Religion: Defending what you don’t even understand

Kafka’s novels were published a century back (1925-27). Much of what he said back then makes sense even today. The absurdity of human affairs is not restricted to any particular historical period.

There is a scene in The Trial in which a guard of the protagonist remarks to another: “He admits he doesn’t know the law and yet he claims he’s innocent.” The profundity of that statement is such that I’m tempted to apply it to the present situation in India where the majority religion has suddenly found too many defenders and warriors none of whom seem to understand what they’re fighting for.

“He doesn’t know what religion is, and yet he claims to be defending it.” One of Kafka’s characters would definitely say that in today’s India.

Let us look at the guard’s statement in a little detail. What it means is:

You don’t know the law. Therefore you cannot know whether you have violated it. Therefore you cannot legitimately claim to be innocent.

The law is possessed by the bureaucracy. They wield it for their own purposes. The ordinary person doesn’t even know the law, but will get to know it when it affects them.

You protest: I’m innocent.

The guard: How do you know?

You: Because I’ve done nothing wrong.

Guard: You don’t know the law, so how can you know what is wrong?

You: Then tell me what law I’ve violated.

Guard: I’m not allowed to do that.

You need the knowledge of the law in order to prove your innocence. To obtain that knowledge, you need access to the authorities. But the authorities have already declared you suspect.

Something analogous is happening in today’s India. People invoke religion – or anything like “our faith” and “religious sentiment” – while they have very little understanding of the philosophical, ethical and historical traditions behind the words.

There’s an infinity of hatred being perpetrated in the country in the name of religion now. What does their religion really mean or teach? Most of them have no idea. Like Kafka’s guards. But they will defend it by all means.

They could as well say to you: “You are not a true Hindu because you do not accept my definition of Hinduism.” OR “You are against religion because you question what I call religious.” Anyone who knows one line of the scriptures is a Swamy or a Yogi now!

Ask him what his religion is or means and he will be as ignorant as Kafka’s guards.

To all those who hurl abuses at me in social media and elsewhere in the name of Hinduism, I have these questions – and never got answers!

What do you mean by Hinduism? Is it:

·      a philosophy

·      a collection of devotional traditions

·      a civilisation

·      a way of life

·      a family inheritance

·      some scriptures

·      a set of rituals

·      belief in dharma and karma

A Pew survey conducted a few years ago showed that there is no single understanding among Indian Hindus of what it means to be Hindu. Hinduism is practised differently in different parts of the country. Nobody can take one way or interpretation and declare that this is Hinduism.

When Kafka’s protagonist tries to discover the Law, he keeps getting different answers from different authorities. Every authority he confronts seems to represent only another fragment of the system.

With such fragments of awareness, the defenders of religion today have transmuted it from a search for truth into a mechanism for deciding who is a genuine Indian.

Kafka’s protagonist has to defend himself against a law which he is not allowed to know.

In India now, many citizens have to defend themselves against a religion which no one seems to know what really is.

PS.  A few days back I happened to have a brief interaction on Facebook with a man wearing a saffron robe and claiming to be a “Swamy.” When he said he cannot forgive anyone who questions Modi’s credentials for being today’s Hindu Redeemer, I commented with a pun which meant Impatient Swamy. The exchange was in Malayalam where the word kshama can mean both forgiveness and patience. Both the Swamy and I used the word kshama but with the different meanings. The Swamy reacted instantly like a Bajrang Dal thug and said, “Tommy, I don’t possess the kshama of Franko Mulakkal.” I didn’t take that exchange further because I realised the Swamy was not worth engaging with. Pointing out an aberration in another religion is not what a holy man would do when questioned. Some similar occasions prompted me to write the above post.

With terrible irony, Facebook elevated me to the status of a fan of the Swamy’s page just because I spent a few minutes on it! Of course, I declined the fan badge without a second thought.