India has been constantly beset by religious, linguistic, socioeconomic and regional clashes since its partitioning in 1947 (Dalmia 2011, 58). Contemporarily, religious riots are commonplace and in certain areas, such as Dharavi, violence has become accepted as the norm (Sardar 2006, 30; Sen and Wagner 2009, 306). The media plays a pivotal role in Indian society, as in the West, and has the power not only to transfer information to the masses but to mould people’s beliefs (Leab 2002, 120; Balraj 2011, 91). The efficacy of the media as a tool for positive or negative social change has been demonstrated in the twentieth century. Many scholars, for instance, believe that communism fell in the former U.S.S.R. partially due to the influence of Western music and culture on Eastern Bloc youth (Dalmia 2011, 58-59). The media was also used in the Balkans to spread nationalist propaganda and facilitated the violent disintegration of Yugoslavia (Rajgopal 2011, 237). In India, the Bollywood film industry has an enormous influence on popular culture (Chatterjee 2009, vii). Now the largest film industry in the world, it produces over 900 films per annum that are viewed globally by approximately three billion people (Mehta 2005, 52; Gokulsing and Dissanayake 2004, 10; Dalmia 2011, 58). Significantly, Muslims are well represented in the industry and many Bollywood films depict the suffering of Indian Muslims, demonstrate that Muslims can be loyal citizens of India and encourage Muslim youth to practice non-violent forms of Islam. After introducing the roots of religious conflict in modern India, this essay examines the message of Bollywood films and the stance that the industry takes against fundamentalist violent expressions of Hinduism and Islam.
Tension between Hindus and Muslims in India began to intensify during the lead up towards independence. Mahatma Gandhi, realising the limitations of what Western secularism could offer Indian society, worked tirelessly to promote Sarvadharma Sambhav, the peaceful coexistence of all religions (Sen and Wagner 2009, 304). Nevertheless, tensions continued to rise and violence erupted upon India gaining independence in 1947, resulting in the partitioning of Pakistan and East Pakistan from predominantly Hindu India (66). Since then, Hindu nationalism has remained a dominant force in Indian politics. According to Wellman and Tukono (2004, 292), a religious communities oppose competing communities in order to strengthen their sense of identity. Between 1999 and 2004, the Bharatiya Janata Party was in government and promoted the ideology of Hindutva, insisting that Hindus constitute the Indian nation as its original inhabitants and are the sole creators of its culture (Sen and Wagner 2009, 309, 313). This has fuelled numerous atrocities against India’s Muslims in the last decade, often perpetrated by ordinary citizens (30). For example, during the 2002 communal riots in Gujarat, Hindu women actively encouraged the rape of Muslim women and shielded rapists from the police (Banaji 2006, 132). Meanwhile, some Muslims from Jammu and Kashmir feel like they no longer have a place in India and have formed terrorist independence movements (Sardar 2006, 31). Consequently, violence has become a regular part of the daily discourse in some areas and regularly claims lives (Sen and Wagner 2009, 306). Clearly, India has not yet resolved the nation’s Hindu-Muslim divide and the promotion of peaceful coexistence is of prime importance to the country’s future.
Despite the fact that Muslims comprise approximately eleven percent of India’s population, they are still not entirely integrated into the mainstream of politics and public institutions (Sardar 2006, 30). This is a reflection of the aforementioned ideology of Hindutva, which encourages the idea that India is a Hindu nation and should be governed by Hindus (30). Yet, in bold defiance of this discriminating ideology, Muslims retain a very high visibility in the Bollywood film industry. For example, the current three highest-grossing male actors in India are all Muslims with the well-known Muslim surname Khan (Dalmia 2011, 61). Shah Rukh Khan, the most popular of these three megastars, has actually taken it upon himself to promote a respectable image of Islam to the public (62). The situation is much the same with Bollywood music. In 2010 the two biggest hit songs, “Munni Badnam Hui” and “Sheila Ki Jawani”, were choreographed by Farah Khan (58). Likewise, Bollywood’s most respected composer A. R. Rahman, who created the music for Slumdog Millionaire, is a devout Sufi and is known to pray regularly (62). This openness towards Muslims is also evident linguistically in Bollywood movies’ titles, songs and dialogues. Ever since the creation of the first Hindi talkies, Muslim Urdu writers have had a significant presence in Indian cinema (Trivedi 2006, 58). As a result of this influence, Bollywood films are generally made in a stratum of the vernacular that is readily understood by both Hindi and Urdu speakers (Trivedi 2006, 53). This is in stark contrast to the government’s sanctioning of Sanskritic Hindi, which is difficult to understand for Urdu speakers and the uneducated, as the official language of India (53). In fact, the dialect of Hindi that is used in Bollywood films is frequently so close to Urdu that some commentators question whether the films are in Hindi at all. Yet, even though the films are generally not in a highly Sanskritic Hindi, neither are they in a strongly Persianised Urdu (54). Rather, they are made in a colloquial Hindi-Urdu vernacular that crosses religious and cultural barriers in an effort to welcome people of both religions to enjoy the film (Trivedi 2006, 53). In light of the numerous Muslims in the Bollywood film industry as well as its openness to Urdu culture, Bollywood films are evidently a valuable platform for the promotion of peaceful coexistence between Hindus and Muslims.
Despite the fact that Muslims are so prominent in the Bollywood industry, some social commentators argue that its films reinforce the image of Muslims as the “other”, creating mistrust towards them and facilitating their ostracism in Indian society (Balraj 2011, 92). For instance, Muslims are frequently portrayed as either the victims or the perpetrators of crime in the Mumbai underworld (93). When dealing with politics, many Bollywood films blame the nation’s political problems on extremist Islam (Kabir 2010, 377; Dirks 2008, 134). In such films, Muslims are usually identifiable through their stereotypical clothing and grooming. For instance, whilst most men under forty in India have moustaches, Bollywood characters tend to be clean shaven, except for Muslims, criminals and some other characters who can be identified by their beards (Dwyer and Patel 2002, 84). However, even though India’s political problems are frequently blamed on stereotypically-dressed Muslim terrorists, many Bollywood films recognise the responsibility of the state in marginalising India’s minorities and depict the suffering they undergo on a daily basis (Gokulsing and Dissanayake 2004, 68). Bombay, released in 1994, is the story of forbidden love between a Hindu journalist and a Muslim woman. The tragic events of the second half of the film demonstrate the harm inflicted on all members of the community by racial hatred and religious riots (68). In the end of the film, people of various religions form a human chain against the rioters and demonstrate that a community must stand together to combat violence (Banaji 2006, 136-7). Whilst Bombay shows the harm caused to communities by religious hatred, films such as Salim Langde Pe Mat Ro, Garam Hawa and My Name is Khan portray the specific suffering inflicted upon Muslims in India and abroad due to negative stereotypes of their religion. In each of these films, the protagonists live in a hostile world and are ostracised by those around them simply on account of the religion they are born into (Gokulsing and Dissanayake 2004, 67; Balraj 2011, 93-94). These films’ portrayal of the suffering caused by religious hatred is highly significant as this issue is frequently overshadowed in Indian society by the problem of poverty (Saari 2009, 61). Whilst garibi hatao, the removal of poverty, is a noble cause, it is also essential people understand that religious discrimination is a major social problem in India that destroys many homes and needs public concern in order to create a better future for the nation (61).
Bollywood directors also combat the discrimination against Muslims in Indian society by including patriotic Indian Muslims or Pakistanis who are loyal friends to their Indian neighbours in their films’ narratives (Banaji 2006, 154). In Mission Kashmir, I.G. Khan is a heroic Muslim police officer who fights against separatists terrorists in Kashmir, has an unconverted Hindu wife Neelima, and frequently offers sentimental statements about the loyalty of Muslims to the nation (Kabir 2010, 379). Likewise, in My Name is Khan, although the protagonist is ostracised simply due to his Muslim surname, Khan, he heroically overcomes his difficulties and demonstrates that Indian Muslims are not the enemies but partners in the battle against terrorism (384). Lal (1998, 495), on this basis of films such as these, argues that Indian cinema has a greater tendency towards inclusiveness than otherness. This is very important to the promotion of non-violent attitudes towards Muslims as it challenges the concept that all Muslims are an imposition on Hindu India, an idea frequently promoted on Indian television and in the news (Sardar 2006, 30). According to Nepstad (2004, 298), religious terrorists have a strong tendency to portray the perceived enemy in Manichean terms as completely wicked. Peacemakers, however, realise that the line between good and evil lies within each individual, not between religious or ethnic groups (298). Thus, by including heroic Muslim protagonists in Bollywood films, the industry is undermining the notion that all Muslims are terrorists and promoting the peacemaking concept that a person’s goodness is not dependent on their religion.
The portrayal of modernised Muslims as the protagonists in Bollywood films not only encouraging Hindus to accept Muslims as a vital part of India, but critiques fundamentalist Islam to the films’ Muslim audiences. Bollywood films are in fact very popular in Muslim countries (Dalmia 2011, 59). Although the films were banned in Pakistan between 1965 and 2008, they were still watched through satellite and smuggled video tapes (59-60). When the ban was lifted on Indian films, people flooded to cinemas to demonstrate their support for the industry (60). In addition to Pakistan, Bollywood films are also widely watched in the Middle East, which is the industry’s third largest overseas market, and a Bollywood theme park is currently being constructed in Dubai (59). The extreme popularity of the films has aroused the concern of Islamic fundamentalists, who are worried about the influence the films have on Muslim youth (58). According to Sen and Wagner (2009, 299), religious fundamentalism is inversely related to modernity and secularism. In the case of Islam, terrorist organisations demand an extremely strict version of the faith and require people to make a strong stance against Western influence (Nepstad 2004, 297). In stark contrast to these fundamentalist characteristics, Muslim characters and actors in Bollywood demonstrate a willingness to adapt to modernity and compromise with contemporary culture (Dwyer and Patel 2002, 83). An example of this is the aforementioned Mission Kashmir, in which the protagonist I.G. Khan espouses a benevolent expression of Islam that is exulted above the fundamentalist form practiced by the film’s terrorist villains (Kabir 2010, 379). In addition to critiquing violent expressions of Islam, films such as this also challenge Indian Muslims to remain loyal to the interests of the nation, in direct contrast to the philosophy promoted by terrorist organisations which demand that people be primarily loyal to Islam and sanction the breaking of laws (Nepstad 2004, 297). A moderate form of Islam is also promoted by members of the Bollywood film industry in their off-screen lives. For example, Shah Rukh Khan has embarked upon a personal crusade against Islamic fundamentalism, speaking of the true Islam of Allah and the false Islam of the Mullahs (Dalmia 2011, 62). Likewise A.R. Rahman uses Sufi prayer to attain a sense of relaxation and containment, promoting the message that religion is about personal spiritual elevation, not fighting (62). The ability of these films and actors to have a tangible influence on Muslim society is demonstrated by the fact that Bollywood film stars are publicly idolised in Pakistan and many Pakistani weddings are now Bollywood-themed, imitating the clothes and setting of a wedding in a film (60). It is hard to image that people could idolise Bollywood’s actors and emulate its cultural form without being influenced by its message (60).
The Bollywood film industry, with its far-reaching influence on popular culture, has a great potentiality to facilitate social change in India (Kumar 2008, xv). In contrast to the lack of Muslims in India’s mainstream political and public institutions, Muslims are very well represented in all aspects of the film industry (Dalmia 2011, 61). Even though Muslims are at times represented in Bollywood films as the “other”, many storylines describe the suffering caused to Muslims in India and have patriotic Muslim protagonists. This alerts audiences to the fact that religious discrimination is a real problem in Indian society which needs to be addressed and challenges the belief that Muslims are an imposition on Hindu India (Saari 2009, 61; Sardar 2006, 30). The exaltation of benevolent patriotic Muslims in the industry also encourages Muslim youth to pursue non-violent forms of Islam in preference to that which is being promoted by certain Mullahs (Dalmia 2011, 58, 61). Nevertheless, despite the Bollywood film industry promoting the coexistence of different faiths in India, religious violence continues to claim many lives in large metropolises (Sen and Wagner 2009, 306). Unfortunately, the benefit of Bollywood’s message is weakened by the fact that other forms of the Indian media, at times with the support of the government, vilify India’s non-Hindu population and blame them for the nation’s troubles. A similar message has been promoted through the Hindutva ideology of the Bharatiya Janata Party, which maintains that India is a Hindu nation and should be governed by Hindus (Sardar 2006, 30). Literary and cultural productions can facilitate political and intellectual efforts to promote peace, but they rarely singlehandedly change a nation (Kumar 2008, xv; Dalmia 2011, 58-59). The Bollywood film industry has a powerful message of peaceful coexistence for Hindus and Muslims, but this needs the support of politics and other forms of media in order to realise a radical change in Indian society.
Works Cited
Balraj, Belinda Marie. 2011. “My Name is Khan and I am not a Terrorist”: Representation of Muslims in ‘My Name is Khan’. Journal of Language and Culture 2 (6): 91-95.
Banaji, Shakuntala. 2006. Reading ‘Bollywood’: The Young Audience and Hindi Films. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chatterjee, Partha. 2009. Introduction. In Hindi Cinema: An Insider’s View, Anil Saari. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Dalmia, Shikha. 2011. Bollywood vs. jihad: which is the bigger threat to fundamentalist Islam: the Pentagon or Mumbai? Reason 43 (4): 58-62.
Dirks, Nicholas B. 2008. The Home and the Nation: Consuming Culture and Politics in Roja. In Bollywood Reader, edited by Rajinder Dudrah and Jigna Desai. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Dwyer, Rachel, and Divia Patel. 2002. Cinema India: The Visual Culture of Hindi Film. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Gokulsing, K. Moti, and Wimal Dissanayake. 2004. Indian Popular Cinema: A Narrative of Cultural Change. Oakhill: Trentham Books.
Kabir, Ananya Jahanara. 2010. The Kashmiri as Muslim in Bollywood’s ‘New Kashmir films’. Contemporary South Asia 18 (4): 373-85.
Kumar, Priya. 2008. Limiting Secularism: The Ethics of Coexistence in Indian Literature and Film. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Lal, Vinay. 1998. The Impossibility of the Outsider in Modern Indian Film”. In The Secret Politics of Our Desires: Innocence, Culpability and Indian Popular Cinema, edited by Ashis Nandy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Leab, Daniel J. 2002. Film and Religion. Film History 14 (2): 119-120.
Mehta, Suketu. 2005. Welcome to Bollywood. National Geographic 207 (2): 52-69.
Nepstad, Sharon Erickson. 2004. Religion, Violence, and Peacemaking. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 43 (3): 297-301.
Rajgopal, Shoba Sharad. 2011. Bollywood and Neonationalism: The Emergence of Nativism as the Norm in Indian Conventional Cinema. South Asian Popular Culture 9 (3): 237-46.
Saari, Anil. 2009. Hindi Cinema: An Insider’s View. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Sardar, Ziauddin. 2006. Haunted by the Politics of Hate. New Statesman,30 January, p. 30-31.
Sen, Ragini, and Wolfgang Wagner. 2009. Cultural Mechanics of Fundamentalism: Religion as Ideology, Divided Identities and Violence in Post-Gandhi India. Culture & Psychology 15 (3): 299-326.
Trivedi, Harish. 2006. All Kinds of Hindi: The Evolving Language of Hindi Cinema. In Fingerprinting Popular Culture: The Mythic and the Iconic in Indian Cinema, edited by Vinay Lal and Ashis Nandy. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Wellman, James K. Jr., and Kyoko Tukono. 2004. Is Religious Violence Inevitable? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 43 (3):291-29-296.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Can Religion contribute to Peacebuilding?
If we sit at the foot of the whole universe to learn we come to understand that everything in the universe, religion, secularism, homeless people, people with a disability, trees, rocks, water, everything has something positive to teach us as well as the potential for destructive power. Secular actors who have participated in every revolution from the French revolution to the present ecological revolution have done so believing that it is secular actors who will bring salvation to the world (Beck, 2010: 20-21). The scientific enlightenment sprung up as secular academics and actors believed that the world would find liberty and emancipation through rationality and science, which would be irresistible to all (Beck, 2010: 21). Secular Actors predicted that religion would slowly decline as science and rationality transformed the world into a place of peace and harmony (Beck, 2010: 30). The United States Government continues to exclude religion from national and global peace-building activities, seeing only the destructive qualities that have emerged from religion in the past and present (Smock, 2008: 7). Governments and secular academics seem to lump all religions and levels of religious expression and practice into one destructive basket, ignoring its positive peace-making qualities.
Cavanaugh (2003) argues that creating a division between religious violence and secular violence is unhelpful as both sides participate in violent forms of behaviour. Both religious institutions and the secular world condemn certain types of violence however continue to pursue violent behaviour as a means to an end. Both religion and the secular world also pursue peacemaking activities as a means to an end. Why should religious forms of peacemaking be excluded, when religious practices may have something to offer that the secular practices don’t offer?
The following essay seeks to argue that religion and spirituality have the potential and the power to participate in creating a more peaceful world. Before looking into the wider global scene, this essay first defines and explores concepts such as religion, spirituality, peace and the qualities that peace builders embody. Forgiveness, reconciliation, nonviolent activism and education are also explored as religious methods through which nonviolent forms of spiritual practice can be implemented to promote peaceful relations in the world.
