Tuesday 18 November 2014

TWO TYPES OF RELIGIOUS IDENTITIES


Finding one’s own identity is a characteristic of human beings. Some identities are given and some are chosen by the individuals. However, there is another type of identity which has both the nature of being given and of being chosen. Thus for example, the ‘religious identity’ of a human being as an individual is given this identity by birth and at the same time he or she is free to choose the identity also. In fact, it is one of the major identities of a person in society. A religion of an individual gives identity to the person and in turn the individuals of a religion form their own identity as a society.  

            The religious identity itself has various expressions like various ways of rituals, worship, dress code, food habits and so on. All these expressions of a religious identity fall into two broad categories namely ‘Socio-centric religious identity’ and ‘Person-centric religious identity’. Each religion has these two identities as a religion is a ‘social’ structure made for ‘persons’. However, religions are regarded according to the predominant identity among these two present in them. Some explanation about these two may help us understand them in a better way.

            The first, Socio-centric religions find meaning in religious activities as a community. The communitarian dimension is given much importance in these religions. The ultimate goal of life is regarded as a community endeavor. Religions like Christianity, Islam and Judaism are examples of socio-centric religions where the community aspect is given much importance. The faithful of these religions find God in a collective manner. It is the common worship that plays a vital role in these religions and charity is the important virtue in socio-centric religions. Since many factors are in common there is a need for rules, commandments, canons, etc. Exact observance of such rules is considered to be virtuous and the negligence of them is deemed as sins. However, there is a possibility of the danger that these rules and regulations become more important than one’s personal approach towards God. For example, missing the ‘Sunday Mass’ may be considered to be a grave sin in Catholicism and even while travelling the Islamic faithful are expected to perform their ‘Namaz’ (which I have noticed while travelling by train). Thus in Socio-centric religion the spirituality is a shared responsibility as a community. The words of Aristotle may be suitable for this aspect that, “A man outside a society is either a god or a beast”. The feature of fraternity is much valued in this religious identity and so the emphasis on their spirituality mostly lies on ‘action’.     

            On the other hand, there is also another group of religions which have Person-centric religious identity. Religions like Hinduism and Buddhism fall under this category of religious identity. In this type of identity, the importance is given to the individuals (more) than to  the religious organizations. Although there are moments of collective worship or festivals in these religions the primacy is given to the individual’s relationship with the Ultimate Reality called God. In these religions too we may find norms set for the better living as a community but ultimately they are meant for the individual persons. The notion of salvation or liberation (Moksha) from the worldly life is the merit of the individual. This merit, unlike the socio-centric religions, is obtained through consciousness. For example, the Vedas of Hindu tradition talks of this consciousness as ‘Brahman realization’.  Great sayings like “Aham Brahma asmi” (I am Brahman) or “Tat tvam asi” (That Thou Art) call for the realization that each one is God in disguise and this awareness leads to the final goal of one’s being. Even the words of Aristotle, which we have mentioned earlier, may not affect this type of religions as even away from the society one can realize that one is a god. And so there may be an attitude developed in this religious identity that society need not be valued in one’s spiritual quest. Thus, in the person-centric religion, human persons are more concerned about ‘consciousness’ than ‘action’.

The interaction between these two religious identities may bring the difficulty of perceiving each other as (an obstacle) a predicament in one’s own way towards the purpose of the religion. For the socio-centric religious person, mere consciousness or realization of God may not have meaning in his or her religious parlance. On the other hand, for the person-centric religious person, society is just a midway region that one has to pass through on in the spiritual journey. Thus there may be an intellectual conflict between them which may also lead to “inter-religious” disastrous results if the problem persists.

On the contrary, a fruitful dialogue may provide the awareness that ‘Reality’ has been or can be seen in different perspectives. Probably, the better understanding could be the integration of the attitudes of these two identities, incorporating consciousness into action or action with consciousness. While striving towards perfection it is important to realize the presence of God within oneself. When one realizes the presence of the Almighty within oneself, the person should extend the notion of realization to the other human beings who also bear God in themselves. Consequently, we all strive for our own perfection in our way by accompanying each other.

No comments: