What is secular and what is religious? As a Hindu I can be spiritual but not religious and vice versa. I can choose to be at any end of the spectrum. Yet, God's relevance matters so aptly said by Swami Vivekananda over a hundred years ago, but equally relevant now:

" All differences in this world are of degree, and not of kind, because oneness is the secret of everything.....As different streams having different sources all mingle their waters in the sea, so different tendencies, various though they appear, crooked or straight, all lead to God......Where can we go to find God if we cannot see Him in our own hearts and in every living being.....The moment I have realized God sitting in the temple of every human body, the moment I stand in reverence before every human being and see God in him - that moment I am free from bondage, everything that binds vanishes, and I am free......"

I haven't had more than a month of vacation in six years.

I finally took a (much needed) break from touring and traveling, for two months. A lot of that has been to be home with my wife as we prepared to welcome our newborn son, Conor, into the world. He was born on August 1st, and since then, I haven't really slept much! But it's been an amazing, recharging time: for my marriage, and for my own heart.

In this instance, I am so disappointed in the criticism of both the President and the House of Representatives. One of America's many illnesses that it is struggling with right now is a "24-7" work week mentality, and that strikes a huge blow to the heart of family. All families, of all sizes, need time to rest; specifically from work, so that you remember who you are. We are not defined by our jobs; we are defined by our love.

In either a year and a half, or in 5 1/2 years, President Obama will still be married, and still have two daughters. He will have the rest of his life to meditate on the leadership and decisions he made in his tenure as President; and in regards to his personal life, he will have to ask, like we all will, "Have i honored the sacred commandment to rest?"

I hope that in the weeks to come, critics of such things would stop and remember this truth, as they work so diligently to find solutions to the larger economic and political problems we face. Who knows - maybe the ideas and vision for the future won't come in the middle of the night at the oval office, but standing at the shores, staring at the ocean, for a moment, to breathe.

Our founding fathers were not fixated on religious expression as much as they were preserving the rights to do so. The issue we're currently facing is an unprecedented censoring of religious expression in American society by a small minority of people who find it offensive. The greatest problem a secular society faces is that if there is no room within the day-to-day functions of the society for religious expression, it will have to find another place for it.

So if people can't pray in schools; if God can't be mentioned in the public square, then God will become more of an important factor for people in the political spectrum. That is, people of faith won't care about policies and governances because they care more about their faith; therefore, they will identify with someone who believes in the right they have to express their faith.

I don't think it's strictly because Rick Perry is Christian. I think it's cause he believes in something. It's hard to know what the current administration believes in, because in every facet of leadership, they have attempted to be all things to all people.

Personally, I'd rather a politician say "I'm not sure what I believe in, but what I do believe in is people's right to practice it." That would be refreshing. I tend to agree that politics shouldn't be so religiously focused. However, when a society becomes increasingly secular, it's going to be expressed somewhere else.

The economic situation in the country is affecting us all; and those affected the most are hit hardest. "Around 14 million people in the U.S. are jobless today. Yet, several states -- even some that are experiencing economic recoveries -- have begun to cut jobless benefits, according to recent data obtained by 24/7 Wall St. (Read more: "9 States Slashing Unemployment Benefits")

As a Hindu American when I read this, the question that comes to my mind is: So what is the Hindu American community doing about it? Having just co-hosted the first Dharmic Hindu Seva Conference at the White House, I see some of us are acting proactively. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, "What affects one, affects all".

In 2008, during his campaign, President Obama's affiliation with certain religious leadership was put into question. Namely, that of Jeremiah Wright see this link.

During the controversy, President Obama simply responded by stating that Rev. Wright "...is like an old uncle who says things I don't always agree with," telling a Jewish group that "...everyone has someone like that in their family."

The American people listened to the then candidate Obama, and believed him. Since his election, he has done nothing of the sort that would lead people to believe that he shares all the same radical views as Jeremiah Wright. Are they friends? Sure? I don't know. There was a period of time where their paths intersected, but time moves on, and so do some affiliations and acquaintances.

John Hagee and C.Peter Wagner are two endorsers of 51 National, Local, and Youth oriented pastors listed on the website of www.theresponseusa.com (which, by the way, includes the Catholic Bishop emeritus of Corpus Cristi, Bishop Rene Henry Gracida). What is happening with this event is that John Hagee is agreeing with a vision set by the Governor, and not vice versa. Him endorsing the event is not Rick Perry endorsing all of Hagee's beliefs - much the same as President Obama not agreeing with all that Jeremiah Wright believes.

