Showing posts with label religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label religion. Show all posts

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Which is Bigger Evil, Corruption or Communalism?


1) Which one needs to
be addressed first?
2) Do they have
any overlaps?
3) What do you think?
Corruption affects common people on a daily basis. It affects the poor in the worse possible ways and closes the opportunities that legally may be there but practically are not available unless a bribe is paid, a favour done or there is some nepotistic connection exists. It disallows inclusive growth.  It affect's an ordinary citizen's abilities to maintain basic living standards, access public services like health and education and social benefits among several other things. It leads to misuse of the available public resources, and therefore, economic growth does not reach all sections of a society.

Communalism destroy the fabric of a society and destroys social cohesion and harmony and take destoys peace and stability which are pre-conditions for development. Communalism increases poverty by preventing movement of labour, capital and other public resources by restricting these within a particular community. It takes social trust away and creates a sense of instability for those who are not part of that community. It affects people's ability to generate more resouces using the current resources because it creates and environment in which property and other liquid resources can be acquired, owned or transacted for benefit only by a certain community based on their claim of a traditional precedence.

Sphere: Related Content
Which is Bigger Evil, Corruption or Communalism?SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Saturday, December 11, 2010

Taking Martyrdom to the Massess

Someone said: “I'm going to die for my faith!
Jesus/Rāma/Allāh/Sammāsambuddha - I love you!
In death I will be united with you.
End of this life will bring glory to you. 
... That is the conclusion I have come to!”

Who cares even if your soul were to fly
Out of the window of the concrete standing tall
And your chitty-chitty, bang-bang conclusion too!

Beware, some rational will make you an ally
Material gains, losses, the rational will evaluate all
And use your conclusion to build a political xanadu!

A voluntary death seeker
Your body will reek of the faith lost.
The martyrdom of an unwisely bold
There’s no nirvāna for a venturesome
You are but a foolhardy soul serving political conveniences!

Sphere: Related Content
Taking Martyrdom to the MassessSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Saturday, August 21, 2010

Women and Religious Fundamentalism

A message from Bhagawad Geeta as the Thought of the Day
in front of Baitil Aman Guesthouse, Shela Village, Lamu,
owned by Sidiki Abdulrehman
WOMEN’S support to religious fundamentalism could be explained with the help of notions of women as objects and subjects of community identity, conditioned as much by patriarchal values as men, their interests so intrinsically connected to the community that thinking of individual or collective interests may amount to blasphemy. Also, making an assumption that all women would like to oppose fundamentalism implies rallying behind universal notions of women-hood and sisterhood, and romanticizing women as universal peace-seekers.

Here, I would like to explore women’s identities, interests and values as complex interactive elements in the multitude of intersections and over-lapping themes of fundamentalism. I will attempt to analyze a few key intersections of religion, nationalism, caste, class, gender and community identity in India with a special focus on current trends in Hinduism to understand the layers of women’s support to religious fundamentalism. I will also attempt to link the growth of religious fundamentalism with increasing attempts to control women.

While approaching religio-spirituality, we should make a distinction between the values of the religio-spiritual realm and their practice. The growth of values is associated more with metaphysical aspects of the religion and is seen as the preserve of enlightened and unattached spiritual persons who could devote themselves fully to emancipate the soul. The practice of these values is considered to be closer to ordinary mortals. The intricate world of attachments in which women live makes them ‘incompatible’ to the demands of a spiritual world which is highly valued, powerful, and a typically male domain. Some women may strategize an escape from attachments and create a religio-spiritual space for themselves by renouncing their sexuality and sex roles through sanyas (renunciation of attachments) (Babb 1988, p. 280-285) and affiliations with religious movements and organizations looking for women in their fold to gain broader legitimacy.

To use Gaitskell’s analysis of South African women’s conversion to Christianity through the Christian Mission Stations (Gaitskell 1990, p. 253), these organizations provide women an alternative set of protectors and economic base which makes escape from the drudgery of life as a daughter, sister, wife or widow possible (Basu 1999, p. 200). In India, right wing organizations like the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), and others, which frequently invoke the goddesses and female spiritual gurus of the past and use women in liturgy have attracted many Hindu sanyasins (female religious mendicants/proponents/ascetics) like Ritambhara or Uma Bharati. The invocations are not only a bait for women but also a reminder to the women affiliates to see the scope for their philosophy and activity in supporting everything that these organizations are doing, including promoting hostility towards faiths and people perceived to be damaging Hinduism.

