Using King’s nonviolence approach in Northern Nigeria.

Could King’s Nonviolence Approach Work For Northern Nigeria in the fight against Boko Haram

Martin Luther king Jr's 'Approach to Nonviolence' in the US in the 1960s is considered a successful movement. As a result, there is a group of people in northern Nigeria that are trying to appropriate his Theology and Strategy to overcome the challenge they face with Boko Haram’s terrorist insurgency.

A look at the theology and strategy of Martin Luther King Jr.; how they could apply and relate or how they cannot relate to the cause of Christian peacemaking in northern Nigeria in the year 2015

The civil rights movement of the 1960’s did not take long to gain momentum, it gained its peak when four African American males attempted to place an order at a diner located inside the Woolworth shopping center in Greensboro, North Carolina. The men were refused service due to their color, and they immediately staged a sit-in at the lunch counter. The action not only encouraged Woolworth to integrate its dining facilities, but also spurred the many changes that followed.

The 1960s witnessed the birth of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), which attempted to alleviate racial discrimination in the South, and passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1960. These rights guaranteed criminal penalties for obstructing an African American's right to vote, the desegregation of buses and the lunch counter.

These successes are prompting a group of people from Northern Nigeria, Muslim’s and Christians, who seek to incorporate what they see as the underlying Theology, Strategy, Principles, and Practices that were carried out by Dr. King and his allies during the civil rights activities of the 1960’s.

Before I proceed in explaining the connection between the movement of the 1960’s and the conflict in northern Nigeria, it is important to have an understanding of what is going on currently amongst Christians and Muslims in northern Nigeria that has resulted in many casualties. Whether there would be synergy between these two faiths to tackle Book Haram, is a topic of investigation.

Western readers might have difficulty understanding who Boko Haram group is, where they come from, and what they mean in the context of Nigerian history. Nigeria is really two distinct countries, a Muslim North and a non-Muslim South. These two distinct cultural and religious entities were artificially fused by the British empire in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in what historians now call the “scramble for Africa,” a period of about forty years when England, France, Portugal, Belgium and Germany occupied almost all of North and Sub Saharan Africa. Most of the members of Boko Haram hail from the northern Islamic states of Nigeria.

The most notable effect of the “scramble for Africa” resulted in Nigeria becoming one of Britain’s colonies. In the 1900’s, the British Empire, and the Fulani emirs (tribal chiefs) had agreed to establish the Protectorate of Northern Nigeria. The North was further divided into provinces, one of which Borno was taken from the former Kanuri inhabited area of Borno Empire. In that agreement, it was stated and agrees that the “Christians missionaries would be allowed to proselytize only amongst the pagan tribes not Muslims.”[1]

Those agreements were not enforced and there were no means of monitoring its execution. Nigeria went on to gain its independence from Britain in 1960, which at the point the missionary activities have grown amongst all the inhabitants the North ignoring the agreement that was agreed upon earlier. Missionary activities proceeded with Proselytizing Muslims and pagan tribes. But in 1964 there was a reaction against the Christian conversion of the tribesmen, the government then sent out “Islamic missionaries” to forcibly circumcise and convert pagan tribesmen to the Muslim faith.

The act of converting pagan tribe’s men into the Christian faith, or the forceful conversion to the Muslim faith, continued to plague Northern Nigeria, particularly the North East corner of the country. Today most of Boko Haram’s acts of insurgency continue the use of forceful conversion of tribesmen, whom nowadays consist mostly of Christians, forcing them to adopt to their radical brand of Islam.

This brief historical background is in no way a total sum of Nigerian history in relation to the British Empire (as it colonial master). It is merely a broad picture of what is going on in Northern Nigeria.

Why is this happening now? The political climate in Nigeria has not helped the situation; thus, propelling the rise of Boko Hara.  It addition, the lack of a democratic way of life has propelled the growth of the Boko Haram. Boko Haram’s initial attack was targeting Christian churches, tribesmen, and schools, gradually moving into any governmental institutions i.e Police, Military institutions of learning. Their attacks have gone from the groups mentioned above to attacking Muslim’s who refuse to buy into their brand of radical Islam.

Boko Haram, which stands for “Western Education is Forbidding” Boko Haram promotes a version of Islam which makes it "haram", or forbidden, for Muslims to take part in any political or social activity associated with western society. This includes voting in elections, wearing shirts and trousers or receiving any form secular of education. Boko Haram regards the Nigerian state as being run by non-believers, even when the country has a Muslim president. And recently they have extended their violent campaign by targeting neighboring states surrounding the Borno State to other west African countries with the intent of creating a caliphate.

In my interaction with some Nigerians that are working on introducing Kingian A nonviolence approach to the region as way to confront the violent act using nonviolence, some of the responses are: “Boko Haram did not just come out of nowhere, they came into existence following a break down in the Nigerian democratic institution, the institution that could be the way citizen express their concern no longer listens to its citizens. The political system is so corrupt, some also argue that religion is a cover for or a surface aspect of deeper antagonisms that’s causing and driving the conflicts to include a complex mix of history, political, economic, ethnic and other factors. Some people feel that the politicians are responsible for the violence, either by using gangs of young men for political thuggery or by stirring up trouble in order to seek a payoff from federal authorities.

The lack of a democratic rule of law gave rise to the group. Since 1999, more than fourteen thousand Nigerians in the central and northeast have been killed, with hundreds of thousands of people displaced, and thousands of churches, mosques, and other properties destroyed. However, the lack of political wills to prosecute perpetrators of these violence causes fear and doubt in the minds of people in communities of Northern Eastern Nigeria.as this terrorist group remains free.

Rather than prosecute, the federal and state officials have repeatedly formed commissions of inquiry to review the causes of the violence and make recommendations to prevent further violence. However, these recommendations are rarely implemented. John Campbell in his report to the US council on Foreign Relations on Religious Freedom said, “The failure to prosecute has created a climate of impunity with dangerous consequences”[2]. Boko Haram then uses this culture of impunity as a recruitment tool amongst young Muslim men, angered by the government’s failure to address the violence, by responding to the call of Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau to attack.

The shadowy nature of Boko Haram as well as its resilience has made it difficult to craft an effective strategy to end the group’s campaign of terror. The Nigerian government initially responded by pursuing a strategy of military confrontation. Which did little to end the attacks. Also troubling was the manner in which government security forces pursued the group. The pursuit were always in a manner that was often rife with Jungle justice and excessive use of violence and killings.  The troops sent did not always discriminate between group members and civilians. The government’s response made Boko Haram’s approach more appealing to young Muslims that already felt marginalized for lack of any social or educational connection to their peers from the Southern part of the country.

What should be happening?

The understanding of the causality that calls for an Islamic state or sharia in Nigeria should not be taken too seriously, despite media hype, and despite the violent act perpetrated by Boko Haram. In my work I have come across Muslims and Christian from the North that are seeking an alternative to the government approach to address the rise of Boko Haram.