When Rick Perry ran for office, I'm assuming he didn't say he was an agnostic, and upon his first day of office, show up to work with a 40 foot replica of the Ten Commandments to put in the middle of the floor of the Texas State Legislature. No. In fact, he's been quite consistent; and whether you agree with his beliefs or not, you can't say he hasn't been forthcoming. We are however, at an impasse as a nation; a time of great social upheaval, be it good or bad. That is something everyone can agree upon. In terms of solutions, some people would rather just focus on solving issues rationally and humanistically, without room for spiritual or moral opinions that would "interfere."

Consider the "Freedom From Religion Foundation," and their lawsuit against Governor Perry. Well, Governor Perry disagrees, and until the court rules, he's allowed to.

Although this wasn't the question asked, my greater concern is a lack of social element of the Gospel. If you're going to bring that many Christians together to pray, is there anything else they could do to make known the love of God? We have a responsibility to intercede in prayer, but we have an equal responsibility to be the hands and feet of Jesus; to care for the poor and the broken. Worship heals the heart, but the body can still be hungry.

I will leave you with the words of Jesus, not a Governor, or an Old Testament prophet, when He speaks of fasting in the Bible. Here's what He says:

"When you fast, don't make yourselves look sad. The hypocrites do that. Don't be like the hypocrites. They make their faces look strange to show people that they are fasting. I tell you the truth, those hypocrites already have their full reward. So when you fast, make yourself look nice. Wash your face. Then people will not know that you are fasting. But your Father that you cannot see will see you. Your Father sees the things that are done in secret. And he will reward you." - Matthew 6:16-18

Dancing on the grave of the enemy--a human impulse, perhaps, but not one that we want to encourage if our spirituality is rooted in interconnection and compassion. Death is one aspect of the Goddess, but death in service of the regeneration of life.

Rather than rejoice, we might feel sorrow and grief--not that Osama bin Laden is dead, but that his death cannot bring back those who lost their lives in the attacks on 9-11 a decade ago, nor the hundreds of thousands who have died since. Not the lives of the young people who served in our military, nor those who perished in our attacks on Iraq and our continuing war in Afghanistan. Not the lives of the guilty who instigated violence nor the lives of the innocent who were simply its victims. His death cannot restore the limbs of the wounded nor the years lost for those wrongly imprisoned. His death cannot heal the scars of the tortured. Not Osama himself, but our own choices in response to his acts have eroded our own freedoms and undermined our commitment to justice.

We're Americans--we love underdogs but despise losers. Now, we've 'won'. Now it's time to leave the battlefield on that note of triumph and turn our attention and our resources to the needs here at home and the needs of the planet we live on. All over the Middle East, we see movements rising that reject dictators and the rule of fanatics and long for democracy. We'd best move quickly to knit up the shredded fabric of our own if we hope to serve as an example. Then, out of this saga of death and revenge, we may yet find some small measure of hope and regeneration.

Pumping our fists in victory or celebrating in the streets is probably not the best Christian response to anyone's death, even the death of a dangerous and violent enemy. The world can be relieved that a leader as evil as bin Laden can no longer plot the death of innocents. We can be grateful that his cynical manipulation and distortion of Islam into a message of division and hate is finally ended. Even if we sharply dissented from the moral logic or wisdom of the failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan of the last decade, we can be glad that a mass murderer has been stopped and brought to justice. And we can be hopeful that the face of the Arab world might now become the young non-violent activists for democracy rather than a self-righteous smirk of a self-promoting video character who tells us he is going to kill our children if we don't submit to his hateful agenda.

But book of Proverbs clearly warns us to "not rejoice when your enemies fall." And, in the hardest words of the gospel, Jesus tells us to "love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." Neither of those texts have been very popular pulpit texts during the years since 9/11. So as people of faith, we don't celebrate the death of other human beings, regardless of how twisted or evil they have become.

The chants of "USA, USA, USA" are also not the best mantra for believers who should know that they are meant to be Christians first and Americans second. It has not been an attractive feature of Christians' response to terrorism that we have too often valued the innocent lives of Americans who have been lost more than the innocents who were in the way of our wars in response to the attacks against us. Christians are simply not allowed to so selectively value human life.

