E 'natural that when a person becomes a public figure, everyone can comment on and interpret his actions and his choices. When a character becomes an icon, what is the symbol of an idea, often loses its communications and human complexity is understood and known by most people in a simplified form, not as a human being but as something abstract , which is instrumental to the idea.
In this sense for many people today, Mahatma Gandhi is no longer a person but rather, an icon and perhaps for this reason, Vittorio Messori in his article "The Legend dell'uomo che aveva una grande anima ", uscito sul Sette, il settimanale di Corriere della Sera lo scorso 23 dicembre 2010, ha scritto, ".. ma su Gandhi molti ignorano molto, seguendo miti orecchiati "?
L'articolo di Messori è stato scritto per presentare il libro " Teoria e Pratica della Nonviolenza " che sarà distribuito con il quotidiano nei prossimi giorni. Ho letto questo articolo con un senso di disagio, perché penso che questo articolo si parla di Gandhi in termini un po' strani.
Secondo Messori, i vari concetti della filosofia di Gandhi, come pacifismo, non violenza e resistenza passiva, sono concetti evangelici taken from the Bible. It 's true that on several occasions, Gandhi spoke of the teachings of the Bible, but I think that the concepts of pacifism and passive resistance, so important to Gandhi, had also many other roots.
For example, I think the basic inspiration for the concept of nonviolence enunciated by Gandhi, was the family atmosphere that had surrounded since he was a child, an environment strongly influenced by the concepts Jains of Ahimsa of Mahavira (Jainism religion, based on the principles of non-violence towards all living beings). In addition, on several occasions he spoke of Gandhi teachings Bhagvadgita , a sacred text of Hindus.
However, I do not think that is a problem if Messori wants to stop the influence of the Bible on the thought of Gandhi, but I thought that was strange that he uses to justify this, " .. peaceful certainly was not and is not the 'Hinduism from which it was Gandhi. Christians and Muslims (in areas where they were in the minority) were persecuted and often quite bloody. "
The religious conflicts that erupt every now and then in India, are well known. Like all religious groups, even among the Hindus, the most conservative and fundamentalist groups out there, and many of them believe in violence. But these episodi, per arrivare alla conclusione che l'induismo è una religione non pacifica, ci vuole una certa superficialità e anche, una non-conoscenza dell'induismo.
Nonostante i tanti conflitti religiosi, India è sempre stata e continua ad essere un paese tollerante e aperto, anche se gli indù sono più dell'84% della popolazione. Nei 63 anni trascorsi dalla sua indipendenza nel 1947, tutte le minoranze religiose indiane sono cresciute numericamente, a dispetto di tutti gli altri paesi della regione. In India vivono 120 milioni di musulmani, ed è il secondo paese nel mondo per il numero dei musulmani. Inoltre, in questi 63 anni di indipendenza dell'India, i diversi stati (paragonabili alle regioni italiane) del nord-est of the country are now predominantly Christian. Eventually, other religious groups like the Parsis, Bahais, Jews and Armenians, persecuted in different parts of the world have found safe haven in India from ancient times. I think that all these facts testify that like other religions, including Hinduism speak of the fundamental values \u200b\u200bof peace and love.
Human history is full of stories of conflict and persecution. Even Europe and Christianity are not absent, just think of the Middle Ages and to 'inquisition. In the name of their God, the most conservative groups of different religions have often chosen violence against others. Recently, I saw the film "Agora " Alejandro Amenabar's that chronicles the religious violence nell'Alessandria the fourth century AD.
However, I think that religions are often just an excuse for so-called "religious conflicts " and there may be other factors behind these conflicts, such as power, envy, resentment and control. This is true even for "religious conflict" in India, even though newspapers often prefer to "simplify" the news not to confuse readers, and also because it is easier to explain everything on the basis of religious differences.
The challenges India faces are many. The religious conflicts that erupt every now and then in the country, have so far remained quite limited and the state has always reacted strongly to stop them, although sometimes with a little 'late. Globalization and economic growth in the last two decades, has set in motion profound changes in the patriarchal society, and sometimes, traditional society has reacted to these changes with terrible violence.
While in India today, the conservative groups of different religions have become stronger on the other hand, there is an exponential growth of the national average with more than 100 television channels that broadcast news from all over the country in various languages \u200b\u200band dialects. 5-6 years from now, no conflict goes unnoticed in India, is immediately taken up by these televisions, so the government is forced to intervene. This situation will strengthen further in the coming decades with the expansion of the Internet to journalism mass.
However, not only in India but in different parts of the world, the most conservative and fundamentalist groups are expanding rapidly and we do not know, how this will develop in the coming years. This problem is a bit 'all religions. To return to the article by
Messori, do not understand why he chooses to point the finger at Hinduism in order to promote a book about the message of Gandhi? Perhaps because Gandhi had spoken against the activities of evangelization British missionaries during the years of colonialism?
(Note: The two images used in this post are from the magazine India Perspectives, January-March 2008)
0 comments:
Post a Comment