, the practices and the traditions, the forms and symbols of their respective religions. In other words, preserving and perpetuating — and sometimes, propagating—their religion is what religious elites do most of the time.
By doing this, they are helping to protect the religion’s identity. Protecting their religion’s identity has become the central concern of religious elites in a world in crisis. A lot of their followers are also committed to this goal. This is especially true of the global Muslim community.
Part of the reason is because Muslims feel that they are under siege; hence the need to defend their identity. It is not just invasion and occupation and other acts of aggression of recent years that have heightened Muslim insecurity and compelled a section of the community to re-assert their identity in all sorts of ways. Attacks on the integrity of the community through books and cartoons and films and speeches— most of the time emanating from the West— have also made the average Muslim more conscious of his identity. There are many other reasons why Muslim identity consciousness has escalated in the last couple of decades.(29).
Greater identity consciousness among Muslims — understandable under the circumstances— has nonetheless been a bane upon the community. It has strengthened the obsession with text and tradition, dogma and dictum, prohibition and punishment especially among the religious elites. They see it as a way of preserving the inner character and outer image of the religion. Of course, by assuming the role of protectors of the religion’s identity, these elites have enhanced their power. Since the community itself looks upon these elites as the only legitimate interpreters of the religion — the ones who have the right to decide what is permissible and what is prohibited — their moral authority is unassailable. Indeed, the interpreters of the divine word have become divine!
When some dogma or practice, some prohibition or punishment, has been rendered sacrosanct by religious elites, it will be impossible to probe text and tradition in order to understand the significance of an underlying principle or value. And yet, it is these underlying principles and values that should be drawn out of the Qur’an and the Sunnah and from Islamic laws and rules as they had evolved over the centuries, to enable us to formulate solutions to the multiple global crises that confront humankind. All religions will have to do this: analyse texts, discard rules and edicts which contradict universal values and principles in the philosophy of the religion itself, and then apply those values and principles to new challenges and new situations.(30) We shall return to this point later.
For now let us provide examples of how we can address the underlying causes of some of our global crises through the application of values and principles without being bound to a specific text or tradition. We have shown that greed is one of the primary causes of the environmental crisis and the economic-cum- financial crisis, and is partly responsible for the growth of a culture of consumerism. The Qur’an condemns greed and narrates the story of the avaricious Qarun (chapter 28:76-82). Muslim religious elites never tire of reciting the story of Qarun but they do not realise that to curb greed one has to develop mechanisms, institute laws and nurture a culture that is revolted by greed. It is revealing that contemporary religious elites have not played any role in creating structures or shaping cultures that will combat greed anywhere in the Muslim world.
Similarly we know that one of the principal causes of our crises is global hegemony and Muslims have been resisting it mainly through violence. While it is true that the Qur’an permits the victims of aggression and oppression to resist with the aid of arms, what is important is not so much the use of arms as the fundamental principle of resistance itself. Religious elites and a significant section of the Muslim community have given more emphasis to the use of arms based upon a literal interpretation of the Quranic text. If they had grasped the significance of the underlying principle, they would have built instead a culture of non-violent resistance. Peaceful, but active and dynamic, resistance to global hegemony may be more effective in securing the liberation of Muslim countries under occupation. After all, two semi-autocratic regimes in the Muslim world — one in Tehran, the other in Jakarta— were overthrown by the people through peaceful means.(31) We tend to forget that in the struggle against British colonialism in the Indian sub-continent, the Pathan chieftain, Abdul Ghaffar Khan, chose the non-violent approach which he was convinced was “ the weapon of the Prophet, but you are not aware of it. That weapon is patience and righteousness. No power on earth can stand against it.” (32)
It is obvious that Muslim religious elites and perhaps the majority of Muslims are not prepared to understand and practise their faith at the level of fundamental principles and values and would rather adhere to literal interpretations of text and to the legalistic tradition in the religion. This is also true— albeit to a lesser degree— of the followers of most other religions. Since it is the failure to uphold fundamental spiritual and moral principles and values that is one of the underlying causes of the multiple crises confronting humankind, we view the Muslim’s present approach to religion as a liability, rather than an asset, in the struggle to overcome the crises of our time.
