Interfaith Ethics – Prospects and Challenges

Interfaith Ethics – Prospects and Challenges

Israel Selvanayagam

Abstract

Apparently all humans share some kind of common good and the Bible affirms God as the source of all good gifts. The so called fruits of the Spirit such as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, fidelity, gentleness and self-control, in various measures, are shared by scriptures and lives of people of other faiths. Then there are distinctive emphases like compassion in Buddhism, non-injury in Jainism, self-disciple and purity of mind in Hinduim, surrender to the will of the Almighty as enshrined in the Islamic law and truthful living in Sikhism. In a world torn by wars and conflicts, drawing insights from different traditions, is provision of a world ethic possible? How is it different from many codes and charters recognized already internationally? How to solve the dilemmas involved in using lesser violence with justice for removing greater violence of injustice? Most important question is as what makes a person morally aware or ethically conscious so that good deeds accrue spontaneously? This paper offers some reflections at the end on visions, values and volition which are interrelated.

Key Words: common good, global ethics, media recognition, vision, value and volition.

Questions for Discussion

Hopefully you have a few friends among people of other faiths. You must have liked something in them, otherwise they cannot be your friends. Friendship is the best form of human relationship as you may already know. You may be willing to share with a group your answers for the following questions?  What is the reason you think that the quality and discipline of some friends from other faiths are greater than that of many Christians you know? Why Gandhi, a friend of some prominent persons of other faiths, came to be such a fascinating figure with deep spirituality and strong will to fight injustice? Why was he fascinated by the Sermon on the Mount and compared it to the Bhagavad Gītā? Is it true that every person has an ethical instinct which s/he can nurture or suppress? Can you think of any other source than God of all goodness, truth and beauty we see around? James writes:

Every good and generous action and every perfect gift come from above, from the Father who created the light of heaven. With him there is no variation, no play of passing shadows (Js. 1: 17).

How do you respond to the preamble of Peter’s speech in the house of Cornelius? He said: ‘Now I understand how true it is that God has no favourites, but that in every nation those who are god-fearing and do what is right are acceptable to him’ (Acts 10: 34). You may be already disturbed of your certainties about faith and its manifestation. There is more to ponder. Paul’s list of the harvest of the Spirit includes ‘love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness fidelity, gentleness and self-control.’ Paul continues to note that the Spirit is our source of life and the Spirit directs the course of it (Gal. 5: 2-24). In one of his most beautiful passages Paul exhorts the Philippians saying, ‘all that is true, all that is noble, all that is just and pure, all that is lovable and attractive, whatever is excellent and admirable – fill your thought with these things’ (Phil. 4: 8). When you see these fruits and qualities do you think that God through the Holy Spirit works in and among all people irrespective of their confessions and creeds? Of course this raises questions about the uniqueness of the Christian message and the need of evangelizing people of other faiths. One quick conclusion some people have arrived at is that it is the devil that deludes people and makes them appear to be good while in fact their inner life is in dark. Do you agree with this? Is there any tool to know the inner life of people except through the fruits they bear? We will now take you to the next step.

Ethical Teachings in other Religious Traditions

Just like in Judaism and Christianity the ethics of all religious traditions has some kind of dilemmas and strains. Take for example the golden rule of ‘do unto others what you want them to do to you.’ There is a profound insight in this rule in terms of attitude but there may be complications in its working out. If you want the other not to disturb you and you do not disturb her there is no point of contact. You may initiate hospitality and if there is no reciprocation you continue to live in frustration. Hospitality to the strangers and sojourners is not a concept but a recipe to invite and prepare food. Therefore, there may be a fruitful dialogue on implementing the golden rule.

If we start from the Hebrew tradition which continues to be held by the Jewish community, one may be surprised for two reasons. Firstly, since the Hebrew scripture is part of the Bible we need not give a separate recognition. Secondly, Jesus has fulfilled all the Hebrew laws and commandments and we need not acknowledge them. But we should avoid any notion of abrogation and supersession. Also we should be aware of the horrible consequences of the anti-Semitic attitudes that culminated in the assassination of six million Jews during the World War II. Therefore it is proper to approach the living Jewish community with respect, charity and love. And for us Christians the greatest gift of Jesus came from the Jewish tradition.

