{"title":"RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE AND RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE","authors":"S. Mendus","doi":"10.2143/BIJ.71.4.2064953","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In his book, Terror in the Mind of God, Mark Juergensmeyer writes: 'Perhaps the first question that came to mind when televisions around the world displayed the extraordinary aerial assaults on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11th 2001, was why anyone would do such a thing. When it became clear that the perpetrators' motivations were couched in religious terms, the shock turned to anger. How could religion be related to such vicious acts?' 1 That question'How could (or can) religion be related to vicious acts and indeed to acts of terrorism?' is the question I want to address in this essay. More precisely, the essay is motivated by my puzzlement that so few of the many people who have written on this topic in recent years that is, in the years since 9/11 and 7 n take seriously the possibility that when terrorists say they are acting for religious reasons, they mean exactly that. There is, it seems to me, deep resistance to, or neglect of, this possibility in the modern literature on terrorism, and I think that that fact is significant both for our understanding of recent terrorist attacks on western liberal societies and for our understanding of the values of liberalism itself. In short, my hunch is that modern liberals do not have an accurate understanding of religiously motivated acts of violence and that that very fact makes them (us) more vulnerable to religiously motivated terrorist attacks. To make the problem slightly more vivid, let me begin with two recent, and very influential, discussions of terrorism. In his book, The Lesser Evil, Michael Ignatieff discusses religiously-motivated terrorism under the general heading 'The Temptations of Nihilism', and he suggests that where terrorists attempt to justify their actions by reference to religion, they are 'hi-jacking' scriptural tradition. He writes 'The devil can always quote scripture to his use, and there is never a shortage in any faith of texts justifying the use of force. Equally, all religions contain sacred texts urging believers to treat human beings decently","PeriodicalId":80655,"journal":{"name":"Bijdragen tijdschrift voor filosofie en theologie","volume":"71 1","pages":"426 - 437"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2143/BIJ.71.4.2064953","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bijdragen tijdschrift voor filosofie en theologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2143/BIJ.71.4.2064953","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
In his book, Terror in the Mind of God, Mark Juergensmeyer writes: 'Perhaps the first question that came to mind when televisions around the world displayed the extraordinary aerial assaults on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11th 2001, was why anyone would do such a thing. When it became clear that the perpetrators' motivations were couched in religious terms, the shock turned to anger. How could religion be related to such vicious acts?' 1 That question'How could (or can) religion be related to vicious acts and indeed to acts of terrorism?' is the question I want to address in this essay. More precisely, the essay is motivated by my puzzlement that so few of the many people who have written on this topic in recent years that is, in the years since 9/11 and 7 n take seriously the possibility that when terrorists say they are acting for religious reasons, they mean exactly that. There is, it seems to me, deep resistance to, or neglect of, this possibility in the modern literature on terrorism, and I think that that fact is significant both for our understanding of recent terrorist attacks on western liberal societies and for our understanding of the values of liberalism itself. In short, my hunch is that modern liberals do not have an accurate understanding of religiously motivated acts of violence and that that very fact makes them (us) more vulnerable to religiously motivated terrorist attacks. To make the problem slightly more vivid, let me begin with two recent, and very influential, discussions of terrorism. In his book, The Lesser Evil, Michael Ignatieff discusses religiously-motivated terrorism under the general heading 'The Temptations of Nihilism', and he suggests that where terrorists attempt to justify their actions by reference to religion, they are 'hi-jacking' scriptural tradition. He writes 'The devil can always quote scripture to his use, and there is never a shortage in any faith of texts justifying the use of force. Equally, all religions contain sacred texts urging believers to treat human beings decently
Mark Juergensmeyer在他的书《上帝心中的恐怖》中写道:“当世界各地的电视播放2001年9月11日对世界贸易中心和五角大楼的空袭时,人们想到的第一个问题可能是,为什么有人会做出这样的事情?”当肇事者的动机显然是用宗教术语表达出来时,震惊变成了愤怒。宗教怎么会和这种恶毒的行为有关系呢?这个问题“宗教怎么可能(或可能)与邪恶行为和恐怖主义行为有关?”这是我想在这篇文章中讨论的问题。更确切地说,这篇文章的动机是我的困惑:近年来,在9/11和7 /11之后的几年里,关于这个话题的许多人中,很少有人认真对待恐怖分子说他们是出于宗教原因而行动的可能性,他们确实是出于宗教原因。在我看来,现代关于恐怖主义的文献中存在着对这种可能性的强烈抵制或忽视,我认为,这一事实对我们理解最近对西方自由社会的恐怖袭击以及我们对自由主义本身价值的理解都很重要。简而言之,我的直觉是,现代自由主义者对宗教动机的暴力行为没有准确的理解,而正是这一事实使他们(我们)更容易受到宗教动机的恐怖袭击。为了使这个问题稍微生动一点,让我以最近两个非常有影响力的关于恐怖主义的讨论开始。在他的书《小恶》中,Michael Ignatieff在“虚无主义的诱惑”的大标题下讨论了宗教动机的恐怖主义,他认为恐怖分子试图通过宗教来证明他们的行为是正当的,他们是在“劫持”圣经传统。他写道,魔鬼总是可以引用经文来为自己所用,在任何信仰中,都不乏为使用武力辩护的经文。同样,所有的宗教都包含神圣的经文,敦促信徒要善待人类