The violence of terrorism, the violence of war, and even the violent reprisal against Osama bin Laden on Sunday should all be causes for our deeper reflection and even repentance for how we have allowed the seeds of such destruction to take root and grow in our hearts and in our world. Neither does this successful action vindicate all the other violence we have committed in the name of our "War on Terror." If anything, Sunday's success showed the effectiveness of what were good intelligence and "policing activities" more than the endless prosecution of wars of occupation, as some have pointed out. More innocent civilians have become the "collateral damage" of our wars than than from the direct assault on civilians undertaken by bin Laden and his Al Qaeda assassins on September 11. This fact, by the standards of Just War Theory, which is at least given lip service in most churches, is a grave moral failing. Violence is always more a sign of our failures than our successes and is not easily exorcized from the world by the killing of one man, no matter how dangerous or symbolic he may be.

As long as Osama bin Laden remained at large and able to launch his hateful rhetoric, we seemed stuck in failed wars as our best response to terrorism. But perhaps with bin Laden now gone and rendered irrelevant, we can turn the page on the ten-year trauma of 9/11 and find better ways to settle our conflicts, defend ourselves, and undermine the threats against peace. I believe one of our most hopeful ways forward is to now unite across religious lines and learn again together "the things that make for peace."

How might we appropriately address the death of a mass murderer?

The Torah describes Moses and Miriam leading the ancient People Israel in a celebratory song after the tyrannical Pharaoh and his Army have been overwhelmed by the waters of the Red Sea.

Later, the Rabbis gave a new overtone to the story: "The angels," they said, " began to dance and sing as well, but God rebuked them: 'These also are the work of My hands. We must not rejoice at their deaths!' "

Notice the complexity of the teaching: Human beings go unrebuked when they celebrate the downfall and death of a tyrant; but the Rabbis are addressing our higher selves, trying to move us into a higher place. (The legend is certainly not aimed at "angels.")

Similarly, we are taught that at the Passover Seder, when we recite the plagues that fell upon the Egyptians, we must drip out the wine from our cups as we mention each plague, lest we drink that wine to celebrate these disasters that befell our oppressors.

I myself would have been a lot happier to see Bin Laden arrested to stand trial, but assuming the report that he violently resisted arrest is true, I have no objection to his having been killed.

Yet I was dismayed by the quasi-sports-victory tone of the celebrations that arose around the country -- chanting "U-S-A, U-S-A," for instance.

What I myself felt was more like "Sad necessity" -- and I would have preferred a mournful remembrance of the innocent dead of the Twin Towers and of Iraq and Afghanistan -- a thoughtful reexamination of how easy it is to turn abominable violence against us into a justification for indiscriminate violence by us.

Can we now say, "Enough, enough!" -- refuse to drink the intoxicating triumphalist wine of celebration, and turn our attention and commitment to end these wars that take on a deadly "life" of their own?

With blessings of shalom, salaam, peace --
Arthur

Rabbi Arthur Waskow, director, The Shalom Center http://www.theshalomcenter.org; newest book, co-authored with R. Phyllis Berman, is Freedom Journeys: The Tale of Exodus & Wilderness across Millennia (Jewish Lights), available from "Shouk Shalom," our on-line bookstore --
https://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/602/t/4180/shop/shop.jsp?storefront_KEY=698

The world is responding to the horrible devastation from the earthquake and tsunami in Japan with compassion and offers of help. The world is watching the explosions at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plants, the releases of nuclear radiation and the potential for meltdown and now the difficulties at other nuclear power plants in Japan, with horror and fear. Horror at the unknown of what will happen to further harm the Japanese people, and fear of nuclear power. The spit atom is not just another source of energy, it is the image of ultimate power. For some, it is God's power alone.

Washington Post blogs have moved. If you are subscribing to the RSS feed for this blog, you may need to re-subscribe with the new feed URL. If you stop receiving updates from this feed, please visit http://www.washingtonpost.com/rss where you can see all of our feeds and re-subscribe to this feed or sign up for new ones.

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, will begin holding hearings Thursday on "the extent of the radicalization of American Muslims." Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, has characterized the hearings as "a witch hunt." Are they?

King also has said he believes the "self-radicalization" of American Muslims represents "a very small minority" of the overall community. What are the potential consequences of singling out one religious group?

This week's House Homeland Security Committee hearing on Radicalization in the American Muslim Community, led by Rep. Peter King (R-NY), should be of grave concern to all Americans. My opposition to this hearing is not based on an opposition to investigations into the relation of radicalization and terrorism - Muslim or otherwise. No one questions the right -- indeed the obligation -- of this Committee and other appropriate government institutions to defend America from both external and internal threats. I acknowledge that a small number of radical Muslims exist in America. My concern is that the hearing failed to recognize that radicalism is not limited to Islam, nor are most Muslims radical. If this hearing were part of a series of hearings on radicalism it would have be justified; but as an isolated inquiry, it was not.

