The Naimisha Journal
In its relatively short - and decidedly Western-centric -
history, a wide variety of academic terms have arisen from within the discipline
known as Religious Studies in the expressed order of assisting the field's
specialists to more ably grasp the structure and outlook of religious sects and
institutions. One pair of such terms that we encounter are the concepts of
"Expansive" versus "Contractive". It is important to note
that these two words are used, not with the intent of ascribing a superiority
status to any one particular sect over another, or of denigrating any particular
religious belief system, but with the aim of rationally understanding the
functional and attitudinal aspects of differing religious institutions. In the
following, I will illustrate the meaning of the terms Expansive and Contractive
by examining two very different faiths: Hinduism and
Islam.
Before we begin, however, it is important to first explain
the difference between these two academic terms. An expansive religion is one
which tends towards social and philosophical inclusiveness. Overall, such faiths
tend to be both tolerant of internal differences of opinion, as well as open to
positive contributions from outside the institutional bounds of the faith.
Generally, they seek to embrace the social, political and philosophical
realities that exist outside the sectarian confines of the religion. Expansive
religions are inherently open, liberal, progressive and accepting. By marked
contrast, a contractive religion is exclusivistic in nature. Members of
contractive sects tend to view themselves as being thoroughly separated from
non-believers by virtue of their own espousal of the one and only true faith.
Unlike expansive faiths, contractive religions tend to be highly suspicious of
both internal dissent, as well as of perceived external challenges.
Consequently, such faiths will often suppress any attempts at reform, change and
renewal from within, and will repeatedly wage both ideological and
martial war against other faiths whom they consider to be at odds with their own
rigidly cherished notions of truth.
It has been argued by numerous scholars and practitioners
that the religion of Hinduism is radically expansive by nature. This
expansiveness can be seen, first, in the realm of traditional Hindu
philosophical and theological thought. The six schools of Hindu philosophy
(Shad-Darshanas), while completely united in their assessment and acceptance of
the basic philosophical foundations of Hinduism, are quite diverse in their
respective approaches to moksha, or the ultimate spiritual attainment of
liberation. For example, while the Samkhya school of Hindu philosophy posits a
dualistic ontology, juxtaposing the two distinct elements of purusha (spirit)
and prakriti (matter), the school of Advaita Vedanta sees reality in purely
monistic terms. For Shankara's Advaita, there is only one substance in reality:
Brahman, or unbounded consciousness.
For Vedanta, on the other hand, ritual is generally viewed as
being merely a collection of symbolic rites, the efficacy of which is negligible
in contrast with the attainment of brahma-vidya, or the knowing of Brahman; but
for the Mimamsa school of Hindu philosophy, ritual in accordance with Vedic
injunction is the highest religio-philosophical activity that can be performed
by human beings. Despite the diversity and freedom of opinion that has existed
both within and between these many schools of Hindu thought, these schools have
all peacefully co-existed in India for thousands of years, preferring to do
battle in the realm of civil academic debate rather than on the bloody
battlefields of supposed holy wars.
In keeping with this respect for diversity of opinion and
thought, hundreds of various sects, traditions and schools of thought have
arisen within the tolerant framework of Hindu culture. So open-minded has the
Hindu outlook traditionally been that it has been said by many Western academic
observers of Hinduism that whatever your individual belief, concern or practice
may be, there is (or at least has at one time been) a sect of Hinduism that
embraces it. While this claim is certainly somewhat of an exaggeration, it does
point to the fact that Hinduism is, indeed, a religion of tolerance, diversity
and expansion.
The atmosphere of tolerance traditionally encouraged by
Hinduism is dramatically seen in how Hinduism has historically dealt with
heterodox religious and philosophical movements. The religions of Buddhism,
Jainism and Sikhism are three religions that originated as offshoots from
Hinduism. Both Buddhism and Jainism began as ascetically oriented movements
within mainstream Hinduism in the fifth century B.C.E. Sikhism, which was
founded by the great Guru Nanak in the fifteenth century C.E., was an attempt to
synthesize the profound philosophical insights of Hinduism with the zealous
martial spirit of Islam. While all three movements were founded as schools of
thought within the greater rubric of Hindu culture, in time, all
three began to view themselves as religions distinct from the Vedic/Hindu
world-view.
Despite several major philosophical and religious differences
between these three sects and Hinduism, however, most of the contention between
these religions have remained on a purely philosophical level. At no time in
Indian history did there occur such instances of persecution and bigotry between
these religions as was witnessed in the Inquisition, Crusades or witch-hunts so
well known in the sad history of Western religious expression. Consequently,
while it is certainly true that no religion falls perfectly into either the
expansive or the contractive category, it is probably rather safe to say that
Hinduism does display more expansive characteristics than not.
