Religion, Heal Thyself First
Can religion cure the world’s biggest social problems?! Who are we kidding?
The major challenge to religion, in this next period of human history, at least at this moment, is not whether religion can cure the world’s biggest social problems but whether it will make things incredibly worse and I say this as a religious person (an observant Jew) with a disciplined spiritual practice.
After the past three hundred years of modernity in which, for good reason, religion was minimized, privatized, and dismissed, religion has reemerged as a central force. This is not surprising, for at the same time that modernity radically questioned religion’s truth claims and thankfully liberated human reason from the superstition, literalness, and overextending of religion, which led to miraculous and revolutionary achievements in our ability to master the material world, e.g., the cure of diseases and the amazing increase in life span, it also resulted in a world disenchanted and disqualified - a wasteland (in T.S. Eliot’s apt description) that left human beings bereft of a sense of meaning, depth, and wholeness – precisely the purview of religion and spirituality and so we have a reawakening. But it sure does seem that in this initial period of the reincarnation of religion, that religion worldwide has done more damage than good – whether by inspiring suicide bombers, leading and inflaming culture wars, stopping scientific advances, or promulgating nasty moral judgments about fellow citizens especially in the area of sexuality.
The determining question as to whether religion will contribute to enhance our capacity to evolve and our ability to address our many challenges or whether religion will take us back to the fourteenth century is this:
Will we religious leadership and religious people simply revert back to a pre-modern arrogance and overreaching and assume that because the limits of modernity have been realized we/religion have the truth about every aspect of life or have we learned and internalized the legitimate limits and humility imposed upon religion by the modern developments in other fields of knowledge - science, psychology, medicine, physics, anthropology, etc. and by the post-modern realization that truth, at least as human beings are capable of attaining truth, is contextual, constructed, and plural. If religion can not include the partial truths of modern and post-modern disciplines while transcending their excesses then not only will religion not help cure the world’s biggest social problems but will dangerously exacerbate them.
For religion to be a substantive force in helping to cure the world’s biggest social problems, its adherents will need to worry far more about their own souls and other peoples bodies than their own bodies and other peoples souls. Religious communities will need to spend more time engaged in moral self-critique than in casting moral blame. They will need to model and witness their truths rather than proselytize, evangelize, dismiss or coerce others.
Religious leaders will need to stop using religion to simply affirm their already held political positions and ideologies (whether on the right or the left as if God is so small as to be a conservative or a liberal) and recover the deeper religious truth that points to the infinite and therefore recognizes the finitude and the partial truth of every position and challenges the sufficiency of any political position (especially one’s own) until the world is healed of all injustice.
Religion will need to know its limits It is a wisdom and practice - a science, a technology - of our inner psycho-spiritual lives and not as an explanation – a science - of the material world. It will need to privilege acts of compassion over pieties, meaning over moralizing, justice over judgmentalism, caring over creed, healing over dogma, and humility over self-righteousness.
Religion will need to remember and embody that the most genuine spirituality and religious life is not making a leap into some mystical oneness but making a leap of empathy and solidarity with other human beings, especially the stranger – the person who really is different, who is other from us, but who like us is an Image of God.
To put it simply, religion clearly is one of the most powerful and combustible forces in human life. It can inspire death cults and Kingdom of Nights and it can evoke sacrificial love and life-affirming compassion. And contrary to what we would like to believe, there is no necessary connection between being a religious or spiritual person and being a moral or compassionate person. So perhaps, as religion again emerges in the public arena, it is time for each of us, especially those of us who consider ourselves religious or spiritual and who are members of religious communities, to continuously be asking ourselves (rather than others) whether our religious wisdom and practices are indeed working. Are they actually helping us to know more clearly the truth about who we really are and our place in the world and are they actually making us ever more compassionate to others - the very purpose, according to the greatest Jewish philosopher Maimonides, of every piece of religious wisdom and practice.
When religious people can answer yes to this every day then religious believers will indeed help, along with all sorts of other believers and non-believers, to cure the world’s biggest social problems.
By
Irwin Kula
|
December 6, 2007; 10:07 AM ET
Share This:
Technorati
| Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: Good Intentions Not Enough |
Next: Casting for Votes, not Debate
Posted by: zxevil160 | March 12, 2008 10:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
b0ka6U U cool ))
Posted by: zxevil160 | March 12, 2008 10:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
b0ka6U U cool ))
Posted by: zxevil160 | March 12, 2008 10:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
In my opinion organized religion has been the single most evil institution in the history of mankind.
The fundamental Problem is that adherents of any particular faith have to believe that their religion is superior to any other. After all, what does one get from religion other than a sense of belonging to an exclusive club. A kind of country club membership. I see all organized religion as a business. The people in charge have to continue to grow the business. And, in order to do so, they try and make a larger and larger percentage of people believe that their product is better than their rivals. Like Coke and Pepsi, each will tell you that their product is better when deep down it is all sugared water.
The other problem, when it comes to religion, is the brainwashing factor. It is so easy to take a bunch of people at an impressionably young age and fill them with the poison of religious bigotary. If I could be granted one wish in the world it would be to ban any person under the age of 21 from reading the Koran, Bible, Gita, Granth Sahib, or any so called holy book. If one does not read a religious book with a critical mind it becomes mere propoganda, and I believe children are not mature enough to avoid falling into the propoganda trap. Once they are hooked, they are gone for good. Even as adults they will never be able to look at the their own religious books and dogmas with a critical eye. They will rationalize, make excuses, find scapegoats, go through all manner of twisted logic to somehow avoid taking a critical look at their faith. This is not limited to Muslims. Sure Islam is the biggest problem now, but one only needs to go back a short period in history to see other faiths going through similar cycles. After all it was not Muslims who threatened to Put Gallileo in jail for daring to say that the earth went around the sun.