Definitions and Complexity:
A simple definition of Religion, “involves the allegiance of an individual to the specific beliefs and practices of a group or social institution, whereas spirituality is the personal, subjective experience of the divine” (Goldenberg & Blancke, 2011: 397). Abu-Nimer (2001: 690) found in his multi-cultural group research that it is typically Westerners who separate religion and spirituality. One of the problems in talking about religion is that human beings interpret their own religion in a variety of ways which are not always in alignment with the original teachings of the founder (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 56). How people understand the Great Mystery will determine whether they see God as an anthropomorphic being or the underlying spiritual life force of the universe, this will then determine whether their spiritual practices are geared towards a ‘this worldly’ or ‘other worldly’ orientation and differing definitions of salvation and liberation all impact on how religious individuals socially and personally engage in the world. These variables in Religion create complexity when discussing religion. Whilst most religions use different names, to denote the supreme deity, they all seem to concur that the nature of the supreme deity is a mystery. Hence forth I will use the term Great Mystery to denote God, Allah or as Buddhists would say Ultimate Reality.
Peace:
“In a peace movement there is a lot of anger, frustration, and misunderstanding. The peace movement can write very good protest letters, but they are not yet able to write a love letter” (Hanh, 1987: 79). If we are constantly against what we see in the world we are not at peace (Hanh, 1987: 9). If we want to see peace in the world and are for peace then we have to be what we want to see in the world. It is pointless saying that we want to see peace in the world if we are angry, frustrated and have misunderstood. These emotions are born from ignorance and are destructive (Hanh, 1987: 41). Harvey (2008) a sacred activist, also conveys a similar idea that “Activism that is not purified by profound spiritual and psychological self-awareness and rooted in divine truth, wisdom, and compassion will only perpetuate the problem it is trying to solve, however righteous its intentions” (Harvey, 2008).
So that our Buddha nature can be made manifest when dealing with problems in our lives, Buddhism teaches us that we must transform destructive emotions into constructive emotions such as love, forgiveness, compassion and understanding, (Hanh, 1987: 41). Secular and religious values are exactly the same according to Abu-Nimer (2001: 692), however spiritual and religious values also include ‘faith in God’ and practices such as pray, meditation, prophetic vision, inner spiritual healing and transformation and inner peace-building. In order to reach a place of peace inside of oneself, this generally involves spiritual healing practices which transform destructive emotional states into constructive emotional states. The secular world helps people to find forgiveness through counselling but does teach skills such as meditation, prayer and spiritual healing practices that can empower individuals to transform destructive emotions on their own (Enright, 2001).
Most religious faiths express the fact that the spirit of God exists in all beings and that we must love our neighbours as ourselves (Osman, 2004: 60; Gopin, 2004: 116). When meeting face to face with one’s enemies, it is important to love and honour the other and work towards finding the divine essence or divine grace in the other. This principle is expressed by Gopin (2004: 116) a Jewish Rabbi and by Jesus when he teaches “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those abuse you” (Luke, 6: 27-28, Bible: 1171). Paul also preaches in Rom, 12:21 (Bible: 1269) “do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good’. In the Baha’i spiritual tradition it is through knowledge of God that one can see true beauty reflected in the heart of others (Pelle, 1991; 17).
In demonizing the other or using deconstruction in order to highlight the corrupt nature of the other, which are paradigms used by fundamentalist religious denominations and by secular political academics, the us versus them paradigm is created. The ‘us versus them’ paradigm is a defense mechanism which is used to prove the superiority and truth of one’s own group teachings and values (Abu-Nimer, 2001: 687-698). It generally emerges as people feel threatened and insecure in the face of difference, wanting all others to be the same as those in their group. Abdu’l Baha (in Pelle, 1991: 17) states that fault finding and back biting are hateful characteristics of man that are driven from a space of fear.
Qualities of Peace-builders:
A principle expressed in both Judaism and by Native American Indian peace-makers is that sometimes one has to “give up power to gain power” (Pesantubbee, 2004: 36) or another way of saying this is one has to “lose a little face in order to do something sublime” (Gopin, 2004: 119). In essence humility, not pride is another essential quality of a peacemaker. Peacemakers in Native American Indian tribes are generally seen as wise elders and are expected to consider the words they will speak very carefully, as words hold power that can harm (Pesantubbee, 2004: 34; Walker, 2004: 539). Talking sticks are used in Native American Indian peace circles as a talking stick gives the one who holds the stick an opportunity to speak from the heart without interruption, whilst the others in the circle must listen respectfully from their heart space. Silence is built into peacemaking circles in order that people in conflict have time to reflect on what they have heard so that they may choose their words carefully before they respond (Walker, 2004: 539). Peacemakers are also said to have tough skin, meaning that a peacemaker will not be wounded or affected by harsh angry words that are being misdirected at them by someone who speaks sharply from a space of fear (Pesantubbee, 2004: 36).
Forgiveness:
Most religions teach divine principles that limit the self-centred ego. The self-centred ego promotes qualities which are fear based such as self-interest, revenge and pride. If one can surrender to the sustainer of life ‘the Great Mystery’ then one can develop a moral consciousness and loving qualities (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 59). According to Gopin (2004: 115) and Walker (2004: 541-542) the spiritual healing process involves thoroughly indulging past memories, grieving, listening, talking, sharing, periods of silence and allowing emotions to be expressed instead of suppressing ones emotions in fear of uncontrolled emotions preventing rational conversation. Any form of healing work, spiritual or otherwise takes a great deal of time and inner struggle. As Gopin (2004: 120) states it is foolish to believe that after one attempt to heal one is healed. Wounds are generally deeply buried and when released create anxiety, fear, resentment, anger, grief and confusion, which takes a long time to work through before constructive emotions and homeostasis can occur in one’s psyche. If the wounds are transferred inter-generationally, then the wounds exist in the fabric of the social consciousness of large groups of people and are even more difficult to shift, as hatred is taught to the young children of the social or religious group from an early age (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 62). It is senseless to believe that one can simply sign a peace treaty with one’s social/ religious enemies and all will be well.
Forgiveness involves a process in which something has gone wrong between human beings or between human beings and the divine or human beings and nature or as some religions will say such as Buddhism, a pattern of the universe has been made disharmonious (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 56). Each religious tradition is different as some have strict rituals, methods and traditions surrounding forgiveness, whilst other religions allow forgiveness to be “extended by anyone at any time” (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 60). The Jewish prophets, Jesus, and the Qu’ran taught that the nature of the Great Mystery is the nature of forgiveness and forgiveness involves a transformation of the heart (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 57; Neu, 2011: 134). In Buddhism, Tao and Hinduism forgiveness is a vital part of the dharma (teachings). Forgiveness helps one to maintain inner harmony and happiness and is a process that is practised in order to remain in alignment with the dharma (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 57).
If individuals follow their religion for external reasons rather than for internal communion with the Great Mystery, then they will be more likely to seek revenge and retaliation (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 61). Most religions teach that if we forgive, then God will forgive us of our own sins and we are healed (Neu, 2011: 132). However forgiveness can be seen as costly by some, as forgiveness and spiritual healing require immense effort, without any prospect of immediate returns (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 63). Most religions and science agree that forgiveness leads to personal transformation. Psalms, 51: 10 (Bible: 626) reads “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and put a new and right spirit within me”. Most religions talk about dying to be reborn, in which spiritual practitioners are willing to confront physical death as well as death of the ego in order to be rebirthed in divine life and service. This often involves a process of spiritual crisis, spiritual healing and transformation (Walsh, 2007: 71). Indigenous people partake of death and spiritual rebirth as part of their rites of passage and initiations (Walsh, 2007: 71).
Forgiveness may be a difficult process; however forgiveness has great value (Neu, 2011: 130). In forgiving, the victim makes a commitment not to pass or fling their own inner pain onto others (Enright, Freedman & Rique, 1998: 54). Forgiveness grinds the negative spiral of revenge and retaliation to a halt and changes the person doing the forgiving (Appleby, 2000: 195). Forgiveness can be unilateral if the perpetrator shows no signs of remorse (Larocco, 2010: 13). If the victim holds onto emotions of anger towards their perpetrator it means that the perpetrator has control of the victim’s life and the person continues to see themselves as a victim rather than finding the gift which exists within forgiveness (Enright, 2001: 10-15). If the victim forgives, the victim affirms to themselves that they are refusing to accept the perpetrators power of negation and dehumanization (Larocco, 2010: 3). With patience and the exploration of feelings that the perpetrator has evoked, the forgiver may reach a place in which they have positive feelings for the perpetrator, as the forgiver moves from a focus on themselves to a focus on their perpetrator (Enright, 2001: 27-28). The healed person may even seek to work with the perpetrator in the hope that the perpetrator will find personal transformation (Enright, Freedman & Rique, 1998: 55). Conflict when tempered with forgiveness and understanding represent opportunities for growth, empowerment and are life transforming (Randolph, 2000: 256).
Scientific research indicates that forgiveness leads to health benefits such as a reduction in stress, anxiety, depression, guilt, increased coping mechanisms, resilience and closeness to the Great Mystery and others (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 66; Enright, 2001: 13-15). Research also indicates that those who hold onto deep anger have blood pressure problems and have a greater risk of suffering heart disease (Enright, 2001: 51-53). The logic of forgiveness does not require compensation or reparation (Griswold, 2007: 63). Unconditional forgiveness leads to greater health, were as the need for an apology and repentance from the perpetrator generally leads to poorer mental health and continuing distress (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 66). Those who do practice forgiveness also seem to be more humble, empathic, loving and grateful (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 67). Men seem to be less willing to forgive then women. Religious and Secular forgiveness programs appear to be equally effective in regards to mental health outcomes (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 68).
Reconciliation:
Forgiveness is required to maintain not only individual inner harmony but also harmonious communal relationships. Forgiveness is seen as a necessary first step towards reconciliation. Reconciliation is a mutual process (Wink in Appleby, 2000: 197). Without forgiveness both sides of the conflict are simply sitting in the place of an armed truce waiting to recommence the fight (Enright, 2001: 30-31). President Nelson Mandala and Archbishop Desmond Tutu who worked towards forgiveness and reconciliation in South Africa, had the capacity to do so due to their using the African Spiritual Philosophy of Ubuntu. Ubuntu emphasizes relationships, interdependence, interrelatedness, generosity, peace, social cohesion, justice, compassion, diversity, caring, hospitality, communal spirituality and interconnectedness (Govier, 2002: 96-97; Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 228). Ubuntu works on the understanding that life is possible through relationships and healthy cohesive relationships are a collective rather than an individual matter (Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 226). Health involves right relationship with the Great Mystery, Mother Nature, other human beings and the ancestors. Health, peace and social cohesion are a community responsibility and are maintained through spiritual rituals and ceremony (Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 226-227; Walker, 2004: 537).
The African Indigenous Church (AIC) worked towards promoting spiritual healing practices and reconciliation in 1912. The AIC formed a part of the African National Congress which was successful in buffering and preventing violent political outbreaks between warring parties during Apartheid struggles (Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 216). In 1968 the Catholic Church in Boliva served as mediators for more than twenty years in every major clash between the Government and the miners. The Catholic Church was seen as the only body who could act in a reconciliatory role during the social and political antagonism (Appleby, 2000: 217). In African countries that have recovered from oppressive political regimes, religious leaders have been called upon “to help determine and implement appropriate instruments of transitional justice” (Appleby, 2000: 220). These are all examples where religious leaders have been called upon to help promote peace-building, where secular attempts alone have failed to create peace.
Non Violent Activism:
Wink (2007: 180-182) argues that Jesus taught non-violent resistance, a form of resistance that was confrontational but not lethal. Jesus understood Gods nature as non-violent and those who choose non-violent methods of resistance were already displaying qualities of the Kingdom of God (Wink, 2007: 181). Jesus taught methods to help people remain empowered, where structural change in the oppressive Roman Empire was not readily available. One of the methods Jesus taught his followers was that “if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also” (Wink, 2007: 183). A backhand slap to the right check was a sign of a person in power attempting to humiliate an inferior. By turning the other cheek the oppressed person was indicating to the oppressor that they could not be demeaned or humiliated (Wink, 2007: 184). Wink (2007: 189-191) argues that Jesus offered oppressed people methods to liberate themselves from victim mentality.
Ghandi often reminded his followers that religious traditions have always emphasised nonviolence and truth as the foundation of peace. Ghandi taught that nonviolent resistance was a method that could be used to counter injustice (Appleby, 2000: 141). Ghandi’s spiritual concepts were drawn from all the major world religions and included Ashima or nonviolence, sanctity of life, prayer, meditation, divine love, ascetic practices and repentance (Appleby, 2000: 141). Other religious movements that used Ghandi’s nonviolent resistance methods include the People’s Power Revolution in the Philippines.
Filipino Catholic priests and nuns served as monitors during the 1986 national elections in the Philippines. The election results were fraudulent as widespread vote tampering occurred during the election in which Ferdinand Marcos claimed victory over Corazon Aquino (Appleby, 2000: 208). The Catholic Bishops denounced the results of the election. Later nonviolent resistance and protection were given to the military by Catholic Church members, as the military worked to expel Marcos from power and place Aquino in Government. Aquino acknowledged that it was the Catholic Church who led the nonviolent revolution which ousted Marcos from power (Appleby, 2000: 208). It becomes clear that spiritual teachers and religious groups are able to promote peacemaking through the practices of election monitoring, conflict mediation, nonviolent protest, empowerment and advocacy for structural reform. There are also those spiritual workers who work behind the scenes praying for the spiritual transformation of their enemies, praying for peace and praying for the healing of those who have been damaged through unlawful practices.
Religious Education and Peace-building:
Other ways that religion can help to build peace in the world is through changing attitudes in the education system. The Baha’i spiritual model of education for unity has been tested in Switzerland over nine consecutive summers with astounding results for teachers, students and staff who participated in the program (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 91). The Baha’i model is founded on the principle of the “Oneness of Humankind” and “prescribes unity in diversity” (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 92). Baha’i introduced spiritual education which synthesis’s teachings from all the world’s religious traditions. Unlike comparative religion, the spiritual teachings focus on the common themes and threads of all religions, whilst remaining true to the teachings of each particular religion (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 99). Not only is equality and justice promoted but also cooperation, balance, humility, detachment, service from the heart, health, healing, creative and performing arts and scientific research (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 93). The aim is to help students and staff transform themselves from within, so that holistically balanced people are created through the Baha’i education system who think of others first and who are aware that they belong to a group consciousness that works towards community building and universal peace (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 93-94). The uniqueness of each individual is cherished and nurtured (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 100).
Similarly researchers are exploring the benefits of Indigenous forms of spirituality and how these forms of spirituality create community building, health, harmony and balance, within the individual, the community and environmentally (Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 215-223). Indigenous spiritual knowledge systems are now being taught and researched at independent research institutes and are core components in some University courses (Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 229). If education institutions can integrate universal spiritual healing principles from all the world religions and work towards helping their students and staff to spiritually transform their own inner worlds before acting externally in the world around them, this will surely help to build a more peaceful and prosperous world.
Conclusion:
It becomes quite clear that different Religions have been successfully involved in peace mediation; reconciliation and nonviolent activism around the globe when political actors have turned to corrupt methods to achieve their goals. The case of Nelson Mandala and Archbishop Tutu working together in South Africa to end apartheid was a heart-warming case in which the political and the spiritual worked together in an attempt to create healing and positive social transformation. Religions such as Buddhism, Mystical Christianity, Hinduism, Islamic Sufism, the Jewish Kabbalah and Indigenous spirituality all offer spiritual healing and transformation practices which help one to transform destructive emotions, find guidance from the great mystery within oneself and empower people to see the good and the divine operating in each and every person as well as in all things happening. If we can view each situation as an opportunity for growth, as an opportunity to find love, understanding, compassion and the divine within ourselves and all things, then no matter what is happening we develop faith in a higher power which helps to bring individuals and groups to a greater space of inner peace, empowerment and calmness. This does not prevent one from acting in the world it simply means that when we do act in the world we act from a more centered, compassionate and loving space.
Whilst the secular community teaches forgiveness, which is a powerful form of spiritual transformation, secular communities do not necessarily teach the skills which empower individuals and communities to participate in their own spiritual healing practices. We need to take note of the success of religious institutions such as the Baha’i who teach Education for Unity and the Indigenous cultures who teach a philosophy similar to Ubuntu. These communities teach service from a heart filled with love and community building rather than secular Liberal notions of individual self-interest. Possibly the secular community needs to learn to “loss some face in order to do something sublime”, that is to sit with their religious peers to learn, instead of seeking to dominate and destroy. The areas that require further research are how constructive religious and spiritual philosophies and spiritual healing practices can be incorporated into our education systems and work places in order to teach inner spiritual transformation practices. If we can use spiritual healing practices to help us to transform our anger, hate, arrogance, prejudice, violence, sense of victimhood and shame into love compassion and understanding prior to our acting or being active in the world around us, we will create a more peaceful, stable, equal and loving social world in which to live.
References:
Abu-Nimer, M. 2001, ’Conflict Resolution, Culture, and Religion: Toward a Training Model of Interreligious Peacebuilding’, in Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 38, No. 6, 685-704.
Appleby, R.S. 2000, The Ambivalence of the Scared, Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
Beck U. 2010,’The Return of the Gods and the Crisis of European Modernity: A Sociological Introduction’, In Beck, U., A God of One’s Own: Religion’s Capacity for Peace and Potential for Violence, Cambridge: Polity Press, Chapter 2, 19-46.
Bushrui, S.B. and Malarkey, J. 2000, Education as Transformation: A Baha’i Model of Education for Unity, in Kazanjian, V.H. and Laurence, P.L., (Eds), Education as Transformation; Religious Pluralism, Spirituality and a New Vision for Higher Education in America, New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Chapter 8, 91-102.
Cavanaugh, W.T. 2003, The Myth of Religious Violence, accessed on 16/08/2011, at http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/oso/private/content/religion/978 .
