The gods of war

PINOY KASI
The gods of war

By Michael Tan
Inquirer
Last updated 01:59am (Mla time) 09/13/2006

Published on Page A13 of the September 13, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

I WAS walking along the street when my attention was caught by the picture of a gun on the sticker on the window of a parked van. I could almost feel the gun nozzle aimed between my eyes, with the threatening words: "Shoot first. Ask question (sic) later."

I would have laughed at the ridiculous message, complete with its atrocious grammar, but the whole day I'd been bombarded by media coverage of "9/11" memorial activities, so I found the sticker jarring, if not annoying -- a reminder of the insane times we live in.

When I first saw the sticker, I thought immediately of the "pro-gun" lobby with car stickers proclaiming themselves as "peaceful responsible owners" of guns. I suspect the "shoot first" sticker comes from some members of that lobby, people who have shed all pretensions of guns being peaceful and who believe a person should have the right to use violence on the slightest suspicion that one is under attack.

We see such primitive and paranoid responses all around us. We have the terrorists who rammed the planes into New York's Twin Towers five years ago, driven by the idea of a holy war to be waged against the United States. These terrorists were convinced that they had to move against a threat to their faith, particularly the United States, even if it meant
sacrificing the lives of fellow Muslims.

But on every Sept. 11th, we forget too how the "shoot first" policy has been multiplied many times over through the policy of "preemptive war" led by George W. Bush and his allies, generating even more violence. The Inquirer published an article yesterday by Michel Rocard, former prime minister of France, describing the "rigidity and brutality" in the US government's response to 9/11, with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.
I thought of how this response has become a model for leaders throughout the world, with little thought of collateral damage. We saw that in the recent carnage in Lebanon; we see it today in our own government's pursuit of a bloody counter-insurgency strategy. Shoot first, bomb first, maybe ask a few questions later, but we need to wage war to bring peace.

Axial Age

The German philosopher Karl Jaspers coined the term "Axial Age" to refer to a period, from 900 to 200 B.C., during which several of the world's greatest religions emerged: Confucianism and Taoism in China; Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism in India; monotheistic Judaism in Israel; and philosophical rationalism in Greece. "Axial" refers to the pivotal role these religions played in the spiritual development of humanity, including religions that were to come later, particularly Christianity and Islam.

Historian and theologian Karen Armstrong has developed Jaspers' ideas of an Axial Age in several of her books, the latest being "The Great Transformation," which goes into an incisive analysis of that period, including the main messages of the sages of that era: Buddha, Confucius, Socrates, Jeremiah and the mystics who wrote the Upanishads. Published earlier this year, Armstrong's latest book is selling well and is said to have even made it to President George Bush's reading list. (Let's hope Bush eventually gets to read, and understand, the book.)

Armstrong has important messages for us as we live through times that are very similar to the Axial Age. I'm going to cite and paraphrase her liberally, using her books and the many media interviews she has granted.

The Axial Age was marked by the rise of kingdoms and empires. Trade was expanding and people were moving out of their small villages to explore a larger world. It was also a violent time, with wars of conquest and attrition.

Armstrong notes how the wise sages of that era came up with similar messages of compassion and a rejection of violence. Religion was a way to transcend the ego, and at the core of this transcendence, each sage proposed his own version of the Golden Rule, of not doing unto others what you would not want them to do to you.

It sounds simple enough, but Armstrong points out that implementing this Golden Rule required great discipline and strength. Contrary to our present emphasis on religions as a set of beliefs, Armstrong says the great religions became great precisely because of their emphasis on action, on taming the ego. Islam's requirements of daily prayer oriented toward Mecca, of fasting during the Ramadan, of the Haj pilgrimage, even of giving alms, were all, in Armstrong's view, "designed incrementally over the years to change your inner world."

Yahweh Saboath

Armstrong points out that many of the founders of today's great religions, from Buddha to Christ and Mohammed, did not talk about doctrines and tended to skirt the idea of a personal God, perhaps in reaction to the way rulers waged war in the name of a particular God, or gods, and beliefs attributed to those gods.

Today, various religious fundamentalists plague us, each declaring his own God as the only true one and a readiness to die and kill in His name. But the rabid defense of one's own beliefs, one's own God, is often another camouflage for egotism.

Armstrong constantly emphasizes that it is not religions that cause war; instead, religions are "sucked in" by the violence of the times. In one interview, she pointed out how the Bible has many of these contradictions: "Jesus, in the New Testament, tells His followers to turn the other cheek, not to attack, and to forgive and love. And then we turn to the Book of Revelation where Jesus is leading armies and destroying the enemies of God
in battle with great gusto."

Armstrong urges a more sympathetic view of fundamentalists, understanding how they tend to be people who are all too angry and fearful as they see rapid changes in the world. She also reminds us that there are secular forms of fundamentalism, usually political ideologies, that can be as destructive and indeed she's right when you think of the likes of Hitler and Pol Pot.

Compassion can seem almost naïve in these times, but Armstrong says that compassion does work. Mohammed lived too in an era of tribal wars and emerged victorious because he often eschewed violent solutions. Today, we associate jihad with Osama bin Laden and terrorism, but jihad means "struggle" and violent wars are seen only as a "lesser jihad." In Islam, the greater jihad involves personal ethical struggles, a striving to do
good.

In "A History of God," Armstrong writes about how the Old Testament evokes a Yahweh Sabaoth, the God of Armies, who is partisan (note the emphasis on a Chosen People) and has little compassion. Armstrong says this Yahweh was little more than a "tribal deity" and the sages of the Axial Age were able to wean people away from these parochial and destructive tribal deities.

Today, we need again to choose, between these bloodthirsty tribal gods of preemptive wars and the simple and compassionate wisdom of the Axial Age.