There doesn’t should be any tension between the religious adherence of participants in a democracy and the political duty of elected leaders when religion is viewed as greater than mere institutionalised tradition. In Vedic literature, dharma serves because the systemic basis affirming the validity of a virtuous life. Similarly, in James 2:14-26, believers are reminded that “faith without works is dead.” Faith and dharma are all-encompassing concepts that transcend doctrines and rituals; due to this fact, religion mustn’t be exploited for political expediency.
Hindu nationalists often query if Indians upholding monotheistic worldviews also can respect their motherland. However, the political wave of Hindutva goes beyond this query. In December 2014, the BJP chief was acquitted of “murder, kidnapping, and extortion charges.” In August 2016, the Hindustan Times reported that 31% of the Prime Minister’s cabinet had criminal cases against them, yet none of them faced imprisonment. However, in a relentless quest to unite the 82% Hindu vote bank, there appears to be a special algorithm for leaders of the opposition who don’t play the faith card for political gain.
Instead of safeguarding the democratic norms ensuring equality for all, prevailing authoritarianism is stripping India’s heritage of deep spirituality and replacing it with the divisiveness of religiosity. Individuals are either idolised or demonised, using religion as a tool for negotiating cultural and social power dynamics.
Last 12 months, the major opposition leader, Rahul Gandhi, was “found guilty of defaming Narendra Modi.” The lower court pronounced a two-year prison sentence, and the high court refused to just accept Gandhi’s appeal. When the case was taken as much as the Supreme Court, Gandhi was finally allowed to return as a member of Parliament. Similarly, leading members of the common man’s party (Aam Aadmi Party- AAP) have been recently imprisoned as a result of money laundering and defamation cases against them.
When leaders are fighting against corruption, speaking on behalf of girls, demonstrating care for kids, and empowering the youth through educational programs and job opportunities, such leaders are being accused and harassed. But when leaders are ignoring the needs of the common folk and attempting to divide the nation on the idea of faith, what treatment do the people have against such tyranny?
So far, the Supreme Court has proven to be the one consistent catalyst for social justice. However, for the reason that ontology behind Eastern thought stays significantly different from the West, the impact of cultural exchange through a colonial past has presented ethical dilemmas and distressing social situations for a individuals who haven’t overcome the hurt of subjugation.
The current outstanding Hindutva ideologue, K. N. Govindacharya, made a case for rewriting the Indian Constitution where Western ideals of a person’s human rights could be replaced by the deal with the interests of the collective Hindu whole. Ardent proponents of Hindutva push forth the narrative that the Muslim invaders got here right into a flourishing, progressive, Hindu India; the Christians got here in as proselytisers; the Europeans characterised the worst of each these categories, due to this fact any foreign influence in India must be demonised in light of preserving Hindu superiority. This pursuit of preserving Hindu pride has simplified the view of faith and culture to a set of heavy-laden obligations and taboos as an alternative of what it is supposed to be – a freedom to experience life and truth in all its fullness!
In India, this tension and confusion have resulted in increased hate speeches, structural violence, and a vilification of the wealthy contributions of Muslim poets and artists, Christian missionaries, and secular-minded scholars. Even though on the grassroots level, society has maintained tolerance and, in lots of cases, even acceptance of diversity, yet on a political level, structural violence has been normalised.
Educated members of the BJP who respect India’s Constitution and who place a greater value on India’s economic development have spoken against leadership within the country, which points to structural and discriminatory violence. But beyond political discourse, in a culture steeped in spirituality, religion must return to its core of allowing each individual the liberty to decide on their journey to have a private encounter with God.
Regardless of our backgrounds, everybody will stand face-to-face before God at some point, and on that day, one is not going to be questioned on ethnic heritage, cultural commitment, religious labels, or any particular political party’s orthodoxy. But in accordance with Matthew 25:36-40, God will query everybody regarding their ethic of care towards the distressed and the downtrodden.
Jesus was a practising Jew, but he often clashed with the religious leaders of his time because he exposed their hypocrisy. He wanted people to make sense of their lives by finding an authentic relationship with the last word divine as an alternative of getting lost in dogma and unnecessarily politicised squabbles. Those who value dharma and faith must return to its original meaning if we hope to see a peaceful, respectful coexistence of individuals, thriving on the planet’s largest democracy.
© Christian Today India
