An innocent man was brutally lynched in Bangladesh over blasphemy allegations, which is nothing more than an excuse for people in our neighbouring country to commit violence against Hindus. This came just days after the dastardly mass shooting at a Hanukkah celebration in Australia’s Bondi Beach, where religious fanatics gunned down 15 people in an act of grave antisemitism.
When religious faith turns into a red flag, and its only purpose seems to be to perpetrate and propound intolerance, the seers and the holy men must wonder where the so-called faithful are going and in which direction the faith is headed. After all, none of them preached hatred. Perhaps there is need for a moral ‘jihad’ against those indulging in the promulgation of terror in the name of religion.
In the aftermath of such violence, liberal democracies react with shock, as leaders condemn the act, the community mourns their dead, and politicians reassure citizens. The elephant in the room is gingerly side-stepped, and life goes on without naming the ideological forces that have shaped the violence.
The Australian shooting raises uncomfortable questions that democracies need to address. Has the fear of causing offence made us reluctant to call a spade a spade? Why are we unable to analyse radicalisation through misinformation and misinterpretation of religious codes, and use our collective intellectual rigour to counter them? Exclusionary and judgmental belief systems that are intolerant to other ideologies should have no place in a modern, inclusive, democratic society.
Gita’s wisdom and Hindu righteousness
Gita’s 16:2 verse can be translated as “Nonviolence, truthfulness, absence of anger, renunciation, tranquillity, absence of fault-finding, compassion for all living entities, freedom from covetousness, gentleness, modesty, steady determination…”. This lesson from the Bhagavad Gita deeply resonates with the pluralism and tolerance embodied in Hinduism. The faith of my ancestors follows a doctrine of tolerance — live and let live — and a philosophy that is not rigid, is accepting and inclusive. Strength is shown through restraint, and not anger and revenge; the concept of an “eye for an eye” has no place in the Hindu dharma.
Hindu righteousness is understood through character, not rigidity or indoctrination. Society derives its philosophy and ethos from nature and the environment, and the paganism found in some rituals is nothing more than a reverence for the life we breathe. The 330,000,000 gods and goddesses that form the basic tenets of Hinduism are steeped in the worship of Mother Nature — and so we have the Sun god (Surya), the wind god (Vayu), the god of the senses (Indra), the creators (Brahma and Vishnu), and the destroyer (Shiva). Non-believers and those who believe in their own gods are equally respected as others who have their faith inscribed in one or the other god.
Modesty, emotional stability and gentleness are projected as moral virtues of a good human being. This suggests that the Indian society promulgates a peaceful co-existence, plurality and moral self-discipline over and above coercion and conversion. Conduct is the epicentre of this concept of theism.
Sanatana Dharma as a way of living
According to Michel Danino, a French born author and historian, “Religion is a Western concept; the Indian concept is neither religion nor even Hinduism nor any ism. It is Sanatana Dharma, the eternal law of the universe, which cannot be formulated in any rigid nor final set of tenets…” The ‘primary etymological’ root for the English word religion comes from the Latin religare, which means to bind, implying that the person is bound to a particular god or faith.
Danino suggests that the Indian concept of Sanatana Dharma is rooted in a complex moral order, in which the cosmos itself is grounded in ethical principles that propose a righteous and upright way of living. Sanatana Dharma and the word ‘dharma’ itself refer to righteous conduct in the Indian context; it follows the tenets of compassion, moral grounding, tolerance, and inclusivity. One need not conform to a specific god or a fixed set of beliefs, as Sanatana Dharma is open and liberating.
As an ancient faith with no single known founder or central authority, it does not seek to bind individuals to a rigid set of theological ideas. Instead, it is propounded as a method — or, in modern terms, a “management roadmap” — for a life well lived. Scriptures such as the Vedas, Ramayana, and Mahabharata, for example, are believed to have been passed down through oral traditions dating back to around 850 BCE.
Religious rigidity leads to radicalism
The belief that one god is superior to all others is antithetical to a pluralistic coexistence. The promise of “Heaven” or “Jannat” as a reward for rigid proponents of a faith, while consigning others to hell, forms the basis of religious intolerance and fuels hatred toward others. This very notion of ‘otherness’ leads to radicalism.
Research shows that fundamentalism has been on the rise again since the 1970s: the radicalisation of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the rise of Sunni fundamentalism in Bangladesh, and the Afghan war all contributed to this trend. These developments led to the emergence of symbols of fundamentalism, such as the resurgence of the hijab, the rise of Sharia law, and enforced gender segregation.
Rise in radicalisation
There is growing evidence suggesting that youth are being exposed to radicalising rhetoric through digital media and online spaces. Extremist groups are now able to recruit directly into the homes, and hearts, of individuals through social media, making reliance on physical networks largely unnecessary. Online forums, apps, encrypted messaging platforms, and the dark web have become safe spaces for radicalisation and recruitment. Extremist content is streamed directly into the minds of the vulnerable, often to such an extent that even family members remain unaware of the depth of indoctrination.
A case in point is the father-son duo involved in the Bondi massacre, where it appears that the perpetrator’s ‘Western’ wife allegedly remained unaware of the actions and intentions of the male members of the family. Extremists craft engaging narratives with great care, using digital propaganda to ensnare and recruit their ‘victims’, disillusioned souls who are offered a sense of purpose and a shortcut to the pearly gates of heaven.
Naveed Akram, 24, is reported to have completed his studies in the Quran at Al Murad Institute outside Sydney. Investigators are still examining the role this education may have played in his indoctrination and whether it contributed to compelling Akram to snuff out the lives of 15 civilians celebrating their own religious occasions.
Faith-based violence is premised on the idea that belief must be uniform, disagreement should be punished rather than tolerated, and individual conscience must submit to the notion that religious freedom itself is secularism. Civilisations that never practised forced conversion understand this instinctively. Democracies that pretend all religions operate with the same degree of tolerance do not.
The terms “secular” and “socialist” were inserted into the Indian Constitution subsequently, but the country possessed these values long before the existence of the present-day nation-state. Ancient civilisation lived by these principles and therefore offered shelter and solace to those persecuted in their lands of origin, that is, Syrian Christians, Jews, Shias from Iran, Sunnis from Afghanistan, among others. Yet history also shows that some who benefited from this tolerant society chose to act against it, culminating in the creation of two separate nations — East and West Pakistan — on the basis of religion.
More importantly, the substance of secular constitutionalism — non-discrimination, equal protection, religious freedom, and minority cultural rights — runs through the country’s legal architecture far beyond the written text of the Constitution. These principles are embedded in its spirit, grounded in the concept of Dharma.
“Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti “ It means truth is one; wise men call it by different names.
Meenakashi Lekhi is a BJP leader, lawyer and social activist. Her X handle is @M_Lekhi. Views are personal.
(Edited by Prashant Dixit)