2017  
  2016  
  2015  
  2014  
  2013  
  2012  
  2011  
  2010  
  2009  
  2008  
  2007  
  2006  
COMBATING COMMUNAL VIOLENCE: PREFACE TO THE SOLUTION
Satyabrata Bhoi | 20 Nov 2008

How can a religion is different from another religion as far as love, benevolence, peace, humanity is concerned? Methods of practice may be different, philosophies may be different, but if there is not love, benevolence, peace and humanity then it can not

Does not meet our requirement. Unpublishable
COMBATING COMMUNAL VIOLENCE
PREFACE TO THE SOLUTION

Satyabrata Bhoi


In the UN conference for religions, the consulting NGO, A Centre for the World Religions (ACWR) had stated that at least one third of the wars that the world has faced till date are directly a result of religious conflicts and violence perpetrated in the name of God. To establish peace with regard to religious conflict, an international body called World Conference of Religions for Peace (WCRP) is working across the globe. Much has been discussed and much concern has been shown, but still communal violence has remained as one of the greatest threat to humanity. It would be bitter to state, but it has been a fact that, religion which is supposed to fill the earth with love and peace has rendered the humanity in a total anarchy.
To provide informative data regarding communal violence is not the motto of this article. Rather it is aimed here at introspecting whether we are really sincere about bringing out an effective elucidation to this sensible dilemma and to provide some way out for genuine consideration by the mass, particularly by the religious leaders and the statesmen across the globe.
When ever a communal violence occurs, statesmen come forward to handle the situation with their political power and diplomacy. (Though many a times such violence are created by the politicians for their ulterior motives.) One thing is not understood that, how the statesmen decide on a subject like religion, which is not supposed to be in the area of their knowledge and action. A politician might be a religious person, but he should not be taken as a religious leader of a community, particularly in a secular world. After the communal violence in Gujurat, a motion was there to bring a special law to curb the communal violence and to see that such things are not to occur in future; even Mr. Asghar Ali Engineer from Centre for Study of Society and Secularism had drafted a law for the purpose as a proposal. But enforcement of any bureaucratic or political law is not a solution to the problem. Why do not they call the religious leaders of all the communities in a common platform and appeal them to bring out a solution?? But this never happens. India – Pakistan partition happened in the name of religions, whose devastating effects are still thrilling the world. What an irony and paradox is it that, though this was a partition made taking two religious groups into consideration, no religious leaders were consulted by politicians while writing this historical misfortune!!
Never less, the religious leaders also do not seem to be earnest in paving a road for harmony. Mere meetings, conglomeration, preaching of ethics will not work, until and unless they are directly involved in addressing the issue then and there on the spot. Though many of the activities of WCRP are worthy of appreciation, still isn’t it an escapist mentality or perhaps helplessness shown by the WCRP in relation to the recent communal violence in Orissa, India- that it has finished its job by writing an epistle to all the religious leaders and statesmen appealing to bring harmony in the state!!! Her Holiness Sister Nirmala came to Orissa, visited the affected area, met the chief minister and after giving some statements and urging to bring peace went away. It is a surprise that it didn’t come in her mind that Orissa is a land where Puri is there and one of the most revered Hindu religious leaders Sankarcharya stays there. She might have invited Sankarcharya to address the issue jointly with her directly at the affected area, Kandhamal. Or otherwise His Holiness Sankaracharya might have made a call to Sister Nirmala to have a meet, to find out some solution and to give a joint visit to the area in unrest and distress. But they didn’t do so. Had they addressed jointly the issue directly at the area in concern, there must have been an effectual development; the violence could have been controlled to a large extent. Not the chief minister also thought it necessary to make it convenient to arrange a common platform for both these religious leaders to address the issue jointly.
It seems religious leaders of different faiths are themselves opposed to each other. That is why they cannot meet at a common point and the differences continue- the world has to suffer. Or otherwise they are not sincere in getting a way out- the world has to suffer. How can a religion is different from another religion as far as love, benevolence, peace, humanity is concerned? Methods of practice may be different, philosophies may be different, but if there is not love, benevolence, peace and humanity then it can not be a religion. This is the ground where all the religious leaders will also meet. Then why they are escaping from the situation, why they are putting their religiousness before the mass as a doubt???

A solution to this persisting problem is drafted in the article “COMBATING COMMUNAL VIOLENCE: A SOLUTION DRAFTED for kind perusal and for a humanistic attention to the topic standing with apathy from ages.

Satyabrata