In the interim, people are calling for a military solution to stop Boko Haram in their tracks of merciless killings and abduction of children, but at the same seeking for a nonviolence approach and as Dr. King puts in these form of nonviolence “is a courageous confrontation of evil by the power of love, in the faith that it is better to be a receiver of violence than inflictor of it.”[3]   For a vast region beset by social and economic problems, the absence of widespread conflict is as notable achievement in the part of those community leaders that are working on conflict prevention.

There is a public policy response that is being used to counter violence in the region, which could be grouped into two categories: community level initiatives and security and legal responses. At the community level, a series of dialogue is taking place between Muslims and Muslims and between Muslims and Christians. The later of the groups, which is the group that I am writing about, is working to implement lessons-learned from Dr. King’s 1960’s Civil right movement as they try to contextualize is to in Nigeria 2015.

It is important to note that this is a work in progress about the events in northern Nigeria although I am reporting it as a finished work .Sometimes progress seems to be moving along fast and at other times slower than expected. What then is Dr.King’s theology and strategy that have a potential key in this work? 

King outlined in his pilgrimage to nonviolence how he arrived at the path to nonviolence and that involved the study of the different views and philosophies that were available for him at the time. He read an essay “On civil disobedience” by Thoreau, the works of Walter Rauschenbusch’s Christianity and Social Crisis.”[4]

He went as far as studying Communism, but rejected their materialist interpretation of history and the depreciation of individual freedom. In his study of capitalism, which is essentially a struggle between the owner of productive resources and the individual but conclude that each of these represent some partial truth but came to the conclusion that, “the Kingdom of God is neither the thesis of individual enterprise not the antithesis of collective enterprise but a synthesis which reconciles the truth of both.”[5]

King’s study of Ghandi, as he claim was, “the first person in history to display the ethics of Jesus that is beyond interaction with mere individuals.”[6] King found Ghandi’s philosophy of nonviolent resistance as a morally and practically sound doctrine to the oppressed people and their struggle for freedom. King, as well as Ghandi, was convinced,  that “true pacifism is not nonresistance to evil, but nonviolent resistance to evil.”[7]

King’s studies led him to develop what is call the six principles of nonviolence and conflict reconciliation. These six principles are guiding the nonviolence community organizing and reconciliation work in Nigeria.

I will show what the six principles and how appropriate application of these principles are reshaping the way Nigerians are working to address Boko Haram’s activities.

1. Nonviolence is a Way of life for courageous people; one common misconception about nonviolence is that it is a weak, passive philosophy.  However, Kingian Nonviolence is about taking a stand against injustice, making a commitment to looking injustice in the face and confronting it with the power of Agape love, of unconditional love for humankind. To confront any conflict directly in the face takes courage, and to do so without resorting to violence takes even more courage, compassion, and a deep desire for justice.

During the Civil Rights movement, movement participants joined in marches and rallies, knowing that the police may attack them with viscous acts of violence: police dogs, fire hoses, beatings.  Furthermore, they knew that if the police used overt levels of violence, they as a movement had committed themselves to acts of nonviolence, and they would not strike back.

As a result of this practice of courageous confrontation, a group and Muslims and Christians in Gombe, have taken this to a higher level by banding together in the spirit of oneness.  Courageously guarding and patrolling their communities at night, they make no use of weapons as a means of protection. They do this knowing that Boko Haram’s method of attack often happens at night, and they feel much more powerful when they are repelled by heavy artillery fire by using their pure commitment to non-violence and courage.

2. The Beloved Community is the framework for the future; Kings vision of a beloved community is a reconciled society, a society that has found true peace and justice for all. This vision includes those who are currently considered enemies. The group in Nigeria has found this framework helpful. First of all, they no longer acknowledge themselves as neither Muslim nor Christian, but see each other as members of the same community that share a common vision for a peaceful community.

It is the framework of the future because the ideals and the values that form the Beloved Community cannot only be a distant goal, but a blueprint of how to get there.  It is an understanding that the values that make the Beloved Community possible must be reflected in our efforts to achieve it. 

3. Attack the forces of Evil not the people doing evil; Nonviolence seeks to defeat injustice, not individuals.  Dr. King said that the Civil Rights movement and the issue of segregation was not an issue between white people and black people, but an issue between justice and injustice. Just like the challenge of Boko Haram in Nigeria, it is not just an issue of Muslim vs. Christian, but an issue of injustice to all. From the moment this group embraced this concept, they discovered that the perpetrators of evil are not themselves evil, but it is the evil system that makes them evil. The recognition of the humanity of Boko Haram perpetrators has led the secret admirers to reconsider their choice of being potential recruits.

4. Accept suffering without retaliation for the sake of achieving this goal; Voluntary suffering can be redemptive.  It can give you strength, and inspire others to join. Going back to the first principle of this community’s courageous night time patrol, this practice take sacrifice i.e. sacrificing one’s sleep for the sake of achieving peace. The group’s actions are inspiring other communities to start similar practices.

5. Avoid internal violence of the Spirit as well as external physical violence. Violence is not only a physical act.  The old saying that, “sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me”[8] may be one of the biggest lies ever told.  Mental and psychological scars from verbal and emotional violence can severely hurt and have a long-term affect more than mere physical acts of violence.

The group in Nigeria practices a form of group meditation and prayers. It is fascinating to see Muslims and Christians sharing a common space to pray and counsel each other. Imams and Pastors sharing with each other their personal internal struggle as they wrestle with news of another Boko Haram. Addressing internal violence as a shared community continue to be a bond that makes their work and town experience the peace they are witnessing.

6. The Universe is on the side of Justice; “believers in nonviolence has deep faith in the future”[9] This goes across faith or traditional line of beliefs. This is still a hope that the group holds on to, that justice and reconciliation would be achieved someday soon.

Looking at how these six principles developed by Dr. King which helped with the organizing and galvanizing the Civil Rights movement, I initially hoped these same principles could have taken effect in Nigeria in the year 2015. In conclusion, I want to say that these six principles have proven to be timeless. There is an ongoing conversation that I continue to have with the group in Gombe, and there is a second group that is being formed as I write this paper in Maiduguri, hoping to use them in their work on conflict Transformation in Nigeria.

What makes this work exciting is the fact that, some of the folks implementing these principles in Nigeria have visited the US for a week-long training session. Others have attended the training using skype. In respect of how these groups took to the training is a topic for further discussion.

Bibliography

Robert L. Holmes, Nonviolence in Theory and Practice: University of Rochester, Waveland Press, 2001

Bernard LaFayette ,Jr and David C Jehnsen, Kingian Nonviolence: The Philosophy and Methodology, Institute of Human Rights and Responsibilities. November 1996 

Charles E Collyer and Ira Zepp, Jr. Nonviolence: Origins and outcomes, Hardback limited edition 2003

Northern Nigeria: Background to Conflict Africa Report N°168, International Crisis Group, Working to Prevent Conflict Worldwide, 20 December 2010 report.