Talking of the Sangh Parivar, Arundhati Roy says, ‘its utter genius lies in its apparent ability to be all things to all people at all times’ (Roy 1999, p. 181). A broad understanding of ‘violence’ beyond the direct physical and mental abuse and as produced in people’s perceptions may help us in seeing the image of the Sangh Parivar as it exists in the minds of middle class, poor and home-bound women. This perception of violence is linked to the notions of religious domination and subordination, which subvert the chances of survival of another value system. For example, beef eating, spread of non-Hindu values, unemployment, religious conversion, inter-religious marriages, adoption of a Hindu child, etc. may be taken as attempts to denigrate the status and spoil the purity of Hindu religion. Therefore, these may be perceived as socio-economic and cultural violence against the ‘Hindu’.

The Sangh Parivar has articulated a feminist politics that reflects upon such perceptions and created ‘a space for personal accomplishment to which unskilled working class women and frustrated middle class women [across caste, particular religious community and region] might be attracted’ (Sahgal and Davis 1992, p. 9, text in brackets mine). While taking on the persona of a religious saviour, the Sangh seeks to mobilize women against the ‘perceived perpetrators of the violence’. The counter violence or support to fundamentalist organizations is seen by these women as an issue of religio-political identity and collective empowerment to oppose ‘occupation of minds and cultures’.

Kandiyoti in her paper ‘Islam and Patriarchy’, talks about women resisting the old normative order slipping away without any empowering alternatives and women pressurize men to live up to their obligations to provide protection in exchange of submissiveness and propriety as part of patriarchal bargain (Kandiyoti 1992, p. 36). The exchange of submissiveness and propriety for protection brings forth the issue of women’s bodies being treated as sites of community identity in a patriarchal society (Kannabiran 1996, p. 32-33). Submissiveness and propriety by these bodies is essential for patriarchal honour.

In India, for example, Ritambhara’s speeches, marked by incitements to reclaim male honour, remind men to live up to their part of the bargain. Similarly, when Uma Bharati asks women to play a political role without compromising their ‘basic nature’ (Llewellyn 2001), she is reminding that impropriety by female bodies would damage the Hindu honour which corresponds to male honour. The Sangh Parivar seeks to secure women’s support by playing on the tensions between ‘deeply ingrained images and expectations of male-female roles and changing realities of everyday life’ (Kandiyoti 1992, p. 36), which put a demand on women to step in the public space. By using the lack of alternatives before women, it attempts to consensualize women’s investment in patriarchal values and simultaneously puts conditions on her public engagement.

The offer of male protection comes with (i) the condition that women will have to become consenting custodians of patriarchal values, and (ii) an implicit guarantee that they will get the residual power and benefits that would accrue from their support to the Hindu male communal coercion (Sangari 1999, p. 398-408). The perceived notions of danger and security and the chance to exercise residual power through patriarchal bargains may make this offer lucrative for many women (Jeffery 1998, p. 223).

According to Moghissi, fundamentalism is ‘an attitude towards time’. It proposes ‘an ideal past, initial conditions’ or ‘golden age’ which contrasts to the present and can be retrieved…’ (Moghissi 1999, p. 69). All may not view the fundamentalist form of return to the golden age as conservative or retrogressive. For example, by linking fundamentalist space with religion and women’s welfare, the Sangh Parivar makes it possible for a woman to occupy public space and for her family to explain their daughter’s feminism as a form of sewa (Sahgal 2000, p. 198). This may appear as liberal to many.

Similarly, in the context of Muslims, ‘attempts by disadvantaged groups to rise in ritual status by strict adherence to "tradition" or the Shariat are not seen by them as a return to medievalism but in fact as symbols of achievement’ (Pandey in Chhachhi 1988, p. 23). So, acceptance in a social group closed so far or the move upwards in the social ladder may appear progressive and create an incentive for both poor men and women to support fundamentalism.

