 Hey, we're back real live. I'm Jay Fidel here on Think Tech. Welcome to Community Matters on Think Tech. Our show today is called The Role of Religions. That's a plural in world peace. We're going to talk about bringing the global community together and religious leaders together to emphasize world peace. How do you put that together? If you want to ask a question about this bad discussion, you can tweet us or you can call us at tweet us at thinktech.hi or call us at 808-437-2014. That's our new number. Our guest for the show, very important, is Ved Nanda of the University of Denver. He's a columnist for the Denver Post and he told me before I could ask him any questions. So watch this. Welcome to the show, Ved. Thank you. Thank you. I've enjoyed being with you and looking forward to a discussion of a very lively and very controversial and very important topic. So I want to pose a proposition to you. Religion, which I thought in my younger years was declining in the world, and was less influential, less effective, has turned around. I remember when George Bush, George W. Bush, was sworn in and he was promising allegiance to faith-based organizations. So what's this about? And no sooner did he get in than he directed the Department of Justice to help the religious community instead of separating the two under the First Amendment Establishment Clause of Separation of Church and State. And since then, it was almost 20 years ago, since then, we have seen, we have seen religion play a bigger and bigger and sometimes very negative role in politics and in our government. Elsewhere, you know, Russia sort of denounced religion at the Revolution and I think it's pretty much stayed that way. China has effectively denounced, you know, religion. Look what they do to the Falon Gong, which is not even a religion. It was just a sort of state of mind and look the way they persecute them. And I think even in Europe, you know, religion is sort of on the decline, except in the Middle East it's not on the decline. It's still very robust and strong. And a lot of people argue that that has a lot to do with the violence in the region as we feel it here. So I'd like to get your take on this sea change. What kind of sea change are we really having here? And we can examine how it started and where it goes. What do you think? Well, I think you're right about Europe because as you go, all those churches, huge colossal buildings and they are empty. Yes. People don't go there. Yes. But I think you also know that for a long time, Islam has had religion and politics. They interrelated. They are not separate. And so in Islam, religion plays a very, very important role. And when I talked about, we, you and I talked about religion and global peace, a world peace, I need to tell you, I mentioned it to my wife. She said, what are you going to be talking about? And I said, religion and world peace. And her response was, huh. And she said, you should stop kidding yourself. So that is the response. And as you probably know, that Samuel Huntington, of course, he got the right. And in that clash of civilizations, his main theme was that it is religions. That are driving all these cultures towards that kind of clash and that clash of civilizations. So the point that you're making is correct that at the present time, all of a sudden with ISIS, beheadings, people who are on the move simply cutting heads and suicide bombers. And therefore, religion is seen as the one that is causing conflict. And the point I want to make is that the potential of religion for creating peace, for maintaining peace, for peace building, that has not been covered in the academia that is not being at the present time in our conversation. And we need to explore that. Well, yes, we do. And I'm just taking, I mean, I think the title of the show is correct to say religions, right, because there are so many diverse religions and some of them, in my view, are more than more legitimate than others. I mean, for example, some of the megachurches in this country, they're into money. They're into social media. They're really using technology to reach as many people as they can and harvest as much money as they can and pay their executive as much money as you can imagine. I don't know if that's really religion. I don't think there's a morality or an ethics at the core there. I think it's money. On the hand, there are some religions that, and I can't make heads or tails really of what's going on in the Muslim world right now. There are people who are legitimately Muslim and there are people who hijack the religion. And what's the connection? What's the relationship? Does one tolerate the other more than say I would tolerate them? Where is it all going? It seems like if you can justify violence by the Koran, and people say that two people on opposite sides of the pole can read the Koran two different ways on critical issues. So which way is the Koran really going? Which is the real message from the Koran? Is it religion we're talking about? Or is it people using religion to suit their own goals? Is it overlays, I'm having or anything? It's a distortion. Yeah. And that distortion of religion is the basis for all these problems at the present time. Because if you look at major religions, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Bahai faith, all of them have got certain values that are common. And if you're going to find a global peace, then you need to find universal values that are common. Yes. And those universal values, if you want to find common, then it's only the potential of religion and religious potential that's going to give you that commonality. Because you look at any of these religions. I chair a small foundation. It's called the Ubara Foundation. And it's only the Indic religions. These are the Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism. And the purpose of that foundation simply is to create awareness of those religions in this country in North America, and to ensure that their goal for global peace, their desire in order to create that kind of harmony among people, that that ought to be understood. In my faith, because