Transformation: A Spiritual-Moral Worldview
If an obsession with dogma and rituals, with forms and symbols, is the challenge, how does one change the mindset? How does one transform the popular understanding of, and approach to, religion? Before we attempt to answer these questions, let us make it very clear that we appreciate the role of rituals and practices, forms and symbols in religion. Prayer as a practice for instance has tremendous value. It links us to the Divine, to the Eternal. It reminds us of the true meaning and the real purpose of life. It strengthens our resolve to do good. It keeps us on the straight path. However, when the performance of the prayer becomes mechanical, its inner value recedes into the background. The mere performance of the prayer is then equated with the person’s moral worth and value. All the rites and rituals associated with the prayer assume greater significance than the meaning and purpose of prayer. This is when the forms associated with a religious practice become more important than the substance of the practice. It is this that we are critical of. It is this that has to change.
Perhaps one way of changing the popular understanding of religion is to emphasise once again the essence of faith. And the essence of faith is the belief in God. It is this belief that tells us who we are; where we are from; why we are here; how we should live here; and where we will go from here.(33) It is the belief in God that underscores that perennial truth, that we are mortal, that life is transient. For believers it means that we must endow this precious gift of life with meaning, with purpose, with beauty, that goes beyond the self. We must do good, for it is our good deeds— and our good deeds alone— that will serve us in the hereafter.
It is giving substance to this belief in God and in goodness that makes the human being a vicegerent, a trustee— a concept that is embodied in not just the Abrahamic religions but also in various schools of Hindu Thought and in Sikhism. It is as vicegerent that the human being protects the environment, uses finite resources with great care, ever cognizant of the needs of unborn generations of the future. As we have observed, as trustee, the human being will be profoundly conscious of the sanctity of life and desist from building and perfecting weapons of death. He will strive to eradicate the vast economic and social disparities that separate groups and classes and create a just and egalitarian order in which the dignity of each and every person is paramount. Equally important, he will ensure that ethnic prejudices and stereotypes are eliminated, while religious and cultural diversity is celebrated as God’s cherished handiwork. Indeed, fostering a strong bond of respect and empathy among people of different faiths, and within the entire human family, would be the mission of the vicegerent since unity, and the peace that ensues from it, are lauded virtues in the eyes of God.
It follows from this, that for those who believe, it is their faith in a truly universal God — not a God that is monopolized by this or that religion—that will inspire them to bring diverse communities together to share the joys and sorrows of life. What this means is that religious communities should cease to want to own God. No religious community should claim that it is the sole possessor of the Truth, that the only way to know God is through its revelation, or through its Prophet or Messenger. Since God is the Absolute Truth, we should all be humble enough to see ourselves as pilgrims in the journey towards that Absolute Truth that is beyond human comprehension. (34).
One of the reasons why a truly universal conception of God is still weak in the different religious traditions is because of our tendency to view God through a particular religious prism, often coloured by its own theology and history. Gradually, this theological and historical understanding of God becomes more dominant than the universal vision of God itself. As some Zen Buddhist put it in another context, “The finger points at the moon; but one gets so engrossed in the finger that one forgets the moon.” Or, in the words of the illustrious Muslim intellectual, the late Ali Shariati, “ Now we all know that religion means path, not aim; it is a road, a means. All the misfortunes that are observable in religious societies arise from the fact that religion has changed its spirit and direction; its role has changed so that religion has become an aim in itself. If you turn the road into an aim or destination — work on it, adorn it, even worship it generation after generation for hundreds of years, love it and become infatuated with it so that every time its name is mentioned or your eye glimpses it you burst into tears; if you go to war with anyone who looks askance at it, spend all your time and money on decorating, repairing and leveling it….if you do all of this, generation after generation, for hundreds of years, what will you become? You will become lost!” (35)
What Shariati is saying in effect is that instead of treating religion as a path that will lead the human being to God we have begun to regard religion as an end in itself. We worship religion, not God. The transformation that we are committed to seeks to bring us back to the worship of God, and to the comprehensive universal spiritual-moral worldview associated with it.