Fundamentalism also has a unique feature of constructing its own version of the ‘true identity’. In India, this is evident from the Sangh’s move to homogenize identity by disregarding the variety of ‘Hindu religions’, which have existed within the concept of Hinduism (Romila Thapar 1989). An interrogation of gender, class and caste in India reveal that the Sangh is promoting a uniformly brahminized, class-based, transregional modernity and a principle of formal gender equality located in a dichotomous upper caste practice.

The impact is visible in the spread of practices like dowry in states like Tamil Nadu (Kapadia 2002), wearing of sindur and mangalsutra and practice of karwa chauth by Hindu women irrespective of the region and culture. In the homogenization process, women’s space as well as capacity to bargain is being curtailed further by emphasizing brahminized feminine constructs and collective identity (Basu 1998, p. 175-76). Traits like self-sacrificing motherhood and devoted wife are now also being channelized towards building and nurturing a Hinduised social cohesion. In this brahminized, class-based, trans-regional modernization process, women may not have the space to think of separating their identities from the image of the ‘homogenized community’.

The Indian national movement, beginning in the 19th century, was imbued with simultaneous processes of socio-religious reform, specifically attempts to improve women’s condition within Hinduism. These attempts could be attributed to (i) initially, a desire to emulate what the reformers considered modern, i.e., the models of womanhood and conjugality of the colonizers, and (ii) later, the need to engage the wider masses in protesting against the colonizers. It would not have been possible to engage women in the protest without raising the issues which restrict their participation. During this period activists like Pandita Ramabai, Anandibai Joshi, Kailashbashini Debi, Tarabai Shinde, Haimavati Sen, Saraladevi, among others, challenged the patriarchal system by identifying the power dynamics which make man-woman relationships unequal (Chakravarti 1998, Sen 2000, Sarkar 1997, Omvedt 1980). Though dalit leaders started talking about caste, cultural, regional and class differences, but on the whole women were treated as a homogeneous entity.

The national movement identified the humiliated and colonized land with the image of a subjugated Hindu woman’s body – her body, sari and adornment encompassing present India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and parts of Afghanistan and Myanmar. The image stays even after 56 years of Partition. It also plays an important role in the projects of Hindu nationalism. The image of the motherland has been used to exhort proliferation of female deity or Shakti cult among women who find the concept of shakti empowering. The Sangh Parivar sees partition as a mutilation of the sacred body of the mother and holds Muslims responsible for this act of ‘desecration’ (Sarkar, p. 163-190 and 268-288). By laying claim to Hindu nationalist feminine icons and linking them to female power, patriotism, partition and a dream of Akhand Bharat the Sangh has successfully managed to mobilize Hindu women to support the cause of avenging partition.

Women’s support to the communalized politics of the Sangh Parivar also needs to be looked at from vantage point of individual women’s politics to benefit from the 73rd and 74th amendments to the Constitution as well as BJP attempts to enlarge its vote constituencies. The BJP has much to gain by keeping women’s collective political empowerment within the bounds of socio-historically gendered subjectivities. However, any such analysis must also keep in purview the socio-historical factors.

Women in India have long been active in various types of social and political movements – at national, regional and local levels. They were engaged in grassroots caste-based politics during the Nehruvian period when political power was mainly with the upper castes.

The emergence of ‘backward castes’ and farmers’ parties brought in many other groups of women in politics. Throughout, mainstream politics neither allowed an orientation towards gender issues, nor allowed women to use their agency in collaboration with women’s activists to actively raise and interrogate issues of gender inequalities. If anything the incorporation of gender issues has been considered divisive in the mass nationalist/caste/community building processes and movements. The controlled participation did help some individual women to ameliorate their own situation but systemic gender inequalities have remained unaddressed (Jeffery 1998, p. 222) and women’s orientation towards collaborative agency has been constrained.

Women’s support to religious fundamentalism reflects a situation where women are caught between emancipatory aspirations and inherited notions of ideal womanhood. Notwithstanding multiple factors influencing women’s support to fundamentalism and the impossibility of talking about a common protest against religious fundamentalism, it is possible to turn this ‘situation of being caught’ into a ‘situation of struggle’. Not by ascription to the universal notions of womenhood and sisterhood but by recognizing women’s multiple realities of and exploring questions such as, ‘is there a dissatisfaction with the nation building processes because they have not addressed the issues of gender, ideology, power and identity’, ‘are the modernization processes being seen by women as socio-cultural and economic devaluation of women’, and so on. The contested relationships between women, religion, society, state, culture, nationalism need to be theorized afresh in the public space and ‘discursive and related historical frameworks alike need to be (re)addressed’ (Rouse 1998, p. 69).