I'm a Hindu, and you probably know that the basic tenet of Hinduism is universal brotherhood, that the entire human race is one family. That one part of that family is Sikh. The entire family suffers. In that family, one person is happy. Others look at the face, smiling face, it's contagion. Yeah. And then so the entire human family is interconnected. Yeah. Are you a devout Hindu? And devout, I don't know what it means. But I think I'm practicing Hindu in the sense that I grew up in it. And I feel that the tenets of Hinduism, where it says, for example, you remember, or you know that when I greet you, and I say Namaste, what I'm saying is divinity in me is boring to the divinity in you. And so once you think about in those terms, that all human beings are divine, and then you cannot have anything else, not only about tolerance, but you go beyond that, you accept differences. You go beyond that, you respect differences, and so that diversity becomes enrichment. Is the Hindu religion, I mean, I admire it very greatly. And I think you, to me, you are the living incarnation of the brotherhood of mankind, womankind. But you know, I, I just, I'm Jewish, by the way. And I'm not devout you, but I am a loyal Jew. And I'm faithful to it. And I don't mind talking about it. And I'm very sad about anti-Semitism. I mean, there was an article in the paper this morning about some policemen at the Temple on the Mount who were killed by some, I guess you'd say terrorists, but that was clearly motivated in their mind by religious principles, religious, arguably religious principles. I think they're hijacking the religion to do that. And so you had this violence happening, this anti-Semitic kind of experience in this country, plenty of it, and look what happened in Germany back in generations ago. So, you know, I'm wondering, you know, can, can with this kind of brotherhood of humanity approach, you know, to find morality, to find ethics in a given religion or combination of religions, is it possible? Given the species, the species has come for hundreds of thousands of years, it had to survive against very difficult odds. And it changed the way we do business. And somewhere in there, we got religion. And somewhere in there, the religion turned somewhat violent, at least in some places. Can we get along without scapegoats? Can we find a morality that avoids anti this and anti that? We can. And that is what Interfaith dialogue does. I am the Vice President of our Interfaith Alliance of Colorado. And we've got Muslim, we've got Jews, we've got Christians, we've got Sikhs, we've got Baha'is, we've got Hindus, and all of them together. And then I'm just absolutely amazed how much that Interfaith dialogue helps. One thing that is very common between Jews and Hindus is that we don't proselytize. And in Hinduism, the nicest thing about it is that it does not consider itself as superior to anybody else. And it does not consider that that is the only way to achieve the ultimate reality of God. And that there are different ways, different paths, and all those paths lead on to the same goal. And it's the rivers, all of them streams, different ones go into the ocean. Yeah. Well, I hope so. I want that. I think right thinking people all want that. But you know, you have these practical considerations. I mean, for example, if you don't proselytize, then maybe you decline in numbers or you remain flat in numbers. I don't know how the Hindu religion is doing, for example, globally. But I think the Muslim religion is probably expanding more than even the Christian religion, which is I don't know if it's bigger or not. But point is that if you if you proselytize, and if you advertise, and use social media and every advertising device you can think of, you have more members, right? And you know, the Christian Church, the Catholic Church is is devoted to improving its own lot to improving it, you know, keeping the flock in the flock, proselytizing, if you will, and avoiding people from leaving the faith. And so, you know, I'm wondering, you know, if the good guys, ultimately, the good guys, the ones who believe in in, you know, brotherhood for everyone, that's my opinion, in my opinion, if the good guys will prevail when everybody else is using proselytization to expand their own domain. I think the realization is growing, that proselytization is not the way, because there are many progressive Christian Christians who believe not in converting people. I sit on the trustees, board of trustees of a Christian institution, and that they do not believe in converting, they do not believe in proselytizing. And that's why I sit there, I have chaired their curriculum committee, their important considerations that they have in their own institution. So I think that can happen, it is happening. And I think gradually, that kind of realization is growing, that it's not necessary, that you tell people to be exclusive. That inclusivity pluralism is the answer, not exclusivity. Sure. But query, are those religious notions or they just ethical notions? I remember back in the 30s, and it's here say, but my mother belonged to something called ethical culture. It was a non religious, but very ethical organization. They had principles that I suppose you could say, emerged from an assortment of religions. But they together in that form, the form she practiced it in, was not religious. And yet they were very ethical moral principles. Do we need the old fashioned religion in order to achieve morality and ethical purity? Or can we find it without religion? Actually, at the United Nations a few years ago, it resolution was set. And that resolution was ban all religions. And they said ethical considerations, moral considerations should be there. But this organized religions should be all banned in the United Nations. Obviously it went nowhere. But that resolution was put there. The point simply is that religions are the ones that ethical core are telling us about ethics. They are the ones who at their core are giving us all those moral principles. The religions are the ones that have those universal values that embody a person to