Edwards, S. and Thwala, J. 2010, ‘African Spirituality and its Implications for Health, Community Development, and Education’, in Dowson, M. and Devenish, S., (Eds), Religion and Spirituality, Charlotte, North Carolina: Information Age Publishing, Chapter 13, 215-233.
Enright, R.D., Freedman, S., Rique, J. 1998, ‘The Psychology of Interpersonal Forgiveness’, in Enright, R.D. & North, J., (Eds), Exploring Forgiveness, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, Chapter 5, 46-62.
Enright, R.D. 2001, Forgiveness is a Choice: A Step-by-Step Process for Resolving Anger and Restoring Hope, Washington: APA Life Tools.
Farhadian, C. and Emmons, R.A. 2009, ‘The Psychology of Forgiveness in the World Religions’, in Kalayjian, A. & Paloutzian, R.F., (Eds), Forgiveness and Reconciliation, New York: Springer-Verlag New York, Chapter 4, 55-70.
Goldenberg, R. and Blancke, B. 2011, ‘God in Process: Is There a Place for Religion in Conflict Resolution?’, in Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 4, 377-398.
Gopin, M. 2004, ‘Judaism and Peacebuilding’, in Coward, H.G. and G.S. Smith, (Eds), Religion and Peacebuilding, Albany: State University of New York, Chapter 6, 111-127.
Govier, T. 2002, Forgiveness and Revenge, London: Routledge.
Griswold, C.L. 2007, Forgiveness: A Philosophical Exploration, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hanh, T.H. 1987, Being Peace, Berkeley, California: Parallax Press.
Harvey, A. 2008, Andrew Harvey, viewed on 04/11/2011, at http://www.andrewharvey.net/sacred_activism.php .
Larocco, S. 2010, ‘Forgiveness: A Quiet Assault on the Malicious’, in Allers, C.R. & Smit, M., (Eds), Forgiveness in Perspective, Amsterdam: Rodopi, Part 1, 3-17.
Neu, J. 2011, ‘On Loving our Enemies’, in Fricke, C., (Ed), The Ethics of Forgiveness, New York: Routledge, Chapter 8, 130-142.
Osman, M.F. 2004, ‘God is the All-Peace, the All-Merciful’, in Heft, J.L., (Ed), Beyond Violence: Religious Sources of Social Transformation in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, New York: Fordham University Press, Chapter 3, 57-73.
Pelle, T. 1991, ‘Baha’i’, in Paige, G.D. and Gilliatt, S., (Eds), Nonviolence in Hawaii’s Spiritual Traditions, Honolulu: Center for Global Nonviolence Planning Project Spark M. Matsunaga Insitute for Peace, University of Hawaii, 13-24.
Pesantubbee, M.E. 2004, ‘In Search of the White Path: American Indian Peacebuilding’, in Coward, H.G. and G.S. Smith, (Eds), Religion and Peacebuilding, Albany: State University of New York, Chapter 2, 27-43.
Randolph, R.M. 2000, ‘Building a Multi-Faith Center at MIT’, in Kazanjian, V.H. and Laurence, P.L., (Eds), Education as Transformation; Religious Pluralism, Spirituality and a New Vision for Higher Education in America, New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Chapter 23, 251-257.
Smock, D. 2008, ‘Special Report, Religion in World Affairs: Its Role in Conflict and Peace’, from United States Institute of Peace, www.usip.org .
‘The Gospel According to Luke’, 1989, Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, San Francisco: Harper Collins Bibles, 1163-1198.
‘The Letter of Paul to the Romans’, 1989, Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, San Francisco: Harper Collins Bibles, 1259-1272.
‘The Psalms’, 1989, Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, San Francisco: Harper Collins Bibles, 1259-1272.
Walker, P.O. 2004, ‘Decolonizing Conflict Resolution: Addressing the Ontological Violence of Westernization’, in American Indian Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 3-4, 527-549.
Walsh, R. 2007, The World of Shamanism: New Views of an Ancient Tradition, Woodbury, Minnesota: Llewellyn Publications.
Wink, W. 2007. ‘Beyond Just War and Pacifism: Jesus’ Nonviolent Way’, in Ellens, J.H., (Ed), The Destructive Power of Religion: Violence in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Westport: Praeger Publishers, Chapter 13, 180-199.
Cavanaugh (2003) argues that creating a division between religious violence and secular violence is unhelpful as both sides participate in violent forms of behaviour. Both religious institutions and the secular world condemn certain types of violence however continue to pursue violent behaviour as a means to an end. Both religion and the secular world also pursue peacemaking activities as a means to an end. Why should religious forms of peacemaking be excluded, when religious practices may have something to offer that the secular practices don’t offer?
The following essay seeks to argue that religion and spirituality have the potential and the power to participate in creating a more peaceful world. Before looking into the wider global scene, this essay first defines and explores concepts such as religion, spirituality, peace and the qualities that peace builders embody. Forgiveness, reconciliation, nonviolent activism and education are also explored as religious methods through which nonviolent forms of spiritual practice can be implemented to promote peaceful relations in the world.
Definitions and Complexity:
A simple definition of Religion, “involves the allegiance of an individual to the specific beliefs and practices of a group or social institution, whereas spirituality is the personal, subjective experience of the divine” (Goldenberg & Blancke, 2011: 397). Abu-Nimer (2001: 690) found in his multi-cultural group research that it is typically Westerners who separate religion and spirituality. One of the problems in talking about religion is that human beings interpret their own religion in a variety of ways which are not always in alignment with the original teachings of the founder (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 56). How people understand the Great Mystery will determine whether they see God as an anthropomorphic being or the underlying spiritual life force of the universe, this will then determine whether their spiritual practices are geared towards a ‘this worldly’ or ‘other worldly’ orientation and differing definitions of salvation and liberation all impact on how religious individuals socially and personally engage in the world. These variables in Religion create complexity when discussing religion. Whilst most religions use different names, to denote the supreme deity, they all seem to concur that the nature of the supreme deity is a mystery. Hence forth I will use the term Great Mystery to denote God, Allah or as Buddhists would say Ultimate Reality.
Peace:
“In a peace movement there is a lot of anger, frustration, and misunderstanding. The peace movement can write very good protest letters, but they are not yet able to write a love letter” (Hanh, 1987: 79). If we are constantly against what we see in the world we are not at peace (Hanh, 1987: 9). If we want to see peace in the world and are for peace then we have to be what we want to see in the world. It is pointless saying that we want to see peace in the world if we are angry, frustrated and have misunderstood. These emotions are born from ignorance and are destructive (Hanh, 1987: 41). Harvey (2008) a sacred activist, also conveys a similar idea that “Activism that is not purified by profound spiritual and psychological self-awareness and rooted in divine truth, wisdom, and compassion will only perpetuate the problem it is trying to solve, however righteous its intentions” (Harvey, 2008).
So that our Buddha nature can be made manifest when dealing with problems in our lives, Buddhism teaches us that we must transform destructive emotions into constructive emotions such as love, forgiveness, compassion and understanding, (Hanh, 1987: 41). Secular and religious values are exactly the same according to Abu-Nimer (2001: 692), however spiritual and religious values also include ‘faith in God’ and practices such as pray, meditation, prophetic vision, inner spiritual healing and transformation and inner peace-building. In order to reach a place of peace inside of oneself, this generally involves spiritual healing practices which transform destructive emotional states into constructive emotional states. The secular world helps people to find forgiveness through counselling but does teach skills such as meditation, prayer and spiritual healing practices that can empower individuals to transform destructive emotions on their own (Enright, 2001).
Most religious faiths express the fact that the spirit of God exists in all beings and that we must love our neighbours as ourselves (Osman, 2004: 60; Gopin, 2004: 116). When meeting face to face with one’s enemies, it is important to love and honour the other and work towards finding the divine essence or divine grace in the other. This principle is expressed by Gopin (2004: 116) a Jewish Rabbi and by Jesus when he teaches “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those abuse you” (Luke, 6: 27-28, Bible: 1171). Paul also preaches in Rom, 12:21 (Bible: 1269) “do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good’. In the Baha’i spiritual tradition it is through knowledge of God that one can see true beauty reflected in the heart of others (Pelle, 1991; 17).
In demonizing the other or using deconstruction in order to highlight the corrupt nature of the other, which are paradigms used by fundamentalist religious denominations and by secular political academics, the us versus them paradigm is created. The ‘us versus them’ paradigm is a defense mechanism which is used to prove the superiority and truth of one’s own group teachings and values (Abu-Nimer, 2001: 687-698). It generally emerges as people feel threatened and insecure in the face of difference, wanting all others to be the same as those in their group. Abdu’l Baha (in Pelle, 1991: 17) states that fault finding and back biting are hateful characteristics of man that are driven from a space of fear.
Qualities of Peace-builders:
A principle expressed in both Judaism and by Native American Indian peace-makers is that sometimes one has to “give up power to gain power” (Pesantubbee, 2004: 36) or another way of saying this is one has to “lose a little face in order to do something sublime” (Gopin, 2004: 119). In essence humility, not pride is another essential quality of a peacemaker. Peacemakers in Native American Indian tribes are generally seen as wise elders and are expected to consider the words they will speak very carefully, as words hold power that can harm (Pesantubbee, 2004: 34; Walker, 2004: 539). Talking sticks are used in Native American Indian peace circles as a talking stick gives the one who holds the stick an opportunity to speak from the heart without interruption, whilst the others in the circle must listen respectfully from their heart space. Silence is built into peacemaking circles in order that people in conflict have time to reflect on what they have heard so that they may choose their words carefully before they respond (Walker, 2004: 539). Peacemakers are also said to have tough skin, meaning that a peacemaker will not be wounded or affected by harsh angry words that are being misdirected at them by someone who speaks sharply from a space of fear (Pesantubbee, 2004: 36).
Forgiveness:
Most religions teach divine principles that limit the self-centred ego. The self-centred ego promotes qualities which are fear based such as self-interest, revenge and pride. If one can surrender to the sustainer of life ‘the Great Mystery’ then one can develop a moral consciousness and loving qualities (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 59). According to Gopin (2004: 115) and Walker (2004: 541-542) the spiritual healing process involves thoroughly indulging past memories, grieving, listening, talking, sharing, periods of silence and allowing emotions to be expressed instead of suppressing ones emotions in fear of uncontrolled emotions preventing rational conversation. Any form of healing work, spiritual or otherwise takes a great deal of time and inner struggle. As Gopin (2004: 120) states it is foolish to believe that after one attempt to heal one is healed. Wounds are generally deeply buried and when released create anxiety, fear, resentment, anger, grief and confusion, which takes a long time to work through before constructive emotions and homeostasis can occur in one’s psyche. If the wounds are transferred inter-generationally, then the wounds exist in the fabric of the social consciousness of large groups of people and are even more difficult to shift, as hatred is taught to the young children of the social or religious group from an early age (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 62). It is senseless to believe that one can simply sign a peace treaty with one’s social/ religious enemies and all will be well.
Forgiveness involves a process in which something has gone wrong between human beings or between human beings and the divine or human beings and nature or as some religions will say such as Buddhism, a pattern of the universe has been made disharmonious (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 56). Each religious tradition is different as some have strict rituals, methods and traditions surrounding forgiveness, whilst other religions allow forgiveness to be “extended by anyone at any time” (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 60). The Jewish prophets, Jesus, and the Qu’ran taught that the nature of the Great Mystery is the nature of forgiveness and forgiveness involves a transformation of the heart (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 57; Neu, 2011: 134). In Buddhism, Tao and Hinduism forgiveness is a vital part of the dharma (teachings). Forgiveness helps one to maintain inner harmony and happiness and is a process that is practised in order to remain in alignment with the dharma (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 57).
If individuals follow their religion for external reasons rather than for internal communion with the Great Mystery, then they will be more likely to seek revenge and retaliation (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 61). Most religions teach that if we forgive, then God will forgive us of our own sins and we are healed (Neu, 2011: 132). However forgiveness can be seen as costly by some, as forgiveness and spiritual healing require immense effort, without any prospect of immediate returns (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 63). Most religions and science agree that forgiveness leads to personal transformation. Psalms, 51: 10 (Bible: 626) reads “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and put a new and right spirit within me”. Most religions talk about dying to be reborn, in which spiritual practitioners are willing to confront physical death as well as death of the ego in order to be rebirthed in divine life and service. This often involves a process of spiritual crisis, spiritual healing and transformation (Walsh, 2007: 71). Indigenous people partake of death and spiritual rebirth as part of their rites of passage and initiations (Walsh, 2007: 71).
Forgiveness may be a difficult process; however forgiveness has great value (Neu, 2011: 130). In forgiving, the victim makes a commitment not to pass or fling their own inner pain onto others (Enright, Freedman & Rique, 1998: 54). Forgiveness grinds the negative spiral of revenge and retaliation to a halt and changes the person doing the forgiving (Appleby, 2000: 195). Forgiveness can be unilateral if the perpetrator shows no signs of remorse (Larocco, 2010: 13). If the victim holds onto emotions of anger towards their perpetrator it means that the perpetrator has control of the victim’s life and the person continues to see themselves as a victim rather than finding the gift which exists within forgiveness (Enright, 2001: 10-15). If the victim forgives, the victim affirms to themselves that they are refusing to accept the perpetrators power of negation and dehumanization (Larocco, 2010: 3). With patience and the exploration of feelings that the perpetrator has evoked, the forgiver may reach a place in which they have positive feelings for the perpetrator, as the forgiver moves from a focus on themselves to a focus on their perpetrator (Enright, 2001: 27-28). The healed person may even seek to work with the perpetrator in the hope that the perpetrator will find personal transformation (Enright, Freedman & Rique, 1998: 55). Conflict when tempered with forgiveness and understanding represent opportunities for growth, empowerment and are life transforming (Randolph, 2000: 256).
Scientific research indicates that forgiveness leads to health benefits such as a reduction in stress, anxiety, depression, guilt, increased coping mechanisms, resilience and closeness to the Great Mystery and others (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 66; Enright, 2001: 13-15). Research also indicates that those who hold onto deep anger have blood pressure problems and have a greater risk of suffering heart disease (Enright, 2001: 51-53). The logic of forgiveness does not require compensation or reparation (Griswold, 2007: 63). Unconditional forgiveness leads to greater health, were as the need for an apology and repentance from the perpetrator generally leads to poorer mental health and continuing distress (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 66). Those who do practice forgiveness also seem to be more humble, empathic, loving and grateful (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 67). Men seem to be less willing to forgive then women. Religious and Secular forgiveness programs appear to be equally effective in regards to mental health outcomes (Farhadian & Emmons, 2009: 68).
Reconciliation:
Forgiveness is required to maintain not only individual inner harmony but also harmonious communal relationships. Forgiveness is seen as a necessary first step towards reconciliation. Reconciliation is a mutual process (Wink in Appleby, 2000: 197). Without forgiveness both sides of the conflict are simply sitting in the place of an armed truce waiting to recommence the fight (Enright, 2001: 30-31). President Nelson Mandala and Archbishop Desmond Tutu who worked towards forgiveness and reconciliation in South Africa, had the capacity to do so due to their using the African Spiritual Philosophy of Ubuntu. Ubuntu emphasizes relationships, interdependence, interrelatedness, generosity, peace, social cohesion, justice, compassion, diversity, caring, hospitality, communal spirituality and interconnectedness (Govier, 2002: 96-97; Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 228). Ubuntu works on the understanding that life is possible through relationships and healthy cohesive relationships are a collective rather than an individual matter (Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 226). Health involves right relationship with the Great Mystery, Mother Nature, other human beings and the ancestors. Health, peace and social cohesion are a community responsibility and are maintained through spiritual rituals and ceremony (Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 226-227; Walker, 2004: 537).
The African Indigenous Church (AIC) worked towards promoting spiritual healing practices and reconciliation in 1912. The AIC formed a part of the African National Congress which was successful in buffering and preventing violent political outbreaks between warring parties during Apartheid struggles (Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 216). In 1968 the Catholic Church in Boliva served as mediators for more than twenty years in every major clash between the Government and the miners. The Catholic Church was seen as the only body who could act in a reconciliatory role during the social and political antagonism (Appleby, 2000: 217). In African countries that have recovered from oppressive political regimes, religious leaders have been called upon “to help determine and implement appropriate instruments of transitional justice” (Appleby, 2000: 220). These are all examples where religious leaders have been called upon to help promote peace-building, where secular attempts alone have failed to create peace.
Non Violent Activism:
Wink (2007: 180-182) argues that Jesus taught non-violent resistance, a form of resistance that was confrontational but not lethal. Jesus understood Gods nature as non-violent and those who choose non-violent methods of resistance were already displaying qualities of the Kingdom of God (Wink, 2007: 181). Jesus taught methods to help people remain empowered, where structural change in the oppressive Roman Empire was not readily available. One of the methods Jesus taught his followers was that “if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also” (Wink, 2007: 183). A backhand slap to the right check was a sign of a person in power attempting to humiliate an inferior. By turning the other cheek the oppressed person was indicating to the oppressor that they could not be demeaned or humiliated (Wink, 2007: 184). Wink (2007: 189-191) argues that Jesus offered oppressed people methods to liberate themselves from victim mentality.
Ghandi often reminded his followers that religious traditions have always emphasised nonviolence and truth as the foundation of peace. Ghandi taught that nonviolent resistance was a method that could be used to counter injustice (Appleby, 2000: 141). Ghandi’s spiritual concepts were drawn from all the major world religions and included Ashima or nonviolence, sanctity of life, prayer, meditation, divine love, ascetic practices and repentance (Appleby, 2000: 141). Other religious movements that used Ghandi’s nonviolent resistance methods include the People’s Power Revolution in the Philippines.
