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:
Post a Comment