Role of Religion in violence:
By Dr. Syed Ehtisham
A Historic review of its Genesis
“Organized religion is like organized crime, it preys on people’s weaknesses, generates huge profits for its operators and is almost impossible to eradicate”
Mike Hermann
The above quote is defeatist. It appears to advocate accommodation
Violence in the current day and age is regarded by most mainstream Muslims as a reaction to inequity, injustice, and disempowerment, real or perceived. Stronger nations attack weaker ones when the latter have either refused to be compliant with the objectives of the former or have actually managed to hurt their economic interests.
In Western countries, violence is attributed variously to fanaticism, clash of cultures, poverty, lack of education etc. Muslim residents of Western countries, by and large, condemn acts of violence against innocent people, but would want the people in the West to understand the reasons why a person would deliberately sacrifice his life.
Examples of violence by the strong on the weak are many and come from the very earliest times of known history. Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Persian, Arab, British, French, Spanish, Dutch, Portuguese, Italian, and Russian empires come easily to mind. They invaded the weaker people to exploit resources of their countries. World wars were fought for the resources of colonies. Post WWII, with weakening of the Colonial powers, the USA took up the role and intervened directly by naked aggression and through surrogates.
Christians were persecuted by Romans, and Muslims by their own people. But violence in the name of religion was first definitively documented in the late fifteenth century Papal B which authorized the king of Portugal “to attack, conquer and subdue Saracens, pagans and other non-believers who were inimical to Christ; to capture their goods and territories; to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to transfer their lands and properties to the king of Portugal and his successors”.
The common thread that runs through all aggression is greed or fear that the new creed would supplant the old one and control mode of production. When resources were no longer at stake diverse beliefs were tolerated as during the period of Muslim rule in India. The British did send preachers to “spread the word of God” and when natives killed an odd missionary, gunboats followed.
Resistance to aggression against heavy odds is equally common.
All animals practice aggression against their own kind, and against other kinds, to a greater or lesser degree. The complexity of the practice appears to be directly related to intelligence. Lower orders kill, generally members of other species, for food. Others may injure/wound rivals for the affections of a female or to control several comely ones, but generally do not kill them.
Violence for greed is the exclusive domain of Homo sapiens.
I will be accused of committing heresy, but am not. All religions are based on the fear of the unknown. They were, and are practiced to propitiate the supernatural for the individual/common good. In any case religious persons do not require any rationale to castigate difference of opinion. All “non-divinely” inspired religions worshipped natural phenomenon, lightening, rain, storms, earthquakes, fire, floods, sun, and moon etc. Male dominance had not taken firm roots, so they had female deities in nearly equal numbers.
“Divinely inspired”[i] religions exhort us to fear God, the Day of Judgment, reward for good, retribution for evil, sight unseen. God has sent messengers with a set of instructions on a body of beliefs, code of behavior, on how to propitiate Him, with out a word on how to find or recognize Him. One is expected to believe in His existence with out reason or rationale. We are told that our faculties are not developed enough or God has not endowed us adequately enough to be able to do so. God remains largely unknown.
All religions reacted to the prevailing milieu, and confronted the established order. They appealed mainly to the disempowered, the destitute and the poor. The rich, the powerful, and the learned had all the privileges already. They ignored the emergent creed, did not see any good reason for change, which would, in any case, affect their interests adversely, and tried to suppress the new forces with naked force, bribes and temptation, whatever would work. The prophet of Islam was offered riches, women, and positions of authority, if he would only give up his “pointless” preaching. They failed in every instance with all the prophets.
Religions initially attempted to eradicate social evils, and economic inequities. The ruling classes took measures to preserve their authority. They controlled the “ administration, the legislature, and the judiciary”[ii]. They treated the poor abominably, indulged in slavery, tightened their stranglehold by such measures as exorbitant interest rates, forced and bonded labor, serfdom, and claim on the major part of the produce of the peasantry. The ruled had no recourse. All the levers of power were in the hands of the ruling class. If they ran away and were caught, the punishment would be worse than death. If not caught, starvation would be the fate of most.
It must be clearly understood that religion did not hit at the root of privilege. It only aimed at amelioration of the living conditions of the powerless. Private property remained sacrosanct. Slavery was not abolished; the owners were exhorted to treat them humanely. Women remained the underclass, though they were lulled with meaningless honors like the paradise is at the feet of mothers or that their word was law as in ancient India[iii]
Written and shared by Dr. Syed Ehtisham