Filipino Catholic priests and nuns served as monitors during the 1986 national elections in the Philippines. The election results were fraudulent as widespread vote tampering occurred during the election in which Ferdinand Marcos claimed victory over Corazon Aquino (Appleby, 2000: 208). The Catholic Bishops denounced the results of the election. Later nonviolent resistance and protection were given to the military by Catholic Church members, as the military worked to expel Marcos from power and place Aquino in Government. Aquino acknowledged that it was the Catholic Church who led the nonviolent revolution which ousted Marcos from power (Appleby, 2000: 208). It becomes clear that spiritual teachers and religious groups are able to promote peacemaking through the practices of election monitoring, conflict mediation, nonviolent protest, empowerment and advocacy for structural reform. There are also those spiritual workers who work behind the scenes praying for the spiritual transformation of their enemies, praying for peace and praying for the healing of those who have been damaged through unlawful practices.
Religious Education and Peace-building:
Other ways that religion can help to build peace in the world is through changing attitudes in the education system. The Baha’i spiritual model of education for unity has been tested in Switzerland over nine consecutive summers with astounding results for teachers, students and staff who participated in the program (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 91). The Baha’i model is founded on the principle of the “Oneness of Humankind” and “prescribes unity in diversity” (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 92). Baha’i introduced spiritual education which synthesis’s teachings from all the world’s religious traditions. Unlike comparative religion, the spiritual teachings focus on the common themes and threads of all religions, whilst remaining true to the teachings of each particular religion (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 99). Not only is equality and justice promoted but also cooperation, balance, humility, detachment, service from the heart, health, healing, creative and performing arts and scientific research (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 93). The aim is to help students and staff transform themselves from within, so that holistically balanced people are created through the Baha’i education system who think of others first and who are aware that they belong to a group consciousness that works towards community building and universal peace (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 93-94). The uniqueness of each individual is cherished and nurtured (Bushrui & Malarkey, 2000: 100).
Similarly researchers are exploring the benefits of Indigenous forms of spirituality and how these forms of spirituality create community building, health, harmony and balance, within the individual, the community and environmentally (Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 215-223). Indigenous spiritual knowledge systems are now being taught and researched at independent research institutes and are core components in some University courses (Edwards & Thwala, 2010: 229). If education institutions can integrate universal spiritual healing principles from all the world religions and work towards helping their students and staff to spiritually transform their own inner worlds before acting externally in the world around them, this will surely help to build a more peaceful and prosperous world.
Conclusion:
It becomes quite clear that different Religions have been successfully involved in peace mediation; reconciliation and nonviolent activism around the globe when political actors have turned to corrupt methods to achieve their goals. The case of Nelson Mandala and Archbishop Tutu working together in South Africa to end apartheid was a heart-warming case in which the political and the spiritual worked together in an attempt to create healing and positive social transformation. Religions such as Buddhism, Mystical Christianity, Hinduism, Islamic Sufism, the Jewish Kabbalah and Indigenous spirituality all offer spiritual healing and transformation practices which help one to transform destructive emotions, find guidance from the great mystery within oneself and empower people to see the good and the divine operating in each and every person as well as in all things happening. If we can view each situation as an opportunity for growth, as an opportunity to find love, understanding, compassion and the divine within ourselves and all things, then no matter what is happening we develop faith in a higher power which helps to bring individuals and groups to a greater space of inner peace, empowerment and calmness. This does not prevent one from acting in the world it simply means that when we do act in the world we act from a more centered, compassionate and loving space.
Whilst the secular community teaches forgiveness, which is a powerful form of spiritual transformation, secular communities do not necessarily teach the skills which empower individuals and communities to participate in their own spiritual healing practices. We need to take note of the success of religious institutions such as the Baha’i who teach Education for Unity and the Indigenous cultures who teach a philosophy similar to Ubuntu. These communities teach service from a heart filled with love and community building rather than secular Liberal notions of individual self-interest. Possibly the secular community needs to learn to “loss some face in order to do something sublime”, that is to sit with their religious peers to learn, instead of seeking to dominate and destroy. The areas that require further research are how constructive religious and spiritual philosophies and spiritual healing practices can be incorporated into our education systems and work places in order to teach inner spiritual transformation practices. If we can use spiritual healing practices to help us to transform our anger, hate, arrogance, prejudice, violence, sense of victimhood and shame into love compassion and understanding prior to our acting or being active in the world around us, we will create a more peaceful, stable, equal and loving social world in which to live.
References:
Abu-Nimer, M. 2001, ’Conflict Resolution, Culture, and Religion: Toward a Training Model of Interreligious Peacebuilding’, in Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 38, No. 6, 685-704.
Appleby, R.S. 2000, The Ambivalence of the Scared, Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
Beck U. 2010,’The Return of the Gods and the Crisis of European Modernity: A Sociological Introduction’, In Beck, U., A God of One’s Own: Religion’s Capacity for Peace and Potential for Violence, Cambridge: Polity Press, Chapter 2, 19-46.
Bushrui, S.B. and Malarkey, J. 2000, Education as Transformation: A Baha’i Model of Education for Unity, in Kazanjian, V.H. and Laurence, P.L., (Eds), Education as Transformation; Religious Pluralism, Spirituality and a New Vision for Higher Education in America, New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Chapter 8, 91-102.
Cavanaugh, W.T. 2003, The Myth of Religious Violence, accessed on 16/08/2011, at http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/oso/private/content/religion/978 .
Edwards, S. and Thwala, J. 2010, ‘African Spirituality and its Implications for Health, Community Development, and Education’, in Dowson, M. and Devenish, S., (Eds), Religion and Spirituality, Charlotte, North Carolina: Information Age Publishing, Chapter 13, 215-233.
Enright, R.D., Freedman, S., Rique, J. 1998, ‘The Psychology of Interpersonal Forgiveness’, in Enright, R.D. & North, J., (Eds), Exploring Forgiveness, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, Chapter 5, 46-62.
Enright, R.D. 2001, Forgiveness is a Choice: A Step-by-Step Process for Resolving Anger and Restoring Hope, Washington: APA Life Tools.
Farhadian, C. and Emmons, R.A. 2009, ‘The Psychology of Forgiveness in the World Religions’, in Kalayjian, A. & Paloutzian, R.F., (Eds), Forgiveness and Reconciliation, New York: Springer-Verlag New York, Chapter 4, 55-70.
Goldenberg, R. and Blancke, B. 2011, ‘God in Process: Is There a Place for Religion in Conflict Resolution?’, in Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 4, 377-398.
Gopin, M. 2004, ‘Judaism and Peacebuilding’, in Coward, H.G. and G.S. Smith, (Eds), Religion and Peacebuilding, Albany: State University of New York, Chapter 6, 111-127.
Govier, T. 2002, Forgiveness and Revenge, London: Routledge.
Griswold, C.L. 2007, Forgiveness: A Philosophical Exploration, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hanh, T.H. 1987, Being Peace, Berkeley, California: Parallax Press.
Harvey, A. 2008, Andrew Harvey, viewed on 04/11/2011, at http://www.andrewharvey.net/sacred_activism.php .
Larocco, S. 2010, ‘Forgiveness: A Quiet Assault on the Malicious’, in Allers, C.R. & Smit, M., (Eds), Forgiveness in Perspective, Amsterdam: Rodopi, Part 1, 3-17.
Neu, J. 2011, ‘On Loving our Enemies’, in Fricke, C., (Ed), The Ethics of Forgiveness, New York: Routledge, Chapter 8, 130-142.
Osman, M.F. 2004, ‘God is the All-Peace, the All-Merciful’, in Heft, J.L., (Ed), Beyond Violence: Religious Sources of Social Transformation in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, New York: Fordham University Press, Chapter 3, 57-73.
Pelle, T. 1991, ‘Baha’i’, in Paige, G.D. and Gilliatt, S., (Eds), Nonviolence in Hawaii’s Spiritual Traditions, Honolulu: Center for Global Nonviolence Planning Project Spark M. Matsunaga Insitute for Peace, University of Hawaii, 13-24.
Pesantubbee, M.E. 2004, ‘In Search of the White Path: American Indian Peacebuilding’, in Coward, H.G. and G.S. Smith, (Eds), Religion and Peacebuilding, Albany: State University of New York, Chapter 2, 27-43.
Randolph, R.M. 2000, ‘Building a Multi-Faith Center at MIT’, in Kazanjian, V.H. and Laurence, P.L., (Eds), Education as Transformation; Religious Pluralism, Spirituality and a New Vision for Higher Education in America, New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Chapter 23, 251-257.
Smock, D. 2008, ‘Special Report, Religion in World Affairs: Its Role in Conflict and Peace’, from United States Institute of Peace, www.usip.org .
‘The Gospel According to Luke’, 1989, Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, San Francisco: Harper Collins Bibles, 1163-1198.
‘The Letter of Paul to the Romans’, 1989, Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, San Francisco: Harper Collins Bibles, 1259-1272.
‘The Psalms’, 1989, Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, San Francisco: Harper Collins Bibles, 1259-1272.
Walker, P.O. 2004, ‘Decolonizing Conflict Resolution: Addressing the Ontological Violence of Westernization’, in American Indian Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 3-4, 527-549.
Walsh, R. 2007, The World of Shamanism: New Views of an Ancient Tradition, Woodbury, Minnesota: Llewellyn Publications.
Wink, W. 2007. ‘Beyond Just War and Pacifism: Jesus’ Nonviolent Way’, in Ellens, J.H., (Ed), The Destructive Power of Religion: Violence in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Westport: Praeger Publishers, Chapter 13, 180-199.
Monday, November 7, 2011
Islamic Violence in the Media: Redefining Stereotypes - Fraser Barton
Since the establishment of religion and religious practices, a symbiotic relationship has subsequently been formed between religion, peace and violence (Bulliet 2002). Whilst such attributes often exist within religious institutions in disproportionate levels, almost all religious practices have established some aspect of their religious heritage based around acts of peace and violence (Dunn 2007). Often these qualities are seen as the defining point of such belief structures, with varying degrees ranging from wilful peace-building to fundamentalist violence evident throughout belief systems. Due to the existence of such violence, it is important to understand the relative impact these actions, often conducted by the religious minority, have upon the religious adherents and the basis of faith for which such behaviour is related. Through the actions of the religious minority, it becomes possible for outward displays of violence to surpass all religiously positive actions and sentiments associated with the religious collective (Bulliet 2002). In times this can occur to the degree by which stereotypes and prejudices may be inadvertently formed through selective exposure. It is therefore necessary to consider the belief framework which can foster such violent actions, yet simultaneously promote acts of peace (Yurdakul-Bodemann 2004). It is the visual nature of such contradictory practices which defines and shapes the overall perspective of the religion and its followers to the religious outsider. Such a distortion is exemplified in the portrayal of religion and religious events within media sources (Yenigun 2004). Throughout the past decade, a significant increase has been seen in the stereotypical portrayal and representation of Muslims throughout western media (Yurdakul-Bodemann 2004). Often such representations are not directly inclined towards marginalisation or suggestive of stereotyping, yet through selective exposure coinciding with religious violence their presence can be established.
This essay will focus primarily upon the disproportionate relationships which exist between the Islamic religion, religiously motivated Islamic violence, acts of Islamic peace and the emphasis upon which each is placed throughout media sources. The socio-political fallout towards Muslim individuals as well as the relative impact by which public perception can be shaped through such media reports will be analysed to highlight a propensity towards ‘Islamic’ violence, occurring to the detriment of the individual and the religion as a collective. Through such analysis it will be shown that despite the existence of depictions of Islamic-related violence present within all forms of media, sources of Islamic peace are equally evident although deliberately portrayed to a lesser extent. It is this marginalisation towards acts of peace and fellowship which will be the focus of this essay, along with assessing the impact of widespread media focus upon Islamic violence. Despite such occurrences it will be shown that shifts towards peace building are present in a post September 11th climate, spearheaded by the Islamic faith in an effort to combat such media negativity, counter stereotypes, and establish and realign public perception towards the positive aspects of Islam.
Throughout the last decade, political, social and religious issues surrounding Muslim individuals have become religiously dominant throughout all forms of news media (Ghazali 2008). This distinct increase in Islamic exposure predictably follows the religious implications surrounding the September 11th terrorist attacks (Ghazali 2008). The declaration of religious war by the Muslim world, proclaimed by Osama bin Laden, provided the necessary framework to initiate religious exposure through the media en masse. Through this release, it is evident that the rise in such exposure has subsequently resulted in media-induced stereotyping and misrepresentations of Islam in general. Media representations of Muslims and Islam have coincided with the marked rise in anti-Islam and anti-Muslim sentiments as a response to the increase in media-reported Islamic related violence (Ghazali 2008). Despite this increase, Islamic media attention cannot be seen as a recent occurrence, with Islamic issues having frequented western media throughout history (Ghazali 2008). What can be seen as unique and in correlation to the increase is the degree of coverage afforded to international and internet sources, with previous geographical confines being dismissed as media technology evolves.
Despite claiming a lack of bias or religious prejudice, the omnipresent nature of news media remains highly influential in shaping public perception towards Islam in the wake of Islamic related violence (Akel). This influence and perspective restructuring is achieved by media sources through various methods. Primarily by controlling the religious issues in which it focuses upon (with a proclivity towards violent, newsworthy issues) coupled with semantic manipulation of Islamic terminology, successful perspective restructuring within audiences is accomplished. It is through such a restructure in which the foundations of stereotyping and racial prejudices become engrained within the individual. This was particularly evident in media reports surrounding the 2001 Sydney Muslim gang-rapes and more recently, although in a non-violent sense yet still retaining prior violence-induced stereotyping, in the persistent influx of Asylum seekers (Rane, Ewart & Abdalla 2010). A significant factor surrounding the continued association between violence and Islam is the degree of exposure in which Islamic issues are afforded. Reports on Islamic issues far exceed that of any other religion, with the majority of Islamic exposure accompanied by aspects of violence (Media Tenor International 2008). Through persistent coupling with violent undertones, whether the issue is conflict related or not, unconscious stereotyping is compounded further (Media Tenor International 2008). Such issues are then reinforced through the media’s classification of Islam as a solitary body, effectively discarding the degree of plurality for which it encompasses and classifying Muslim’s as violent by association (Smock & Huda 2009).
Through the media’s role in portraying aspects of religious violence, manipulation of the distribution of Islamic-related violence becomes evident. It is through this selective reporting that media sources are able to focus attention towards the desired violent issues, avoiding critical non-violent aspects of the religion (Dunn 2007). A significant degree of control is also seen through the association of religious terminology with acts of violence. A classic example of how exposure has influenced not only public opinion, but has redefined religious boundaries is through the notion of media-induced Jihad (Akel). Through its initial association with Islamic violence, the role of Jihad has manifested itself deep within media representations and has since become far removed in western definitions from its original Islamic meaning (Abdullah). The media has projected such an image of the term Jihad and coupled with its misrepresentation and association with violent Islamic extremists, have effectively redefined its implications. Jihad is now known to the western world as a violent holy-war against all non-Muslims, when in fact through media intervention, its intended meaning is all but unknown to westerners (Akel).
Collectively, with disproportionate emphasis being placed upon violent actions and little to no recognition towards Islamic-related peace building, it is undeniable that the persistent stereotyping and social stigma surrounding Islam is effectively compounded by media selectivity. This is further reinforced through the interpersonal and intercultural implications which arise as secondary issues, further inhibiting accurate representations of Islamic religious structure from being formed. An example of such an issue is the development of term ‘Islamic fundamental’ and its persistent association with Islamic violence and increasing prevalence throughout media sources (Yenigun 2004). Through the continuance of such an association, the term fundamentalist and the attached ideologies have become almost exclusively associated with Islamic belief (Yenigun 2004). Although the construction of such a term was ultimately borne out of Islamic-related violence, the stereotyping of the word with the religion as a collective has resulted, despite the many internal contradictions present between adherents and fundamentalists. The sense of redefinition and reclassification coincides with that seen in the misuse of the media with the term Jihad (Akel). What is of particular importance in assessing both terms is the acknowledgement of the ability of the media to facilitate religious restructuring. Whilst such restructuring does not occur within Islamic confines, religiously foreign individuals are the target of influence. The issue surrounding religious misrepresentation and restructuring ultimately begins within the religiously ignorant, those who formulate and act upon false stereotypes built upon foundations of extraneous religious violence.
The impact of such stereotyping upon the individual often marginalises the role of the religion in favour of a reductionist perspective, whereby religion is somewhat removed from the context and Islam its representation is reduced to a primal basis of anger and violence (Rane et al. 2010). The danger of this is again in the perspective of the outsider, who becomes unwilling and eventually unable to interpret Islamic variance relating to violent actions. Campaigns against the inability to discern fundamental violence from structured belief are being undertaken by competing Muslim media outlets, although financial and global constraints are rendering the attempts ineffective (mesic.pdf). Media misinformation coupled with unintended disinformation has seen the greatest impact upon Muslim individuals. Reports concerning war or terrorist actions are often misrepresented as being Islamic based. Issues surrounding religiously irrelevant events such as the Gulf War and in recent times the Libyan Civil War have been falsely represented as being religiously motivated, resulting in further reinforced stereotypes and unwarranted social instability for Muslim individuals (Akel).