Martin Luther King,Jr. Stride Toward Freedom, The Montgomery Story. Harper & Row Publishers, San Francisco, 1986

Martin Luther King, Jr. Why We Can’t Wait, Penguin Group, New York, 2000

[1] John Hare, National Geographic, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/150314-boko-haram-nigeria-borno-rabih-abubakar-shekau/ March 2014

[2] John Campbell, http://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/USCIRF%202014%20Annual%20Report%20PDF.pdf

[3] Martin Luther King, Jr., Stride Towards Freedom.98

[4] ibid. 91

[5] Ibid., 95

[6] Ibid., 97

[7] ibid., 98

[8] unknown

[9] Stride towards freedom .106

Peacemaking in action.

Introduction

Violence across the United States and around the world has occurred in a variety of settings such as, school yards, movie theaters, office buildings, employee parties, churches, mosques, synagogues, temples, on street corner, and on farms.  Acts of violence around that world has become an epidemic and there has been very little effective response, among different faith traditions to reduce these properly.  With the exception of holding prayer vigils at or near the sites of such violent acts, faith communities have not provided the level of care to treat individuals or address a large swath of affected communities by ways on conflict transformation. While, these six religions[1] and its adherence claim to proclaim the message of peace as one of the core tenet of its faith. 

Therefore, this study will stress how diverse, even opposing religious expressions of faith used peacemaking and dialogue as a method for conflict transformation in Rockford. The involvement of diverse yet opposing religions in active peacemaking help increased awareness in unveiling the ambiguity of signs and symbolism.

 The main purpose of this paper is to stimulate dialogue in the area of Peacemaking using the semiotic of nonviolence and conflict reconciliation. The overall goal of this study will be to provide new insight through stories from Rockford, the application of Peacemaking in action through an understanding of the semiotic of nonviolence and conflict transformation.

Thesis Statement

This study seeks to shows that diverse, even opposing religious expressions of faith, can use peacemaking as a method for fruitful dialogue and co-existence, which leads to tangible peacemaking and conflict transformation.

Having briefly stated the motivation and the purpose or thesis for this study. In the next section, although, there are differences that exists among these six religion in areas such as doctrines, beliefs, and practices. Nevertheless, these diverse religious faith expressions have one common understanding, the proclamation of their peace position. Religion is not merely a force that divides human affairs but stands to unite as well; in many instances, it unites people across ethnic, racial, socio-economic, and political lines through a common allegiance to the ethos of that religion. Religious ties could, in fact, provide common ground between oppositions within national and ethnic interest groups. I will demonstrate that with each of these religions as peacemaking is both evident, common and central to their faith.

Taking some cues from religious response to natural disaster. In such relief instances workers and agencies, work together in spite of their religious or theological differences. They unite for the cause, drawing such examples has enable us to implementation some strategic plan to instruct and assist faith communities on how to become actively engaged in seeking solutions.  I consider these group as religious first respondents. Not only are faith leaders needed to be trained, but adherence of these six religions must take appropriate action and remain vigilant on a sustainable basis for peace to take root.

The story:

            On May 11, 1989, black and Hispanic public school students from Winnebago County, Illinois filed a class action lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 against the Rockford Board of Education in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs, represented by people who care, asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging that their constitutional rights had been violated by racial discrimination in the assignment of schools and classes to students in their school district.[2]

            The people who care versus the Board of Education case threatened to split the city of Rockford between the haves, and the have nots, between white majority populace and its black and Hispanic minority populace. As stated above, this began when the only high school in the black and Hispanic community was closed, forcing students from these communities to travel across the city from the West side to the East side that already have a high school before the closing of the only high school in the minority community by building a second-high school on the East side of town.

The plight of the citizens of Rockford versus the board of education reached a point during this case that further divided the city by race and socio-economic class as well as religious perspectives. Placing faith communities on this spectrum, I asked these six religious leaders what their religion teaches about peace and how their teachings might help in calming the anxiety in the city of Rockford.

            My intention of this invitation from the different religious perspective, is a way of building well. The idea is to challenge them, “to remember the most powerful walls are invisible, in our minds, what might it mean to create a well in the midst of conflict, not a wall?”[3] Peacemaking begins with the attitude of the individual towards conflict transformation, the way individuals look at conflict and how they respond to it, and such a view frames the individual response which could determine, if peace can be attained or if the conflict would lead to destruction. In this case explore a changing attitude towards a conflict that leads to Peacemaking is needful. The story of these six religions began with the intentionality of all involved, looking into their traditions, drawing from the tenets of their faiths. The story involves people who have chosen to intentionally work together, in an active and direct way to address the conflict faced by the city of Rockford.

A recognition of peacemaking that is backed up religious leaders can prove to be successful in conflicting situations in the US and around the world. When religious leaders take the lead in building inter-ethnic and inter-religious peace among its adherents, “Peace can include an inner, or subjective, journey towards what Buddhist might call “the eternal life” and Christians might call “life in Christ” and Muslims call “the surrendered life.” These phrases name a deeper and more complete side of peace, which according to most world religions.”[4]  Radical peacemaking is an ongoing spiritual process that involves forgiveness, repentance, and justice that seeks to restore broken systems and relationships.

Looking at the common method of peacemaking that exists in these six religions could help “promote peace between religions, understood as friendship –in community and friendship at a distance. Friendship in the community can be seen as people of different religion travelling on the same buses sharing the same workplace”[5]

Method of Peacemaking by the adherence of these six religions:

Christian method to Peace

Christian attitude towards violence and conflict is a matter for faith, asking the question we believe God is present with us? Neuroscientist reports that “the brain’s fear circuitry is more powerful than the brain’s reasoning faculties.”[6] So when Christian approach peacemaking, the goal is to approach from a reasoning faculties than form fear.       Therefore, the Christian approach to peace and nonviolence benefited from Judaism’s foundation on nonviolence, by focusing on the nonviolence part of Jewish tradition. “In the first-century Jews were affected by the Roman Empire and longed for relief as is frequent is such situations, they hope for someone to deliver them was high.”[7]               One man from Galilee, Jesus of Nazareth offered a startling innovation; instead of military imagery, the imagery of suffering servant as reflected from the book of (Isaiah 53) declaring that “conquerors would not be overcome by violence”[8] a counterproductive technique the could lead to calamity, but yet became the corner stone for Christian peacemaking. Jesus’ response to the Roman empire transforms perception of “self, others and the issues in question.[9]

There is no doubt that over the years Christians has been actively involved in dialogues with other religions as a way to achieved peace. In addition to this method, Christians also use the act of listening as a means to reach to other faith traditions. This actions have created a pathway for talks that accommodated many different ways and opinions. Listening has helped Christians to prescribe the road that must be traveled to with other religions in order to attain peace. Imitating or repeating the teaching and the practice of Jesus in every action is part of the Christian mandate. Christian order to regard listening, according to McDaniel it, “involve a desire to walk in Christ’s footsteps, day by day and moment by moment.”[10]

