THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING: A KEY TO UNDERSTANDING OPPPRESSION

Marianne Williamson in her speech announcing her candidacy for President in the Democratic Party argued that what lies at heart of problems plaguing our country is a spiritual crisis. This is in keeping with the work to which she has devoted herself as reflected in her books and public appearances. However, Williamson’s work embodies a very important and much needed form of spirituality called “socially engaged”. That is, she translates her spiritual convictions into social activism devoted to promoting compassion and justice. In her speech, she made clear that these areas of activism will remain a focus of her priorities as a Presidential candidate. These include creating a healthy and optimal environment for children in their formative years, achieving economic equality, and advancing criminal justice system reform. She is to be commended for exemplifying socially engaged spirituality and its relevance to our current political situation.

It is not common for individuals in politics to frame the pressing issues facing our country (and the rest of the world) in spiritual terms. Unfortunately, such is not the case for religion which is often used in highly distorted and destructive ways to justify hatred, violence and various forms of oppression. This conflating of some form of religious doctrine with political agendas and ideologies, as argued by Karen Armstrong in Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence, should not become the basis for a condemnation of religion. As she explains, the understanding of religion, particularly in Western Christian nations and most particularly in certain forms of Protestantism, is often skewed and biased. Armstrong discusses persuasively that this is a view of religion generally not shared in other parts of the world or by other faiths. This then gives rise to misconceptions of what role religion has played in human history and what the teachings of the great wisdom traditions actually say. As will be elaborated in what follows, it is no accident that political and economic ideologies that do incalculable harm to human beings employ religion as a means of justifying and sanctioning acts of injustice.

A strange and often contradictory attitude toward religion can be found among individuals in our more secular age. This is a legacy of modernism and the more materialistic, mechanistic view of reality that it advances. As observed by a number of authors, such as Ken Wilber, Alan Watts and Karen Armstrong, the rise of science beginning in the Renaissance and continuing and culminating in the Age of Enlightenment, eventually sought to dismiss and utterly disprove the legitimacy of religion and spirituality. In an ironic twist, this crusade against religion culminated in science becoming a form of religion in its own right, as expressed in the ideology called scientism. It asserts a materialistic creed of an unintelligent universe of blind forces operating in accordance with absolute and discoverable laws. It is a universe indifferent to human beings who themselves are nothing more than matter ruled by natural forces. The death of God was proclaimed (Nietzsche), the world became disenchanted (Max Weber), and the only means of establishing truth was by means of the scientific method. From this point of view, religion and spirituality are primitive, archaic and superstitious ways of thinking that we must outgrow.

Alongside this negative and dismissive attitude of religion, we can see a very different view in various forms of fundamentalism that elevate religion to the sole source of unquestioned truth and divine dictates that prescribe human behavior. This view, as espoused by many neoconservatives, holds that these ‘truths’ and ‘prescriptions’ must be the basis for governing state action, formulating public policy, and deeming what are and are not accepted cultural practices. In the most extreme case, no distinction is made between state and religion as in theocracies. These examples illustrate the previous point that religion can be used to condone violence and hatred and to justify political and economic structures and practices that oppress, exploit and harm human beings both materially and psychologically.

This morass can pose a genuine challenge to anyone desiring to make the case that spirituality and religion not only have a legitimate place but a vital role in social activism and the fight for justice. Regardless of whether one considers himself or herself spiritual or identifies with a particular religion, as I have argued in previous posts, it is a serious mistake to neglect or underestimate the power which religion/spirituality exert on human beings’ understanding of themselves and life. Moreover, they can be a power for good and encourage meaningful efforts to alleviate human suffering. This, however, requires clarity about what is understood by spirituality (I will be using religion and spirituality interchangeably). I subscribe to the observation made by an eminent historian of religion, Mircea Eliade, that the sacred which is the source of spirituality and religion is an essential element in the very structure of human consciousness that has existed for as long as human beings. The shape and manner in which the sacred is understood, however, changes and evolves over the course of human evolution and is influenced by social and cultural context. However, what remains a core element of spirituality, as noted by the philosopher of religion John Hick, is in an awareness of and response to something beyond us (what can be called the transcendent, the holy or the divine). From this standpoint, all human beings experience a sense of emptiness or incompleteness that gives rise to their seeking a reality that would ultimately fill the void and make them feel complete. This is chiefly attained by having an immediate and direct experience of the divine or holy. Spirituality is essentially the cultivation of an attitude of receptivity that makes one open to a transformative experience of liberation that is accompanied by a number of moral and spiritual benefits.

