COVID-19’S most important lesson for all religions must surely be that none is superior to any others.
If there is a numero uno, it would have steered its faithful devotees to safety ensuring no harm befalls them.
Instead, religious followers are like everyone else in having to depend on vaccines whose production can’t be said to have been inspired by religion.
Sadly, it takes a virus to inform humanity that it is one family without borders.
We are ruled by a host of common factors and no matter what our religion, the same vulnerabilities apply: if you’re old you’re vulnerable, if you have comorbidities you’re vulnerable. If you mix in a crowd, you are vulnerable.
Back in early 2020, religious crowds fell victim to the first wave of Covid-19 pandemic attacks.
Throughout April 2021 India suffered a colossal ascent in cases because millions went for a holy river dip, and in Malaysia the government acknowledged that religious activities during a festive season in May 2021 caused the new tidal wave of infections.
Just as the same crowd conditions infect all, so also the same vaccines protect us all. There isn’t one vaccine for Muslims, one for Christians, and one for Hindus.
Covid-19 should make us realise that our various religions shouldn’t be worn as masks to hide our common identity as humans.
The psychological distance between one religion and another is the distance we keep ourselves from God.
Strangely, the brainless pathogens are a united force whereas brainy humans are lined up on opposing sides doing battle with each other for converts to swell their ranks.
Vietnam recently witnessed a mixed marriage between the Alpha and Delta variants originating from different continents, and the union produced a hybrid more powerful than its parents.
Do we even permit interfaith marriage? Religions are so engrossed in conversion that humanity spends more of its energy fighting itself than in preserving lives and livelihoods.
Just four months ago, a Buddhist-raised woman secured victory in the federal court after a six-year legal battle in a case that involved six lawyers on her side and seven lawyers on the opposing side.
Thirteen lawyers argued whether she had the right to continue living as a Buddhist.
Nobody in court raised the most important question of all: since when did religions stand on opposing sides and who made them do so?
Almost a year ago, a young woman shared in a forum her dilemma after converting to another religion while her boyfriend remained committed to his religion that was also her previous religion.
He was reluctant to follow her in her new way of worship. Why can’t they practise dual religiosity?
Some countries practise dual nationality, and does this imply torn loyalties? Dual nationality is wrong only if you assume that nations are enemies to each other.
There is a similar assumption behind the prejudice against dual religiosity.
But where is it stated in any scripture that if your religion is true, it then means that all other religions are false? You can have dual religiosity, and it’s a holistic practice.
Child conversions produce the most heart-wrenching tragedies. A landmark year was 2016 when such cases made newspaper headlines time and again.
In one instance, a divorced woman converted her two children without the father’s consent and four years later the case had made its way to federal court.
In another famous instance, the federal court had to rule whether both parents must consent before a child is allowed to be converted.
Before end of 2016, one state government had passed an amendment to allow unilateral conversion of a child. That same year, a group of youthful politicians declared that conversion spelled victory for the successful religion against evil. So other religions are evil?
Wading into the debate, one of Malaysia’s topmost journalists wrote in December 2016 that “unilateral conversion should not be allowed for whatever religion, be it Islam, Christianity, Hinduism or Buddhism.”
Allow children to decide once they become adults, he added. That merely shoves the problem to adulthood.
Except in marriage where it is desirable for the couple to align their beliefs and ritual practices, conversion in modern times is a dangerous throwback to the age of civilisational warfare.
When two opposing civilisations with different state religions go into battle for territorial control, one technique to weaken the enemy’s numbers is to induce mass conversion. It is an instrument of tactical warfare used by several religions that have been contesting for dominance in the West Asia-North Africa-Mediterranean region over many centuries.
But you don’t find Hindus and Taoists converting each other, because India and China never fought a civilisational war.
Conversion is a weapon of war, not a tool for peace.
How does the pursuit of conversion weaken humanity in its battle against viral invasions?
In the first instance, you slander the targeted religion by declaring that its scripture contains falsehoods. In retaliation it will likewise view your scripture as false.
In this “us versus them” division, it is religion versus religion undermining the global effort to stem out Covid-19.
The flipside to conversion is that just as we get converts to apostasise from their parents’ religion, so too we fear that our own ranks may be hit by apostasy.
We inflict self-harm because the pursuit of conversion throws our brains into war mode.
Dividing humanity into an abode of peace (believers) and an abode of war (non-believers), the people of God endure hidden stress induced by a tense mind.
You suffer psychological damage by keeping your brain frozen in a deep militant past.
But there is also physical damage in failing to sense the agony of a crying parent who has lost a child through unilateral conversion.
Such insensitivity means that we are not whole, and lack of wholeness damages our body’s immune system.
In this condition, humanity will get struck down again should another dreaded zoonotic virus emerge from the wilds.
The writer champions interfaith harmony. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