The question that one may want to raise at this point is this: how is such a God-centric worldview relevant to religions such as Buddhism or Confucianism when these religions do not subscribe to the belief in God? It is not possible to explore in depth how these religions stand in relationship to the concept of God in this paper. Nonetheless, a cursory glance at the subject would reveal that the Buddha himself did not repudiate the idea of God which is why 20th century Buddhist icons like Buddhadasa Bhikku have spoken of an impersonal God who is “ omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, eternal and absolute, thus having all the necessary qualities of the “ Supreme Thing” ” (36). In philosophical terms, scholars have argued that “Extinction (Nirvana) or ‘the Void’ is but God subjectivised, as a state of realisation; God is but the Void objectively realised as Principle.” (37). Similarly, in Confucianism, there is a notion of living in accordance with the Will of Heaven. Just governance rests upon the Mandate from Heaven. (38). Perhaps what is more significant is that in the thinking of a lot of ordinary Buddhists and Confucianists, there is something that lies beyond this life, a Transcendent Reality of sorts, some Divine Power that somehow impacts upon them, and to Whom they have to be accountable.
What we are suggesting is that in all religions there is a spiritual-moral dimension which has to emphasised. It is spiritual because it acknowledges the Transcendent and the Divine and links the Divine to this transient existence. It is moral because it bestows primacy upon values and virtues such as justice and freedom, kindness and compassion. The two concepts are linked because the spiritual is the ultimate source of the moral while the moral derives its strength from the spiritual.
In the religious curricula for schools and universities, it is this spiritual-moral dimension that should be brought to the fore. The media should also help to develop this universal God-centric spiritual-moral worldview by applying it to concrete situations. Most of all, it would be wonderful if there were at least a few voices from within religious circles with strong theological credentials that articulated this spiritual-moral message with reason and passion instead of merely conceding the ground to those religious elites who are preoccupied with perpetuating a narrow notion of religious identity that revolves around prohibitions and punishments.
It is not just a question of strengthening the spiritual-moral dimension within a specific religion. The spiritual-moral dimension could well become the basis for dialogue and interaction among different religious communities. Even though their perspectives on God or the Divine maybe dissimilar, there are some parallels in the way in which different religions accord importance to the Transcendent Reality. Among some religions, there may also be parallels related to the hereafter, and judgement in the hereafter. However, within the spiritual realm, the parallels that are most striking are those linked to mysticism in the past. Whether it was a Muslim or Christian or Hindu mystic, they adopted a universal approach to religion. The substance of faith was more important to them than its form. (39)
At the level of moral values, the similarities among the different religions are even more remarkable. We have shown how they share a common moral position on the fundamental causes of the various crises that confront humanity. If we examined their positions on the seven crises we have analysed, we would discover many similarities among the different religions. All of them espouse living in harmony with the natural environment, establishing a moral economy, exercising political power in an ethical manner, curbing militarism, telling the truth in the media, checking consumerism, and enhancing harmony among people of different religions and cultures. On health care as a public service, on buttressing character through education, and on the cohesiveness of the family, the various religions share common perspectives. One should add, that the different religious philosophies also subscribe to the view that rights cannot be separated from responsibilities.(40)
To develop a more profound commitment to shared values and principles found in the various religious philosophies — a commitment from the heart, and not just the head— one has to engage with different religious groups in the larger community. By working on grassroots projects related to say health or education that bring together people from different religious backgrounds, one will develop a better appreciation of their similarities and dissimilarities. One will realize that in spite of all the differences, there are many commonalities in human behaviour and attitude. We will become conscious of the fact that there is a human identity that transcends our distinct religious identities. It is this common human identity that we should nurture and nourish. Affirmation of our common human identity, it should be emphasised, does not in any way threaten our religious or other identities.