Article originally published in Seminar #537, May 2004, India Shining at http://www.india-seminar.com/2004/537/537%20comment.htm

References:
Babb, Lawrence A. (1988), ‘Indigenous Feminism in a Modern Hindu Sect’, in Rehana Ghadially, (ed) Women in Indian Society, New Delhi/Newbury Park/London: Sage Publications.
Basu, Amrita (1998), p. 175-176, ‘Hindu Women’s Activism in India and the Questions it Raises’, in Patricia Jeffery and Amrita Basu, (eds) Appropriating Gender: Women’s Activism and Politicized Religion in South Asia, New York and London: Routledge.
Chakravarti, Uma (1998), Rewriting History: The Life and Times of Pandita Ramabai, New Delhi: Kali for Women.
Gaitskell, Deborah (1990), p. 253, ‘Devout Domesticity? A Century of African Women’s Christianity in South Africa’, in Cherryl Walker, (ed) Women and Gender in Southern Africa, Cape Town: David Philip.
Jeffery, Patricia (1998), p. 222, ‘Agency, Activism and Agendas’, in Patricia Jeffery and Amrita Basu, (eds) Appropriating Gender: Women’s Activism and Politicized Religion in South Asia, New York and London: Routledge.
Kandiyoti, Deniz (1992), p. 36, ‘Islam and Patriarchy: A Comparative Perspective’, in N. Keddie and B. Baron, (eds) Women in Middle Eastern History, New Haven: Yale.
Kannabiran, Kalpana (1996), p. 32-33, in K. Jayawardena and M. D’Alwis, (eds) Embodied Violence: Communalizing Women’s Sexuality in South Asia, London: Zed Books.
Kapadia, Karin (2002), (ed) The Violence of Development: The Politics of Identity, Gender and Social Inequalities in India, London: Zed Books.
Llewellyn, J.E. (2001), ‘Uma Bharati at the 4th Akhil Bharatiya Sadhwi Shakti Sammelan at the Santoshi Mata Ashram’, in Kankhal, 10 April 1998, http://courses.smsu.edu/jel807f/sadhwi.html
Moghissi, Haideh (1999), p. 69, Feminism and Islamic Fundamentalism, New York: Zed Books.
Omvedt, Gail (1980), We Will Smash This Prison!: Indian Women in Struggle, London: Zed Press.
Pandey, Gyan in Amrita Chhachhi (1988), p. 23, ‘The State, Religious Fundamentalism and Women – Trends in South Asia’, in WLUML Dossier 4, August/September 1988, London: Women Living Under Muslim Laws.
Rouse, Shahnaz (1998), p. 69, ‘The Outsider(s) Within: Sovereignty and Citizenship in Pakistan’, in Patricia Jeffery and Amrita Basu, (eds) Appropriating Gender: Women’s Activism and Politicized Religion in South Asia, New York and London: Routledge.
Roy, Arundhati (1999), p. 181, ‘Fascism’s Firm Footprints in India’, in C.W. Howland, (ed) Religious Fundamentalism and the Human Rights of Women, New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Sahgal, Gita (2000), p. 198, ‘Secular Spaces; The Experience of Asian Women Organizing’, in Gita Sahgal and Nira Yuval-Davis, (eds) Refusing Holy Orders: Women and Fundamentalism in Britain, London: Women Living Under Muslim Laws.
Sahgal, Gita and Nira Yuval-Davis (1992), p. 9, (eds) ‘Introduction: Fundamentalism, Multiculturalism and Women in Britain’, in Refusing Holy Orders: Women and Fundamentalism in Britain, London: Virago.
Sangari, Kumkum (1999), p. 398-408, Politics of the Possible, New Delhi: Tulika.
Sarkar, Tanika (1997), ‘Women in South Asia: The Raj and After’, History Today, September 1997.
Sarkar, Tanika (2001), p. 163-190 and 268-288, Hindu Wife, Hindu Nation: Community, Religion and Cultural Nationalism, London: Hurst & Company.
Sen, Samita (2000), ‘Toward a Feminist Politics? The Indian Women’s Movement in Historical Perspective’, Policy Research Report on Gender and Development, Working Paper Series No 9.
Thapar, Romila (1989), p. 209-231, ‘Imagined Religious Communities? Ancient History and the Modern Search for a Hindu Identity’, Modern Asian Studies, 23(2).