Christian listening merely emphasizes openness; it is a tradition that emphasizes humility and listening to others and welcoming the stranger as some defining characteristics of an authentic Christian spirituality. As I understand it listening to others and finding their personal experience is, in fact, is a pathway that Christians has used over time or throughout history to achieved peace,[11] seeking to always find God in the opposing party in the conflict. Christians in Rockford has come to understand that listening is “a metaphor for empathic presence to others with interest in affirming and honoring their well-being. It is a way of feeling called rather than seeing”[12]

Therefore, in Rockford, Christians have continued to emphasize the need for openness, listening to others and their experiences, it become apparent, it is not just about self-protecting of Christians from others, but including the strangers, who might even attempt to dishonor Christian wholesomeness toward peace. In Rockford community, we (Christian) believe that the contemporary Christian approach or effort of walking the way of peace between religions are a part of a larger voyage toward “a beauty that includes awareness of our interconnectedness.”[13]

Simply put, Christians in Rockford community firmly believes that even though we (Christians) based on our beliefs differs say, from Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism and many others religions. All of these religions desire or hopes for peace on earth. Deep listening is the story in Rockford community.    

The Christian community in Rockford was quite intentional in equipping people of other religions with the skills of listening and forgiveness. As a result, people of different religions and no religions traveling on the same buses, now share similar civic responsibilities, they are working together, and are playing together all these for the sake of a common good of the community.

Among other things Christians in Rockford decided to do, is to educate people of other religions to understand what it means to a Muslim “being a Muslim,” a Christian “being a Christian,” a Hindu “being a Hindu,” so they can be a good listener and be able to forgive. In so doing, sustainable peace is attained.

Christian in Rockford, believes that religious leaders and their adherence must all embody these listening skills and respects in their ways of living. Also, both adherents and their leaders must become the peace the commend to their world. Jesus’ riding on the donkey on “Palm Sunday” can be seen as an “ancient peace demonstration. The symbol had the king riding into the capital city of Jerusalem, but not on a valiant steed with swords blazing- rather, on a humble donkey. Palm branches rather than swords were in the hands of the crowd.”[14].

Buddhist method to Peace

As for the Buddhist understanding, life is full of suffering hence the quest to understand the causes and seeking a path to end such a suffering was what compelled Gautama on a quest for peace, Although, the common believe especially in the Western world is that Buddhism is a peaceful religion. Buddhism has historically “distinguished itself among all religions as essentially the most peaceful one.”[15]

There are two prominent Buddhist that recently received the Nobel Peace Prize laureate award, not just for their startling evidence of the high peace potential of Buddhism.  But having played a strong role in the formation of the largest and probably most important of all inter-religious peace initiative, the World Conference of Religions for Peace, which officially came into existence in 1969.[16]  The first prominent Buddhist, in 1989 the 14th Dalai Lama, was awarded the prize for his consistent non-violent struggle that brought liberation to his people from Chinese occupation. The second Buddhist, Aung San Suu Kyi of Burma also in 1991 received an award for her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights.

Buddhist’s method to peace could be seen through the lenses of the eight-fold path; 1. Right understanding, 2. Right Attitude, thought and emotion, 3. Right Speech, 4. Right Action, 5. Right livelihood, 6. Right Effort, 7. Right mindfulness, and 8. Right concentration.[17] Along with these eight paths five precepts that every priest is called to live by, abstaining from killing living being, abstain from stealing, abstain from sexual misconduct, abstain from false speech, and abstain from intoxicant.[18]

The Buddhist approach involves a state of tranquility within and between people, with the acknowledgement that there would be conflict and violence, yet one must remain in a state of constant meditation as a practice, “meditation is a major practice in Buddhism …. Loving-kindness, cultivating goodwill towards one’s self and others.”[19]

Through the work of the center for nonviolence and conflict transformation, the center was able to provide some training to the younger Buddhist in their various schools across Rockford. The aim of the training is to help the most budding Buddhist connect between Buddhism and how to sustain the tradition of forming an inter-religious peace initiative as their ancestor did which led them to promote nonviolence by the formation of an inter-religious peace initiative. 

Judaism’s method to Peace

            The Torah, as the primary Jewish scripture starts with the creation of the world, it covers a fundamental element of human community that involves sympathy to the oppressed.[20] Judaism treats warfare as a necessary evil. The ideal, of course, is peace. The phrase peace, Shalom, carries an overtone of wholeness, completeness, and integrity. The way Judaism attain conflict resolution is through education. In order word, even though in ancient times, warfare was a constant feature of Israel’s life.

            Nonetheless, the Jewish tradition provides for itself a model for conflict reconciliation to occur. First, the Jews needed to work on their argumentative attitude. Once they overcome this attitude, they can leave in peace with others. Here is how education takes place through conflict in the Jewish world. Because all activity takes place in one large hall of the Synagogues. That encourages the students to read to each other and then argue the meaning of the sacred text. If they cannot agree, on the significance, they may go to consult their teacher. This is an example of the way Jewish heritage promotes internal conflict reconciliation. According to Dan Cohn-Sherk, the Jews leaders “have taught their children through debate and argument rather than through authoritative pronouncement.”[21]

            Through education in the synagogues, the Jewish people have learned to accept how to deal with difference among themselves, which is based on a rabbinic tradition that calls them to “forbid making attacks without demanding the surrender of the enemy.”[22] Through the educational development, in accordance with the method of peacemaking in the Jewish tradition, the center for nonviolence and conflict transformation (CNCT) and the Jews in Rockford, were helped to see the need and the importance of being a peacemaker, by extending their sense of kinship beyond the Jewish people.

            Now the younger Jews in Rockford know how to express their disagreement with other people. The younger Jews in Rockford accept and know how to deal with difference among themselves and others in the community. The development of unity that is based on the bond of unity in accordance with the Jewish tradition helped to develop a new pattern of unity and bond of kinship that is all inclusive. Knowing that Midrashic sources “extols peace as of paramount importance.”[23] However, Ledrach, sums it as the “overall purpose that building peace pursues, both in terms of changing destructive relationships patters and seeking systemic change.”[24] Therefore the method of peace should provide a language that more adequately approximates the nature of the conflict.

Hindu’s method to Peace

            The creation of Hindu identity was against the threat of Islam, as militant Hindus would see it. Hinduism was on the warpath. Nevertheless, that has changed as Hindus is now considered a predominately peaceful religion. In light of this, Michael von Bruck writes, Hindus express oneness and wholeness which is peace with other faiths through “its power to integrate and transform all [religious] differences.”[25] It is this basic and simple attitude that the Hindus employ to attained peace and harmony in the surrounding religious context they are located.