As we affirm our common humanity we will understand why universal spiritual-moral values and principles that transcend our religious identity are imperative in meeting the various global crises. For each and every crisis, it should be apparent, demands that all of us, whatever our religious or cultural affiliation, cooperate with one another. No religious community by itself can overcome any of the crises facing us. Besides, thanks to the new information and communication technologies,(ICT) the borderless world is an irrefutable fact. In the last 10 years, geographical, economic and even cultural borders have been rendered less and less important. Are we to believe that religious boundaries are somehow impervious to this monumental change?
This is why it is crucial that we look for signs that suggest that religious consciousness will also undergo a significant transformation in the coming years — a transformation that will weaken the hold of blind dogma and bring to the fore those universal spiritual-moral principles that we have reflected upon.
Signs of Hope?
There are a number of developments that may herald a momentous change in the future.
One, the emancipation of women through education and concomitant changes in employment patterns especially in Muslim countries have challenged orthodox, dogmatic thinking in matters pertaining to religion as never before. Some of these educated Muslim women have also mastered the Qur’an and are offering insightful interpretations about the rights of women that have exposed the misogynistic prejudices of male religious elites, past and present. These new interpretations are helping to strengthen the progressive, dynamic dimension of Islam.
Two, there are groups and individuals in the Muslim diaspora — specifically in Europe and North America— who are also raising fundamental questions about how conservative religious elites have interpreted Islam. In fact, all over the Muslim world critical thinking of this sort has emerged, and is growing. In some countries such as Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country, it is a powerful force and represents mainstream Islam. Of course, on a worldwide scale, it is still a minor trend. Nonetheless, this rational, humane perspective on Islam has strengthened the inclusive, universal understanding of, and approach to, the religion.
Three, the new ICT have also played a part. They provide alternative sources of information, ideas and analysis on controversial Islamic issues— sources managed by individuals and groups who are not religious conservatives. Millions of Muslims can access their thinking at the click of a button. Some of these blogs and websites have developed sizeable audiences. Of course, there are also many other websites and blogs that continue to plug an atavistic line. But what is important is alternative views on religious questions are now widely available to a huge segment of the Muslim community, and is having an impact.
Apart from these three factors, there are two other developments that may strengthen the position of Muslims who are more inclined towards universal spiritual-moral principles in their religion.
One, the current consensus is that US helmed hegemony is declining. (41) If this hegemony— and the invasion and occupation of Muslim countries that accompanies it— is one of the main reasons why a siege mentality manifested in an obsession with identity, has become more pronounced within a significant segment of the Muslim community, it is quite conceivable that with the decline and eventual demise of hegemony, Muslims will develop a more rational and sensible relationship with their identity. Dogma and ritual, laws and prohibitions, which are now harnessed to define Muslim identity may lose their grip upon the Muslim mind. This may make it easier for universal, inclusive spiritual-moral values and principles to spread within the community.
Two, in addressing the various crises that have been discussed in this paper, some activists and intellectuals have attempted to show the relevance of values and principles garnered from the different religions— which is what we have also tried to do. We shall provide a few more salient examples. Through the environmental crisis, some of the enduring principles in indigenous spiritualities have been highlighted, including their deep respect for nature. As a result of the financial crisis, a lot of people in banking and academic circles have become aware of Islamic finance and its principles. Islamic finance, for instance, emphasizes a secure asset foundation, and discourages debt-based transactions. This has attracted Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Likewise, former Iranian President, Mohammed Khatami’s call for a dialogue among civilisations in 1998 as a response to Samuel Huntington’s ‘clash of civilisations’ thesis, designed to perpetuate US hegemony in the post cold war era, was an attempt to shift the focus from power to ethics in international relations. As Khatami put it, “ The ultimate goal of dialogue among civilizations is not dialogue in, and of itself, but attaining empathy and compassion.” (42) He was articulating a new spiritual-moral principle in international relations.