The benefits or gifts that accompany this experience highlight a second core element of religion discussed by Karen Armstrong. A typically held view is that religion is primarily a matter of belief — a commitment to an established creed and associated rites practiced in common by members of the religious community. Armstrong argues that religion is a practical discipline that is aimed at the cultivation of compassion and justice. It is concerned with ethics, what we do, how we conduct our lives. The aim is to rid ourselves of obstacles to compassion and justice such as selfishness, greed, ignorance, and egocentricity. Through all the great spiritual traditions this ethical dimension is captured in the Golden Rule. As the philosopher Martha Nussbaum observes in her book, The Monarchy of Fear, the prevalence of fear in contemporary politics can stoke other emotions such as anger, disgust and envy that pose threats that all are toxic threats to democracy and justice. A practical hope that keeps love and trust alive and that can stir a commitment to action provides a way of opposing the impact of fear. For Nussbaum religion has and can continue to be a positive resource for promoting and sustaining hope with the proviso that “…we should always ask ourselves where our religion is taking us and whether that goal is compatible with the love of all persons”.

The cultivation of the love for all persons lies at the very ethical core of religion. This brings us to what I believe exemplifies why spirituality has a critical role to play in the progressive movement and any other serious movement devoted to justice. I would argue that the single greatest cause of suffering in all its various forms is oppression. And as the psychologist, Morton Deutsch, makes clear, “Oppression is the experience of repeated, widespread, systemic injustice.” Oppression is a social form of suffering that the philosopher, Iris Marian Young, asserts takes five forms: exploitation, marginalization, powerlessness, cultural imperialism, and violence.

The centrality of the problem of suffering to religion took a distinctive turn during the Axial Age (the 8th to the 3rd century BCE) in human history, according to John Hick. There was a growing awareness among human beings regarding the pain and suffering of their condition and their sense of being alienated from the transcendent. Initially, the solution to this awareness of distress and dissatisfaction was to pursue some means to achieve a personal transformation and liberation. These methods are devoted to removing the obstacles to connect with the transcendent: egoism, greed, indifference to the suffering of others, and a willingness to commit oneself to idols that offer a false promise of fulfillment and peace. A central element of this transformative experience is the realization of our fundamental connection not only to the divine, but to all our fellow human beings and life itself. A significant and natural outcome of this insight is compassion. As the roots of compassion indicate, it is the ability to be open to and connect with the suffering of others, to be moved by this, to feel with others in their anguish, and to seek in whatever way possible to remove the causes of their suffering. Compassion would be impossible in the absence of the ability to connect on such a deep level with others.

In the second half of the 20th century, with the work of Marx and the rise of the social sciences it became apparent the biggest cause of suffering was not personal problems but was attributable to social structures and practices that created inequality and injustice. In other words, oppression due to imbalance of power created and maintained by the haves and the have-nots. Thus, liberation could no longer be merely a personal matter. Instead it had to be aimed at freeing entire populations from oppression. Compassion without justice is meaningless. As the religious writer and social activist, Dorothy Soelle, insisted, the suffering of the innocent, that is unmerited and avoidable, is an evil that must not merely be opposed but eliminated. Spirituality can and must be a force turned against the greed, materialism, indifference to suffering, and heartless abuse to power that has been unleashed by neoliberalism. When joined with other avenues of social activism, the potential to reestablish justice through compassion is enhanced.

A number of conclusions can be drawn from this analysis.

1. The problem of suffering that lies at the heart of religion/spirituality has historically provided powerful, insightful and practical insights into the nature of suffering, it causes and how it can be addressed, opposed and eliminated.

2. Oppression is the greatest cause of suffering.

3. The role of compassion and commitment to justice, as understood by religion, is essential to any means used to oppose and end oppression.

4. By the same token, mistaken and false forms and uses of religion and spirituality — particularly when wedded to certain political and economic ideologies — have been potent sources of oppression. At present that ideology is neoliberalism. These can be conceptualized as forms of idolatry.

5. The current form of idolatry is the elevation of the “market” as an absolute to which all human beings must submit themselves. The “market” imposes demands and exacts sacrifices from human beings that cause profound suffering.

6. The restoration of a correct understanding of religion/spirituality and the potential it has of exposing false idols, fostering compassion, and fighting for justice offers an essential avenue for opposing and ending oppression.

These are points that I will be discussing in future posts.