RELIGION AND PEACE

 

R. R. DIWAKAR

 

There was a time in the history of political institutions when religion had the power to control political decisions. There was also a time when kings and emperors, at least in India, went to religious Gurus for counsel. More than two thousand years ago, Asoka of Pataliputra struck by remorse on account of the bloody war he waged against Kalinga, turned to religion even while continuing to be an emperor. He is, in the eyes of some historians, the greatest emperor who ever ruled in any country. But for reasons which cannot be enumerated here, politics and religion and even morality for the matter of that, were gradually divorced and we see a spectacle today when religion and morality seem to be completely out of bounds in politics and especially in the matter of peace and war, and preparations for war.

 

Even if one argues that religion and morality have only to do with the individual soul and personal conduct, one cannot be blind to the fact that man’s life and his integral being and his total approach cannot be split up so mechanically. Whatever a man believes and does has its own impact on society, man being essentially a social being. We cannot isolate man’s religious and moral beliefs from his beliefs in economic and social theories. Nor can man be moral and immoral in parts unless he is a split personality. And a split personality is a sick personality, and not a moral progressive human being. If we once concede that it is normal for human beings to be partly moral and partly immoral, we open the floodgates of double thinking and hypocrisy and all kinds of deterioration in human values and human conduct.

 

It was in this context that Gandhi emphasised the integrated outlook on life. He refused to recognise compartments in his approach to problems and said, whether it is religion or politics or economics, all of them must be based on the truth of human values and search for that truth. He saw that politics of his time and of earlier days was polluted and full of hypocricy, double thinking and double acting and therefore wholly weak and corrupt. He thought of spiritualising politics and raising it to the level of truthfulness and honesty which could be tested by moral considerations. His religion, as he put it, was not merely doctrinal and ritualistic as religion is usually understood; but it was the religion underlying all religions, namely truth, the law of human evolution. To him religion meant truth and the essence of moral life as dictated by the inner conscience. Even God can be denied and is denied and decried but truth cannot be denied and is not decried, because one can test it by his own experience. Search for truth which can be testified by one’s own conscience is the essence of the religious spirit.

 

What do we see today all round, especially in the matter of world peace and peace between nation and nation? And what are religions and religious heads, and religious people doing about it? Can real religion be lived and practised when the mind is full of fear, insecurity, uncertainty? Is not peace, the sense of security, the feeling that there is an atmosphere of friendliness and harmony, essential for a truly religious life. But precisely it is religions, religious heads, and religious people who do not seem to be vitally or very much concerned with peace, with a world without war, a world where human beings and nations would live in an atmosphere of friendliness and mutual co-operation. At any rate, even though some religious heads and men of religion express their casual concern, there does not seem to be a universal religious attempt, a concerted, coordinated massive effort to establish peace, peace without a ceaseless preparation of war, peace which is not charged with the fear of war at any moment–and a war, a nuclear war which would wipe humanity itself out of existence with all vaunted civilization.

 

It must be realised, now or never, that peace and war are not something which can be left to politicians or military authorities. No activity of man and none of the affairs of men in fact, could be left to themselves without religion and morality. The tragedy of our times is that while we seem to have progressed immensely in our control of matter, we are lacking miserably in controlling the elemental brutal urges in ourselves which make demons of us, ruthless, mechanical robots who have no count for human values, values which alone can elevate man to a higher level of happy, peaceful, harmonious existence.

 

While there have been attempts by politicians and statesmen to create a League of Nations and then a United Nations UNESCO, religions, religious heads and religious men of the world have never made any organised attempt to consider the problem of peace among nations.

 

It was in this area that the Kyoto Conference (1970) took a definitely advanced step so far as religions, religious heads, men of religion are concerned. More than two hundred delegates from more than forty countries representing not only the main religions but several denominational religions were assembled. Not one of them spoke of his own religion or its tenets, etc., but was concerned with the human condition obtaining today on this globe of ours. The name was “World Conference of Religions for Peace.” But peace did not merely mean absence of war. It was much more than that. The search for peace and the establishment of peace has to be linked up with (a) the protection and preservation of Human Rights as defined and enumerated by the United Nations Organisation in 1948; (b) the development of peoples and countries which have remained behind in securing the common amenities necessary for human living; and (c) disarmament, without which all talk of peace is moonshine.

 

Today it happens that religion and religious concern and area of interest has shrunk and religion has shut itself into a shell of its own, instead of comprehending the whole of human life and human affairs. The word Dharma, the law of being, is the one which appropriately means and includes the totality of human life, its proper unfolding and evolution towards happier and more harmonious existence. One would wonder how and why a United Religious Organisation did not come into existence far earlier than a United Nations Organisation. Politicians are concerned only with the political life of the people, economists with the economic life, and social workers with the social life of the people. It is religion which concerns itself with the totality of the human being, his emancipation, his freedom, his dignity, his total progress and unfoldment of all the potentialities with which man is endowed. If men continue to be poor, to be harrassed, to be condemned to slavery, exposed to exploitation, deprived of the means of development on account socio-economic and political systems and structures, who else but men inspired by religion and with highly altruistic motives can concern themselves with the human condition, without any personal or selfish aims? It is time therefore that in addition to “Unitive Understanding”, steps are envisaged which would usher into existence a United Religious Organisation, which will concern itself with the totality of the human condition and its great future.

 

Back