The Dangers of Monotheism

[Guest guest]

The Dangers of Monotheism in the Age of Globalization

http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=5211

- by Jean-Pierre Lehmann

 

Is there a link between monetheistic religions and intolerance and

hostility? As Jean-Pierre Lehmann argues, monotheistic religions have

caused much turmoil throughout history and continue to do so today.

What is needed is a new global ethical and spiritual role model, and

in his opinion, the best candidate to fill that spot is India.

 

Many in the West and elsewhere were shocked that an Afghan man, Abdul

Rahman, was facing possible execution for having converted to

Christianity. This is a crime, we were told, punishable by death

according to Shariah law, which is the law of the land in

Afghanistan, as well as in a good number of other Muslim countries.

And even now that Mr. Rahman has safely arrived in Italy, where he

was granted asylum, the episode is a telling example of the

intolerance that is often the result of strict monotheism.

 

To be sure, Christianity was even worse in its own heyday, not only

because heathens were exterminated in all sorts of diverse forms, but

also those whose Christianity (for example, the Albigensians in the

12th and 13th centuries) was deemed to be heterodox.

 

Also, the Spanish conquistadores in Latin America, in collusion with

the Church authorities, burned a good number of infidel American

Indians.

 

Declining hostility

 

Generally speaking, however, over the course of the last couple of

centuries or so, as the political clout and influence of the

Christian churches has waned, the execution, torture and imprisonment

of infidels and heretics has greatly decreased.

 

Today, there are a good number of converts to Islam living in

Christian countries and they have encountered relatively little

hostility.

 

Religious collusion

 

The idea that Christian civilization (a fairly loose term) renounced

religious persecution simply because the power of the churches

declined is, of course, belied by the Holocaust.

 

Despite being carried out by secular authorities, the Holocaust took

place in Christian countries and with the silent connivance of the

established Christian churches. A quite vivid illustration is that of

the fascist Ustaše movement in Croatia, which was in close cahoots

with the Catholic Church.

 

The Jews who were brought to the concentration camps were far worse

off than Abdul Rahman, who before he found refuge in Italy had been

told he would not be executed if he converts back to Islam. The Jews

at Auschwitz were not given a similar option.

 

Violent records

 

Although both Christianity and Islam each have their strong points,

without doubt, on balance their historical record would show more

liabilities, more warfare, more intolerance, more persecution, than

truly positive assets.

 

The number of people killed in the name of these two religions must

be far greater than the numbers killed for any other cause.

Furthermore, in this first decade of the 21st century, religion plays

a far more prominent role than it used to.

 

Hijacking the faith

 

In the case of the three monotheistic religions, Judaism,

Christianity and Islam have all been hijacked by their respective

fundamentalists.

 

I am a great believer that the progress of civilization requires the

gradual eradication of all forms of established religion. Not by

force, I hasten to add, but by the evidence of history, the

rationality of man and the persuasion of humanist secularism.

 

In Western Europe, where the vast majority of the population is no

longer Christian in anything but name, sadly humanism has not taken

hold.

 

Filling the void

 

An addiction to money, or psychoanalysis or drugs or a combination of

the three tends to prevail. Whatever has the upper hand, it is

definitely not humanism.

 

So it would seem people have a natural desire for religion or

something that can be substituted for it if not god, then mammon.

 

Polytheistic acceptance

 

In recognizing this reality, therefore, it would seem that perhaps

rather than eradicating religion per se, we should instead eradicate

monotheistic religion in favor of polytheistic religion.

 

If you have only one god, and you believe that god is all powerful

and omniscient, and you come across someone who does not agree, then

you may feel it is your duty to kill him.

 

If, on the other hand, you believe there are hundreds, indeed

thousands of gods, and that none can be totally almighty or

omniscient, then you are likely to be far more tolerant.

 

Intolerant tendencies

 

The great pre-Christian civilizations of Greece and Rome had no

religious wars and had a far healthier view of their frolicking gods

and goddesses than the intolerant monotheistic Christianity that

later came to dominate Europe.

 

Polytheistic religions also tend to have a far more positive and

healthier attitude to sex, which is seen as a good thing, than do the

monotheistic faiths, where there is a much stronger tendency to

equate sex with sin.

