|
INTRODUCTION
It has been my experience that I am always true from my point of view, but am often wrong from the point of view of
my honest critics. I know that we are both right from our respective points of view. And this knowledge saves me from attributing
motives to my opponents or critics. The seven blind men who gave seven different descriptions of the elephant were all right
from their respective points of view, and wrong from the point of view of one another, and right and wrong from the point
of view of the man who knew the elephant. I very much like this doctrine of the manyness of reality. It is this doctrine that
has taught me to judge a Mussalman from his own standpoint and a Christian from his. Formerly I used to resent the ignorance
of my opponents. Today I can love them because I am gifted with the eye to see myself as others see them and vice-versa. - Gandhi
(1)
Religion
of course is a matter of faith and we often tend to believe it is independent of reason or rational enquiry. Emotional
defence and biased probing both reflect the lack of honesty in motives when religion becomes an object of study. We have ample
display of both in most debates on religious issues when people of different faiths interact. For, when such debaters discuss,
or even attempt to study each other, they are easily piqued or irked by the other’s viewpoint. Then there cannot possibly
be a reasoned debate. This is understandable because although religion can be debated, the hallmark of a genuine debate is
objectivity and mutual respect, and religion (as faith in general) finds itself unable to encourage this in its debaters.
But it is doubly unfortunate as well, for we must believe, firstly, in the worth of a reasoned enquiry in all aspects of human
endeavour; and secondly, such an enquiry need not reduce the realistic vigour of faith.
In fact, it must underscore our belief that no reasoned debate can hurt the legitimate interests
of any worthwhile enterprise. Such an enquiry must only strengthen our worthwhile beliefs, help weed out the decrepit, and
help us identify them in others as well. Therefore, then, there is reason to believe that even on religious matters, a reasoned
debate is possible. Although religion
can be debated, the hallmark of a genuine debate is objectivity and mutual respect, and religion (as faith in general) finds
itself unable to encourage this in its debaters. But
it is doubly unfortunate as well, for we must believe, firstly, in the worth of a reasoned enquiry in all aspects of human
endeavour; and secondly, such an enquiry need not reduce the realistic vigour of faith. In fact, it must underscore our belief
that no reasoned debate can hurt the legitimate interests of any worthwhile enterprise. Such an enquiry must only strengthen
our worthwhile beliefs, help weed out the decrepit, and help us identify them in others as well. Therefore, then, there is
reason to believe that even on religious matters, a reasoned debate is possible.
Although no last word can be said on this matter,
it may help to recapitulate Gandhi’s views on one’s own religion as well as religion in general, on the proper
attitude when one studies another’s religion, his opinion on missionary work, proselytization, and Christianity.
|
 |
Mens Sana Monographs [MSM]: A Mens Sana Research Foundation Publication
|
