Religion, Politics, Tombs and Temples

The above pictures are of various historical monuments Ruth and I, along with our colleague Sarah Adams, visited on weekends and holidays as a respite from our studies of Hindi and as part of our cultural orientation to India. All are within easy commuting distance of where we’re staying in Delhi. We’re planning to visit the Taj Mahal in Agra next weekend, a two hour train ride from here.

The picture on the top left is of Safdarjang’s Tomb, one of the last examples of Mughal architecture before the empire fell to the British. The picture on the bottom left is of Humayun’s Tomb. Emperor Humayun was the son of Babur, the first Mughal ruler in India. The picture on the top right is of the Golconda Fort in Hyderabad. The picture on the bottom right is of the Lotus Temple in Delhi.

The Indus Valley, in which Delhi is situated, is the cradle of Indian civilization. Around 1500 BCE, Aryan tribes from Central Asia gradually invaded, bringing their Sanskrit language (the predecessor of Hindi) and their religious beliefs (the predecessor of Hinduism) with them. This Indian social and religious history opens new avenues for our understanding of the relationship between religion and politics. What can American Christians learn from it?

Northern India was also the birthplace of Buddhism. In remorse for the death and destruction caused by his wars of conquest, the great Mauryan Emperor Ashoka embraced Buddhism and made it the religion of his empire in 262 BCE. He embraced nonviolence and other Buddhist ethical teachings, seeking to incorporate them into the administration of his realm.

It would be a fascinating study to compare Ashoka’s embrace of Buddhism with Roman Emperor Constantine’s embrace of Christianity in 312 CE. Ashoka was much more serious about adopting the social-ethical tenants of Buddhism than Constantine was about adopting the social-ethical tenants of Christianity. From an Anabaptist perspective (and also a Buddhist perspective) it involves difficult questions about what happens to a religious tradition when it becomes the official religion of a state.

The historical sites we visited in Delhi are from the Muslim Mughal Empire which began with the invasion of Babur who marched into India from his capital in Kabul, Afghanistan in 1525 CE. The Mughals were known for their opulent court life and their love of creating beautiful architectural edifices, of which the Taj Mahal is the most well known. They tried to outdo each other in building magnificent tombs.

The Mughals were known for their religious tolerance. Babur’s grandson Akbar (1556-1605), the most powerful Mughal emperor, integrated Hindus into the top echelons of his administration. He had a deep interest in religious matters and sponsored conversations with religious experts of all persuasions, including Hindus, Christians, Parsis, and even agnostics.

As a Mennonite, I cannot help reflecting on the fact that Akbar’s religious pluralism and his interfaith conversations were taking place in the sixteenth century when our European Anabaptist ancestors were being persecuted and martyred for their stance on religious freedom. Indians understandably get somewhat frustrated when Westerners act as though religious freedom is a unique characteristic of Western culture.

These different histories may help explain why Indian secularism does not have the anti-religious characteristic as much of Western secularism. There was not the same struggle to free itself from powerful, controlling religious institutions. Deeply devout Hindus, such as Mahatma Gandhi, readily embraced secularism as the policy of the newly created Indian state in 1947. And they understood it to be part of their Indian cultural and religious heritage.

I do not want to leave the impression that all has been well in interfaith relationships in India. Aurangzeb, the last powerful Mughal Emperor (1658-1707), was a puritan who opposed both the extravagant opulence and the easy religious tolerance of his predecessors. His became infamous for his destruction of Hindu temples and his imposition of Islam on his subjects. He even attacked and destroyed the more tolerant Muslim kingdom of Golconda at present day Hyderabad in south-central India. The British, who established their first foothold on the sub-continent at Kolkata in 1690, were able to exploit such interfaith conflicts in their subsequent conquest of India. This legacy is at the root of ongoing Hindu-Muslim tensions.

Representing a universalistic Bahia perspective on religious faith, the recently built and spectacular Lotus Temple is within walking distance of our house. It’s an inviting space that welcomes people from all faith traditions to mediate and pray. Bahia faith seeks to draw from all religions in its vision for world peace. This raises different questions.

How do we deeply respect and learn from other religious traditions yet live and witness from the center of our own faith? India presents such a challenge. Can we invite people to join us in the new life and community we find in Jesus, yet avoid the religious superiority that thinks we alone have the truth? To paraphrase one of Jesus’ sayings, “It’s easy to attempt to remove the speck in the eye of the other religion while ignoring the big plank of religious prejudice in our own eye.”

It all gives our MCC India team plenty of fodder for thought as we work at creating peacebuilding and interfaith partnerships and programs in India. We North Americans will have much to learn from our Indian partners.