Once one of the scribes asked Jesus, ‘which is the first of all the commandments?’ He answered, ‘The first is, the Lord our God is the one Lord, and you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all our soul, with allyour mind, and with all your strength. The second is, you must love your neighbour as yourself. No other commandment is greater than these’ (Mk. 12:28-31; for slight difference see Mtt.22:34-40). The last sentence there appears as ‘Everything in the law and the prophets hangs on these two commandments’. In Mtt. 19:18, 19 Jesus summarises the law in a different way: ‘Do not murder; do not commit adultery; do not steal; do not give false evidence; honour your father and mother; and love your neighbour as yourself’. It is significant that all the commandments in this summary are from the Jewish tradition (see Ex. 20: 1-17; Levi. 19: 18; Deut. 6: 4-5). Therefore we have so much to hold together with Jews in the ethical plane and the fact of Christian uniqueness should not be allowed to obscure it. The repeated insistence on ‘love one another’ as evident in the New Testament is not for a doctrinal war with Jews but to find the concrete ways of sharing that ideal together.

Hinduism, a polycentric and complex religious tradition, starts with a sanātana dharma, an eternal way of life. The ethical framework is enshrined in the compound term of varṇāśrama dharma which has two components. First, each one has to perform the duty according to the varṇa (color, the prototype of caste); the four varṇas and their particular duties are as follows: the Brāhmaṇas will engage in the performance of ritual and teaching the Vedas and Śāstras; the Kṣatriys are responsible for fighting in war and ruling; the Vaiśyas are supposed to engage in trade and agriculture; and finally, the Śūdras are assigned to do all kinds of servitude. But over the centuries there have been confusion and mixture of castes due to socio-economic-religious changes.  The Dalits, Pañchamas or Chandālas have been the worst victims of these changes. Second, four stages in life are called āśrama dharma. Accordingly, there are the student stage (brahmacharya), household stage (gṛhastha),  forest dwelling stage (vānaprastha) and renunciation stage (sannyāsa). The Dharma Sūtras and Śāstras have elaborate teaching on the duties attached to these stages. Purity, self-control and duty for duty sake are the most recurring ideals.  All have to cohere around the dharma or the righteous order which corresponds to grand ritual, the regular functioning of the universe and a harmonious society.

The Bhagavad Gītā shares the concerns of the Dharma Sūtras and Śāstras and goes beyond them. Its central message is ‘fight and kill for the sake of restoring the dharma.’ Arjuna as the captain of the Pāṇdava army should not delude himself by thinking of the ill-effects of war and as a kṣatriya it is his duty to fight without attaching himself to the fruits or consequences. The author of the Gītā shares with Manu who says that it is better to do one’s own duty imperfectly than doing other’s perfectly.  The Gītā elaborates the connection between inbuilt impulses or volitions (guṇas) and moods, and actions.

The ethical dilemma about war and non-injury (ahimsā) in the Gītā has found expression in a remarkable manner.  For example, B.G. Tilak, a forerunner of the Hindutva movement through his elaborate commentary on the Gītā stimulated a generation of young people with the message ‘fight and kill for the restoration of the ancient dharma which has been corrupted by foreign elements.’ On the contrary, Gandhi picked up ahiṁsā which occurs only four times in passing and interpreted it as the quintessence of the Gītā which compares well with the Sermon on the Mount.  Tragically, Gandhi’s assassin came from the group influenced by the interpretation of Tilak. These two approaches are followed ditto or in different combinations in the ongoing ethical hermeneutics in the Vaiṣṇava tradition today. This pattern may be found in other traditions as well, and the saying goes that the same scripture can make one a saint and another a suicide bomber.

At the same time, without bothering about the above strands, Hindus find the Gītā to be enormously resourceful to inform their ethical behaviour. For example, we read:

Fearlessness, purity of heart, steadfastness in the knowledge and yoga, almsgiving, control of the senses, Yajna, study of the scriptures, austerity and straightforwardness. Non-injury, truth, absence of anger, renunciation, serenity, absence of calumny, compassion to beings, uncoveteousness, gentleness, modesty, absence of fickleness. Vigour, forgiveness, fortitude, purity, absence of hatred, absence of pride, these belong to one born for a divine state (16: 1-3; tr. Swami Chidbhavananda).

Such passages are interpreted by classical Vedāntins as appealing to individual life though there have been exceptions. Thus Rāmānuja, the 11^th century proponent of the so called ‘qualified non-dualism’, based mainly on the Gītā, entertained a low caste person in his home which made his wife run away. Today the Hindutva government insists that the Bhagavad Gītā’s national scripture but conceals both its synthetic and contradictory nature. The Prime Minister presents a copy of it to his host countries saying he could not think of a better gift from India. The External Affairs minister advocates reading one verse every day not realizing that the verse for many days can be horrible such as Kṛṣṇa’s saying that he created the four castes and the Vaśyas, Śūdras and women were low born. Also the fact that it is a Vaiṣṇava text and it has no bearing on the majority non- Vaiṣṇava traditions such as the Śaiva is not acknowledged.

