…OuR gReAtEsT pRoViDeR…

By VALSON THAMPU

Where is your brother, God asked, at the beginning of Biblical history. The original context was that of bloodshed: Brother killing brother, which is what every murder really is. Within the vision of vasudaiva kutumbakam , can anyone, even the most abhorred enemy, be less than a brother?

The Cain-Abel story provides deep insight into religion-related tensions: First, it is in the context of religion that brother kills brother. The very purpose of religion is being largely misunderstood. The purpose of religion is to enable us to be keepers rather than killers of each other, protectors rather than predators of life and nature. The ascendancy of vested interests in religion, however, degrades it into a licence for murder and mayhem, as has happened in the history of all religions.

All through history, the most sanctified form of murder has been the killing of the ‘enemies’ of one’s God. Yet, God is the giver and defender of life, whose Commandment, ‘ You shall not kill ’, does not entertain any excuse or extenuating circumstance. It is an absolute imperative, not only to desist from murder but also to protect life. We are not to kill under any circumstance, for no twist or turn of events can nullify the truth that God alone has authority over life.

What has degraded religion into a theatre of cruelty and barbarity is the ownership mentality of the devotees vis-a-vis their respective gods. Yet, the truth is that a god owned exclusively by a segment of the human species is no God. Hence it is that we have two contrary images of God in almost all religious traditions: The first image is that of a tribal God whose affinities and concerns are limited to a designated group. The alternate image is that of a transcendental God who has no favourites and whose concerns are non-partisan. This God insists on an absolute adherence to universal values, especially the value of cherishing and defending human life and the integrity of creation.

There is a remarkable instance in the Bible when the tension between these two views on God come face-to-face dramatically. It happens in the Garden of Gethsemene in the course of Jesus’s arrest. Jesus inquires of Peter how many swords he has. Peter replies that he has two, to which Jesus says, ”They will do’’. At Jesus’s arrest, Peter strikes with his sword at a member of the hostile crowd and slashes off his ear. Jesus reprimands him with the words, ”Put down the sword. He who takes the sword shall fall by it’’. If it were not to use against ‘enemies’, why did Jesus want Peter to take the swords with him to Gethsemene in the first place?

The Gethsemene drama engages the seminal temptation in religion: To turn the sword into the foremost expression of one’s zeal for God. Both in Gethsemene and on the Cross, Jesus unequivocally rejects the option of the sword as a symbol of religious loyalty.

But, for the most part, the message has been lost on Christendom. Crusades and inquisitions, the bloody ritual of devotion-through-sword continued for centuries thereafter, corrupting the Christian witness to a bruised world.

At Gethsemene, Jesus instructs Peter on how to use the sword and, even more importantly, how not to use it. He leaves Peter in no doubt that loyalty expressed through the sword is utterly unacceptable to God. Peter that day understood that sword number one must be used against himself: Especially when tempted to use the sword against ‘others’ expressing their religious zeal. So the first spiritual use of the sword is against oneself. It is the sword of self-denial, which is a pre-condition for discipleship.

Religion degenerates into a blood bath only when those who lack the spiritual strength of self-denial wield the sword. The sword can be an instrument of justice or injustice, compassion or cruelty, depending on who wields it. The tragedy is that swords and trishools fall into the hands of those who lack self-control. The only mission of those who have no control over themselves is to control and terrorise others.

The second spiritual use of the sword, is against one’s own religious community, to cleanse and purify it. First, one should be vigilant against one’s own impure motives.

Second, one should be vigilant against the ego and aggression of one’s own religious community. Religion, like politics, is a domain of power and power turns into corruption unless it is cleansed of all vested interests.

Let no one who cares for his religion ignore the witness of history. It was the blatant indulgence in cruelty and bloodshed in the name of Christ that spread cynicism about Christianity in the West and heralded the post-Christian culture. Today, Hinduism may seem the goose that lays the golden egg into the political basket of some. But, in the cruel ironies germane to such situations, the goose in question faces the prospect of losing its life to the rapacity of its keepers and profiteers.