I don't know what the answer is. As long as the childhood brainwashing goes on, there will be an endless supply of mindless robots with the same evil poison in their brains. The prospect is scary.
Posted by: rick | December 14, 2007 10:13 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Thank you for this post, Rabbi. I wish more of our spirtitual leaders shared this point of view.
Posted by: Mad Love | December 14, 2007 1:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
From the New York Times
Islam’s Silent Moderates
By AYAAN HIRSI ALI
Published: December 7, 2007
The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with 100 stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. (Koran 24:
"The key to ending this tyranny of interpretation of the Koran is within the Koran itself, if the people have the courage to use it."
IN the last few weeks, in three widely publicized episodes, we have seen Islamic justice enacted in ways that should make Muslim moderates rise up in horror.
A 20-year-old woman from Qatif, Saudi Arabia, reported that she had been abducted by several men and repeatedly raped. But judges found the victim herself to be guilty. Her crime is called “mingling”: when she was abducted, she was in a car with a man not related to her by blood or marriage, and in Saudi Arabia, that is illegal. Last month, she was sentenced to six months in prison and 200 lashes with a bamboo cane.
Two hundred lashes are enough to kill a strong man. Women usually receive no more than 30 lashes at a time, which means that for seven weeks the “girl from Qatif,” as she’s usually described in news articles, will dread her next session with Islamic justice. When she is released, her life will certainly never return to normal: already there have been reports that her brother has tried to kill her because her “crime” has tarnished her family’s honor.
We also saw Islamic justice in action in Sudan, when a 54-year-old British teacher named Gillian Gibbons was sentenced to 15 days in jail before the government pardoned her this week; she could have faced 40 lashes. When she began a reading project with her class involving a teddy bear, Ms. Gibbons suggested the children choose a name for it. They chose Muhammad; she let them do it. This was deemed to be blasphemy.
Then there’s Taslima Nasreen, the 45-year-old Bangladeshi writer who bravely defends women’s rights in the Muslim world. Forced to flee Bangladesh, she has been living in India. But Muslim groups there want her expelled, and one has offered 500,000 rupees for her head. In August she was assaulted by Muslim militants in Hyderabad, and in recent weeks she has had to leave Calcutta and then Rajasthan. Taslima Nasreen’s visa expires next year, and she fears she will not be allowed to live in India again.
It is often said that Islam has been “hijacked” by a small extremist group of radical fundamentalists. The vast majority of Muslims are said to be moderates.
But where are the moderates? Where are the Muslim voices raised over the terrible injustice of incidents like these? How many Muslims are willing to stand up and say, in the case of the girl from Qatif, that this manner of justice is appalling, brutal and bigoted — and that no matter who said it was the right thing to do, and how long ago it was said, this should no longer be done?
Usually, Muslim groups like the Organization of the Islamic Conference are quick to defend any affront to the image of Islam. The organization, which represents 57 Muslim states, sent four ambassadors to the leader of my political party in the Netherlands asking him to expel me from Parliament after I gave a newspaper interview in 2003 noting that by Western standards some of the Prophet Muhammad’s behavior would be unconscionable. A few years later, Muslim ambassadors to Denmark protested the cartoons of Muhammad and demanded that their perpetrators be prosecuted.
But while the incidents in Saudi Arabia, Sudan and India have done more to damage the image of Islamic justice than a dozen cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad, the organizations that lined up to protest the hideous Danish offense to Islam are quiet now.
I wish there were more Islamic moderates. For example, I would welcome some guidance from that famous Muslim theologian of moderation, Tariq Ramadan. But when there is true suffering, real cruelty in the name of Islam, we hear, first, denial from all these organizations that are so concerned about Islam’s image. We hear that violence is not in the Koran, that Islam means peace, that this is a hijacking by extremists and a smear campaign and so on. But the evidence mounts up.
Islamic justice is a proud institution, one to which more than a billion people subscribe, at least in theory, and in the heart of the Islamic world it is the law of the land. But take a look at the verse above: more compelling even than the order to flog adulterers is the command that the believer show no compassion. It is this order to choose Allah above his sense of conscience and compassion that imprisons the Muslim in a mindset that is archaic and extreme.
If moderate Muslims believe there should be no compassion shown to the girl from Qatif, then what exactly makes them so moderate?
When a “moderate” Muslim’s sense of compassion and conscience collides with matters prescribed by Allah, he should choose compassion. Unless that happens much more widely, a moderate Islam will remain wishful thinking.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Posted by: Drew | December 12, 2007 11:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Rabbi Kula, thank you for a great post.
As our Congress spends time passing House Resolution (#847) which would recognize “the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith," our social problems mount with amazing complexity.
As the Texas legislature spends resources unanimously passing a bill that now requires "under God" to be placed in the Texas pledge of allegience, several of us remain concerned about the state of homelessness in even our most affluent Texas towns.
As far as religious leadership as a driving force for social change, I'm not holding my breath.
Posted by: Jeff P | December 12, 2007 11:15 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.











b0ka6U U cool ))