The Tamil Śaiva tradition holds a different set of ethical ideas and the most important one if love. Its teaching overlaps with the ideals of the Gītā, but love is given a supreme status. For example, Thirumanthiram of Thirumūlar, one of the twelve canonical texts of the tradition says that it is the ignorant who say Śiva and love are separate and those who realise this will get united with love and God. Service to all beings, particularly the saints is taken as the greatest expression of love. In the modern period, Swami Vivekananda once declared, ‘I do not know the 30 crore deities of our pantheon. But I know millions of my suffering fellowmen who are my gods to be served.’ For him ‘Nara seva is Nārāyaṇa seva (service to humans is service to God).’ He claimed that the most compelling form God Nārāyaṇa takes is that of the poor.

Buddhist ideals of simplicity and self-denial, and compassion and solidarity with the suffering are well-known. Even today Buddhists claim to have the art of happiness, solution for healing emotions and seeing peace in a most comprehensive sense involving all beings.

The first chapter of the Holy Qur’ān is the leading passage for devout Muslims:

In the name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful...Sovereign of the Day of Recompense. It is you we worship and you we ask for help. Guide us to the straight path – The path of those upon whom You have bestowed favour, not of those who have evoked (Your) anger or of those who are astray. (tr., ed. by Saheeth International).

Honour of humans, pacts and promises, manliness, hospitality and bravery have been regarded as the religious ethics of the Arab Muslims. The egalitarian principles of Muslims find vivid expression in the way they worship in the mosque (from king to slave stand shoulder to shoulder without any priority or chairs or high chairs) and behaviour in the pilgrimage (same simple dress for all). The good model of the Prophet Mohammed is in Sunnah (well-trodden path) which has been codified into Hadīth which has become the second foundation of Islam. All the ethical teachings are codified in the Muslim law (Shariat). God as all compassionate and all merciful and God as the judge in justice has created some tension. The four jurist schools of Islam differ in the cases of punishment. For example, murder and adultery is punished with death, but for acts like theft there are different opinions about the severity of punishment. On the whole, submission to the will of God by following the accepted law makes one to be a true Muslim.

The combined ethical values of Hinduism and Islam can be found in Sikhism. More than that there is the emphasis on truth. Satnām (True name) is attributed to God. When that is applied to daily life, the following statement in the Adigranth stands out as most fascinating and profound: ‘Truth is the highest, higher still is truthful living.’

It should be admitted that every religious tradition faces the tension and even contradiction between the ideal and actual. Empirical studies may reveal the magnitude of this tension. For example, a study alone will establish that the celebrated Hindu dharma is inclusive embracing all people as equal, the practice of caste and conservative trends in the Christian Church; the implementation of the progressive social thought of Rāmānuja in a Śrī Vaiṣṇava community. Whether women enjoy equality in the mosque and Muslim community, is a question for discussion. Forgiveness of the most compassionate God needs to be connected with the human capability to live straightforward and tendency to go astray and commit crimes.

Global Ethics, Local Ethics and Personal Ethics

Mutual understanding, peaceful co-existence and co-operation for common welfare among people of different faiths are not new ideas.  However, they have been reinforced with new slogans and novel frameworks.  The “Global Ethic” of Hans Küng (a Swiss Roman Catholic theologian) is one such slogan. Küng’s attack on the conservative trends within the Catholic Church and concern about worldwide fundamentalism show promise for the recovery of the evangelical faith of Christianity.  Moreover, he has chosen to promote an idea which is appealing and more respected in the world scene today.

When Küng launched his new project on global responsibility and a world ethic in 1990, his concern was very clear.  It has found succinct expression in the following words:

No survival without a world ethic.  No world peace without peace between the religions.  No peace between the religions without dialogue between the religions.