            Through the center for nonviolence and conflict transformation, Hindus in the city of Rockford were helped through a nonviolence educational development. The center helped in orienting younger Hindus to the importance of constructing an attitude which will lead them to practice silent peace of mind. As a result of the educational development of the center for nonviolence and conflict transformation, the younger Hindus were able to demonstrate a peaceful silent which serves as the tool for them to integrate easily with the other faith traditions. The younger Hindus now have become the advocate for an ideal of harmony and peace. They preached harmony and peace within and outside their faith traditions.  Knowing that conflict is a result of differences that produces tension, living in a world of difference: different people, culture, religion, and opinions. The peaceful posture of Hindu worship presents worshippers with a willingness to accept difference as a way to reaching the whole, knowing that “tension is not by definition negative or positive. It is both natural and necessary.”[26] 

            Also, the believe that, “there is one all-passive Supreme Being, imminent and transcendent, creator and destroyer, manifested and unmanifested. Different aspects given different names.”[27] Serve as a driving force as they seek to make peace with friends, neighbor’s and the community. There method to peace could also be attributed this religious foundation of pluralism, with a widespread understanding that all religions have merits and should therefore be toleration for all.

Islam’s method to Peace

Islam from the Arabic verb means salami asleku, surrender or submit to God. Although, much of the Quran speaks of struggle, such a struggle is over false, truth, and right, over good and evil.  Mohammed Hammad Lahvi shed light on the understand saying “Islam is peace and security.”[28]  Only saying that Islam attaches itself to the great significance of peace and harmony in society. Muslim’s denotes that Allah is peace, denoting that the “Almighty is the source and the cause of peace.”[29] Muslims invoke such peace upon themselves as they enter the mosque to pray. In such a case Islam’s method to peace comes from a guide from their holy scriptures.

            Therefore, Islam advocates living in peace with God the Creator and Lord of all that exists. As well as, seeking peace within ourselves, and living in harmony with other human beings, and in peace with our surroundings and environment in its entirety.  Muslim’s views all conflicts, interpersonal, or within the family and community, national, and or international disturb this relationship of peace. This order is tied to justice according to Islamic understanding, one cannot achieve one without the other, in that case, all legitimate grievances must be addressed, for real essential peace to be achieved. Some relevant verses from the Qur’an addressed to the Islamic community: “O You who believe! Stand out firmly for God, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear God. For God is well-acquainted with all you do” Al Maidah 5:8. 

The respect for the inviolability of the human soul does not tolerate humiliation nor aggression but emphasize harmony and mutual security. Every kind of injustice, individual or collective is forbidden, and any one putting such actions in to practice lives in violation of the ethos of Islam.  It is worth mentioning that within Islamic societies there exists a great diversity of traditions, cultures, and opinions that could be used to enrich the possibilities for pursuing peace-building efforts and resolving all existing conflicts. The Sufis are one of such group, this group are “mystics and ascetics”[30] whom have tended to preserve the definition of powers among different groups in Islam. Exhibiting what true method to peace is in Islam.

Sikh’s method to Peace

Sikh's embodied the principle of peace and nonviolence as the major contributing factor to the formation of their religious beliefs and practices. Guru Nanak preached his message of goodwill and peace on earth in the early 16th Century. Placing great emphasis on “the unity and the uniqueness of God, the creator lord who govern the world with commands based on twin principles of justice (nian) and Grace (nadir).”[31] To the Sikh’s, God created human beings and was assigned a high degree of holiness in the order of creation, thereby calls for all Sikhs involvement in the community life as part of the requirement for the creation of a just and peaceful society. Sikh’s discipline is devoted to the systemic study of outward signs, symbols, and communication of Guru Nanak who knew that it takes much courage, sacrifice, and effort to make genuine peace on earth a reality.

So, the belief that “God is inside every person, and every person is, therefore, capable of change, no matter how wicked they appear.”[32]The belief in God in everyone, so endowed with the seeking to find the way to God would be to serve people, getting rid of every ego and pride, caring for the poor, the sick, and the have-nots and Sikhs sense of call to these duties, pray, work, and give.  Interpreting Guru Nanak’s founding ideology of freedom for all humankind from religious persecution, discrimination, and political oppression, calling Sikhs to follow the oath of truthful conduct and righteous action.

Sikh’s quest for kinship of all creation, stresses, “Where God exists there is no selfishness, where self-exists there is no God.”[33]Sikhs method to peace involves the constant reminder that in life, there must be the balance between material ambition and spiritual well-being. Radical Peacemaking, together with Sikh’s seeks the simplicity of life-based out of their belief that humans created with a high degree of holiness. With this knowledge, the center for nonviolence and conflict transformation (CNCT) was able to help the Sikhs to seek out the simplicity of holiness and as well not to be selfishness in their relationship with others religious bodies in Rockford.  The center for nonviolence and conflict transformation finds this approached helpful as we continue to work toward and just and peaceful Rockford. Also, the “Khalsa” believe that they are pure and unique one’s, “however did not make them try to convert others to their faith.”[34] Thus in Rockford, this makes such a partnership for peacemaking possible.

Peacemaking in Action is a story not yet finished, but we continue to write. It is that which is active and engaging, not about a maintenance of a/the status quo, but helping different religious groups, even in an opposing situation to seek the peace from these religious traditions, their beliefs, and practices. So far working together has helped starts conversations within members of the community.  By watching whom we are talking to, being a part of the community we all could count on, a community that stands for the kind of world which is not, regrettably available to us yet, but that which we would dearly wish to inhabit together and hope to responses. 

Working Bibliography

Abu-Nimer, Mohammed. Nonviolence and Peace Building in Islam: Theory and Practice. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2003.

Abu‐Nimer, Mohammed. Conflict resolution in an Islamic context: Some conceptual questions. Peace & Change 21, no. 1 1996: 22-40.

Armster, Michelle& Lorraine Stutzman Amstuz. Conflict Transformation and Restorative Justice Manual.Akron PA, 2008.

Arnold, Johann Christoph, and Karl Tiedemann. Seeking Peace. NorthStar Publishing Company, 1999.

Bauman, Zygmunt. Community: Seeking safety in an insecure world. John Wiley & Sons, 2013.

Berndt, Hagen. Non-violence in the World Religions: Vision and Reality. London: SCM Press, 2000.

Berger, Arthur A. Signs in contemporary culture: An introduction to semiotics. Sheffield Publishing, Wisconsin,1998. 

Berger, Arthur A. Seeing Is Believing: An Introduction to Visual Communication. Mayfield Publishing Company, California, 1989.

Burke, Kenneth. The rhetoric of religion: Studies in logology. Vol. 188. Univ of California Press, 1970

Childers, R. C. Art. VII.Khuddaka Páṭha, a Páli Text, with a Translation and Notes. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland New Series 4, no. 02

Corrington, Robert S. A semiotic theory of theology and philosophy. Cambridge University Press, 2000.

