If the function of religion in society has conventionally been to offer a basis for thoughts and actions, thus allowing people to relate, bond and abide by a common principal and goal, then it is indeed a matter to contemplate how, the same binding force might be instrumental in generating so much hate and destruction. Historically hate or violence has not been foreign to the realm of religion and its propagation and practice. Unjustified or immoral as some of those actions might have been, it was not difficult to trace the motivation behind those acts. Be it witch burning in Europe in 1480 – 1700s or communal riots of Ayodhya, Northern India, the underlying factors stemmed from the need to enforce power over differences that posed as a threat to the prevailing notion. The need to enforce power in general, be it for religious reasons or political, has been to implement a rule or dogma that was deemed superior than the contrary. Points of contention historically have been differences in faith, color, territorial and economic. The point or cause, however myopic, lends the intent or initiative an element of sanity.
That said, when the Mumbai attacks of 2008 took place, I was in Saint Nicholas, Granada, feasting my eyes on one of the most magnificent Islamic monuments – the Alhambra. It was a cold, rainy, windswept night and when I finally put my feet up inside a quaint 18 th century Spanish villa, next to a small rickety room heater, it was still a bit damp and chilly…my husband and I watched the news on Spanish television and tried to fathom, to the best of our abilities the scenes of horror that were being depicted in Spanish. Wounded bodies were being carried away on stretchers, grieving and wailing victims in the backdrop of the famous Mumbai Taj Hotel, designed quite ironically with the elements of Islamic architecture to reflect the famous Taj Mahal, built by Muslim ruler Shah Jahan. We figured out from the news, that it was difficult for the Indian military to differentiate the attackers as their skin color and features were so alike the throng of crowds on the streets that it provided the perfect camouflage!
Recently when investigations established that the attack was planned in the neighboring country and implemented with the aid of citizens of India who are allowed to practice their faith on its land which provides them immunity under the wings of a secular and democratic government, I found myself musing on the intent of this attack. The point of contention clearly could not be color or faith which is part of the fabric of the country. Is it then territorial or economic? If it is economic then clearly destruction of lives and wealth does not help generate any. Since the territorial issues are confined to the Northern borders that are unlikely as well…in which case we might question the cause…the absence of which leaves no basis for sanity that initiated the attack.
Is such a massacre an excuse for acting out unresolved anger and frustration in the name of God? The mad man is confined to the asylum thus reprieving society of his destructive actions. When it is the collective thought process initiated by the binding force of religion with a perverted hunger for power in the absence of a cause, how does one contain it?