The magnitude of suffering experienced by people all over the world and the continuing threat of total annihilation of the world by sophisticated weaponry is recognised and recorded by Küng in a moving way.  His proposal for recognizing a morality without religions is provocative and his suggestion for serious and soul- searching exploration and dialogue within the ecumenical movement and between the religious traditions is convincing.  Küng made use of the occasion of the centenary celebration of the first World Parliament of Religions in 1993 to promote his programme at international level.  ‘The Declaration of the Parliament of the World Religions’, signed at the parliament which reflected in letter and spirit his own vision, however, reinforces his vision for realizing an inter-dependent world, where every human being is treated in a humane way and takes responsibility for their fellow human beings.  For not taking into account the multi-dimensional character of religious life, regional variations of ethical potential and behaviour, controlling powers in the form of nations and lack of clarity about the structures that safeguard and realize a world ethic, Küng’s programme is criticized as another scheme to be added to the plethora of statements such as the UN Charter of Human Rights. Therefore it is not surprising that some scholars and theologians found an element of a European preaching to the third world. Such ‘preaching’ may be substituted for challenging the western world, which directly and indirectly cause untold suffering in the world, particularly the poorest of the poor.

There is no dearth of visions, goals and ideas. The ‘Preamble’ of the Indian Constitution affirms equality of all citizens, just sharing of resources and equal opportunities in all fronts of life. The recent developments in this country have some positive sides. The strict guidelines of the Election Commission, many Supreme Court judgments without a trace of bias and prejudice, the Right to Information Act and greater awareness of corruption may be pointed out with optimism. But it is left to the local communities to access them and their accessibility to ordinary masses.

Probably the majority of the communities, both urban and rural in India and elsewhere, are multifaith. It is often insisted that instead of irritating and being a nuisance to the other, each community must come forward to demonstrate the best side of their beliefs and values. Common humanity can find its finest expression in a local community. Both the positive sides of health and happiness and the negative sides of illness and death know no religion. But religion can come in when people in a community share them. And interreligious cooperation for social regeneration has been emphasized in the interfaith movement for a long time. But we are in want of concrete stories. Can there be an interfaith blood camp? Can there be corporate efforts to clean the local pond or well? Can there be attempts to check corruption in the local authority and fair price shop? Can people of different faiths work together for the present movement of ‘Clean India’?

Admittedly, there might be tensions when new ventures are undertaken. For example, if the Dalits of the local community do not have access to public well and temple, and those guardians of such a long unjust tradition agitate there should be sustained negotiations. When such issues are being negotiated the celebration of a festival may be suspended as that is the case in some villages in Tamilnadu. There might be greater moral dilemmas in certain issues. For example, is the use of little violence to avoid greater violence justified? Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount said, ‘If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn and offer him the other also’ (Mtt. 5: 39). But when a police struck him while standing on trial for answering the high priest in a particular manner, Jesus said, ‘If I was wrong to speak what I did, produce evidence to prove it; if I was right why strike me?’ (Jn. 18: 23). Such dilemmas are well acknowledged in mass media and challenges posed. For instance, in the famous Tamil film that revolutionized the thinking of the Tamils, ‘Parāsakti’ (supreme power 1952) a young widow with her child, after going through the ordeals and surviving exploitations, attempts suicide and gets arrested. In the court when it was said that all created things belonged to the government, she bombarded with questions about this forced belonging while the government and her organs could not help her in her struggle for survival. The message was sharp and clear that as long as a governments or religion was not able to provide solidarity with people in their struggle and suffering, they have no right to pass legal and moral judgment on their decision. Thirty-five years later, in ‘Nāyakan’ (leader - 1987) the hero, justifies violence for finding an end to forces of violence that dehumanizes ordinary people, and at a poignant moment at the end of the film, his grandson suddenly appears,  and asks the strange grandfather, ‘are you good are bad?’ and the answer is ‘I don’t know.’ An interfaith exploration into such dilemma would represent a matured gesture to move away from sterile slogans.

Visions, Values, Volitions

It is a simple observation, often made in interfaith meetings, that there is considerable gap between ideal and actual in all religions and it is made indiscriminately with sweeping generalization! The specific contexts and the magnitude of contradictions, and the dilemmas in certain issues we have outlined above are not analyzed. This is yet another sign of a mood and spirit dictated by defense and defiance and even an indirect verbal attack on people of other faiths as evident in interfaith gatherings. Sometimes it is necessitated by highlighting the best of one’s tradition and the worst of the other. Such attitude and behaviour hampers honest explorations into resources and experiments of each religious community which could be harnessed inter-religiously for the benefit of a crying community locally and a confused world at large.

