PEACE IN PLURAL SOCIETIES — Reflections

is an important part of human life. It is the political exploitation of religion by some opportunist people that is the problem. Hence, it is the exploitation of religion, rather than religion itself, that needs to be eliminated. Religion has two dimensions: personal and collective. The personal dimension of religion denotes beliefs, worship, morality and spirituality. The collective dimension of religion includes its political and social rules. The right approach would, in general conditions, be to focus on the personal dimension of religion and on promoting the spirit of religion. As far as the political and social rules of religion are concerned, they should not be taken up until such time as the entire society is prepared for them. These rules can be established only through the voluntary and collective consent of the entire society. That is why no practical steps should be taken as far as these rules are concerned as long as the collective consent of the society is not in favour of this. This can be termed a practical division between religion and politics. That is to say, while considering, at the ideological level, politics to be part of religion, in the face of reality, the practical enforcement of the political rules of religion can be delayed or postponed. This is a wise approach. In this way, the demands both of religion and of politics can be met: those of religion, in the present, and of politics, in the future. On the other hand, if this pragmatic policy is not adopted and both aspects of religion are stressed, the result will be that the demands of both religion and politics will be left unfulfilled. With regard to communal harmony, there are some issues that need to be looked at. Ordinarily, if a Muslim does something wrong, Hindus speak and write against him. In the same way, if a Hindu does something wrong, Muslims speak and write against him. This method is, from the point of view of reform, completely useless. It only pleases one particular community, but it has no positive impact whatsoever on the other community. Contrary to this, the beneficial approach is that if a Muslim does something wrong, Muslim scholars and intellectuals should speak and write against it. Likewise, if a Hindu does something wrong, Hindus should speak and write against it. It is just as when a child does something wrong, his parents are the first to scold him, if necessary.