By emphasising these principles, drawn from religions, we are once again establishing their relevance to a world in crisis. At the same time, for advocates of spiritual-moral principles in Islam and in other religions, it is proof of the validity of their approach.
Do all these examples, trends and developments provide hope? They do.
But we are under no illusion. It is a long, dark night. The political elites who command power, the economic elites who control wealth, and the religious elites who wield influence reign supreme.
Still, we have caught a glimpse of the early glimmers, the first gleams, of light.
We await the break of dawn.
ENDNOTES
1) This is a view propounded in Wolfgang Sachs, Planet Dialectics (London: Zed Books, 1999).
2) See Jared Diamond, Collapse How Societies Choose to fail or Succeed (London: Penguin Books, 2006).
3) Miguel d’Escoto Brockman, “Opening Remarks at the High-level Event in the Millennium Development Goals” Speech (New York: United Nations General Assembly, UN Headquarters, 25 September 2008). Mr. Brockman was the President of the 63rd Session of the UN General Assembly.
4) See Brockman.
5) See Global Finance Walden Bello, Nicola Bullard and Kamal Malhotra, editors London: Zed Books, 2000).
6) “World Economic Situation and Prospects 2009 Executive Summary” Report ( New York: United Nations, January, 2009) p.iii
7) This trend is analysed in the context of India, the world’s largest democracy, by Rajni Kothari, Growing Amnesia (New Delhi: Viking, 1993). See also Chandra Muzaffar, Rights, Religion and Reform ( London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2002), especially Chapter 2, “ Development and Democracy in Asia”
8) See “ United Kingdom Parliamentary Expenses Scandal Wikipedia. It was first exposed by the Daily Telegraph from 8 May 2009.
9) See Chandra Muzaffar, Hegemony: Justice, Peace ( Shah Alam, Malaysia: Arah Publications, 2008) especially chapters 1, 3 and 4.
10) For a detailed analysis of US militarism see Chalmers Johnson, The Sorrows of Empire ( New York: Verso, 2004).
11) See “ Global Military Expenditure Set New Record in 2008, says SIPRI.” Press Release 8 June 2009 (Stockholm: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, 2009).
12) This is discussed in Abdel Bari Atwan, The Secret History of Al-Qa’ida (London: Abacus, 2007).
13) See Edward Herman, Beyond Democracy: Decoding the News in an Age of Propaganda (USA: South End, 1992).
14) The phenomenon of greed and how it is seen in the different religions is studied in Subverting Greed Paul Knitter and Chandra Muzaffar, editors ( Boston: Orbis Books, 2002).
15) For an elaborate discussion of this point, see Chandra Muzaffar, Global Ethic or Global Hegemony? (London: ASEAN Academic Press, 2005), especially chapter 9.
16) This is one of the issues probed in Daisaku Ikeda, Light of Education (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Soka Gakkai Malaysia, 2004).
17) Some of these issues are raised in Patents, Pills and Public Health. Can TRIPS deliver? (London: PANOS, 2002).
18) For an insightful analysis of the crisis of the modern family, see Christopher Lasch, Haven in a Heartless World (New York: Basic books, 1977).
19) The theme ‘Global Hegemony’ is analysed in depth in Noam Chomsky, Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance (London: Hamish Hamilton, 2003).
20) To appreciate this argument see Seyyed Hossein Nasr, The Encounter of Man and Nature: The Spiritual Crisis of Modern Man (London: G.Allen and Unwin, 1968).
21) This powerful point is made in Imam Ali, A Selection from Nahjul Balagha
(Houston Texas: Free Islamic Literatures Incorporated (FILNIC), 1979) especially in the Imam’s letter to the Governor he had appointed, Malik-e-Ashter. Ali was the fourth, and most erudite, of the early Caliphs of Islam.