Second, this hearing did not occur in a vacuum. It was supported by other Members of Congress, whose statements tarred the entire Muslim community and suggested the community has failed to work with law enforcement officials to prevent terror. While some who have spoken out have since modified their positions, and we commend those who have done so, the filters created by those comments feed into fears that the hearing reflects a view of "collective guilt" that is anathema to the values of our country. A hallmark of our justice system is the belief that individuals are responsible for their actions, and that innocence is presumed until guilt is proven. In contrast, in part because of the statements of people in power, one of the main themes of the hearing was the blaming of an entire faith for the actions of troubled and guilty individuals. Mere rhetoric condemning that interpretation of the hearing does not suffice.

As a Jew and an American, the atmosphere surrounding the hearing and the messages it conveyed is troubling. Both in design and execution, the hearing was at odds with our proud tradition of religious pluralism. Our Pilgrim forebears fled religious persecution. The three religion clauses of the Constitution were enshrined to eliminate the notion that one religion would be favored or preferred, while others disadvantaged or demonized. Today, Muslim Americans are facing a new kind of bias and at times outright discrimination, based on stereotypes and fear of the unknown.

Further, no religious faith, including Christianity, Judaism, or Islam, should ever be characterized by the most debased words or deeds of its members. As Jews, who have throughout history been the victims of the worst forms of religious stereotyping, we know all too well the danger that threatens when a religion is demonized.

For all these reasons, in the wake of the hearing, I hope that the members of the committee will speak clearly about the danger of allowing the Muslim community writ large to be vilified, that they will recognize and address the threats posed by religious extremism of all faiths, and will focus on positive ways that moderate religious forces can and do contain and undercut religious extremism - starting with the American Muslim community.

The approximately three million Muslim Americans can be found in every state in the union. Yesterday, we did not hear much about the majority of Muslim Americans who are moderate. Americans need to explore how to strengthen this Muslim moderate community, giving them a stronger voice and a more visible seat at the table. Yesterday's hearing failed to do that.

Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough recently spoke about the threat of radicalization and the role that the Muslim community plays in combating radicalization at home as part of a larger strategy to defeat al Qaeda:

"Of course, the most effective voices against al Qaeda's warped worldview and interpretation of Islam are other Muslims. As the President said in Cairo, "Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism - it is an important part of promoting peace." Around the world, poll after poll shows that the overwhelming majority of Muslims reject al Qaeda. Many Muslim leaders around the world have loudly condemned al Qaeda and its murderous tactics and declared that it is a violation of Islam to murder innocent people. They've spoken out at great risk to their lives, and some have lost their lives because of it."

This is true on a global level as well. We should be able to contain extremists in the Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish and Christian communities by strengthening moderate religious expressions, and we have not been very successful at that. We fail to understand that often the embrace of, for example, moderate Islam by America, by Western countries generally, or by Christians and Jews, can often be used by the extremists in ways that resonate strongly in the Muslim street. The extremists argue that moderates are agents of Western cultural or religious colonialism and Western Imperialism. We have failed to fashion effective ways to support moderate Islam without allowing our embrace to be used against them. That would be an outstanding subject for a hearing!

Domestically the analysis is different. Here moderate Islam is already playing a pivotal role in containing Muslim extremism. Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca testified that moderate Muslims have played a pivotal role in exposing terrorist plots emanating from within their community. According to a Duke University study , the largest single source of initial information that brought terror suspects to the attention of the U.S. government was tips from the Muslim-American community. Muslim-Americans provided initial tips in 40% of cases involving terror suspects since 9/11. To the extent that the hearing drove a wedge between the Muslim community and authorities charged to protect us all it undercuts its very purpose.

Rather than focusing only on the radical fringe, Rep. King should have focused on what each of us, Muslim, Jew, Christian, Hindu, Catholic, Buddhist and others, can do to ensure that our nation is welcoming to all and is prepared to encourage moderate forces at home and abroad. One look at the world today makes it clear that the American tradition of religious freedom has allowed a multitude of faiths to thrive in the U.S. in ways unmatched elsewhere in the world. And that same freedom has ensured that our nation has not experienced the same type of religious strife seen, for example, in Europe. America does not pit faith against faith; we celebrate all faiths. That is the noble legacy that has been our hallmark for more than 200 years and has made us the envy of the world. For that reason, and so many others, hearings such as these that come across as anti-Muslim (or anti-any religion) undermine America's strength and the sense of common purpose.