Although media-induced stereotypes have been and will continue to become firmly instilled by selective media reporting, steps are being taken to promote public awareness of the issues facing Muslim individuals. Islamic followers are challenging the stereotyping present throughout media representations of their faith and ideology in an effort to address such inaccuracies and redefine reporting styles (Ghazali 2008). One of the greatest challenges facing Islam is the initiation of religious outreach and interfaith dialogue as a bridge towards peace, reconciliation and stereotype eradication (Ghazali 2008). In an effort to increase positive inter-religious relationships, Muslim individuals (primarily in America) are showing increasing motivation towards political activism as well as increased social and interfaith activities in an attempt to dispel racial stereotypes (Ghazali 2008). This has been deemed a necessary step in a combined, combative effort to reshape public perception towards Muslim individuals (Abdullah).
It is evident that media holds an innate ability to manipulate and misconstrue issues surrounding political and social issues directly relating to Islam. Islamic social and religious directives are currently underway in an effort to form open lines of inter-religious communication and detract from stereotypical allegations of violence (Smock & Huda 2009). This is ultimately the key to positive peace-building between unrelated indifferent faith structures. Western society is not devoid of racial and religious stereotypes cultivated by eastern countries. In essence, communication between religious and social institutions is vital to allow accurate and necessary representation and avoid external (Media-related) impressions to become distorted stereotypes (Smock 2002). Prior existence of such interfaith agencies has yielded promising results, with its implementation at all levels of religious and social stratification deemed necessary in establishing peace-building and cross-cultural harmonisation (Smock 2002).
The future of religious misrepresentation within the media is confined to the extent in which religious, racial and social cohesion will allow it to progress. Critical reassessment is necessary by media sources in fully establishing the extent of religious and social conflict which is arising as a direct result of media-influence religious tension. Steps are already being undertaken by the Muslim communities in an effort to utilise media sources to reverse the development of Islamic stereotypes, instead promoting peace, fellowship and religious education (BBC News 2007). Advertising campaigns were undertaken throughout Britain promoting Islamic peace following the 2005 July subway terrorist attacks (BBC News 2007). The media campaign targeted peace, integration and assimilation in an effort to counteract the mass development of racial prejudices which followed the terrorist attacks (BBC News 2007). Further utilisation of media sources by Islamic individuals with geographical coverage comparable to that of western media would provide contrasting perspectives to counterbalance biased western media should it choose to continue.
With the multitude of issues surrounding the media’s misrepresentation of Islam, it is evident as to how concentrated religious violence can indirectly result in religious self-harm through the facilitation of subjective information transfer. Although many steps are being taken towards peace and reconciliation through accurate and diverse representations of the religious and societal contributions of Islamic followers, it is still necessary for western media sources to acknowledge an indirect contribution towards the resultant, unjustified religious violence. Through this acknowledgement, essential framework for rebuilding religious ties and establishing the necessary conduit for religious dialogue becomes available to all parties. Furthermore it becomes necessary to no longer overshadow peace-related religious practices with cyclical religious violence, whereas effectively silencing all religious-related violence can in turn reduce unjust stereotype formation and help maintain healthy inter-religious relationships.
References:
Abdullah A n.d., Muslims and the Media since Post September 11, Scholarly Article, Western Knight Centre for Specialised Journalism, viewed 03 November 2011,
www.wkconline.org/resources/pdf/2005muslim_Aslam_Abdullah.pdf.
Akel, B n.d., Islam and the Western Media, Website Article, Islam for Today, viewed 02 November 2011, http://www.islamfortoday.com/media.htm.
BBC News 2007, Muslim ‘peace’ adverts launched, Online Newspaper Article, BBC News, viewed 03 November 2011, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7021323.stm.
Bulliet RW 2002, ‘The Crisis within Islam’, The Wilson Quarterly, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 11-19.
Dunn K, Klocker N, and Salabay T 2007, ‘Contemporary Racism and Islamophoabia in Australia: Racialising Religion’, Ethnicities, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 764-781.
Ghazali, AS 2008, Islam & Muslims in the Post-9/11 America, Eagle Enterprises, Modesto
Avaliable at: www.amperspective.com/Islam_and_Muslims_in_Post_9-11_America.pdf.
Media Tenor International 2008, 9/11: How is Islam portrayed in the western TV news?, Statistical Report, Media Tenor International, viewed 02 November 2011,
www.mediatenor.com/download_nl.php?download=ADR91198_int.pdf.
Rane H, Ewart J, Abdalla M 2010, Islam and the Australian News Media, Melbourne University Press, Victoria.
Smock D. 2002, USIP Special Report: Islamic Perspectives on Peace and Violence, Washington: US Institute of Peace, viewed 04 November 2011,
Available at: http://www.usip.org/resources/islamic-perspectives-peace-and-violence .
Smock D and Huda, Q 2009, USIP Special Report: Islamic Peacemaking since 9/11, Washington: US Institute of Peace, viewed 04 November 2011,
Available at: http://www.usip.org/resources/islamic-peacemaking-91 1 .
Yenigun, HI 2004, ‘Muslims and the media after 9/11, A Muslim discourse in the American media’ American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 39-69.
Yurdakul-Bodemann, G 2004, ‘Islamic Peril: Media and Global Violence’, The Canadian Review of Sociology, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 96-98.
This essay will focus primarily upon the disproportionate relationships which exist between the Islamic religion, religiously motivated Islamic violence, acts of Islamic peace and the emphasis upon which each is placed throughout media sources. The socio-political fallout towards Muslim individuals as well as the relative impact by which public perception can be shaped through such media reports will be analysed to highlight a propensity towards ‘Islamic’ violence, occurring to the detriment of the individual and the religion as a collective. Through such analysis it will be shown that despite the existence of depictions of Islamic-related violence present within all forms of media, sources of Islamic peace are equally evident although deliberately portrayed to a lesser extent. It is this marginalisation towards acts of peace and fellowship which will be the focus of this essay, along with assessing the impact of widespread media focus upon Islamic violence. Despite such occurrences it will be shown that shifts towards peace building are present in a post September 11th climate, spearheaded by the Islamic faith in an effort to combat such media negativity, counter stereotypes, and establish and realign public perception towards the positive aspects of Islam.
Throughout the last decade, political, social and religious issues surrounding Muslim individuals have become religiously dominant throughout all forms of news media (Ghazali 2008). This distinct increase in Islamic exposure predictably follows the religious implications surrounding the September 11th terrorist attacks (Ghazali 2008). The declaration of religious war by the Muslim world, proclaimed by Osama bin Laden, provided the necessary framework to initiate religious exposure through the media en masse. Through this release, it is evident that the rise in such exposure has subsequently resulted in media-induced stereotyping and misrepresentations of Islam in general. Media representations of Muslims and Islam have coincided with the marked rise in anti-Islam and anti-Muslim sentiments as a response to the increase in media-reported Islamic related violence (Ghazali 2008). Despite this increase, Islamic media attention cannot be seen as a recent occurrence, with Islamic issues having frequented western media throughout history (Ghazali 2008). What can be seen as unique and in correlation to the increase is the degree of coverage afforded to international and internet sources, with previous geographical confines being dismissed as media technology evolves.
Despite claiming a lack of bias or religious prejudice, the omnipresent nature of news media remains highly influential in shaping public perception towards Islam in the wake of Islamic related violence (Akel). This influence and perspective restructuring is achieved by media sources through various methods. Primarily by controlling the religious issues in which it focuses upon (with a proclivity towards violent, newsworthy issues) coupled with semantic manipulation of Islamic terminology, successful perspective restructuring within audiences is accomplished. It is through such a restructure in which the foundations of stereotyping and racial prejudices become engrained within the individual. This was particularly evident in media reports surrounding the 2001 Sydney Muslim gang-rapes and more recently, although in a non-violent sense yet still retaining prior violence-induced stereotyping, in the persistent influx of Asylum seekers (Rane, Ewart & Abdalla 2010). A significant factor surrounding the continued association between violence and Islam is the degree of exposure in which Islamic issues are afforded. Reports on Islamic issues far exceed that of any other religion, with the majority of Islamic exposure accompanied by aspects of violence (Media Tenor International 2008). Through persistent coupling with violent undertones, whether the issue is conflict related or not, unconscious stereotyping is compounded further (Media Tenor International 2008). Such issues are then reinforced through the media’s classification of Islam as a solitary body, effectively discarding the degree of plurality for which it encompasses and classifying Muslim’s as violent by association (Smock & Huda 2009).
Through the media’s role in portraying aspects of religious violence, manipulation of the distribution of Islamic-related violence becomes evident. It is through this selective reporting that media sources are able to focus attention towards the desired violent issues, avoiding critical non-violent aspects of the religion (Dunn 2007). A significant degree of control is also seen through the association of religious terminology with acts of violence. A classic example of how exposure has influenced not only public opinion, but has redefined religious boundaries is through the notion of media-induced Jihad (Akel). Through its initial association with Islamic violence, the role of Jihad has manifested itself deep within media representations and has since become far removed in western definitions from its original Islamic meaning (Abdullah). The media has projected such an image of the term Jihad and coupled with its misrepresentation and association with violent Islamic extremists, have effectively redefined its implications. Jihad is now known to the western world as a violent holy-war against all non-Muslims, when in fact through media intervention, its intended meaning is all but unknown to westerners (Akel).
Collectively, with disproportionate emphasis being placed upon violent actions and little to no recognition towards Islamic-related peace building, it is undeniable that the persistent stereotyping and social stigma surrounding Islam is effectively compounded by media selectivity. This is further reinforced through the interpersonal and intercultural implications which arise as secondary issues, further inhibiting accurate representations of Islamic religious structure from being formed. An example of such an issue is the development of term ‘Islamic fundamental’ and its persistent association with Islamic violence and increasing prevalence throughout media sources (Yenigun 2004). Through the continuance of such an association, the term fundamentalist and the attached ideologies have become almost exclusively associated with Islamic belief (Yenigun 2004). Although the construction of such a term was ultimately borne out of Islamic-related violence, the stereotyping of the word with the religion as a collective has resulted, despite the many internal contradictions present between adherents and fundamentalists. The sense of redefinition and reclassification coincides with that seen in the misuse of the media with the term Jihad (Akel). What is of particular importance in assessing both terms is the acknowledgement of the ability of the media to facilitate religious restructuring. Whilst such restructuring does not occur within Islamic confines, religiously foreign individuals are the target of influence. The issue surrounding religious misrepresentation and restructuring ultimately begins within the religiously ignorant, those who formulate and act upon false stereotypes built upon foundations of extraneous religious violence.
The impact of such stereotyping upon the individual often marginalises the role of the religion in favour of a reductionist perspective, whereby religion is somewhat removed from the context and Islam its representation is reduced to a primal basis of anger and violence (Rane et al. 2010). The danger of this is again in the perspective of the outsider, who becomes unwilling and eventually unable to interpret Islamic variance relating to violent actions. Campaigns against the inability to discern fundamental violence from structured belief are being undertaken by competing Muslim media outlets, although financial and global constraints are rendering the attempts ineffective (mesic.pdf). Media misinformation coupled with unintended disinformation has seen the greatest impact upon Muslim individuals. Reports concerning war or terrorist actions are often misrepresented as being Islamic based. Issues surrounding religiously irrelevant events such as the Gulf War and in recent times the Libyan Civil War have been falsely represented as being religiously motivated, resulting in further reinforced stereotypes and unwarranted social instability for Muslim individuals (Akel).
Although media-induced stereotypes have been and will continue to become firmly instilled by selective media reporting, steps are being taken to promote public awareness of the issues facing Muslim individuals. Islamic followers are challenging the stereotyping present throughout media representations of their faith and ideology in an effort to address such inaccuracies and redefine reporting styles (Ghazali 2008). One of the greatest challenges facing Islam is the initiation of religious outreach and interfaith dialogue as a bridge towards peace, reconciliation and stereotype eradication (Ghazali 2008). In an effort to increase positive inter-religious relationships, Muslim individuals (primarily in America) are showing increasing motivation towards political activism as well as increased social and interfaith activities in an attempt to dispel racial stereotypes (Ghazali 2008). This has been deemed a necessary step in a combined, combative effort to reshape public perception towards Muslim individuals (Abdullah).
It is evident that media holds an innate ability to manipulate and misconstrue issues surrounding political and social issues directly relating to Islam. Islamic social and religious directives are currently underway in an effort to form open lines of inter-religious communication and detract from stereotypical allegations of violence (Smock & Huda 2009). This is ultimately the key to positive peace-building between unrelated indifferent faith structures. Western society is not devoid of racial and religious stereotypes cultivated by eastern countries. In essence, communication between religious and social institutions is vital to allow accurate and necessary representation and avoid external (Media-related) impressions to become distorted stereotypes (Smock 2002). Prior existence of such interfaith agencies has yielded promising results, with its implementation at all levels of religious and social stratification deemed necessary in establishing peace-building and cross-cultural harmonisation (Smock 2002).
The future of religious misrepresentation within the media is confined to the extent in which religious, racial and social cohesion will allow it to progress. Critical reassessment is necessary by media sources in fully establishing the extent of religious and social conflict which is arising as a direct result of media-influence religious tension. Steps are already being undertaken by the Muslim communities in an effort to utilise media sources to reverse the development of Islamic stereotypes, instead promoting peace, fellowship and religious education (BBC News 2007). Advertising campaigns were undertaken throughout Britain promoting Islamic peace following the 2005 July subway terrorist attacks (BBC News 2007). The media campaign targeted peace, integration and assimilation in an effort to counteract the mass development of racial prejudices which followed the terrorist attacks (BBC News 2007). Further utilisation of media sources by Islamic individuals with geographical coverage comparable to that of western media would provide contrasting perspectives to counterbalance biased western media should it choose to continue.
With the multitude of issues surrounding the media’s misrepresentation of Islam, it is evident as to how concentrated religious violence can indirectly result in religious self-harm through the facilitation of subjective information transfer. Although many steps are being taken towards peace and reconciliation through accurate and diverse representations of the religious and societal contributions of Islamic followers, it is still necessary for western media sources to acknowledge an indirect contribution towards the resultant, unjustified religious violence. Through this acknowledgement, essential framework for rebuilding religious ties and establishing the necessary conduit for religious dialogue becomes available to all parties. Furthermore it becomes necessary to no longer overshadow peace-related religious practices with cyclical religious violence, whereas effectively silencing all religious-related violence can in turn reduce unjust stereotype formation and help maintain healthy inter-religious relationships.
References:
Abdullah A n.d., Muslims and the Media since Post September 11, Scholarly Article, Western Knight Centre for Specialised Journalism, viewed 03 November 2011,
www.wkconline.org/resources/pdf/2005muslim_Aslam_Abdullah.pdf.
Akel, B n.d., Islam and the Western Media, Website Article, Islam for Today, viewed 02 November 2011, http://www.islamfortoday.com/media.htm.
BBC News 2007, Muslim ‘peace’ adverts launched, Online Newspaper Article, BBC News, viewed 03 November 2011, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7021323.stm.
Bulliet RW 2002, ‘The Crisis within Islam’, The Wilson Quarterly, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 11-19.
Dunn K, Klocker N, and Salabay T 2007, ‘Contemporary Racism and Islamophoabia in Australia: Racialising Religion’, Ethnicities, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 764-781.
Ghazali, AS 2008, Islam & Muslims in the Post-9/11 America, Eagle Enterprises, Modesto
Avaliable at: www.amperspective.com/Islam_and_Muslims_in_Post_9-11_America.pdf.
Media Tenor International 2008, 9/11: How is Islam portrayed in the western TV news?, Statistical Report, Media Tenor International, viewed 02 November 2011,
www.mediatenor.com/download_nl.php?download=ADR91198_int.pdf.
Rane H, Ewart J, Abdalla M 2010, Islam and the Australian News Media, Melbourne University Press, Victoria.
Smock D. 2002, USIP Special Report: Islamic Perspectives on Peace and Violence, Washington: US Institute of Peace, viewed 04 November 2011,
Available at: http://www.usip.org/resources/islamic-perspectives-peace-and-violence .
Smock D and Huda, Q 2009, USIP Special Report: Islamic Peacemaking since 9/11, Washington: US Institute of Peace, viewed 04 November 2011,
Available at: http://www.usip.org/resources/islamic-peacemaking-91 1 .
Yenigun, HI 2004, ‘Muslims and the media after 9/11, A Muslim discourse in the American media’ American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 39-69.
Yurdakul-Bodemann, G 2004, ‘Islamic Peril: Media and Global Violence’, The Canadian Review of Sociology, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 96-98.
Sunday, November 6, 2011
The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Girardian Perspective
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been waged since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948 and it has spawned many opinions and theories about the role of religion in the conflict. Many scholars have tried to analyse the situation in order to find the root of the conflict and to try and explain exactly why there is no resolution in sight. This paper will examine the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in relation to René Girard’s theories of mimetic desire, mimetic rivalry and the scapegoat mechanism and find that each of these theories is significant in the conflict. In order to demonstrate the significance of mimesis and the scapegoat theory, they will be applied to three components of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The essay will firstly provide an overview of the theories of René Girard before delving into discussion of the conflict. Then, mimetic desire will be examined in relation to the Zionist movement and the creation of the Jewish homeland. This will then be followed by an analysis of the selection of Jerusalem and the West Bank for the Jewish State in relation to mimetic rivalry. Lastly, the scapegoat mechanism will be discussed in relation to the assassination of the Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin. These three examples corresponding to Girard’s three theories will reveal the importance of the mimetic desire and rivalry as well as the scapegoat mechanism in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
René Girard’s works on mimetic desire have influenced many current-day scholars and it seems to have universal application potential. Girard’s theory addresses human desire and hence, the relationship between desire and violence (Stirling, 2004, 11). For the purpose of this essay, the discussion of Girard’s work will cover three main areas: mimetic desire, mimetic rivalry and the scapegoat mechanism. These areas are all very closely related and the first to be explained will be mimetic desire. As Girard states, “the subject thus looks to the other person to inform him of what he should desire in order to acquire that being” (Girard, 2005, 145-146). This means that humans desire what others have and as an extension, what others desire (Kirwan, 2005, 15).. Fundamentally, Humans desire something not due to its intrinsic value, but because others desire to possess it (Reynolds, 2009, 84). This leads to the idea of mimetic rivalry. After the subject has learnt to desire a particular object, conflict can result (Stirling, 2004, 17). At first, the model is admired for possessing the desired object, thus giving the object value. However, the subject will desire the model’s object which will imbue the model with a greater sense of being and when the subject tries to acquire the object, the model will move in order to stop the acquisition (Stirling, 2004, 18). The result of the rivalry is a cycle of increasing competition which exponentially increases the desire. This process then escalates and spreads like a contagion through mimesis among group members until it threatens destructive chaos (Reynolds, 2009, 85). It is at this point that the group will look for a scapegoat. The scapegoat mechanism is a solution to the cumulative tension brought about by mimetic rivalry. The scapegoat is the victim onto whom the group transfers their violent impulses without worry of corresponding competition. The person is identified, blamed for the troubles and then ‘sacrificed’ by either killing or expelling as a substitute for the mimetic rivalries (Reynolds, 2009, 85-86). As has been explained, Girard’s three theories about mimesis are extremely important in order to examine all types of conflict.