With the backing of renaissance, enlightenments and post-modern thinking of various measures in the world it is claimed that humanity has come of age without requiring stick and carrot to drive people in high speed to reach a happier and then happiest destination in this world. This might be in the imagination and optimism of a tiny minority, but for a majority it is a mirage. They face daily corruption in high places including world of sports, judiciary and police. It is observed often in India that it is the educated and employed who exploit the common people more than the uneducated. There are aspirations expressed poetically that we long for a world without caste, communal clash, law courts and police stations.  But without asking the moral and ethical questions, there is a mad rush to introduce sophisticated devices to check crime and ensure safety and security, which are ever growing concerns. Is installation of CCTV cameras in premises the only way to check the movements of members of a community? How to develop a spirituality which combines inner freedom and innate responsibility for the sake of the public witness of a community?

In ‘Global Ethics’ in the form of affirmations, guidelines, codes of conduct etc the word ‘God’ is not mentioned. God is pushed from the public square and discourses and pushed to religious enclosures. Can God be ignored permanently?  Many observe that in the modern world the opposite to God is not non-god but neo-gods such as the celebrities who appear to offer solutions for all sorts of ethical problems. This is not to advocate for reverential respect for all visions, images and vocabularies of God. For example, there is a vision across different theistic traditions that God is almighty, unmoved mover, the one who rules in capricious authority, who predestines the destiny of all humans and who is the governor of the law of karma. In this vision, God’s grace operates within such system, not against it. On the contrary, particularly in the core vision of the Hebrew/Jewish tradition which continued in the Christian tradition. As the root story of liberation and the sub-stories suggest God confronts evil systems like slavery or bonded labour, provides solidarity with the victims and the vulnerable of any kind, forgives the past, opens up a new possibility and sets a hope for the future. Here ethics is not an abstract concept but commandments to be followed by a faithful community in a concrete context. When laws and precepts emerged on the basis of experiments, as some psalmists sing, they were a delight to meditate and love to follow them. Certainly some of the later legal traditions were discriminatory, which complicated matters as elaborated in later parts of the New Testament as opposed to divine grace. But Jesus was very clear about the ethical codes of his tradition, revised some of them as any Rabbi of the tradition would have done, and claimed that he came to fulfill them fully. The greatest command, he declared, was to love God with one’s whole being and to love the neighbor as oneself. He gave the new command ‘love one another.’ He did not expect that everyone individually will follow it perfectly but experiment its depth, height and breadth in the community.  Whether the present church follows it or not, at least it reads about it reminding themselves and outsiders. As Christians are asked to be polite to the extent that what the right hand does the left hand doesn’t know, they don’t trumpet pioneering works of charity, mainly among those on the margins – lepers, disabled, sick, women, children, the untouchable etc. which are appreciated by many people of other faith while some see them as a bait in the hook to catch and covert others into their religious fold. Now there are signs of other communities undertaking similar works.

 Philosophical debates about the existence of God are not relevant in the field of practical ethics in personal lives and in concrete contexts. The Bible is full of visions, experiments and movements. It does not deal with the vexed question about the problem of evil and suffering, but proposes to follow the commandments at present and move on to the next stage. There is a stunning statement: ‘There are things hidden, and they belong to the Lord our God, but what is revealed belongs to us and our children for ever; it is for us to observe all that is prescribed in this law’ (Deut. 29: 29). This insight may prompt us to raise important questions. For example, is it right to ask about an imagined ideal and solution while we are not doing what we can within our capacity? Is it proper to ask a primary school pupil the question meant for a university student? When we can solve the problems of poverty, illiteracy, corruption and violation of human rights with a fraction of the money we spend on defense, without doing that, can we question about natural calamities and tragedies in life? In an interfaith discussion more such questions may be raised.

Finally, within religious traditions and outside, ethical teachings abound. The question is: what makes people to be determined about common human values such as honesty, discipline and taking initiative for change? Piety or religiosity is not the solution, particularly if it is simple and superficial. Basically, there should be a moving vision, strong will and spontaneous volition. What kind of vision of the ultimate reality or God who moves the devotee to engage in liberating action following the worship? If God appears in the form of the poor how can the devotee identify? If deep meditation helps to see the skeleton frames of masses appearing on the mind screen as was the experience of Swami Vivekananda, is it possible to develop a new idea and practice of yoga? If the law of karma governs ethical actions and their consequences as held in Jaina, Buddhist, Hindu and Sikh traditions, where does come the interior power to trigger and change? What kind of power of the free will of an individual to participate in positive change if predestination is still acceptable for most Muslims and some Christians? Further, in matters of certain cultural practices and expression of sexuality, can there be uniform codes of conduct? These questions are raised with a view to stimulate sustained interfaith dialogue with commitment and openness.