For the first 19 years of my life, my interfaith interaction had been kept to a minimum. I grew up in a largely insular religious Jewish community, kept dialogue to only those who accept most of the same principles of faith as I do, and pursued service with only those of the same belief system as my own.
It was with this background that I decided to take advantage of the open atmosphere of college to expose myself to something completely new – a class on Interfaith Dialogue and Action. While service has definitely been an important part of my life, the real push for me to take this class was the discussions and relationships I hoped to build with members of Penn’s interfaith community, centered around our shared desire for dialogue and action.
The class quickly became one of my most interesting experiences. Every week, we were examining anthropological models and sociological theories, political campaigns and social justice movements, cycles of oppression and historical trends, all focused on religion. The central theme of the class, I felt, was the ubiquitous nature of religion, as there isn’t a section of society that doesn’t have at its core a connection to the religious values of those who make up society.
While the class opened my eyes regarding the pervading importance of religion, this picture clashed with the lack of real discussion about religion in all these fields mentioned. I think it is here where one of the immediate gains of the class can be seen – here is a group of students who will go on to be leaders of their communities, both in the realm of the religious and secular.
We are now able to bring up the topic that no one else will dare to mention, though its importance in various fields cannot be understated. Interfaith dialogue isn’t just for preachers and rabbis who walk together into bars to share punch-lines– leaders of all communities, tied together by whatever strand of commonality, must appreciate and utilize effective interfaith dialogue to continue to build up all that makes communities special.
As for me, aspects of class have a different shade of meaning. Many of the universal relationships to be discussed in conversation – interfaith marriages, proselytization, conversion, etc. – are not wholly applicable in a technical sense to my brand of Rabbinic Judaism. Members will not be actively seeking to connect Judaism and other faiths through the above venues as a result of their non-proselytism, exclusionary nature. At the same time, in the Penn community and beyond, these close contact relationships can occur between those of the Jewish people, without necessarily ascribing to the same belief system as my own, as beliefs range widely as per cultural and intellectual sources of inspiration. These same values of interfaith communication, dialogue, and action have very real benefit in interactions with those who fall within your faith group but still hold different beliefs or values.
At the same time, this class pushed the constraints I had assumed on pluralistic societies and the parameters I had assumed for interfaith communities. I’ll admit I had additionally supported a goal that didn’t reach far enough – in terms of a pluralistic society on campus and beyond, I was satisfied with tolerance, with the absence of hate and distrust, the ability of groups to live side by side and appreciate the absence of negatives. I was satisfied with mutual respect on the basis of common ground that could be found, without touching upon differences. Differences were too tense, differences could lead to conflict, and isn’t it differences that has led the parts of the world to equate deep religious adherence with terror and fear? I had the mindset, and I think most have the mindset, to strive towards tolerance as the end game. This class allowed me to see that this is selling humanity short. We are so much more capable than mere tolerance. Acceptance has become the new buzz word in our class community. Acceptance of the differences in beliefs or heritage means acknowledging that no, we’re not all the same. But what motivates us, what propels us to promote justice in the world, is still relatable to all, can still be used in collaboration with others and their inspirations.
One of the major benefits of our push towards acceptance has been the shared knowledge that has permeated the class. This group is filled with individuals who have already navigated Penn’s large campus, and its array of groups and communities. By establishing a fellowship, centered around the value of religion and the need for service, we as students have been able to use the connections our partners have already formed, to go after the resources our peers have already sought out and utilized successively. The existence of a commonality in our goals allows for the collaboration and partnerships, between the experienced and the freshman, the veterans and the newcomers. This shared evidence has allowed not only for the opportunity of increased effectiveness in service. The class partnered together those who have gone through the struggles of balancing religious devotion and observance with college life. As a freshman, this was very comforting, to be exposed to other people who have made religion a centerpiece of their lives, whose commitment to faith inspires me no matter the difference of beliefs. Beyond everything, the class opened my eyes to what can be done with the limitations of college life, of what can be done on this campus, with just the four years given to us. The work and dedication of those upperclassmen in the class has truly been a source of comfort and inspiration.
This class was more than just establishing a circle of religiously diverse individuals – it is a platform for developing the skills needed for navigating all that we all bring to the interfaith circle. Objections to secularism, support for socialism, distrust of nationalism, apathy for atheism, longing for salvation, all of these are powerful emotions that can guide the faithful. There is much positive behind these emotions, positive that can sometimes only be brought to the surface with mutual respect. As a class, I hope we have gained the skills and understanding needed to handle all the strong passions stirred up by faith-related matters, to channel them into positive interfaith action.