move up. You remember the UNESCO, United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization talks about it. It says that all these wars as wars are born as wars are the creation of a human mind. You know, I'm paraphrasing it. And that said that because of that, it's only human mind, mind that is in which we can create defenses of peace. And what they really meant was that it's internally each person who has to reach that level where that understanding is there. And then that is where the region comes in, because for their own spiritual, for their own moral, ethical, value oriented life, it creates, gives you a desire to move up and to look at all human beings as they say. Wow, this is great. We're going to take a short break. We're going to come back, and we're going to talk about the possibility, the process of religion being corrupted. And people, you know, sort of sliding down a slope and becoming more base and less moral, all within the context of religion. Let's take a one minute break. We'll come back and discuss that and more. Fed Nanda. I'm Richard Concepcion, the host of Hispanic Hawaii. You can watch my show every other Tuesday at 2 p.m. We will bring you entertainment, educational, and also we tell you what is happening right here within our community. Think Tech Hawaii Aloha. You're watching Think Tech Hawaii, 25 talk shows by 25 dedicated hosts every week, helping us to explore and understand the issues and events in and affecting our state. Great content for Hawaii from Think Tech. Okay, we're back. We're live here in Think Tech Community Matters with Fed Nanda, the University of Denver. His professor there, an international law and matters in general. And he's a columnist for the Denver Post. And he's here in Hawaii, teaching as a visiting professor at the law school. Yes, it's wonderful to have you on the show. Well, thank you very much. I've enjoyed Hawaii every time. Many years ago, I came here for a year as their distinguished scholar or whatever. And I enjoyed it. And they have been very gracious. I've been inviting me ever since. And I come back occasionally to teach for them who I am and go back. But this, you know, very soft culture that is very hospitable and warm. And it's wonderful to see that you're perfectly aligned with it. So religion, I mean, and you see it in, for example, my earlier reference to the American South, see people who not satisfied with their lives, I guess it's always been people who are not satisfied with their lives. They have vacuum apuca in their hearts somehow. And they need, you know, they need human company. They need to be in a group. They need to ally themselves to connect with a group. And religion offers that possibility. It makes people brothers in the course of that religion. But the problem is that religion historically is just as a matter of, you know, the historical progression of it. It has its ups and downs. Some religions get better and some get worse. Some do the moral job and others don't do the morals. They lose their way. And so they get corrupted and they get hijacked. And I think you see that in the Muslim experience right now. But could you comment on that process? What causes that process for a perfectly good religion to become, you know, the harbinger of bad things? How does that work? I think it's people and it's time. And because of all that, I think occasionally, not occasionally, but often, you find that after a period of time, then those rituals, those traditions, they become so embedded. And in the process of all, you are right, it can get corrupted. And that has happened to many religions. And then reform movements in those religions move up and try to create a better setting. Look at the popes and you go back hundreds of years and see what those popes did and what the religion did. And then all of a sudden you find that there is a change. Reform movement came up and the process again began. Decline. And I think as you rightly said, ups and downs have happened. But these, I think, major religions that I mentioned, you know, Christianity, you are right, is the religion with the largest number of followers. Then comes Islam, then comes Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Judaism. And these religions have gone through that kind of corruption, almost all of them. But then reform movements bring them up and they are again back. Because basically their values at the core are good. Morality and ethics that you said, all these religions teach us. And also there are many people, for example, in my school, I talked with kids and a kid is going to say, I'm not religious, but I'm spiritual. And then you can see that religion is the one that teaches spirituality. Yes, spirituality is its own religion somehow. But you know, then you have this very important historical intersection between religion and government, you know, the social compact, if you will. And I look for a long time and still in some places religion is government, it's the same thing. But our founding fathers in this country, you know, saw that problem. They saw it because their experience in Europe. And they separated the two, the First Amendment, separation of church and state, which to me was the smartest thing they could possibly have done. It was the cornerstone of the Constitution, but it has seriously eroded. So, A, may I ask you, do you think it's right that they separated the two? And what do you think now? What should we have? Should we have, what kind of connection should we have between religion, the church, and the state? Or shall I say the religions, the churches, and the state? What sort of connection is there? Very short answer is that there is a brilliant move and the thought to stay that way. Because religion should be simply individual faith and individuals should follow any of that faith and that is in our own Constitution, that is in the United Nations, that faith and religion, there should be freedom of that. And the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that Eleanor Roosevelt was the one responsible for, a basic tenet of that is that every individual has a right to religion, right