The original source of the religious violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was the creation of the Jewish state of Israel, stemming from the Zionist movement which displays Girard’s theory of mimetic desire. In order to understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one must understand the history and context of the Zionist movement. Zionism is a Jewish political movement that supported the establishment of a Jewish national homeland (Gurock, 1998, 298). There are many different sorts of Zionism, though they all share a common trait, the claim to Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people, based on religious and historical ties to the Land of Israel (Simoni, 1997, 346).The movement was eventually successful and on 14th May 1948, the State of Israel was formed as the Jewish homeland (Taylor, 1971, 10). However, the Palestinians and the Arab states rejected Israel being created in western Palestine and demanded a single state leading to the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. This created a domino effect of religious violence. The Arab armies invaded Israel and the conflict lead to the flight of 711 000 Palestinians from Israel and the exodus of approximately 850 000 Jews from the surrounding Arab nations. The Israeli government then passed a law which prevented the expelled Palestinians from returning to claim their property or live in their homes (Shavit, 2004). Many people would also label the expulsion of Palestinians as ethnic cleansing (Pappe, 2006, 129). Basically, the establishment of the State of Israel in the heart of what was a previously Islamic land marked a major turning point in Islamic anti-Semitism (Judaken, 2008, 542). However, the conflict stems from mimetic desire of the land. Essentially, both the Jewish people and the Palestinian people desire the same land. The key issues of the conflict continue to be security, water and control of Jerusalem (Sela, 2002, 492). The Zionist movement was also brought about by the desire of the Jewish people to have what people of other nationalities possessed—a homeland. As it can be seen, Girard’s theory of mimetic desire is very influential in this case as mimetic desire can be seen in two instances, both in the idea of the nation and for the land possessed by the Palestinians resulting in mimetic rivalry and culminating in religious violence.
The ensuing conflicts that followed the creation of the Jewish nation-state, Israel, can be easily described by Girard’s theory of mimetic rivalry. For the purposes of this argument, the holy city of Jerusalem will be the object of both Palestine and Israel’s desire and hence, the source of conflict. Jerusalem is a holy city in all three Abrahamic faiths: Christianity, Islam and Judaism. The Jewish people want ownership of this land as to them; it is their holiest city while in Islam, Jerusalem is their third holiest city (Friedland & Hecht, 2000, 8). This means that both nations claim to have a religious interest in the holy city that they keep fighting over; however, the mimetic rivalry furthers the conflict over Jerusalem. ‘Ownership’ of the city has changed frequently since the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. In the 1948 war, Israel captured West Jerusalem whilst East Jerusalem was taken by Jordan. Israel then seized East Jerusalem in 1967 and the Basic Law then referred to Jerusalem as Israel’s ‘undivided capital.’ However, internationally, Jerusalem is not recognised as Israel’s capital, and most treat East Jerusalem as Palestinian territory being held by Israel under military occupation (United Nations). In this case, and as displayed in Girard’s theory, each protagonist blames the other for the conflict (Stirling, 2004, 18). This change of ‘ownership’ is clearly displaying Girard’s theory of mimetic rivalry, as previously stated; there is a cycle of ever increasing competition increasing desire of the object exponentially threatening to unravel into chaos (Reynolds, 2009, 85). As one Jewish commentator stated, “Jewish control over the scared city was essential” many regarded it as heretical to give up the least bit of Biblical land (Juergensmeyer, 2003, 37). However, at least a part of this sentiment could be explained by mimetic rivalry and the desire to keep the other party from possessing the sacred land. However, in the 1990’s, peace talks were becoming increasingly effective, until the Oslo Accords and the assassination of the Prime Minister in 1994. Alas, yet again, the violence began and the world saw some of the most brutal, violent attacks in modern history. René Girard’s theory of mimetic rivalry can be easily seen different phases of occupation of Jerusalem since the creation of the state of Israel.
The scapegoat mechanism can be seen many times throughout the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; however the case that will be used is the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995. The assassination was a reaction to the signing of the Oslo Peace Accords. The Accords called for withdrawal of Israeli forces from parts of the Gaza strip and West Bank, affirming the Palestinian right of government from within those areas (Mattar, 2005, 67). November 4, 1995 Rabin addressed a crowd of 100,000 telling them that he believed Israeli’s believed in peace and they were ‘ready to take a risk for it’ (Juergensmeyer, 2003, 48). Shortly after exiting the stage, a student shot the Prime Minister at point-blank range. As the student, Yigal Amir, was being apprehended he claimed to have ‘no regrets’ and that he ‘acted alone and on orders from God’ (Juergensmeyer, 2003, 48). Yigal Amir had seen a Rabbi and was informed that his actions would be justified by the ‘pursuer’s decree’ of Jewish legal precedence which morally obligates a Jew to halt someone who represents a ‘mortal danger’ to the Jewish people. Rabin presented this danger as he was allowing the Palestinian authority to expand into the West Bank (Juergensmeyer, 2003, 49). Many Zionists believed that the creation of a Palestinian government on the West Bank posed a danger not only to Israel, but to Jews in general and Judaism as a religion (Juergensmeyer, 2003, 53). The assassination of Rabin acted as a scapegoat mechanism within the Jewish community. The mimesis was still taking place over Jerusalem and the Israeli population did not want to concede even some ownership to the Palestinians and hence, the Prime Minister was “sacrificed” for the greater good of the Jewish community in the eyes of the Zionists. In Girard’s theory, it is common for the victim to exhibit stereotypical qualities that mark the victim as different or standing out from the others in the group (Reynolds, 2009, 89). In this case, Rabin was willing to concede some holy land to achieve peace, whereas, others in the Jewish community were not. Girard’s scapegoat theory can be applied to the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, one of the many lives lost within the religious violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
This paper has examined the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in relation to René Girard’s theories of mimetic desire and rivalry as well as the scapegoat mechanism to find that each of these theories is significant within the conflict. In order to demonstrate this significance, the three theories were applied to three components of the conflict. Mimetic desire was discussed in relation to the forging of the Jewish sovereign state. It was found that mimetic desire was seen twice in this instance: the first time being the mimetic desire of the Jewish people to have what other nationalities had, a nation state; secondly, the desire to have the land that was occupied by the Palestinians, in particular, Jerusalem. The occupation and constant fighting over the city of Jerusalem was then examined in regards to the theory of mimetic rivalry. It was found that the constant fighting and taking of Jerusalem by one state then the other, only lead to a cycle of mimetic rivalry which intensified over time and is continuing even today. Lastly, the scapegoat mechanism was analysed in relation to the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. It was found that Rabin acted as a scapegoat for the Jewish people and their unhappiness to give up control of some of the West Bank to the Palestinian authorities. The three examples that corresponded to Girard’s three theories have shown that mimetic desire; rivalry and the scapegoat mechanism are extremely significant in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and are still active within the conflict today.
Bibliography
Friedland, Roger & Hecht, Richard D. To Rule Jerusalem. USA: University of California Press. 2000.
Girard, René. Violence and the Sacred. Great Britain: Continuum. 2005.
Gurock, Jeffery S. “American Zionism: Mission and Politics.” In American Jewish History. USA: Routledge. 1998, 288-301.
Judaken, Johnathan. “So What’s New? Rethinking the ‘New Anti-Semitism’ in a Global Age.” In Patterns of Prejudice 42, no. 4 – 5 (2008), 531-560.
Juergensmeyer, Mark. "ZION betrayed.” In Terror in the Mind of God: the Global Rise of Religious Violence. USA: University of California Press. 2003. 45-60.
Kirwan, Michael. Discovering Girard. UK: Darton, Longman & Todd. 2005.
Mattar, Philip. Encyclopedia of the Palestinians. USA: Facts on File. 2005.
Pappe, Ilan. The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. England: Oneworld Publications. 2006.
Reynolds, Thomas E. “Beyond Violence in Monotheism: Interfaith Possibilities in René Girard’s Theory of Mimetic Rivalry.” Studies in Interreligious Dialogue 19, no. 1 (2009), 81-101.
Roshwald, Aviel. “Jewish Identity and the Paradox of Nationalism.” In Nationalism, Zionism and Ethnic Mobilization of the Jews in 1990 and Beyond. Edited by Michael Berkowitz. Netherlands: Kominklijke Brill NV. 2004, 11-25.
Sela, Abraham. “Jerusalem.” In The Continuum Political Encyclopaedia of the Middle East. New York: Continuum. 2002. 491-498.
Shavit, Ari. “Survival of the Fittest: An Interview with Benny Morris.” In Logos Journal 3, (2004), http://www.logosjournal.com/morris.htm
Shimoni, Gideon. The Zionist Ideology. USA: Brandeis University Pres., 1997.
Stirling, Mark. “Violent Religion: René Girard’s Theory of Culture.” In The Destructive Power of Religion: Violence in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, edited by J Harold Ellens. USA: Praeger Publishers. 2004, 11-50.
Taylor, A. R. “Vision and Intent in Zionist Thought.” In The Transformation of Palestine. Edited by I. Abu-Lughod. USA: North-western University Pres., 1971. 8-15.
United Nations. “The Status of Jerusalem.” In The Question of Palestine and the United Nations. http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/palestine/ch12.pdf
René Girard’s works on mimetic desire have influenced many current-day scholars and it seems to have universal application potential. Girard’s theory addresses human desire and hence, the relationship between desire and violence (Stirling, 2004, 11). For the purpose of this essay, the discussion of Girard’s work will cover three main areas: mimetic desire, mimetic rivalry and the scapegoat mechanism. These areas are all very closely related and the first to be explained will be mimetic desire. As Girard states, “the subject thus looks to the other person to inform him of what he should desire in order to acquire that being” (Girard, 2005, 145-146). This means that humans desire what others have and as an extension, what others desire (Kirwan, 2005, 15).. Fundamentally, Humans desire something not due to its intrinsic value, but because others desire to possess it (Reynolds, 2009, 84). This leads to the idea of mimetic rivalry. After the subject has learnt to desire a particular object, conflict can result (Stirling, 2004, 17). At first, the model is admired for possessing the desired object, thus giving the object value. However, the subject will desire the model’s object which will imbue the model with a greater sense of being and when the subject tries to acquire the object, the model will move in order to stop the acquisition (Stirling, 2004, 18). The result of the rivalry is a cycle of increasing competition which exponentially increases the desire. This process then escalates and spreads like a contagion through mimesis among group members until it threatens destructive chaos (Reynolds, 2009, 85). It is at this point that the group will look for a scapegoat. The scapegoat mechanism is a solution to the cumulative tension brought about by mimetic rivalry. The scapegoat is the victim onto whom the group transfers their violent impulses without worry of corresponding competition. The person is identified, blamed for the troubles and then ‘sacrificed’ by either killing or expelling as a substitute for the mimetic rivalries (Reynolds, 2009, 85-86). As has been explained, Girard’s three theories about mimesis are extremely important in order to examine all types of conflict.
The original source of the religious violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was the creation of the Jewish state of Israel, stemming from the Zionist movement which displays Girard’s theory of mimetic desire. In order to understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one must understand the history and context of the Zionist movement. Zionism is a Jewish political movement that supported the establishment of a Jewish national homeland (Gurock, 1998, 298). There are many different sorts of Zionism, though they all share a common trait, the claim to Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people, based on religious and historical ties to the Land of Israel (Simoni, 1997, 346).The movement was eventually successful and on 14th May 1948, the State of Israel was formed as the Jewish homeland (Taylor, 1971, 10). However, the Palestinians and the Arab states rejected Israel being created in western Palestine and demanded a single state leading to the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. This created a domino effect of religious violence. The Arab armies invaded Israel and the conflict lead to the flight of 711 000 Palestinians from Israel and the exodus of approximately 850 000 Jews from the surrounding Arab nations. The Israeli government then passed a law which prevented the expelled Palestinians from returning to claim their property or live in their homes (Shavit, 2004). Many people would also label the expulsion of Palestinians as ethnic cleansing (Pappe, 2006, 129). Basically, the establishment of the State of Israel in the heart of what was a previously Islamic land marked a major turning point in Islamic anti-Semitism (Judaken, 2008, 542). However, the conflict stems from mimetic desire of the land. Essentially, both the Jewish people and the Palestinian people desire the same land. The key issues of the conflict continue to be security, water and control of Jerusalem (Sela, 2002, 492). The Zionist movement was also brought about by the desire of the Jewish people to have what people of other nationalities possessed—a homeland. As it can be seen, Girard’s theory of mimetic desire is very influential in this case as mimetic desire can be seen in two instances, both in the idea of the nation and for the land possessed by the Palestinians resulting in mimetic rivalry and culminating in religious violence.
The ensuing conflicts that followed the creation of the Jewish nation-state, Israel, can be easily described by Girard’s theory of mimetic rivalry. For the purposes of this argument, the holy city of Jerusalem will be the object of both Palestine and Israel’s desire and hence, the source of conflict. Jerusalem is a holy city in all three Abrahamic faiths: Christianity, Islam and Judaism. The Jewish people want ownership of this land as to them; it is their holiest city while in Islam, Jerusalem is their third holiest city (Friedland & Hecht, 2000, 8). This means that both nations claim to have a religious interest in the holy city that they keep fighting over; however, the mimetic rivalry furthers the conflict over Jerusalem. ‘Ownership’ of the city has changed frequently since the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. In the 1948 war, Israel captured West Jerusalem whilst East Jerusalem was taken by Jordan. Israel then seized East Jerusalem in 1967 and the Basic Law then referred to Jerusalem as Israel’s ‘undivided capital.’ However, internationally, Jerusalem is not recognised as Israel’s capital, and most treat East Jerusalem as Palestinian territory being held by Israel under military occupation (United Nations). In this case, and as displayed in Girard’s theory, each protagonist blames the other for the conflict (Stirling, 2004, 18). This change of ‘ownership’ is clearly displaying Girard’s theory of mimetic rivalry, as previously stated; there is a cycle of ever increasing competition increasing desire of the object exponentially threatening to unravel into chaos (Reynolds, 2009, 85). As one Jewish commentator stated, “Jewish control over the scared city was essential” many regarded it as heretical to give up the least bit of Biblical land (Juergensmeyer, 2003, 37). However, at least a part of this sentiment could be explained by mimetic rivalry and the desire to keep the other party from possessing the sacred land. However, in the 1990’s, peace talks were becoming increasingly effective, until the Oslo Accords and the assassination of the Prime Minister in 1994. Alas, yet again, the violence began and the world saw some of the most brutal, violent attacks in modern history. René Girard’s theory of mimetic rivalry can be easily seen different phases of occupation of Jerusalem since the creation of the state of Israel.
The scapegoat mechanism can be seen many times throughout the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; however the case that will be used is the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995. The assassination was a reaction to the signing of the Oslo Peace Accords. The Accords called for withdrawal of Israeli forces from parts of the Gaza strip and West Bank, affirming the Palestinian right of government from within those areas (Mattar, 2005, 67). November 4, 1995 Rabin addressed a crowd of 100,000 telling them that he believed Israeli’s believed in peace and they were ‘ready to take a risk for it’ (Juergensmeyer, 2003, 48). Shortly after exiting the stage, a student shot the Prime Minister at point-blank range. As the student, Yigal Amir, was being apprehended he claimed to have ‘no regrets’ and that he ‘acted alone and on orders from God’ (Juergensmeyer, 2003, 48). Yigal Amir had seen a Rabbi and was informed that his actions would be justified by the ‘pursuer’s decree’ of Jewish legal precedence which morally obligates a Jew to halt someone who represents a ‘mortal danger’ to the Jewish people. Rabin presented this danger as he was allowing the Palestinian authority to expand into the West Bank (Juergensmeyer, 2003, 49). Many Zionists believed that the creation of a Palestinian government on the West Bank posed a danger not only to Israel, but to Jews in general and Judaism as a religion (Juergensmeyer, 2003, 53). The assassination of Rabin acted as a scapegoat mechanism within the Jewish community. The mimesis was still taking place over Jerusalem and the Israeli population did not want to concede even some ownership to the Palestinians and hence, the Prime Minister was “sacrificed” for the greater good of the Jewish community in the eyes of the Zionists. In Girard’s theory, it is common for the victim to exhibit stereotypical qualities that mark the victim as different or standing out from the others in the group (Reynolds, 2009, 89). In this case, Rabin was willing to concede some holy land to achieve peace, whereas, others in the Jewish community were not. Girard’s scapegoat theory can be applied to the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, one of the many lives lost within the religious violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
This paper has examined the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in relation to René Girard’s theories of mimetic desire and rivalry as well as the scapegoat mechanism to find that each of these theories is significant within the conflict. In order to demonstrate this significance, the three theories were applied to three components of the conflict. Mimetic desire was discussed in relation to the forging of the Jewish sovereign state. It was found that mimetic desire was seen twice in this instance: the first time being the mimetic desire of the Jewish people to have what other nationalities had, a nation state; secondly, the desire to have the land that was occupied by the Palestinians, in particular, Jerusalem. The occupation and constant fighting over the city of Jerusalem was then examined in regards to the theory of mimetic rivalry. It was found that the constant fighting and taking of Jerusalem by one state then the other, only lead to a cycle of mimetic rivalry which intensified over time and is continuing even today. Lastly, the scapegoat mechanism was analysed in relation to the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. It was found that Rabin acted as a scapegoat for the Jewish people and their unhappiness to give up control of some of the West Bank to the Palestinian authorities. The three examples that corresponded to Girard’s three theories have shown that mimetic desire; rivalry and the scapegoat mechanism are extremely significant in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and are still active within the conflict today.