Sphere: Related Content
Women and Religious FundamentalismSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Sunday, July 18, 2010

Ah la la ho Over Abortion

The ongoing debate on abortion in Kenya ... I wonder when will the 'Holy See' and their side-kicks and cronies will accept that only a few in the world give two hoots to children thrown in the garbage dumps, streets, abused and starved in homes and schools. Instead of caring for the alive but miserable in this world, they are driving the whole world to go ah la la ho over the unborn. This reminds me of a Buddhist श्लोक (verse):


In the great self existing mandal (a concentric structure) of dharmadhatu (spiritual metal)
where all phenomena reside free from cause and conditions.

Everywhere I look for the self called me (in the light of the abortion debate, I read ‘me’ as women),
it is nowhere to be found.

This life force (I take it as the foetus) is but a brief flicker
like a June bug in the night.

Happy is the yogin (the female knowledge-self who practices contemplation) who clasps the jewel of radiant
Bodhicitta (the aware/enlightened self) unbounded and self-perfected

Now, this interpretation of the श्लोक (verse) is far and away from the implied meaning, but this is what most often the interpretations do - they allow to interpret from the vantage point of the person interpreting (and that's how either distortions/retrogressive or progressive understandings emerge over a period)! In the second last sentence of this note, I have given a link to an interesting paper, which is not about morality or legality of abortion, but on a much narrow issue that when pregnant woman needs a treatment that would harm the foetus in her womb, should she be denied the treatment, or the foetus be put under threat that may affect it if born or find ways to abort the foetus safely. The paper goes on to say that the foetuses have legitimate interests, rather than rights, and a sick pregnant woman has the rights over her body and a right to health. So when there are competing interests, the rights of the woman to decide on her medical treatment, to give consent and her health should prevail. When you have opened the link, click on One-Click Download button on the top to download the paper: "Ethical and legal issues in reproductive health: Ethical and legal approaches to ‘the fetal patient’". It is worth a read!

Sphere: Related Content
Ah la la ho Over AbortionSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Saturday, December 5, 2009

Violence in Religion or Violence with Religion?


A look at history is good enough to tell us that the history of religion is a history of violence. Not surprising; religion is indeed opium of the masses - quoting it even though it comes from a racist political philosopher - and the elite alike. Unlike any other aspect of life, this one offers a remedy for all, if you are willing to believe. People are taught to protect what can salvage them from any situation. When so much of ' the potential' is at stake, obviously it is easier to instigate those who are afraid for their well-being, vulnerable because everything else has not just failed but also told them that nothing can save them from the doom of one or the other kind. Unpredictability of the future scares all and each wants to minimize that unpredictability as far as possible. If a belief that offers some level of security to people is portrayed as under threat, people rise and react.

Religion has never been a private matter - practice of religion gives identity, the nature of that practice makes one visible or invisible in a larger whole. Religion therefore has to be a major tool in the hands of those who seek political power or clout. The element of power has created such close relationship between religion and violence. All major religions, Catholicism, Protestantism, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism are tainted with violence.

Violence is said to be not part of any religion but when religion is the matrix within which identity is crafted, violence gets embedded in religion.

The sheer number of people - just in the sense of population - frightens humanity because humans have demonstrated consistent capacity to harm and destroy. The fear, therefore, is not unfounded. The fear then becomes the basis for social organizing, whether it is through the family or religion or any other institution which can assure the larger society that things will not go haywire and that they are not at each-other's mercy. Family, clan, religion, etc are some of the oldest institutions that have been set up to organize the society in a manner that the social as well as personal behaviours stay within certain agreeable boundaries. Since these are human creations, they can be used by humans to serve or dis-serve the humanity.