22) We first began expounding this ‘worldview’ in 1980. See Chandra Muzaffar, “The Spiritual Worldview” in One God: Many Paths ( Penang, Malaysia: Aliran, 1980). It was adumbrated in “ The Spiritual Vision of the Human Being” in The Human Being: Perspectives of Different Spiritual Traditions ( Penang: Aliran, 1991). The concept has been refined in several essays since then, the latest being in “ Towards a Universal Spiritual-Moral Vision of Global Justice and Peace” in Religions in the Quest for Justice and Peace Chandra Muzaffar, editor ( Penang: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia) forthcoming.
23) See Nikki R. Keddie, An Islamic Response to Imperialism: Political and
Religious Writings of Sayyid Jamal Al-Din Al-Afghani ( USA: University of California Press, 1968)
24) Quoted in Fred Dallmayr, Small Wonder Global Power and its Discontents
(USA: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2005) p. 28.
25) Many examples of religious resurgence are provided in The
Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics Peter L. Berger, editor (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1999)
26) One of the best known proponents of this was of course the late Pakistani theologian –activist Abulala Maududi. See for instance his Islamic Law and Constitution (Lahore, Pakistan: Islamic Publications, 1955).
27) For some discussion of this see Engaged Buddhism Buddhist
Liberation Movements in Asia Christopher Queen and Sallie B. King editors (New York: State University of New York Press, 1996)
28) Their philosophy is contained in “ A People’s Charter on Peace for
Life” Charter ( Korea: Hwacheon, 2008)
29) These reasons are discussed in Chandra Muzaffar, Exploring Religion
in our Time ( Penang: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia) forthcoming. See especially the chapter on “Religion and Identity in a Globalising World.”
30) In this regard an interesting work that examines a new methodology of
interpreting the Qur’an is Abdullah Saeed’s Interpreting the Qur’an Towards a Contemporary Approach (London: Routledge, 2006).
31) Non-violent resistance in Muslim settings is looked at in Chandra
Muzaffar Muslims, Dialogue Terror ( Petaling Jaya, Malaysia: International Movement for a Just World, 2003) especially chapters 2 and 3.
32) Quoted in Chandra Muzaffar “ A non-Violent Struggle — The Alternative to Suicide Bombing?” in At the Crossroads A Malaysian Reflects on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict ( Petaling Jaya: Bakti Ehsanmurni, 2005). For a comprehensive study of non-violence and power see Jonathan Schell The Unconquerable World (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2003).
33) This is elaborated in our “ A Spiritual Vision of the Human Being”
34)This is a view that has been expressed on a number of occasions by the
highly respected Islamic scholar, Professor Mahmoud Ayoub, who for many years was at Temple University in Philadelphia. We have discussed this idea of a God that is not owned by any religion in our Exploring Religion in our Time.
35)See Ali Shari’ati On the Sociology of Islam ( Berkeley, California:
Mizan Press, 1979) p. 93.
36) See Santikaro Bhikku, “ Buddhadasa Bhikkhu: Life and Society
Through the Natural Eyes of Voidness” in Engaged Buddhism, p. 161.
37)See Frithjof Schoun, In the Tracks of Buddhism (London: Mandala
Unwin Paperbacks, 1989) p.19.
38)This is explained in Huston Smith, The Religions of Man (New York:
Harper and Row, 1958) pp 190- 191. See also Tu Wei-Ming Humanity and Self-Cultivation (Berkeley: Asian Humanities, 1979).
39)No mystic expressed this universal approach to religion more lucidly
than the great Sufi, Jelaluddin Rumi. See his Rumi Daylight (USA: Threshold Books, 1994).
40) For an analysis of the rights-responsibilities nexus, see Chandra Muzaffar, “Transforming Rights: Five Challenges for the Asia-Pacific” in our Rights, Religion and Reform.
41) See chapter 2 in particular in our Hegemony: Justice, Peace.
42) See “Empathy and Compassion” The Iranian 8 September 2000.