SONGSOPTOK: To what extent do you
practice ‘religious tolerance’? Since when (how long ago)?
FAIYAZ AHMED: I have never
been conscious of the fact that I practice ‘religious tolerance’. Religion has
never been a defining factor in my life or my relationships – in love or war –
as the religious affiliation of my friends or foe is a matter of little concern
for me - like the colour of their skin or the shape of their nose. In fact ‘religious tolerance’ is a term I am not comfortable
with because of its negative connotations. We accept what we like but tolerate
what we don’t. Hence, one’s attitude should be one of acceptance of the
plurality around us without being judgmental about it.
SONGSOPTOK: Do you believe all religions
are the same?
FAIYAZ AHMED: All religions are the same and at the same
time they are all different from one another. Every religion has two aspects – that
which is preached and not practiced and that which is practiced but not preached.
Once religion is shorn off its dogmatic elements, rites and rituals, a
uniformity emerges that transcends the baser instincts of man – the religion of
Spinoza or Marcus Aurelius for instance. This is the religion that we preach. The other and more common aspect of
religion covers dogmas, rituals and prohibitions. It is this aspect that is
usually exploited and abused to highlight and accentuate the differences
between communities. It leads to social conflict and reveals the gross
inhumanity of the human race.
SONGSOPTOK: In case you practice religion, do you
consider all your religious beliefs to be true? What about those of others?
FAIYAZ AHMED: Religious beliefs cannot always be identified
with truth as truth is independent of belief. I know, for instance, that the
earth revolves round the sun but this is not just a belief. It is a proven
fact, independent of my prejudices and freely available for verification or
falsification by anyone who cares to do so. On the other hand, when I say that
Muhammad was the last prophet, or Jesus was born of a virgin, I enter the realm
of faith and I must accept them as true if I am a Muslim or a Christian. Hence, dogmas of a particular religion have to
be accepted as ‘truths’ by its adherents though they may or may not be true.
The problem arises when there is a conflict of beliefs - when
Muslims and Jews declare pork to be unclean and not to be eaten and Hindus
assert that beef should be avoided as the cow is holy - and each one is willing
to kill or be killed for their beliefs. If we all realised that scriptural
authorities are just a guideline and need not be taken literally a lot of
untold miserly could be avoided.
SONGSOPTOK: Do you believe that all faiths are equally
beneficial and equally harmless to society?
FAIYAZ AHMED: I believe that all faiths are equally harmful
and whatever benefits that result from following them is restricted to the
believer.
SONGSOPTOK: Do you believe all religious groups are
equally beneficial and equally harmless to their followers?
FAIYAZ AHMED: I would say that all religious groups may be
beneficial to their followers but they are definitely harmful to society as a
whole. Furthermore, in view of the fact that all religions are split into many
groups – often at war with one another – the benefits, if any, accrue only to a
small minority. Sometimes, even the
benefit that followers of a particular faith may derive from following their
religion may be doubtful. This happens when they are in a minority and the
majority is determined to pursue its own ends and impose restrictions on the
minorities.
SONGSOPTOK: Should members of any given religious group
refrain from criticizing religious practices of others?
FAIYAZ AHMED: Any religious group being critical of another
is simply a case of pot calling kettle black. Unfortunately, the faithful may
rarely realise this. So while we may wax eloquent on the shortcomings of other
religions we may be blissfully unware of the flaws that may exist in our own
religion. As the gospel of St. Mathews (7-3) says, “And why beholdest thou the
mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in
thine own eye?”
Often this blindness is quite deliberate.
One of the fundamental cause of social disharmony is the mutual
misunderstanding that prevails across the social spectrum. The common man is
emotionally tied to the religion he/she was born in and would brook no
criticism however well founded or valid. The so called men of faith have done
everything to propagate hatred between communities and politicians have joined
their rank in adding fuel to their fiery tirades. Unfortunately, inspite of all
the scientific progress that we have made, civilization has yet to reach the
level whence civil behavior towards our fellow-men becomes the norm.
SONGSOPTOK: Do you usually refrain from talking about
your beliefs to others? Should you be ignoring your own religious ideas?
FAIYAZ AHMED: In Victorian England it was impolite to
mention religion in polite society. Today religion has acquired the stigma of
untouchability without the protection of reservation. So while religion is no
longer a taboo subject it is rarely possible to discuss it without passion or
prejudice. The result is that it often turns into a slinging match reminiscent
of TV panel discussions between political parties. The deeper meaning of
religion, its spiritual elements, its significance in our inner life and its
message of universal humanism is completely lost in the Tower of Babel.
SONGSOPTOK: What are the different ways
religious tolerance, including secularism, can help (or hurt) the demands of a
complex world?
FAIYAZ AHMED: One of the fundamental features of the modern
world is that most of the youth today think very little about religion. This
has two effects – one good and one bad. The good effect is that it turns them
away from any form of bigotry unless special attention is paid to instill
religious fervor in them. The bad effect is two-fold – it often turns them into
staunch hedonist completely unaware of the deeper meaning of life or in the
worst case they may fall into the trap of extremist elements and become the
scourge of society.
As a result, some kind of moral instructions in the early stages
of life is imperative if we are to avoid the dangers of both kind of extremism.
When I was a student, our first period in school was devoted to ‘Moral Science’
which was essentially the inculcation of ethical values without the tag of
religion. I am told that this kind of instruction is rarely given in schools
anymore. An introduction of something along these lines may go a long way in
making better citizens and better human beings.
SONGSOPTOK: Should ‘religious tolerance’ be a part of the
school curricula?
FAIYAZ AHMED: Education, especially in early childhood,
should be free of any religious instructions. Children should be taught the
moral values of life without introducing the concept of sin or punishment. A
rational approach – free of religious bias – is more likely to succeed than a
life instilled with fear of hell fire. Parents have a strong role to play in this process. They should
speak of all religions as dispassionately as possible without paying undue
attention to the merits of their own faith. While in college, I remember once
reading a book that was extremely critical of Islam. My father, who used to
conduct a kind of periodical inspection of my study table, saw the book, leafed
through it and remarked, ‘The kind of books you read….”. The incident left a
deep impression on my mind, as there was no anger or regret in his tone, just
an acceptance that I was matured enough to make my own mind.
SONGSOPTOK: Religious acceptance and bigotry appear to be
the two sides of a coin (unbiased). People are equally likely to choose one
over the other. Do you agree with that observation? Please explain.
FAIYAZ AHMED: I think it is perfectly possible to be a
useful non-combative member of a society without introducing a religious
element in our social interactions. It is not necessary to wear ones religion on
ones sleeve. I may not like the idea of eating beef but it should not come in
the way of building a healthy relationship with a beef-eater. Just as we are willing to accept the foibles
and eccentricities of our friends without any negative bias we should be
willing to accept their eating habits or religious rites.
We sincerely thank you for your time and hope we shall have your
continued support.
Subhodev Das
(Chief Advisor: Songsoptok)
0 Comments