Since religion carries with what people regard as incomprehensible truths - truths which cannot be easily understood by ordinary beings and the only way to benefit from those truths is by placing their blind trust in them - even the state has often bowed before the power of religion. State and politics aim to command allegiance and compliance for the right or wrong reasons and religion has historically demonstrated its ability to galvanize allegiance and compliance. It is not surprising, therefore, that the state and politics use and abuse religion.

So while it can be said that religion does not carry violence, if eyes and ears are kept open, it can be seen that by its nature religion makes violence pursue it. And to say that religion and violence are completely divorced is not to recognise that many form of practices of religion condone violence when it takes place in form of animal sacrifice or identity politics killigs. Religion is what people practice, ie, the reality of religion lies in its practice, not in the texts that the majority have not read, cannot read or cannot understand. And religions, even in their purest forms, have tended to stand side by side with violence.

Since religion is so close to the core of human beings, the political and state machinery mix up with religions allow them to acquire much greater role. Since it is believed to have come from a supreme power, who all can trust and who can solve all problems of humanity and so on, it also gains the legitimacy to be the factor that should direct every day actions of human beings. Where that happens, it is not impossible to see how religion begins to influence practice of social justice, gender equality, rights, etc. And in societies where more than one religion exists, the competition among them is directly correlated with the level of religious involvement in violence and political involvement in religions.

Sphere: Related Content
Violence in Religion or Violence with Religion?SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Saturday, August 22, 2009

The Patriarchy Factor in Dowry and Intercaste Marriages

An Indian with a sense of belonging to India but can I take away the cynicism that I have about so many things in India? No, perhaps that is also a trait of a typical Indian – the Argumentative Indian, as Amartya Sen puts it. The cynicism of the day is the caste factor in the intercaste marriages in India. A large number of upwardly mobile urban-dwelling people, except those who are on the right to the centre in their ideologies, believe that with India’s economic growth and development a few changes will happen automatically. These ‘foreseen’ automatic changes include decline of the caste system, the end of women’s subjugation, and consequently, of the practice of dowry. It is believed that women’s migration from unpaid care work and unorganized sector to paid employment and organized sector would push the way towards the end of dowry as an institutionalised practice. The fact is that from being a practice of a select few castes in some regions of India, the practice of dowry has now spread to almost all castes and regions in India, including amidst all major religions. This is despite the fact that women’s participation in the labour force and their contribution in cash to household monthly income has grown.

Similarly, it is believed that when intercaste marriages take place, they lead to erosion of the caste system. Is it really so? The answer is not a complete yes or no. There is erosion, of the woman’s caste, in most cases that I know of. But even when the man’s caste does not really gain or lose a caste-conscious member in its fold, it often gains a new practitioner of its values. It is similar to what happens in many inter-religious marriages. So unlike the practice of dowry, where there is a distinct growth in the practice, in case of caste, the growth in much more understated. This is mainly due to the prevalence of patriarchy. Women upon marrying a man from another caste, take upon the man’s surname, his family practices, his family’s language, and his family’s values. They may or may not give up their own but they tend to assimilate into the new. In keeping with the patriarchal tradition, children of such marriages take on the caste of the father. So while there may not exist an overt caste affiliation, the practices and values of caste are passed on and inherited. The same applies to inter-religious marriages, where children are treated as being born into the father's religion.

The manifestation of patriarchy's influence is not limited only to the practices of dowry and intercaste or inter-religious marriages. Patriarchy combined with the ‘caste power’ also takes all those – women and men – who do not belong to politically identified religions or are agnostic to be Hindus. So applying Hindu identity and upper caste practices to abandoned and orphan children in the institutional care, abandoned or unknown dead, believers in animism with or without a label of religion, etc are common.

In sum, if caste and practices like dowry are to be done away with, the practices of patriarchy must change.

Sphere: Related Content
The Patriarchy Factor in Dowry and Intercaste MarriagesSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Sunday, June 29, 2008

Religion and Expression

Yesterday a distant colleague (we work in the same organization but there’s no cross-linkage – I wonder if it is because of the mammoth size of the organization or us …) said that I am insulting locals because I am upfront in my rejection of a belief that the god created all creatures in the world to be devoured by the human beings and understanding of the god as a power privileging one creature (human beings) over all others. According to my colleague we are guests in the country so we should not try to challenge local beliefs.

