Living with each other's differences

The story of the ‘The Imam and The Pastor’, is one that needs to be revisited to fully comprehend the concept of the need to move beyond the concept of a clash between each other to reaching out and developing an alliance with ‘the other’.

Emerging from the 1990s in Northern Nigeria after being in the frontlines of confrontations between Christians and Muslims which saw the killings of thousands in inter-religious warfare, Imam Muhammad Ashafa and Pastor James Wuye are two of the most unlikeliest of allies, forging new grounds with their Interfaith Mediation Center, responsible for mediating peace between Christians and Muslims in Nigeria's Kaduna state.

They both came out of the heart of the religious teachings of their communities (Imam Ashafa was once committed to the total Islamization of Nigeria and Pastor James to its total evangelization) and were sucked into the religious conflict, becoming bitter enemies, determined to kill each other. Pastor James recounts that ‘My hate for Muslims had no limits’ whilst Imam Ashafa says that ‘We had a zeal to protect and revive the glory of Islam’.

Joining rival militias and fighting against each other, the Pastor had his hand hacked off while defending his church against Muslims and the Imam had his spiritual adviser and two of his brothers killed by Christian extremists. Imam Ashafa recalled that time ‘ For 48 hours, we were killing and maiming each other. Each of us were fighting believing that we had to defend our faith’.

In 1995, a chance meeting between the two at a mediation conference held under the auspices of the Kaduna State Women’s Commission, saw them discovering a lot of commonalities between themselves. This started their journey towards healing and forgiveness. They each began to question the cost of violence, reverting back to their scriptures for guidance on common approaches. The culmination of this was the Interfaith Mediation Centre which has been described as a prototype of global conflict resolution. The journey has been a tough one. They were labeled as betrayers by their own people and when they visited each other’s religious institutions, they were met with suspicion. Their personal journey was equally tough. Moving away from hating each other was a hard one. The turning point for Imam Ashafa came when he heard a jummah khutbah about forgiveness and the example of the Prophet (PBUH) who forgave the Quraish upon the conquest of Makkah. For Pastor James, it took him three years to really overcome his hatred. He says that sometimes when they would be travelling together, even sharing a room, he was sometimes tempted to try and suffocate Ashafa in retaliation for the loss of his hand. However it was with the sickness of his mother and the support shown by Imam Ashafa that Pastor James began to really embrace the concept of reconciliation. He was further helped by the words of a fellow evangelist: ‘You can not preach to someone you hate. You must begin to forgive them for every hurt against you.’ The two men are now working together and more importantly helping to empower others to understand and rejoice in the commonality in the faith of others and to speak of those faiths with the respect they deserve whilst remaining faithful to their own religions.

The story of Imam Ashafa and Pastor James is one about the power of the responsibility placed upon the shoulder of the individual to take the lead in becoming a true citizen of the country and of the world, where he / she can rise above their narrow confines of individualistic concerns to face the broader concerns of all humanity and to redress the contradiction of society. This is not just something that should be left to the politicians or the institutions but really no one can be ruled out having a part in contributing. Ultimately the contradiction of society will be redressed when people come together confident in their universal principles; strengthened by their common values; defenders of pluralism in their society and respectful of identities of others, which means that they will take up the challenge of joining forces in a revolution of trust and confidence against the tide of discrimination and intolerance and poverty.
Their journey of forgiveness and reconciliation is about taking an individual responsibility to create a safe space for people to talk and share ideas. This safe space entails not only moving beyond victimhood but also being cognizant of the past (accepting and facing up to the past honestly)

The story of the Imam and the Pastor shows that strong ethical commitment in religious traditions can sharpen identity politics but more importantly can form the basis of inter and intra faith collaboration. Thus religious pluralism can not only lead to an absence of violence mainly due to better understandings and interaction but it opens a space for discussion, dialogue and engagement. In short, we must learn to listen closely to one another, not simply because it is polite, but because it is just possible that we might learn something important about ourselves, and build a better global village in the process. This is perhaps the greatest lesson we can get from the story of the Imam and the Pastor.

Understanding the Need to Talk

The moment was poignant. A Buddhist Monk in Sri Lanka addressing a group of religious leaders in Tamil. The meeting was held by the North East Interfaith Forum at the Mahatma Ghandi Centre in Colombo in January 2011 to discuss practical actions that religious leaders could take towards post conflict reconciliation in the country.

For a country that has been ill at ease with the close relationship between Sinhala nationalism and Buddhism, the feat of a Buddhist Monk being able to converse in Tamil should not be underestimated. Sri Lanka is emerging from a conflict that has been rooted in a difference of culture, language, ethnicities and ultimately religion. Ultimately it has been rooted in miscommunication and misperceptions.
Hence any steps towards reconciliation would have ultimately started with the need to address miscommunication and misperceptions. The acknowledgement of the need to speak in a common language (either one that is neutral or the language of the ‘other’) is a first step.

Though the conflict was not directly related to faith, because of the inter relationships between culture, ethnicity and religious belief, faith has ultimately become a theatre in which the conflict has played out (your faith intertwined with your ethnicity has often highlighted your support for or against the conflict). Thus the coming together of the religious leaders was symbolic in attempting to arrest the misperceptions surrounding the role of faith in causing the conflict. The role of the religious leaders should also not be underestimated because for millions of Sri Lankans, religious leaders hold an influential role in their lives. By gathering together to express solidarity, the religious leaders were conscious of the influence they could hold on others.

In their deliberations, the religious leaders touched on many issues of concern for them which they felt they needed to address. What was also significant was the realization to move away from just rhetoric and to address burning issues of concern between them.

The deliberations touched on 6 aspects that was felt to be important to the group:

1) The realization of the need to move from an atmosphere of clash to an atmosphere of alliance. In other words, the first step towards understanding and reconciliation is the need to take a conscious decision that the moment for conflict is over. If anything the transcendental moment of lucidity has meant that there needs to be an alliance to move forward.

2) The realisation of the need to acknowledge the 'other'. This in effect means that importance is placed on someone who is 'different' to you. The Buddhist Monk speaking in Tamil provided an opportunity to recognise Tamils as a significant player in this process.

3) The need to move beyond victimhood. Very often it is easy to play the victim and to say that everyone is against us. However this does not get us very far and we become isolated and distrustful

4) The need to take responsibility. Playing the victim means abrogating responsibility for one's actions and blaming everyone else apart from yourself in what has happened to you.

5) The need to create a space. This can not be underestimated, as a space opens opportunities for dialogue and starting the process of understanding each other. The space for discussions is what has somewhat been constrained in the past

6) The need to acknowledge the past. This is an important step as it gives credence and importance to every stakeholder. The past should not become a ball and chain for the future, but it should be understood in order for us to move forward but not allowing the negative feelings associated with the past to weigh us down.

These 6 steps are somewhat a progression in terms of ideas as they represent certain milestones in people's journey's towards reconciliation. The mere fact that religious leaders are now taking the initiative to get involved highlights how important reconciliation is for the country away from the political nuances of the corridors of power. The religious leaders had assembled to share a declaration of solidarity in calling for a new environment to establish village level action committees in order to address grass roots issues. As they deliberated over key action points, it was clear that they were united in one thing: the need to develop a new vision for the country.

This in itself needs support.