Bibliography
Friedland, Roger & Hecht, Richard D. To Rule Jerusalem. USA: University of California Press. 2000.
Girard, René. Violence and the Sacred. Great Britain: Continuum. 2005.
Gurock, Jeffery S. “American Zionism: Mission and Politics.” In American Jewish History. USA: Routledge. 1998, 288-301.
Judaken, Johnathan. “So What’s New? Rethinking the ‘New Anti-Semitism’ in a Global Age.” In Patterns of Prejudice 42, no. 4 – 5 (2008), 531-560.
Juergensmeyer, Mark. "ZION betrayed.” In Terror in the Mind of God: the Global Rise of Religious Violence. USA: University of California Press. 2003. 45-60.
Kirwan, Michael. Discovering Girard. UK: Darton, Longman & Todd. 2005.
Mattar, Philip. Encyclopedia of the Palestinians. USA: Facts on File. 2005.
Pappe, Ilan. The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. England: Oneworld Publications. 2006.
Reynolds, Thomas E. “Beyond Violence in Monotheism: Interfaith Possibilities in René Girard’s Theory of Mimetic Rivalry.” Studies in Interreligious Dialogue 19, no. 1 (2009), 81-101.
Roshwald, Aviel. “Jewish Identity and the Paradox of Nationalism.” In Nationalism, Zionism and Ethnic Mobilization of the Jews in 1990 and Beyond. Edited by Michael Berkowitz. Netherlands: Kominklijke Brill NV. 2004, 11-25.
Sela, Abraham. “Jerusalem.” In The Continuum Political Encyclopaedia of the Middle East. New York: Continuum. 2002. 491-498.
Shavit, Ari. “Survival of the Fittest: An Interview with Benny Morris.” In Logos Journal 3, (2004), http://www.logosjournal.com/morris.htm
Shimoni, Gideon. The Zionist Ideology. USA: Brandeis University Pres., 1997.
Stirling, Mark. “Violent Religion: René Girard’s Theory of Culture.” In The Destructive Power of Religion: Violence in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, edited by J Harold Ellens. USA: Praeger Publishers. 2004, 11-50.
Taylor, A. R. “Vision and Intent in Zionist Thought.” In The Transformation of Palestine. Edited by I. Abu-Lughod. USA: North-western University Pres., 1971. 8-15.
United Nations. “The Status of Jerusalem.” In The Question of Palestine and the United Nations. http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/palestine/ch12.pdf
Thursday, September 29, 2011
The Uniting Church promoting Violence or Peace?- An Interview with Reverent Ross Mackay
The Uniting Church promoting Violence or Peace?- An Interview with Reverent Ross Mackay
Today the topic of religious violence, and thus peace, is of continually growing importance and relevance to every person, especially considering the growing trend of terrorism claimed in the name of religion (Nepstad, 2004). In accordance to Nepstad (2004) religion can be a force of both violence and peace. To investigate this dichotomy I interviewed Reverent Ross Mackay, a Minister for the Uniting Church in Australia. The Uniting Church was established in 1977 through the union of three major Christian Churches in Australia. It is a church that prides itself on being multicultural and endorsing the rights of religious freedom, and equality. (Uniting Church Australia, 2011 & thetransitlounge, 2007). Reverent Mackay was thus chosen as an interview subject as I wished to investigate the topic of religious violence and peace from the perspective of the Uniting Church.
To begin with I wished to investigate Reverent Mackay motivation for joining the Uniting church, rather than some other Christian order. To him the Uniting Church, unlike many of her sister orders, is based on the fundamental premise that all people have a right to worship and fair treatment. This is supported by Hannah- Jones (2003) who found that previously unaccepted groups of individual, such as women, could be ordained by the Uniting Church. Similarly the Reverent gave a further example of this in says that a Uniting Churches in the city of Logan have excelled in promoting multicultural acceptance and acceptance of people with varied backgrounds. Reverent Mackay believes that these practices are essential to the Church’s goal of promoting social justice and equality (Uniting Church in Australia, 2011). He stated that “The uniting church allows for congregations to have a homosexual minister if that is their preference, this is a fantastic freedom that other churches don’t have.” Acceptance is importance to him as he believes that exposure to varied groups of individuals helps to teach those in the church community to be more open and accepting of diversity. This in turn prevents misunderstanding and discrimination, which in turn promotes peace within the community.
Insight had been gained into how the Uniting Church internally maintained social justice and equality, however a lot of religiously motivated violence occurs between different religious groups (Nepstad, 2004). I wished, therefore, to see how the church attempted to maintain equality and peace between themselves and other religious groups. One tool proposed to be useful for peace building is Interfaith dialogue (Smock, 2008). When asked to comment on the involvement of the church in interfaith dialogue, the Reverent stipulated that the Uniting Church regularly engages in interfaith talks as a means of increasing positive relations and identifying similarities between themselves and other religious groups. Reverent Mackay also believes that interfaith dialogue and interfaith cooperation in religious education in schools would be beneficial in preventing misunderstanding between youths of different religions. The reverent said that he “would love to have a rabbi and an Islamic Imam come to do RE with me.” He believes, however, that more conventional Christian dominations would not approve of this. The Uniting Church and its Ministers, more so than other Christian denominations, therefore appears to facilitate religious cooperation and understanding by endorsing interfaith dialogue and interaction. This, the Reverent believes is integral in preventing religiously motivated violence.
Forgivness and Justice was the next topic I asked the Reverent about. These concepts are one that have been strongly linked to religious violent conflict (Volf, 2000), usually in the form of retaliatory violence in the name of justice. The reverent stipulated a need for a distinction between God’s justice and man’s justice:
“Gods justice says that for me I need to judge myself against Jesus and try to come to that standard of forgiveness. Man’s justice would say I need to judge myself against someone else and come up to that level. So that is, if someone steals from me, they go to jail, that’s our justice. Jesus said to his disciples, take your coats with you, if someone needs it give them your coat and your tunic as well…I mean there has to be some form of go to jail thing, as otherwise people who were really selfish would run amuck totally. But at the same time, we seek to do god’s justice.”
He argues that when exacting justice Christians must attempt to emulate Christ and in doing so, be willing to place the needs of others before their own needs. He further proposes that forgiveness must be people’s primary objective, stating that “you can be a victim and be forgiving the person while they are still hurting you, Christ did that on the cross”. The biblical reference of Jesus on the Cross emphasises why forgiveness is of primary importance before justice can be sought. This is an interesting concept supported by the works of academics such as Volf (2000) and other religious leaders such as the Jewish Rabbi John Sacks (Fetzer Institute, 2009). They suggest that this structure of forgiveness than justice can be a means of preventing retaliatory violence. It can therefore be argued that this concept of forgiveness before seeking justice, taught by the Uniting Church, is helpful in preventing violence.
Religious violence and fundamental extremism is an ever present and controversial topic in today’s society. I asked the Reverent what his opinions where on religious fundamental extremists and their use of examples of violence within religious texts to motivate violent action by their followers. Religious fundamentalism and violent references within religious texts has been strongly associated to the use of violence (Post, 2005 & Omar, 2005). Despite this, religious leaders such as Imam Omar, (2005) and many academics (Post, 2005 & Rogers, Loewenthal, Lewis, Amlot, Cinnirella & Ansari, 2007) have argued that religion is rarely the primary cause for violence. They instead say that so called religious violence is usually motivated by the interplay of political, cultural and social factors, which individual attempt to resolve under the guise of religious conflict. Reverent Mackay agrees saying:
“you can always find something in there [religious texts] to justify what you do if you read a particular section. But read in its entirety in the understanding of Jesus, it is very hard to promote violence. So the people who are fundamental are pushing their own agenda, mostly out of fear.”
To him, religions in their essence are not violent. It is the interpretation of religious texts out of context and the interplay of other, non religious factors that result in violence occurring.
My interview with Reverent Mackays makes me believe that the Uniting Church may indeed be able to play a role in facilitating peace, social justice and preventing religiously motivated violence. The Uniting Churches doctrine of acceptance and equality serves to lesson discrimination and endorse social justice. Furthermore, the practice of interfaith dialogue and the Reverent’s desire to have interfaith interaction in schools, encourage interfaith cooperation. Furthermore the doctrine of forgiveness before justice is promising, I believe, for encouraging peace as it lessens the likelihood of retaliatory violence. It is true that religious texts can be used facilitate violent action, but it is argued that religion and religious doctrine is very rarely the root cause of supposed religious violence (Post, 2005 & Omar, 2005). Therefore, I believe that the Christian religious principles, taught by the Uniting Church, can be used to deter religious violence and facilitate peace building and social justice.
References
Fetzer Institute (Producer). (2009) Rabbi Jonathan Sacks - Consider Forgiveness. retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7zb4KgEaog&feature=relmfu
Hannah-Jones, A. (2003). Comepting claims for justice: Sexuality and race at the eighth assembly of the Uniting Church in Australia, 1997. Journal od the History of Sexuality, 12(2).
Nepstad, S. E. (2004). Religion, Violence, and Peacemaking Journal of Scientific Study of Religion, 43(3), 297-301.
Omar, R. (2005). Overcoming religiously motivated violence Cross Currents, 55(1), 77-82.
Post, J. M. (2005). When hatred is bred in the bone: Psycho-cultural foundation of contemporary terrorism Political Psychology 26(4).
Rogers, B., Loewenthal, K., Lewis,C., Amlot, R., Cinnirella, M., & Ansari, H. (2007). The role of religious fundamentalism in terrorist violence: A social psychoology analysis. International Review of Psychiatry, 19(3).#
Smock. (2008). Religion in world affairs: Its role in conflict and peace. Washington: United States Institute of Peace.
thetransitlounge (Producer). (2007, 17th September 2011) The Uniting Church in Australia 30th Celebration. retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBn5KMTO9G8
Uniting Church Australia, (2011). About the Uniting Church Australia Retrieved 27th September 2011, from http://www.uca.org.au/about.htm
Today the topic of religious violence, and thus peace, is of continually growing importance and relevance to every person, especially considering the growing trend of terrorism claimed in the name of religion (Nepstad, 2004). In accordance to Nepstad (2004) religion can be a force of both violence and peace. To investigate this dichotomy I interviewed Reverent Ross Mackay, a Minister for the Uniting Church in Australia. The Uniting Church was established in 1977 through the union of three major Christian Churches in Australia. It is a church that prides itself on being multicultural and endorsing the rights of religious freedom, and equality. (Uniting Church Australia, 2011 & thetransitlounge, 2007). Reverent Mackay was thus chosen as an interview subject as I wished to investigate the topic of religious violence and peace from the perspective of the Uniting Church.
To begin with I wished to investigate Reverent Mackay motivation for joining the Uniting church, rather than some other Christian order. To him the Uniting Church, unlike many of her sister orders, is based on the fundamental premise that all people have a right to worship and fair treatment. This is supported by Hannah- Jones (2003) who found that previously unaccepted groups of individual, such as women, could be ordained by the Uniting Church. Similarly the Reverent gave a further example of this in says that a Uniting Churches in the city of Logan have excelled in promoting multicultural acceptance and acceptance of people with varied backgrounds. Reverent Mackay believes that these practices are essential to the Church’s goal of promoting social justice and equality (Uniting Church in Australia, 2011). He stated that “The uniting church allows for congregations to have a homosexual minister if that is their preference, this is a fantastic freedom that other churches don’t have.” Acceptance is importance to him as he believes that exposure to varied groups of individuals helps to teach those in the church community to be more open and accepting of diversity. This in turn prevents misunderstanding and discrimination, which in turn promotes peace within the community.
Insight had been gained into how the Uniting Church internally maintained social justice and equality, however a lot of religiously motivated violence occurs between different religious groups (Nepstad, 2004). I wished, therefore, to see how the church attempted to maintain equality and peace between themselves and other religious groups. One tool proposed to be useful for peace building is Interfaith dialogue (Smock, 2008). When asked to comment on the involvement of the church in interfaith dialogue, the Reverent stipulated that the Uniting Church regularly engages in interfaith talks as a means of increasing positive relations and identifying similarities between themselves and other religious groups. Reverent Mackay also believes that interfaith dialogue and interfaith cooperation in religious education in schools would be beneficial in preventing misunderstanding between youths of different religions. The reverent said that he “would love to have a rabbi and an Islamic Imam come to do RE with me.” He believes, however, that more conventional Christian dominations would not approve of this. The Uniting Church and its Ministers, more so than other Christian denominations, therefore appears to facilitate religious cooperation and understanding by endorsing interfaith dialogue and interaction. This, the Reverent believes is integral in preventing religiously motivated violence.
Forgivness and Justice was the next topic I asked the Reverent about. These concepts are one that have been strongly linked to religious violent conflict (Volf, 2000), usually in the form of retaliatory violence in the name of justice. The reverent stipulated a need for a distinction between God’s justice and man’s justice:
“Gods justice says that for me I need to judge myself against Jesus and try to come to that standard of forgiveness. Man’s justice would say I need to judge myself against someone else and come up to that level. So that is, if someone steals from me, they go to jail, that’s our justice. Jesus said to his disciples, take your coats with you, if someone needs it give them your coat and your tunic as well…I mean there has to be some form of go to jail thing, as otherwise people who were really selfish would run amuck totally. But at the same time, we seek to do god’s justice.”
He argues that when exacting justice Christians must attempt to emulate Christ and in doing so, be willing to place the needs of others before their own needs. He further proposes that forgiveness must be people’s primary objective, stating that “you can be a victim and be forgiving the person while they are still hurting you, Christ did that on the cross”. The biblical reference of Jesus on the Cross emphasises why forgiveness is of primary importance before justice can be sought. This is an interesting concept supported by the works of academics such as Volf (2000) and other religious leaders such as the Jewish Rabbi John Sacks (Fetzer Institute, 2009). They suggest that this structure of forgiveness than justice can be a means of preventing retaliatory violence. It can therefore be argued that this concept of forgiveness before seeking justice, taught by the Uniting Church, is helpful in preventing violence.
Religious violence and fundamental extremism is an ever present and controversial topic in today’s society. I asked the Reverent what his opinions where on religious fundamental extremists and their use of examples of violence within religious texts to motivate violent action by their followers. Religious fundamentalism and violent references within religious texts has been strongly associated to the use of violence (Post, 2005 & Omar, 2005). Despite this, religious leaders such as Imam Omar, (2005) and many academics (Post, 2005 & Rogers, Loewenthal, Lewis, Amlot, Cinnirella & Ansari, 2007) have argued that religion is rarely the primary cause for violence. They instead say that so called religious violence is usually motivated by the interplay of political, cultural and social factors, which individual attempt to resolve under the guise of religious conflict. Reverent Mackay agrees saying:
“you can always find something in there [religious texts] to justify what you do if you read a particular section. But read in its entirety in the understanding of Jesus, it is very hard to promote violence. So the people who are fundamental are pushing their own agenda, mostly out of fear.”
To him, religions in their essence are not violent. It is the interpretation of religious texts out of context and the interplay of other, non religious factors that result in violence occurring.
My interview with Reverent Mackays makes me believe that the Uniting Church may indeed be able to play a role in facilitating peace, social justice and preventing religiously motivated violence. The Uniting Churches doctrine of acceptance and equality serves to lesson discrimination and endorse social justice. Furthermore, the practice of interfaith dialogue and the Reverent’s desire to have interfaith interaction in schools, encourage interfaith cooperation. Furthermore the doctrine of forgiveness before justice is promising, I believe, for encouraging peace as it lessens the likelihood of retaliatory violence. It is true that religious texts can be used facilitate violent action, but it is argued that religion and religious doctrine is very rarely the root cause of supposed religious violence (Post, 2005 & Omar, 2005). Therefore, I believe that the Christian religious principles, taught by the Uniting Church, can be used to deter religious violence and facilitate peace building and social justice.
References
Fetzer Institute (Producer). (2009) Rabbi Jonathan Sacks - Consider Forgiveness. retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7zb4KgEaog&feature=relmfu
Hannah-Jones, A. (2003). Comepting claims for justice: Sexuality and race at the eighth assembly of the Uniting Church in Australia, 1997. Journal od the History of Sexuality, 12(2).
Nepstad, S. E. (2004). Religion, Violence, and Peacemaking Journal of Scientific Study of Religion, 43(3), 297-301.
Omar, R. (2005). Overcoming religiously motivated violence Cross Currents, 55(1), 77-82.
Post, J. M. (2005). When hatred is bred in the bone: Psycho-cultural foundation of contemporary terrorism Political Psychology 26(4).