to faith, and that nobody should interfere with it. Oh, that's so important and I wish it were plenary, but it's not plenary. And there are so many places in the world where people argue and hurt each other because of religious principles and because of the other guy's religious principles. I remember hearing, you know, a speech by a Muslim teacher in one of the countries in the Middle East, a college teacher, and he was saying not only does Quran tell us that we have to kill our enemies, but we have to kill all the people who are not killing our enemies. I mean, it was so extreme. There's a lot of what is going on. I went to Pakistan on a debating tour and everywhere that we went, four or five places, six places probably, students would tell me that, you know, we love you, we are so glad that you are here. They are Muslims and I had a sick person with me, S I K H with Turban and all that. So he and I, we weren't the two people debating them in different universities and they would tell us that if the Mullah tells us tonight that we should kill you, we couldn't kill you. And they were very, very friendly, but that is the kind of Islam distortion of it which can at present time result in that kind of action. And you can look at Taliban, you can look at ISIS, you can look at when Yugoslavia split. Sure, same thing. And then you can see three different settings, Serbians, fundamentalists, you can see Kurds who are Roman Catholics, and then you had the Bosnian Muslims and at each other's throats and you have again Iraq, Shia and Sunni, sects, and then that I think in, at the essence at times there are political and economic issues that are also mixed up with religion and faith. Well in this country it's a huge, it's turned into be a huge issue. It wasn't always thus but it has, in my view, declined into a real squabble over religion and rights under government. And so we've had all this controversy about Roe v. Wade and, you know, the right of a woman to have an abortion or not and there are attacks going on daily in every state of the Union, all 50 states by various organizations who would like to curtail the possibility of an abortion. We have the the gay community and we have people all around the country who would like to, you know, restrict them, limit them, punish them, whatever it is. And that's all really I think in the name of religion. So what you have is government has gone soft on this issue. Government has let this happen. The people, the legislative and the judicial branch, for that matter the executive branch, they have failed to enforce the brilliance of the First Amendment, separation of church and state. So, Vett, this is not an easy question. What can we do? I can simply say, amen. You are absolutely right. If I had the answers, I would be sage Arisir. I don't, but at the same time I do understand that, that that rule of law that we believe is very important is absolutely essential in this kind of his setting. First amendment rights, separation of church and state, enforcement of those rights, LGBT are all those people who are at the present time disadvantaged, acceptance of them, all that is absolutely imperative. And you mentioned very briefly, you didn't dwell on it, but anti-semitism at the present time in Europe, in this country, is absolutely ought to be totally unacceptable, intolerable. I'm the person who believes very much in tolerance, but for on those kind of issues, I have zero tolerance as such. So, last part of our discussion. So, if I want to do something, and I do, and I know what you do, and I know a lot of people who do, what do I do? Because right now, the sign curve seems to be going down morally and ethically on these kinds of issues. What do I do to stand up? What do I do to make people realize that we all have an obligation to love our brother no matter, you know, what his situation is, to not to not have anti-this and anti-that and punish people for no reason. What do we do? I would suggest to be part of an interfaith alliance. I would suggest that at the University of Denver, we have got a religious advisory council. People from different faiths, getting together, talking to each other. At the present time, the difficulties are there, but you know that there are many organizations in Palestine, in Israel, working on Palestine-Israel issues together, and I admire them and marvel them. And last time we talked about NGOs and last time we talked about civil society. So the hope in my mind is the civil society, individuals working through these groups of people together on dialogue. Dialogue is the answer, not conflict and not fights. But in civil society, in a place where there is a rule of law, and hopefully you can say that here still, even with current administration, they have to do something too. In other words, if you and I, an interfaith alliance, all agree that we must return to this kind of morality and appreciation and love for each other, for all of humanity, how do we get government to go along with that? How do we stop people who don't believe in that, who practice anti-Semitism, anti-Muslimism, anti-Hinduism, anti-everything? How do we stop them? What instruments can we use after we make an interfaith agreement on the point? Two things that I would suggest. One is that these civil society groups have a great deal of say on decision-makers. They need to be brought into the picture. They need to be convinced and at the present time they listen to people. If we can create that kind of an awareness, then I think we can also create awareness among decision-makers and so that we can have the enforcement, as you rightly said, that church and state kind of separation and then an effort on our part through an organized kind of way of civil society and decision makers to make sure that what your goal is can be accomplished and achieved. So then what, where do I look it up to find out about the interfaith? I'll send you the information. All right and I'll share it. Thank you so much Vang Nanda again. It's wonderful to talk with you. Aloha in the fullest sense of it. Aloha. Thank you very much. Enjoy the conversation. Thank you.