I am not sure what to call this … a cultural relativist approach to survive in another country, or a patronizing approach, or treating the Afghans as incapable to thinking, understanding and tolerance. Another distant colleague joined the conversation and tried to argue from a point of view that my rejection of the belief should not be treated as an affront to the locals and that it is a matter of personal beliefs and such an interpretation of my view is a denial of my basic right to hold and express an opinion. The colleague was told the view coming from a non-Muslim is an affront to Muslims including her, an expatriate Muslim. This was a new angle to the discussion about who has a right to expression and who has socio-cultural and religious rights within an Islamic state.This was an interesting conversation which threatened to divide the so called homogeneous group of expatriates – all my previous conversations found the discussions referring to the ‘expatriates’ and ‘nationals’ in a binary opposition as though each of the supposedly homogeneous groups were not at all divided or riven. In a way it did divide unlike before … for the next few days I avoided the distant colleague who suggested that I must conform (and devour all creatures as is the majority local practice, I suppose); the other distant colleague begin to regard the first distant colleague as a fake whenever that one critiqued fundamentalism; and the first distant colleague called two of us insensitive to Muslims at our backs.

I am still not able to regard the first colleague as a fake because some aspects of her life known to me demonstrate that she has trespassed fundamentalist ways … in fact, the way she lives her life demonstrates that it is shaped more by her personal inclinations than by any dogma. But I am not able to understand her apparent effort to simplify the world into Muslims and non-Muslims and deny liberal opinions in a Muslim context. She is also not a conservative or so I think based on what I have seen of her. Yet, I am unable to find a rationale for her illiberal and intolerant attitude towards very basic requirement, ie, freedom of expression, for a dialogue. Is it the fear of the locals … or an assumption that her identity as a Muslim puts her in a relatively secure position compared to other expatriates; that if she is seen as not conforming it may jeopardize that position …?

There have been tremendous progress in Afghanistan in the last few years that I have seen; there have been different developments in thought as well as in the way people live. A great mass of new knowledge has come into an ordinary urban middle class or affluent Afghan’s possession, particularly men’s possession – new knowledge about technology, world economy, development, international law, state systems; knowledge about the history and politics of the state and neighbouring countries and in particular about their thinking in matters of religion and the methods religious expression; and a revival of the interest about other religions, about the differences and similar ways in which religions and religious practices have developed.

There some Afghans I know who have not kept the information and knowledge newly accessible and available to them in a compartmentalized order – there has been an obvious influence of the new information and knowledge on their understanding of their religion and also a very obvious interpretation of the new information and knowledge through the lenses of the religion. With some among this group I have noticed that they almost in awe of the new information and knowledge mainly because they were deprived of these for so long that any bit of something new is far from irrelevance or being a fad. Some others see destructive zeal in the pace at which the new information and knowledge is flowing in and they would like to keep them separate from the understanding and practice of their religion because they feel otherwise they would be compromising their intellectual and spiritual integrity.

I haven’t had opportunities to have such discussion in rural areas. Discussions in the rural areas have been mostly related to the social (some bit of tradition and culture minus religion) and economic development issues. But I have found openness among even the rural people to accept my non-compliance with certain practices including meat-based food and headcover when I have made the effort to explain my non-compliance as matters of my belief and difference in culture. I have felt respected when I have said that I am not an Afghan and I do not want to imitate one. Some have treated my efforts as my intellectual ingenuity, some as daring, and some as sheer foolishness. I do not possess any sort of spiritual depth so cannot argue from a spiritual or theological perspective. I feel that the effort to explain my views and beliefs is indispensable to develop a relationship between different identities. The views and identity that I come with cannot be left as antagonistic to the local or their perspectives as unrelated from mine. There is a degree of incongruence in our views and beliefs but as human beings we must be able to think together on some issues and be comfortable in each other’s company.

I don’t think that there is anything new about the situation; I think this has been a perpetual state of affairs on our planet earth! Things have blended in a new combination in the past (some backfired) and things will blend anew. Some may backfire but I don’t regard not taking the risk as an alternative. It would be a pity to let our fears shut the doors to such opportunities of being able to co-exist comfortably in our separate identities.

Sphere: Related Content
Religion and ExpressionSocialTwist Tell-a-Friend