David E. Westbrook Comparative analysis of conflict resolution and nonviolent activism leading to an integrated model for peaceful social change, 2003.

David A. Rausch & Carl Herman Voss, World Religion Our Quest for Meaning, Trinity Press International, 1993.

Douglas Johnson and Cynthia Sampson, Religion, the Missing Dimension of Statecraft, New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Dear, John. Seeds of nonviolence. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2008.

Dear, John. The God of peace: Toward a theology of nonviolence. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2005.

Douglass, Susan L., and Munir A. Shaikh. Defining Islamic Education: Differentiation and Applications. Current Issues in Comparative Education 7, no. 1 2004

Eco, Umberto. A Theory of Semiotics. Vol. 217. Indiana University Press, 1976

Galtung, Johan. Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of peace research 6, no. 3, 1969: 167-191.

Gandhi, Mahatma. All men are brothers: Autobiographical reflections. A&C Black, 1980.

Hastings, Tom H. The Lessons of Nonviolence: Theory and Practice in a World of Conflict. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland, 2006.

Halverson, Jeffry R. Searching for a King: Muslim Nonviolence and the Future of Islam. 1st ed. Washington, D.C.: Potomac Books, 2012.

Katongole, Emmanuel, and Chris Rice. Reconciling all things: A Christian vision for justice, peace, and healing. InterVarsity Press, 2009.

Katongole, Emmanuel. Greeting Beyond Racial Reconciliation. The Blackwell Companion to Christian Ethics, 2004.

Kurlansky, Mark. Nonviolence: The history of a dangerous idea. Modern Library, 2009.

Lederach, John Paul. Preparing for peace: Conflict transformation across cultures. Syracuse University Press, 1995.

Lederach, John Paul. The moral imagination: The art and soul of building peace. Vol. 3. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Lederach, John Paul. The Little Book of Conflict Transformation. Clear articulation of the guiding principles by a pioneer in the field. Intercourse.PA, 2003.

Lippy, Charles H. Pluralism comes of age: American religious culture in the twentieth century. ME Sharpe, 2000.

McDaniel, Jay Byrd. Gandhi's Hope: Learning from Other Religions as a Path to Peace. Orbis Books, 2005.

MacNair, Rachel M. Religions and Nonviolence: The Rise of Effective Advocacy for Peace: The Rise of Effective Advocacy for Peace. ABC-CLIO, 2015.

McNeil, Brenda Salter. Roadmap to Reconciliation: Moving Communities Into Unity,Wholeness and Justice. InterVarsity Press, 2016. 

Mackenzie, Don, Ted Falcon, and Sheikh Rahman. Getting to the Heart of Interfaith. Skylight Paths, Publishing, Woodstock, Vermont, 2010.

Mann, Gurinder Singh, Paul Numrich, and Raymond Williams. Buddhists, Hindus and Sikhs in America: A Short History. Oxford University Press, 2007. 

Moeschberger, Scott L., and Rebekah A. Phillips DeZalia. Symbols that Bind, Symbols that Divide. Springer Publishing Switzerland, 2014.

Moses, Rafael. The leader and the led: A dyadic relationship. The psychodynamics of international relationships 1, 1990: 205-217.

Myers, Joseph R. The search to belong: Rethinking intimacy, community, and small groups. Zondervan, 2003.

Pal, Amitabh. Islam Means Peace: Understanding the Muslim Principle of Nonviolence Today. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Praeger, 2011

Porter, Thomas W. The Spirit and Art of Conflict Transformation: Creating a Culture Of  JustPeace. Upper Room Books, 2010.

Quinn, Robert E. Change the world: How ordinary people can accomplish extraordinary things. Jossey-Bass, 2000.

Said, Abdul Aziz, Nathan C. Funk, and Ayse S. Kadayifci. Peace and conflict resolution in Islam: Precept and practice. Univ Pr of Amer, 2001. 

Scott, Alex. Christian Semiotics and the Language of Faith. iUniverse Inc New York, 2007.

Schmidt-Leukel, Perry, ed. War and peace in world religions: the Gerald Weisfeld Lectures 2003. Vol. 2003. Scm Press, 2004. 

Sharma, Arvind, ed. The World's Religions: A Contemporary Reader. Fortress Press, 2010.

Sharp, Gene, and Marina Finkelstein. The politics of nonviolent action. Vol. 3. Boston: P. Sargent Publisher, 1973.

Shilhav, Yosseph. Principles for the location of synagogues: symbolism and functionalism in a spatial context. The Professional Geographer 35, no. 3, 1983 

Silverman, Kaja. The subject of semiotics. Oxford University Press, 1984. 

Smith-Christopher, Daniel L. Subverting Hatred: The Challenge of Nonviolence in Religious Traditions. Faith Meets Faith. New York: Cambridge, MA: Orbis Books; in Association with Boston Research Center for the 21st Century, 2000.

Stassen, Glen H. Just Peacemaking as the New Paradigm for the Ethics of Peace and War. Formation for Life: Just Peacemaking and Twenty-First-Century Discipleship (2013) 

Sri Guru Granth Sahib, Vol. 4. Vol. 4. Allied Publishers, 1962.

Thomas Matyok, Maureen Flaherty, Hamdesa Tuso, Jessica Senehi, and Sean Byrne, Peace on Earth, The role of Religion in Peace and Conflict Studies, Lexinton Books, 2014.

Thomas, Scott. The global resurgence of religion and the transformation of international relations: The struggle for the soul of the twenty-first century. Springer, 2005.

Wiesel, Elie. Against Silence; The Voice and Vision of Elie Wiesel. Edited by Irving Abrahamson. Holocaust Library, 1985. 

Wink, Walter. Jesus and nonviolence: A third way. Fortress Press, 2003.

Yelle, Robert. Semiotics of Religion: signs of the sacred in history. A&C Black, 2012.

[1] Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Sikhism

[2] People Who Care v. Rockford Board of Education http://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=1052

[3] Thomas Porter, The Spirit and the Art of Conflict Transformation, Creating Culture of Just Peace. Upper Room Books. Nashville,13.

[4] Jay McDaniel, Gandhi’s Hope: Learning from other Religions as a Path to Peace,78.

[5] Ibid., 6.

[6] Thomas Porter, The Spirit and Art of Conflict Transformation,16.

[7] Rachel M. MacNair, Religion and Nonviolence, The rise of Effective Advocacy. 106

[8] Ibid.,106.

[9] John Paul Lederach, Preparing for Peace, Conflict Transformation across Cultures, 18.

[10] Jay McDaniel, Gandhi’s Hope: Learning from other Religions as a Path to Peace, 39.

[11] Ibid., 39.

[12] Ibid., 41.

[13] Ibid., 38.

[14]Rachel M. MacNair, Religion and Nonviolence, The rise of Effective Advocacy for Peace, 109.

[15] Schmidt-Leukel 1989, 33.

[16] Ibid., 43.