It was with this background that I decided to take advantage of the open atmosphere of college to expose myself to something completely new – a class on Interfaith Dialogue and Action. While service has definitely been an important part of my life, the real push for me to take this class was the discussions and relationships I hoped to build with members of Penn’s interfaith community, centered around our shared desire for dialogue and action.
The class quickly became one of my most interesting experiences. Every week, we were examining anthropological models and sociological theories, political campaigns and social justice movements, cycles of oppression and historical trends, all focused on religion. The central theme of the class, I felt, was the ubiquitous nature of religion, as there isn’t a section of society that doesn’t have at its core a connection to the religious values of those who make up society.
While the class opened my eyes regarding the pervading importance of religion, this picture clashed with the lack of real discussion about religion in all these fields mentioned. I think it is here where one of the immediate gains of the class can be seen – here is a group of students who will go on to be leaders of their communities, both in the realm of the religious and secular.
We are now able to bring up the topic that no one else will dare to mention, though its importance in various fields cannot be understated. Interfaith dialogue isn’t just for preachers and rabbis who walk together into bars to share punch-lines– leaders of all communities, tied together by whatever strand of commonality, must appreciate and utilize effective interfaith dialogue to continue to build up all that makes communities special.
As for me, aspects of class have a different shade of meaning. Many of the universal relationships to be discussed in conversation – interfaith marriages, proselytization, conversion, etc. – are not wholly applicable in a technical sense to my brand of Rabbinic Judaism. Members will not be actively seeking to connect Judaism and other faiths through the above venues as a result of their non-proselytism, exclusionary nature. At the same time, in the Penn community and beyond, these close contact relationships can occur between those of the Jewish people, without necessarily ascribing to the same belief system as my own, as beliefs range widely as per cultural and intellectual sources of inspiration. These same values of interfaith communication, dialogue, and action have very real benefit in interactions with those who fall within your faith group but still hold different beliefs or values.
At the same time, this class pushed the constraints I had assumed on pluralistic societies and the parameters I had assumed for interfaith communities. I’ll admit I had additionally supported a goal that didn’t reach far enough – in terms of a pluralistic society on campus and beyond, I was satisfied with tolerance, with the absence of hate and distrust, the ability of groups to live side by side and appreciate the absence of negatives. I was satisfied with mutual respect on the basis of common ground that could be found, without touching upon differences. Differences were too tense, differences could lead to conflict, and isn’t it differences that has led the parts of the world to equate deep religious adherence with terror and fear? I had the mindset, and I think most have the mindset, to strive towards tolerance as the end game. This class allowed me to see that this is selling humanity short. We are so much more capable than mere tolerance. Acceptance has become the new buzz word in our class community. Acceptance of the differences in beliefs or heritage means acknowledging that no, we’re not all the same. But what motivates us, what propels us to promote justice in the world, is still relatable to all, can still be used in collaboration with others and their inspirations.
One of the major benefits of our push towards acceptance has been the shared knowledge that has permeated the class. This group is filled with individuals who have already navigated Penn’s large campus, and its array of groups and communities. By establishing a fellowship, centered around the value of religion and the need for service, we as students have been able to use the connections our partners have already formed, to go after the resources our peers have already sought out and utilized successively. The existence of a commonality in our goals allows for the collaboration and partnerships, between the experienced and the freshman, the veterans and the newcomers. This shared evidence has allowed not only for the opportunity of increased effectiveness in service. The class partnered together those who have gone through the struggles of balancing religious devotion and observance with college life. As a freshman, this was very comforting, to be exposed to other people who have made religion a centerpiece of their lives, whose commitment to faith inspires me no matter the difference of beliefs. Beyond everything, the class opened my eyes to what can be done with the limitations of college life, of what can be done on this campus, with just the four years given to us. The work and dedication of those upperclassmen in the class has truly been a source of comfort and inspiration.
This class was more than just establishing a circle of religiously diverse individuals – it is a platform for developing the skills needed for navigating all that we all bring to the interfaith circle. Objections to secularism, support for socialism, distrust of nationalism, apathy for atheism, longing for salvation, all of these are powerful emotions that can guide the faithful. There is much positive behind these emotions, positive that can sometimes only be brought to the surface with mutual respect. As a class, I hope we have gained the skills and understanding needed to handle all the strong passions stirred up by faith-related matters, to channel them into positive interfaith action.
No comments:
Post a Comment