With the above caveat about the dangers of generalizing in
mind, we will now explore a more contractive religion. Unlike the tolerance
observed throughout the long and very illustrative history of Hinduism, Islam
demands that its adherents follow a very rigidified code of beliefs, attitudes
and practices. Every Muslim, for example, is required to uphold six sacred
religious beliefs. Muslims must believe: a) that there is only one true god,
whose name is Allah, b) in the existence of a vast repertoire of semi-divine
beings called angels, c) in a specific number of recognized prophets (ranging
from Abraham to Muhammad, and including Jesus and Moses) who were sent by Allah
to reveal his commandments upon humanity, d) in the revelations given by Allah
to these specific prophets, e) in a final Day of Judgment in which all beings
will either join Allah in paradise or perish eternally in hell, and f) in the
doctrine of predestination (the idea that Allah has already preordained who will
be saved and
who will perish).
In addition to these six obligatory beliefs, it is required
that each Muslim perform five practical religious duties, known as the Five
Pillars of Islam. These are: 1) Confession of the faith ("There is no god
but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet"), 2) prayers five times daily, 3)
fasting during the month of Ramadan, 4) Almsgiving, and 5) the Hajj pilgrimage
to Mecca. All people who do not follow these commands of Allah are considered by
Muslims to be unbelievers, and are subsequently subject to conversion to the one
true faith of Islam.
In Islamic theo-political theory, the non-Muslim world is divided into two broad
categories: a) Dhimmis, or people of "the book", and b) Heathens, or
subhuman non-believers. The Dhimmis - Jews and Christians - are considered to be
people of the Covenant because they are followers of the earlier revelations of
the prophets Moses and Jesus, respectively. Dhimmis were therefore historically
given special protective status in the Islamic world. Despite this special
treatment by Islamic rulers, however, Judaism and Christianity are still
considered by Muslims to be religions that fall short of being true religion.
Followers of all other religions that lie outside of the
Judeo-Christian-Islamic world-view, however, are looked upon as
"heathens" by the Islamic religious law. Such "Heathens"
include Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, and the followers of all earth-centered
indigenous religions. "Heathens", up until the last few hundred years,
were considered third class citizens in Islamic societies, and were subject to
forced conversion, special taxation and persecution. The temples and sacred
relics of such "heathens" were systematically destroyed, their
priests, saints and sages were killed and their histories rewritten by Islamic
scholars. Islam is considered by more liberal Muslims as being the most
legitimate of all religions, and by its conservative elements as being the only
true religion , all other forms of religious expression being but pale
imitations of the glory of Islam.
Not only are non-Muslim religions looked upon with a very
high degree of suspicion by Muslims, but internal dissent is also rarely
tolerated in Islam. Heterodox movements within Islam, such as the Shias, Druze
and Alawites, are considered heretical and their respective followers have
historically been persecuted and killed by the majority Sunnis. In addition,
strict Islamic societies are usually guided by the Sharia, the rigid code of law
and rules which governs the life and behavior of all Muslims. The strict demands
placed upon believers, coupled with a lessor degree of tolerance than is
exhibited in more expansive religions, make for a convincing argument that Islam
would be considered a contractive religion by most objective observers.
It is crucial that the many varied and diverse religions of the world be studied, as much as is feasible, on their own terms, and from an objectively sympathetic perspective. Like all the many attempts to analyze and categorize faith systems that have arisen from the field of Religious Studies, the Expansive/Contractive definition is but an attempt to better understand the differences between the many diverse religions of the world. These terms are certainly helpful pointers to a general understanding of the specific religions under observation, but they not wholely perfect instruments in making such assessments.
It is my hope that these two terms have assisted the reader somewhat in gaining a more objectively focused glimpse into the psychological, philosophical and social distinctions that exist between two very different world-views.
Bibliography
Andrae, Tor. Mohammed: The Man and His Faith. New York: Schribners, 1936.
Avdich, Kamil Y. Survey of Islamic Doctrine. Cedar Rapids, Iowa:
privately printed, 1979.
Cane, P. V. A Brief Sketch of the Purva-Mimamsa System. Poona: Aryabhushan Press, 1924.
Chaudhuri, Roma. Ten
Schools of the Vedanta. 3 vols. Calcutta: Rabindra Bharati University, 1981.
Deutsch, Eliot. Advaita Vedanta: A Philosophical Reconstruction.
Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1969.
Espisito, John, ed.
Islam and Development. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press,
1980.
Galwash, Ahmad. The Religion of Islam. Cairo, Dar al-Shaab, 1952.
Klostermaier, Klaus K. A Survey of Hinduism. New York: SUNY Press, 1994.
Lacombe, Olivier. Indianite: Etudes Historiques et Comparatives sur la Pensee Indienne. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1979.
Lapidus, Ira M. A
History of Islamic Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Radhakrishnan, S. Indian Philosophy. 2 Vols. Delhi: Oxford University
Press, 1996.
Rahman, Fazlur. Islam. 2nd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.
Rust, Eric C. Religion, Revelation & Reason. Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1981.