[17] Rachel M. MacNair, 63.

[18] Ibid., 63.

[19] Ibid., 66.

[20] Ibid., 18.

[21] Schmidt-Leukel et. al. 1989, 96.

[22] Ibid., 83.

[23] Ibid., 90.

[24] John Paul Ledrach, Preparing for Peace, 18.

[25] SchMidt-Leukel et al. 1989, 13.

[26] Thomas Porter, The spirit and Art of Conflict Transformation, 13.

[27] Rachel M. MacNair, Religion and Nonviolence, The rise of Effective Advocacy. 42-43

[28] Arvind Sharma, The World’s Religion, 53.

[29] Ibid., 53.

[30] Daniel Smith- Christopher, Subverting Hatred, 109.

[31] Gurinder SinghMann et al, Buddhist, Hindus, and Sikhs in America, 99.

[32] Rachel M. MacNair, 170

[33] Rachel M. MacNair, 171

[34] Gurinder SinghMann et al, Buddhist, Hindus, and Sikhs in America,103.

Semiotics of nonviolence.

AN INVESTIGATION OF THE SIMILARITIES OF THE SEMIOTICS OF NONVIOLENCE AND CONFLICT RECONCILIATION AMONGST SIX RELIGIONS

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to stimulate dialogue in the area of the semiotics of nonviolence and conflict reconciliation. The paper will attempt to layout some of the similarities, the problems, and challenges of leadership development amongst religious leaders related to formation in nonviolence.  In doing so, this paper will analyze evidence from scholarly documents with particular attention to the historical perspectives and contemporary practitioners in key traditions. 

The overall goal of this study is to provide new insight through to the study of the semiotics of nonviolence and conflict reconciliation. This study will highlight some of the most important issues within the field of semiotic studies, especially the neglected areas such as training procedures and leadership development. Largely, the paper will present the case that more attention be paid to both the study of the semiotic of nonviolence and conflict reconciliation, and how to bridge the gap of contemporary leadership development to understand signs, symbols, and the use of language in conflict transformation. 

Thesis Statement.

This study seeks to demonstrate the similarities, the problems, and challenges of leadership development on the semiotics of nonviolence and conflict reconciliation.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this study is to explore the semiotic of nonviolence and conflict reconciliation and how a lack of a semiotic understanding of the similarities within the six religions impacts leadership development.

Outline the essay’s main components.

·      Establish a foundational understanding of the similarities in the six religions

·      Delineate adaptations that required the use of semiotic of nonviolence and conflict reconciliation amongst the six religions.

·      Where applicable will evaluate successes and failures in my related fieldwork.

·      I aim to show that the semiotics of nonviolence and conflict transformation amongst these six religions are similar in their understanding but dissimilar in some cases and most especially in their application. At some point, they stand in opposition to one another but on the overall they look similar and most especially when based on sign and symbolism.

Throughout history, the development of major religions shows that humans, themselves developed religious ideas into institutions with patterns of doctrines that saw each system as separate and unique. In The Meaning and End of Religion, Cantwell Smith shows how the institutions of religion developed as a clear and bounded historical phenomenon.

These six religions together make up well over two-third of the world's population. Without peace and justice between these religious communities, there can be no meaningful peace and conflict transformation in the world. The future of the world depends on a common understanding of nonviolence and conflict transformation

The basis for this semiotic understanding already exists. It is part of the very foundational principles of these faiths: love of the Divine, and love of the neighbor. These principles are found over and over again in the sacred texts of Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Sikhism. The Unity of God, the necessity of love for Him, and the necessity of love of the neighbor is thus the common ground between these faiths and it is obvious where love exist violence and conflict tend to disintegrate.

However, these religions have different symbolic systems that communicate similar meaning. These symbols are never completely arbitrary, suggesting they are a symbolic signifier that ses bonds. Semantically speaking, symbols can be things with such an important historical culture and meaning, such as the cross for Christians, the Star of David for the Jews, the Star and Crescent for Muslim’s, the Om or Aum for the Hindu's, the Parasol or Umbrella for the Buddhist, and the Khanda for the Sikh’s. All these symbols have one thing in common; they are tied to the history of each religion and play an important role in every society.

CHRISTIANITY

There has been quite some debate, recently about the practice of nonviolence amongst the early Christians. To this end, some scholars suggest how early Christians refused the Roman military service especially because of its religious requirements more than any hatred to killing. [1] Additionally, these scholars go on to describe how early Christian’s opposition boldly rejected the emperor's violent actions and accused Roman society of atheism, Their commitment to nonviolence was a threat to the Roman society which was rooted in the monotheism. Their refusal to honor the state gods, which were the essence of Roman identity, brought upon them great persecution. Religion and power have always been a tempting mix.  Further, Christopher reiterates how several of the early Christian "martyrs who refused military service amounted to participation in a rival religion, a religion which mandated violent activities was martyred soon after proclaiming his clear perception of the connection of violence with nationalist religious zeal"[2].

On Christian nonviolence, Christopher cites the works of scholars like Engelhardt, who revealed how Christians in the fourth and fifth centuries responded to Christian nonviolence, is "the refusal to be moved by the flag and state [and] the refusal to participate in the liturgies of destruction and in the hymnic glorification of violence as national epic and identity.”[3] Besides the debate about the nonviolence of the earliest Christians, the same message of nonviolence is also reflected in the teaching of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. These scholars have shown that the Gospel teaching of Jesus of Nazareth on violence were consistent with both the Jewish and Hebrew emergence, such as quietism and a nonviolent ethos among the early teachers of Pharisaic Judaism[4].

The antiwar teaching of Jesus is very clear especially in the context of making ethnical decisions when it comes to participating in warfare per se. For instance, what was a non-question or issue for the Jews of Palestine who were in a territory occupied by Rome was "Shall we flight in the military”? Instead, for them, the question was about the strategies of resistance to the occupying power. In all of these Jesus' teaching about the notion of "loving enemies" and "praying for those who persecute you" applied to relations with the occupying power.[5]

For the Jews in Palestine at the time, to hear Jesus say, "Love your enemies" would arguably mean, "love the Romans; do not just the resistance movement. I say to you, "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" (Matt. 5:48).

