If religion is an industry, God is a commodity. Perhaps that’s a strong statement. Strong, but true! From time and again religion, as it is commonly practiced in India (owing to the sectarian fanaticism characteristic of fundamentalists) has been distorted in ways more than one. This has been done in a game of politics and power, relegating the larger interest of society to a secondary status. Often our politicians, priests, and religious fundamentalists, sell God to the people of India for votes, money or power.
Consider, for instance, the issue in Ayodhya. Do you see any point to it? Well, I don’t. For another temple or mosque essentially adds nothing to making this nation a little stronger or an individual’s life a little better. And our politicians excel in the art of making an issue out of a non-issue, while sidelining the more important issue of individual and societal well-being. Sectarian consciousness based on religion, region, sex and other such identities, while allowing an individual to assert one’s individuality and grow within (so that at some point one can transcend these very identities and realize the unity of one and all, animate and inanimate) does cause a distortion of one’s sense of oneself when taken to the extremes of fanaticism. For, in your exclusively fanatic devotion to one of the many identities you carry (religion, region et al) and share with others, you forget your individuality – the composite of all your shared identities – and lose yourself to one shared identity. I’ll explain.
The very ideas of religion, region etc, seemed too divisive to me; and, in some sense, repugnant. For time and again they threaten the unity of my country and the well-being of my countrymen. However, as I reasoned out, these identities are part of one’s individuality. They let an individual grow, give and celebrate them in a larger celebration of life. The question is: who or what instills this belief in me that India ought to be a united land shared by different identities? Why does its unity matter to me? It matters, perhaps, because I can see a larger shared identity, an idea that connects Indians, the idea of India. That is my conception of India. India resides within you, within me, within each Indian. We are a living manifestation of the Indian Identity which, diverse as it may seem, is condensed into but one idea, which is India. India is basically an amalgamation of different identities into one cohesive whole. None of these identities will thrive in isolation. Nor can India thrive without them.
So, to go from strength to strength, India needs an Indian to recognize his/her own, in Tagore’s words, “vigorous individuality” while being conscious of the fact that none of his/her identities is complete in itself but a part of the larger identity, India. And to say that India, as an identity, is complete in itself would be as much an underestimation of the extent of one’s individuality as to say, that your name, as an identity, is complete in itself. For it is not; your name is nothing if there’s no other identity to use it in relation to. India resides within an Indian. However, an Indian (or for that matter, any individual) is much more than the label assigned by his/her race, region, religion, nation et al. Just as India is composed of and a celebration of the myriad identities this country nurtures, an individual’s identity is a composite of identities that transcend India. This identity of the individual is a celebration of life. And life is a celebration of this identity, of this individuality.
If you’re wondering in what way my identity as an individual, transcends that of India, let me explain. Who am I? At the physical level I am just a moving mass of atoms endowed with a property called ‘life’. Everything is a collection of atoms. Not everything, however, is endowed with ‘life’. So this distinction creates two identities – animate and inanimate. But, inasmuch as I am a collection of atoms, I’m one with the universe. The atoms that make me have been there from time immemorial in one form or another. I’m the same energy, the same matter that once pervaded this Universe, that was a part of some star, and that will go back to it once my body – a collection of atoms, is unable to sustain itself and in the process loses its property called ‘life’ and then crumbles up to release the atoms back to the Universe. So, essentially, my most basic identity, at the physical level, is that I am a collection of atoms.
At this level I can sense a unity with the Universe. The first differentiation of my identity occurs once I’m endowed with ‘life’. Then I am an animate object, distinct from those inanimate. You’ll see that this is the first layer of identity that covers my more basic identity as one with the universe. Then, again, I am an animal, distinct from plants; I am a mammal, distinct from other classes of animals; I am a human, distinct from other mammals; I am a man, distinct from a woman; and so on. So, essentially, I am a composition of layers over layers of identities. The idea is to discover what lies beneath the layers and at what level the unity of all holds. At one level, I am distinct from you. At another, I am one with you. At one level, I am a believer in nationalism. At another, I am an internationalist. And at quite another level, I believe in universalism. To grow as an individual and contribute meaningfully to this celebration of the universality of all, I need to recognize and appreciate both: my uniqueness as an individual and the fact that I’m one with the universe at the most basic level.
To put it succinctly, in Tagore’s words,
“Individuality is precious, because only through it we can realize the universal.”
Ravi Kunjwal
Image Source:http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/IMA/S719~Unity-Posters.jpg]
Did i say it stops “at a national identity level”? I didn’t as far as i know. Did you read this:
And, well, to say that India, as an identity, is complete in itself would be as much an underestimation of the extent of one’s individuality as to say that your name, as an identity, is complete in itself. For it is not; your name is nothing if there’s no other identity to use it in relation to. India resides within an Indian. However, an Indian (or for that matter, any individual) is much more than the label assigned by his/her race, region, religion, nation et al. Just as India is composed of and a celebration of the myriad identities this country nurtures, an individual’s identity is a composite of identities that transcend India.
So there you are: “an individual’s identity is a composite of identities that transcend India.”
Nations are but constructs that are meant to carefully group individuals within the larger world group in order that they may realise their individuality, as individuals and as nations, and explore its potential. Extremes never work in the long run. In your extreme enthusiasm to create One World for a World Citizen, you’ll only kill individual national identities and their flavour in favour of a monotonous world where people think on similar lines, where they speak one language, they don’t have any disagreements because they refuse to think (completely subjugating their individuality to a common World Citizenship), and they don’t realise that they are different from each other as well. Didn’t I, however, speak of the universality of one and all? Despite our differences we share a common planet, a common Universe and common elements that constitute us.
Look, you need an identity to identify yourself in relation to the world you live in. As an Indian you’d have as much, and i suppose more, of a dedication to the well-being of your nation as to the well-being of any other nation. However, an individual, despite being part of the larger universe, is essentially a local being. He can experience only one part of the universe at a time. You can’t comment or give any constructive suggestions as to the well-being of the people of, say, a place like Tonga, for you’ve never been there, never lived there, never been a part of its culture, never known the people there, and you do not necessarily share their values, born and brought as you are (presumably) in the Indian ethos. You can’t feel exactly the same way for Tonga as you might for India. Similarly, someone from Tonga might not have any interest in India and more interest in Tonga. So, the Indian and the people of Tonga owe more to their respective countries than to the each other’s nation. An American cannot govern India if he doesn’t make the effort to learn more about the Indian psyche. In this learning process he becomes a part of India, for he’s put some effort into knowing India better. That’s why you can obtain indian citizenship through naturalisation.
“today nationalism gives rise to only war and the creation of the “other””
That is nationalism taken to the extreme negative sense of the word. Ideologies by themselves are seldom good or bad. It’s your perception and execution of them that makes them so.
You talk at once of religious and regional fanaticism, and at the same time talk about a national Indian identity- which i think is another form of fanaticism, namely Nationalism. i agree with you in that one should be able to transcend these identities; but i disagree that this transcendence should stop at a national identity level. the definition of an “Indian” becomes increasingly ambiguous in this day and age. gone are the days of imperialism: today nationalism gives rise to only war and the creation of the “other”.