 

Militant Christianity

 

As concerns the United States, militant Christianity is clearly in

ascendance, indeed it has one of its own in the White House.

According to a recent Pew survey, 15, 14 and 20% of the U.S.

population said they would have reasons not to vote for a

presidential candidate who was Catholic, Jewish or Evangelical

Christian.

 

However, when that candidate was an atheist, the percentage, at 41%,

was substantially higher. This is extremely worrying and does not

portend well for the future. While it would seem that religious

Americans are more tolerant as concerns their respective religions,

they remain brazenly intolerant of atheists.

 

Perhaps the most encouraging development in this early 21st century

is the emergence of India as an increasingly global force,

economically, politically and culturally.

 

Managing multiculturalism

 

There are many anomalies, problems and injustices in Indian society

and some of these, such as the caste system, have been perpetrated by

religion.

 

But India is a microcosmic reflection of how globalization can work,

especially in its generally remarkable ability to have managed

multiculturalism to such a brilliant extent.

 

Diverse Unity

 

India's one billion plus population is the most heterogeneous in the

world. There are far more ethnic, linguistic and religious groups

than in, say, the European Union. Yet, a far

greater degree of unity has been achieved among India's disparate

ethnicities than among the tribes of Western Europe.

 

Thus, though Fareed Zakaria in " The Rise of Illiberal Democracy " has

rightly pointed out that democracy can more often than not be the

problem rather than the solution in inter-communal relations witness

Iraq!

 

Perhaps the greatest achievement of India is to have maintained a

very robust democracy in an extremely multi-ethnic environment.

Contrast that with Egypt, for example, which used to have a highly

multi-ethnic make-up, but which has now been mostly dissipated.

 

Hardly Utopia

 

Of course India is not Utopia. No place is and no human is perfect.

Against the remarkably inspirational preaching of non-violence of

Mahatma Gandhi, India has opted to become a nuclear power.

 

Nehru's alleged egalitarianism notwithstanding, India has the dubious

distinction of having the world's greatest number of illiterates,

especially among women. So, yes, there are failings galore and there

are also, alas, Hindu fundamentalists.

 

A global ethical role model?

 

But in a global environment desperate for ideas, philosophy and

religion, India is the most prolific birthplace of all three because

of the great synergy of democracy and diversity, and the much greater

degree of self-confidence that Indians now feel.

 

Indians and members of the enormous Indian Diaspora over which the

sun never sets are the thought leaders in economics, business,

philosophy, political science, religion and literature.

 

The planet needs quite desperately a sense of moral order,

spirituality and an ethical compass. The Indian religious and

philosophical traditions can provide a great deal of all three.

 

It was in a recent conversation with an Indian religious guru that I

was also pleased to discover I could adhere to his religious tenets,

while maintaining my secular convictions. No imam or priest would

allow me that.

 

More than a global economic force

 

The planet also needs an alternative geopolitical force to the

American Christian fundamentalist brand of hegemonic thinking that

the Bush Administration has generated and that is not likely to

evaporate even after his departure from office.

 

Europe is an inward-looking and, in many ways, spent force. China is

a dictatorship. The Islamic world is going through an awkward moment

to put it mildly.

 

Hence the importance of the role India must play in this respect

both because of its innate qualities and because there is no other

serious contender. The 21st century better become the century

inspired by the virtues of Indian polytheism or else we are headed

for disaster.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sir,

 

By India, perhaps you mean Hinduism, Sanatana Dharma. Overzealous

attitudes were not, rather are not anything new in India or Hinduism.

 

Sanatana Dharma does not cover only variety. Monotheism is also part of

Hinduism. Individuals' actions / reactions/misadventures should not be confused

or identified with Religions.

 

No religion is bad. Sage Ramakrishna (West Bengal, if you don't know him), found

that all religions like Christianity, Islam etc are true religions capable of

the same end result as Hinduism( Pl read his biography, it is illuminating).

 

So the person and not any Nationality is important. India today abounds in False

Swamijis and leaders of Hindu religion who have no real understanding of

Hinduism, but have the charisma to collect both Indian and Global following.

Such people's main intention is money/ power. They are least interested in

Humanity.

 

So a simple and true follower of any religion anywhere in the world is capable

of bringing abou the change.

 

balaravi