Rogers, B., Loewenthal, K., Lewis,C., Amlot, R., Cinnirella, M., & Ansari, H. (2007). The role of religious fundamentalism in terrorist violence: A social psychoology analysis. International Review of Psychiatry, 19(3).#
Smock. (2008). Religion in world affairs: Its role in conflict and peace. Washington: United States Institute of Peace.
thetransitlounge (Producer). (2007, 17th September 2011) The Uniting Church in Australia 30th Celebration. retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBn5KMTO9G8
Uniting Church Australia, (2011). About the Uniting Church Australia Retrieved 27th September 2011, from http://www.uca.org.au/about.htm
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Islam: Peaceful or Violent?
In its original essence Islam means peace but in a modern context Islam and peace seem to be mutually exclusive terms. On the 29thof August 2011, I interviewed Mufti Junaid Akbar the leader of Masjid Taqwah, a mosque located at Bald Hills, to discuss how Islam is identified and perceived by the Australian society both internally and externally in correlation with the success of interfaith dialogue due to these societal perceptions. Religious violence is often married with phrases such as “terrorism”, “fundamentalism” and “fanatic” with an immediate association towards Islam due to the creation of a global conscious. Thus, the media has an ability to indoctrinate “Islamophobia” into society by framing, labeling and stereotyping Muslims with negative connotations driven by moral panic and fear. By isolating Islam as a violent religion the media creates a barrier for interfaith dialogue in the pursuit for peace and as a result, Mufti Junaid Akbar advocates that education of the truth of Islam is essential in developing an understanding that is critical to obtain interfaith dialogue through encouraged participation.
Religion and violence are intrinsically related in a continuous relationship that is derived from several factors including globalisation, misinterpretation and exclusivity. Volf (2000, p. 862) argues that “the resurgence of religion seems to go hand in hand with the resurgence of religiously legitimised violence… [as] religions are by nature violent.” However, when asked to describe religious violence Mufti Junaid Akbar maintained that violence within Islam is intolerable which asserts the misunderstood and misconstrued identity of what Islam is, even to a practicing Muslim. It can be argued that the construction of a religious identity promotes notions of exclusivity and isolation that act as a catalyst in mobilising causal factors of religious violence that essentially “define, propel and sustain conflict” (Smock 2008, p. 2). Essentially, globalisation or a worldly communal consciousness supports this exclusivity and allows understandings that were previously contextualised to be decontextualised giving rise to identifiers of fundamentalism (Swatos 2005, p. 332). Mufti Junaid Akbar asserted that those Muslims who are labeled fundamentalists are not Muslims as they do not understand the means of revelation which is corroborated by Oommen (1994) stating that fundamentalism is “text without context.” To support this claim I presented Mufti Junaid Akbar with a passage from the Quran in Surah 9:5 that states “fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in ever stratagem (of war).” As an isolated text it has an undeniable violent nature however it has not been contextualised with the Quran commentaries that Mufti Junaid Akbar presented in the Quran’s defense to place this passage in the original historical context. Evidently, religious violence is constructed through global means of exclusivity and identity that is essentially misinterpreted and misunderstood but it often exploited through global media mediums that asserts the cohesive relationship between religious violence and Islam.
Islamophobia is driven by the media’s ability to capture and frame moral fears and panic and position Islam in a negative light. Dalrymple (2004, p. 18) argues that Islamophobia is “the principal Western statement of bigotry against ‘the Other’.” In addition, Edward Said (cited in Lebling 1980, p. 119) describes the functions of ‘the Other’ which “has sought to reduce the richness of Arab life and civilisation to a set of easily manageable and unchanging stereotypes.” Thus, the fear of ‘the Other’ being Islam or Muslims has been indoctrinated by the media’s ability to frame and capture this fear that propagates an “us” and “them” dichotomy (Hopkins 2008, p. 46). This dichotomy gives rise to mediatisation which refers to “the tendency to acquire information about politics and to receive political messages form a plurality of sources in the mass media … that are in competition with each other for the attention of consumers” (Alonso, Keane & Merkel 2011, p. 204). Evidently, the mediatisation of Islam presents Islam in the public sphere as a phenomenon to be feared, exploited and discriminated against that essentially initiates Islamophobia within Australia. The media was a reoccurring issue Mufti Junaid Akbar raised and strongly expressed his opinion on the media’s portrayal of Islam in the following statement:
All the media does is show negative information about Islam. It will not inculcate a harmonious society, it will cause a lot of friction between the multi cultural people who live in that society… putting fear in the people, there is no message there... There is no chance that the Muslims are going to take over Australia. We want to live here like any other normal person in peace… You can’t deal with the media because they are very powerful. In the UK riots Muslims played a good part in solving that problem but you didn’t see that.
Mufti Junaid Akbar’s opinion is in corroboration with the assumptions many Australians have about Muslims that “their [Muslims] beliefs are antithetical to Australian values; that they [Muslims] cannot assimilate; that they [Muslims] are inherently violent and condone extremism” (Rane et al. 2011, p.129). Evidently, the media utilise xenophobic and Eurocentric notions to frame Islam as a religion associated with violence that effectively indoctrinates particular opinions in Australian society that have the potential to prevent interfaith dialogue due to either ignorance or a lack of understanding.
However, the education of Islam has the potential to overcome the negative representations of Islam and encourage community engagement in interfaith dialogue that is essentially an intrinsic component of peace. Smock (2008, p. 1) highlights the importance of interfaith dialogue as it “aims to defuse interfaith tensions that may cause future conflict or derive from previous conflict.” Interfaith dialogue is not a new phenomenon as Mufti Junaid Akbar stated “wherever the prophet has a chance to solve the problem by dialogue he solved it by dialogue.” As a pre-service teacher I discussed education as a gateway to interfaith dialogue with Mufti Junaid Akbar who is also a teacher and asserts the importance of interfaith dialogue in peacemaking but also admits the difficulty in achieving interfaith dialogue due to the lack of participation and sees education as a powerful tool in changing this difficulty. Holden (2006) conducted research on Islamic perspectives of Year Ten and Eleven students that highlights this difficulty with fifty percent of students believing Muslims are terrorists which inevitably leads to a lack of understanding, injustice and prejudice towards Islam. To combat these statistics Shatiq and Abu-Nimer (2007, p. 18) argue that interfaith dialogue can be achieved by “fostering strong educational programs in Islamic studies within the context of a pluralistic society.” By contextualising Islam through education the inherent meaning of Islam as being a religion of peace may be achieved to be a ground for interfaith dialogue (Yaran 2007, p. 88). Mufti Junaid Akbar strongly emphasised that the importance of education as it teaches true wealth which is identified in the following excerpt:
Wealth is something that never separates from a person ever... As soon as a person dies those things a person struggles with their entire life are the first to be separated from them… So in reality true wealth remains with a person in this world, in the grave and in the hereafter and that is the wealth of belief…True wealth is belief in God and virtuous acts which will never be separated from you.
Evidently, the promotion of true wealth by investing in the belief of virtuous acts enables the achievement of interfaith dialogue. As a result, education can be a successful gateway in achieving interfaith dialogue by encouraging the participation needed to foster understanding.
The identification of Islam as a violent religion is a reflection of the global consciousness created by the misinterpretation and misunderstanding of Islam on a spiritual and scriptural level. Clearly, globalisation plays an essential role in the mediatisation of religion that asserts Islam as a violent religion that reflects xenophobic and Eurocentric ideologies that creates a distinguished “us” and “them” dichotomy. The identification of Islam as the “Other” strongly effects the outcome of interfaith dialogue as participation is limited due to the negative connotations associated with Islam. However, inclusive and appropriate education of Islam is an essential tool in changing the current dichotomy and allowing interfaith dialogue to become more susceptible and successful in Australian society. Evidently, Mufti Junaid Akbar reinforced hope in the attainment interfaith dialogue by highlighting the misconceived internal and external issues surrounding Islam and realigning these misconceptions with the true essence of Islam.
Reference List
Alfonso, S, Keane, J & Merkel, W 2011, The future representative democracy, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Cavanaugh, WT 2006, ‘Does religion cause violence?’, Public Lecture held at St. Mary’s Church, Upper Coomera, pp.1-18.
Dalrymple, W 2004, ‘Islamophobia’, New Statesman, vol. 16, p.18.
Holden, S 2006, ‘Religious Relations’, Teacher: The National Education Magazine, March, p. 18.
Hopkins, L 2008, ‘Muslims, Turks and anti-Muslim discourse’, Australian Journal of Communications, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 41-56.
Lebling, B 1980, ‘Orientalists’, Journal of Palestine Studies, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 118-122.
Oomen, TK 1994, ‘Religious nationalism and democratic polity’, Sociology of Religion, vol. 55, pp. 455-472.
Rane, H, Nathie, M, Isakhan, B & Abdalla, M 2011, ‘Towards understanding what Australian Muslims really think’, Journal of Sociology, vol. 47, pp. 123-143.
Shatiq, M & Abu-Nimer, M 2007, Interfaith dialogue: A guide for Muslims, International Institute of Islamic Thought, Virginia, United States.
Smock, D 2008, Religion in world affairs: Its role in conflict and peace, United States Institute of Peace, viewed 12 September 2011,.
Swatos, WH 2005,’Globalisation theory and religious fundamentalism’, in P Kivisto (ed.), Illuminating social life: Classical and contemporary theory revisited, Sage, London, pp. 330-352.
Usami, MT 2006, The Noble Quran, Makataba Maariful Quaran, Karachi.
Volf, M 2000, ‘Forgiveness, reconciliation and justice’, Millenium, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 861-877.
Yaran, CS 2007, Understanding Islam, Dunedin Academic Press, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Religion and violence are intrinsically related in a continuous relationship that is derived from several factors including globalisation, misinterpretation and exclusivity. Volf (2000, p. 862) argues that “the resurgence of religion seems to go hand in hand with the resurgence of religiously legitimised violence… [as] religions are by nature violent.” However, when asked to describe religious violence Mufti Junaid Akbar maintained that violence within Islam is intolerable which asserts the misunderstood and misconstrued identity of what Islam is, even to a practicing Muslim. It can be argued that the construction of a religious identity promotes notions of exclusivity and isolation that act as a catalyst in mobilising causal factors of religious violence that essentially “define, propel and sustain conflict” (Smock 2008, p. 2). Essentially, globalisation or a worldly communal consciousness supports this exclusivity and allows understandings that were previously contextualised to be decontextualised giving rise to identifiers of fundamentalism (Swatos 2005, p. 332). Mufti Junaid Akbar asserted that those Muslims who are labeled fundamentalists are not Muslims as they do not understand the means of revelation which is corroborated by Oommen (1994) stating that fundamentalism is “text without context.” To support this claim I presented Mufti Junaid Akbar with a passage from the Quran in Surah 9:5 that states “fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in ever stratagem (of war).” As an isolated text it has an undeniable violent nature however it has not been contextualised with the Quran commentaries that Mufti Junaid Akbar presented in the Quran’s defense to place this passage in the original historical context. Evidently, religious violence is constructed through global means of exclusivity and identity that is essentially misinterpreted and misunderstood but it often exploited through global media mediums that asserts the cohesive relationship between religious violence and Islam.
Islamophobia is driven by the media’s ability to capture and frame moral fears and panic and position Islam in a negative light. Dalrymple (2004, p. 18) argues that Islamophobia is “the principal Western statement of bigotry against ‘the Other’.” In addition, Edward Said (cited in Lebling 1980, p. 119) describes the functions of ‘the Other’ which “has sought to reduce the richness of Arab life and civilisation to a set of easily manageable and unchanging stereotypes.” Thus, the fear of ‘the Other’ being Islam or Muslims has been indoctrinated by the media’s ability to frame and capture this fear that propagates an “us” and “them” dichotomy (Hopkins 2008, p. 46). This dichotomy gives rise to mediatisation which refers to “the tendency to acquire information about politics and to receive political messages form a plurality of sources in the mass media … that are in competition with each other for the attention of consumers” (Alonso, Keane & Merkel 2011, p. 204). Evidently, the mediatisation of Islam presents Islam in the public sphere as a phenomenon to be feared, exploited and discriminated against that essentially initiates Islamophobia within Australia. The media was a reoccurring issue Mufti Junaid Akbar raised and strongly expressed his opinion on the media’s portrayal of Islam in the following statement:
All the media does is show negative information about Islam. It will not inculcate a harmonious society, it will cause a lot of friction between the multi cultural people who live in that society… putting fear in the people, there is no message there... There is no chance that the Muslims are going to take over Australia. We want to live here like any other normal person in peace… You can’t deal with the media because they are very powerful. In the UK riots Muslims played a good part in solving that problem but you didn’t see that.
Mufti Junaid Akbar’s opinion is in corroboration with the assumptions many Australians have about Muslims that “their [Muslims] beliefs are antithetical to Australian values; that they [Muslims] cannot assimilate; that they [Muslims] are inherently violent and condone extremism” (Rane et al. 2011, p.129). Evidently, the media utilise xenophobic and Eurocentric notions to frame Islam as a religion associated with violence that effectively indoctrinates particular opinions in Australian society that have the potential to prevent interfaith dialogue due to either ignorance or a lack of understanding.
However, the education of Islam has the potential to overcome the negative representations of Islam and encourage community engagement in interfaith dialogue that is essentially an intrinsic component of peace. Smock (2008, p. 1) highlights the importance of interfaith dialogue as it “aims to defuse interfaith tensions that may cause future conflict or derive from previous conflict.” Interfaith dialogue is not a new phenomenon as Mufti Junaid Akbar stated “wherever the prophet has a chance to solve the problem by dialogue he solved it by dialogue.” As a pre-service teacher I discussed education as a gateway to interfaith dialogue with Mufti Junaid Akbar who is also a teacher and asserts the importance of interfaith dialogue in peacemaking but also admits the difficulty in achieving interfaith dialogue due to the lack of participation and sees education as a powerful tool in changing this difficulty. Holden (2006) conducted research on Islamic perspectives of Year Ten and Eleven students that highlights this difficulty with fifty percent of students believing Muslims are terrorists which inevitably leads to a lack of understanding, injustice and prejudice towards Islam. To combat these statistics Shatiq and Abu-Nimer (2007, p. 18) argue that interfaith dialogue can be achieved by “fostering strong educational programs in Islamic studies within the context of a pluralistic society.” By contextualising Islam through education the inherent meaning of Islam as being a religion of peace may be achieved to be a ground for interfaith dialogue (Yaran 2007, p. 88). Mufti Junaid Akbar strongly emphasised that the importance of education as it teaches true wealth which is identified in the following excerpt:
Wealth is something that never separates from a person ever... As soon as a person dies those things a person struggles with their entire life are the first to be separated from them… So in reality true wealth remains with a person in this world, in the grave and in the hereafter and that is the wealth of belief…True wealth is belief in God and virtuous acts which will never be separated from you.
Evidently, the promotion of true wealth by investing in the belief of virtuous acts enables the achievement of interfaith dialogue. As a result, education can be a successful gateway in achieving interfaith dialogue by encouraging the participation needed to foster understanding.
The identification of Islam as a violent religion is a reflection of the global consciousness created by the misinterpretation and misunderstanding of Islam on a spiritual and scriptural level. Clearly, globalisation plays an essential role in the mediatisation of religion that asserts Islam as a violent religion that reflects xenophobic and Eurocentric ideologies that creates a distinguished “us” and “them” dichotomy. The identification of Islam as the “Other” strongly effects the outcome of interfaith dialogue as participation is limited due to the negative connotations associated with Islam. However, inclusive and appropriate education of Islam is an essential tool in changing the current dichotomy and allowing interfaith dialogue to become more susceptible and successful in Australian society. Evidently, Mufti Junaid Akbar reinforced hope in the attainment interfaith dialogue by highlighting the misconceived internal and external issues surrounding Islam and realigning these misconceptions with the true essence of Islam.
Reference List
Alfonso, S, Keane, J & Merkel, W 2011, The future representative democracy, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Cavanaugh, WT 2006, ‘Does religion cause violence?’, Public Lecture held at St. Mary’s Church, Upper Coomera, pp.1-18.
Dalrymple, W 2004, ‘Islamophobia’, New Statesman, vol. 16, p.18.
Holden, S 2006, ‘Religious Relations’, Teacher: The National Education Magazine, March, p. 18.
Hopkins, L 2008, ‘Muslims, Turks and anti-Muslim discourse’, Australian Journal of Communications, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 41-56.
Lebling, B 1980, ‘Orientalists’, Journal of Palestine Studies, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 118-122.
Oomen, TK 1994, ‘Religious nationalism and democratic polity’, Sociology of Religion, vol. 55, pp. 455-472.
Rane, H, Nathie, M, Isakhan, B & Abdalla, M 2011, ‘Towards understanding what Australian Muslims really think’, Journal of Sociology, vol. 47, pp. 123-143.
Shatiq, M & Abu-Nimer, M 2007, Interfaith dialogue: A guide for Muslims, International Institute of Islamic Thought, Virginia, United States.
Smock, D 2008, Religion in world affairs: Its role in conflict and peace, United States Institute of Peace, viewed 12 September 2011,
Swatos, WH 2005,’Globalisation theory and religious fundamentalism’, in P Kivisto (ed.), Illuminating social life: Classical and contemporary theory revisited, Sage, London, pp. 330-352.
Usami, MT 2006, The Noble Quran, Makataba Maariful Quaran, Karachi.
Volf, M 2000, ‘Forgiveness, reconciliation and justice’, Millenium, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 861-877.
Yaran, CS 2007, Understanding Islam, Dunedin Academic Press, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
