Dialogue between religions

Inter-religious dialogue has become a buzzword these days. After the controversy followed by the controversial remarks of Pope, the Church has adopted the line of an inter-faith dialogue. Not only that, it has also become a hip thing amongst the liberals and peace-quacks. And though I have a very high regard for their statesmanship and scholarship, even President Clinton and Prime Minister Blair have joined in the chorus.

But just when everyone talks about the dialogue between the religions and faiths, no one is coming up with the parameters for such dialogue. All they vaguely suggest is a need for debate on role of rationality in faith. Sounds illuminating, but is it practical?

I mean, how can you convince a Muslim to accept the rationale of trinity or how can you expect a Christian to accept that Islam is a true religion of the God of Jesus and Moses and it is here that the God completed his religion (both things fundamental to the respective beliefs of Islam and Christianity). Or how can you convince an Evangelist or a Jew or a Muslim that the creation of the state of Israel should be viewed in context of real polity and not through the prism of their respective religions. And with these differences how can you expect them to respect other’s religion as a genuine religion?

Forget about interfaith issues. There are conflicts of the same intensity or even graver with in the religions. The conflict of Shias and Sunnis in Islam or Protestants and Catholics in Christianity are in many ways graver than the conflict between Islam and Christianity.

With these conflicts and beliefs and knowing that faith is blind, no amount of interfaith dialogue is going to bear any fruit. The need is of an intra-faith confrontation within the religions between the moderates and hardliners in all religions around the World. A debate between moderate Muslims and Osamas, a debate between likes of Pope and Clintons and Blairs, a debate between Noam Chomskys and hardliner Zionists and Jews, a debate between moderate, liberal Hindus and Narendra Modis, a debate between all those who genuinely believe in the ideals of humanity and those who see everything from a radical religious or racial prism. A debate is needed to shape the hearts and minds of the people all across the World and it has to be ensured that the liberals prevail in this debate.

This debate cannot be won unless and until with out any fear, the liberals do not start challenging the clichés that have taken their respective societies and religions hostage and the exploiters who exploiting this assume the divine authority. People who matter and people who consider themselves liberal must have to stand for rationality and liberty with in their own religion and win the hearts and minds of their communities not against the religion but against the bigotry and radicalism of the clergy that keeps their religion and society hostage.

I have a great regard for any and all religions and I believe that religion remains an important part of a human’s personal life and will remain so. However, religion is a private affair and the time has come where a strong push is required by those who believe in humanity and liberty to remove it permanently from polity for a safer and peaceful World. For it is not the religion that in essence causes the problem but the clergy whose influence gets attached to it and since religion and faith remains a sensitive issue in the prevailing environment for any individual, the scope for exploitation is more than anywhere else. The challenge is to kill the exploitation in the name of religion without infringing upon the right to have a faith. And while balancing the two, killing the exploitation must take precedence.