What is certainly obvious is the fact that all of Jesus’ teaching on nonviolence was quite understood by early Christians. For instance, when a disciple took a sword to defend Jesus himself, Jesus commanded that he put the sword back or away, for: “all who take up the sword will perish by the sword” (Matt. 26:52).  It is undeniable clear; in the teaching of Jesus how His advocacy of peacemaking is tied to His view of the nature of the community He founded. For Christopher, the Christian nonviolence was not a general ethical maxim. It was a rule for the community of disciples and followers, directing them in the way they were to live in the midst of those who lived quite differently from them.[6]

ISLAM

According to Arvind Sharma, Islam founded by Muhammad a Prophet, who doubled as the Ruler, and Commander in chief. He was a native son of the Arabian Peninsula. Muhammad was the prophet who preached the word of Allah to the people and upon conversion, they become Muslim's. Mohammed became a prophet at the age of forty, on the claim, when God sent the angel Gabriel to him, and everything he heard from the Angle were written down, and it became the Quran. Islam is rarely associated with nonviolence and conflict transformation in the public minds. The word “Islam literally means peace and security which means that Islam attaches utmost significance to harmony, peace and a smooth running of society.”[7]

However, the perception of associating Islam with peace and harmony could be difficult to point seeing that most violence in Islam comes from the fact that Islam does not make a distinction between religion and state, thereby making, “Islamic church and an Islamic state has always been a controversial institution.”[8] The result of this action means Islam makes no distinction between the affairs of the world by differentiating it from religion, according to their teaching everything is interrelated.

In Islam, the use of the word “Jihad” does not necessary means holy war, “Jihad means inner struggle or effort. By a famous hadith of the Holy Prophet."[9] However, in today’s society the mere mention of that word Jihad has become synonymous with conflict and can be attributed to the radical Islamic portrayal and the use of the word, traditionally these words serve to show an outward struggle of "confronting social injustice"[10] which includes an actual pursuit of the teachings of peace.

Islam, literally meaning of the word is “peace and security”[11] thus simplified as Islam attaches itself to the “utmost significance to harmony, peace and the smooth running of society.”[12] It, therefore, seems appropriate to remind reader of the evidence that the name Allah is "the peace."[13] Always invoking the name in an appropriate time to connote the blessing and the mercy of the Almighty.

Here are some concepts of peace in Islam that have been misconstrued and thus serve to confirm the perception and notion that Allah is sanctioning conflict. Based on the belief that violence disturbs serenity and peace in society and Islam sanctioning of these three kind of violence have contributed in fuelling the association of Islam as violent, these are:

Although Islam’s objectives are aimed at promoting a moral value system and the protection of lives and properties of its members in society, for their claim, "life and properties of the citizen are regarded as sacred in Islam, and the murder of one is held tantamount to the massacre of all human beings".[14]

1.     Jihad is just to oppose and combat those who disturbs the peace of society

2.     Jihad is set to establish a way of securing peace in society, and the use of force could only be used for self-defense.

3.     Jihad, as a way to establish a better way to understand the concepts of the Quran.[15]

"Thus, these three concept can be summarized like this, sanction is given to anyone who fights because they have been wronged... permission to fight in self-defense and not for hostility...the third is fighting is a legitimate means of defending the right of the oppressed"[16]

These attributes are to serve as a key factor for peace and security in the world. The Quran also require that whenever one speaks, one should speak justly and as the Almighty said, “O my servant! I have forbidden injustice for Myself and forbade it also for you. So avoid being unjust to one another."[17] 

JUDAISM

It is of interest to note how nonviolence is expressed in Jewish texts. Christopher, in citing the works of Leibowitz (1982, 172), notes how the Hebrew bible itself does not explicitly demand a completely nonviolent lifestyle. However, it commands the love of one’s neighbor and sees love as the appropriate answer to situations of conflict that breed hatred and revenge. For instance, Christopher point to the fact that the Bible is clear when it says, “Do not hate your brother in your heart; reprove him, and be sinless. Do not take revenge or harbor a grudge, rather love your neighbor as yourself; I am YHWH” (Lev. 19:17-18).[18]

It is very clear; regarding nonviolence, the in the Bible  desire has and still is to limit vengeance is specific in the institution of Cities of Refuge. For example, according to the Bible based on Christophers reading, "these places were created to protect the accidental murderer from being hunted down by avenging relatives. Capital punishment . . . is virtually eliminated in the first major post-biblical code of Jewish law.”[19]

As Scholars over the years claim, Judaism's long-standing denunciation of militarism of every age completely predominates in Jewish texts. According to Christopher, Deuteronomy 8:11-18 clearly “warns Israel against taking pride in its military successes and imagining them to be independently achieved; it sees these attitudes as the height of human pride and folly and dangerously close to idolatry”[20].

From the forgoing, it is obvious that God needed to fulfill the promise was made to the Patriarchs in Deuteronomy 9:5. So it would be quite a mistake, in fact, a great mistake, for Israel to begin to imagine that it was morally virtuous enough for her to claim that it merit its material inheritance. In my view, this form of anti-militarist attitude is best reflected by the noted verse from Zachariah which says "Not by force or by might, but by my spirit, says the Lord (Deuteronomy 4:6). This is at the core of the nineteenth-century Universalist, pre-Zionist understanding of Hanukkah. Deuteronomy 9:5 and the Deuteronomy 4:6 are yet examples of how a Bible passage sheds light on other. It is an example of how iron sharpened iron.[21]

The book of Exodus admonishes that: "If you build an altar to God do not use hewn stones, for your sword will have been raised on it, thereby defiling it" (Exodus 20:22).  To this end, Rabbinic scholars like Simon ben Eleazar used to say that, “The altar is made to prolong the years of man and iron is made to shorten the years of man; it is not right for that which shortens life to be lifted up against that which prolongs life.”[22] The ideal of peace and nonviolence is evident here. It is clear here that iron in the form of a sword indeed has the capacity to shorten the years of man whenever it is raised up. The alternative to that is building an altar to God. The alternative to building an altar to God is a form of nonviolence. Nonviolence prolongs life; nonviolence does not delight in killing life but in preserving life.

It is important that we take a close look at the book of Isaiah as we discuss nonviolence. According to scholars, one can hardly try to outline the expressions of Isaiah 2:4 as it is the ideal of peace, and the age of peace and of nonviolence"He will judge between the nations and will settle disputes for many peoples. They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore."[23] 

As I highlighted earlier, a close look into Isaiah 2:4 reveals that justice and peace are an integrally connected to each other. It is obvious that the order of justice and peace is very critical here. Based on these two elements, Christopher writes, first "justice is established, and only afterward does peace become a reality. The aggrieved party is not expected to give up his claim and be pacified; on the contrary, he has the right and the obligation to demand justice".[24]

In addition, Christopher contends peace without justice is surrender, which, when achieved under the guise of peace, is built on the flimsy foundations of falsehood. It only plants the seeds of future oppression.  For Christopher, any attempts at reconciliation initiated before injustice is redressed can theoretically still lead to nonviolent conflict resolution.[25]  There is no doubt at all that the Isaiah 2 texts indicate a clear perception of the importance of such sentiments in Jewish life. Therefore, in exercising a nonviolent alternative as far as the Jewish zealot were concerned is not to allow any one to carry either a sword or a bow, or a shield, or or a club, or a spear on the Sabbath. 

BUDDHISM

Buddhism is the Religion, with the title Buddha meaning “the enlightened one”[26]. The founder was Siddharta Gautama, born in 560 B.C. in the village of Lumbini near the city of Lapilavastu, south of present day south of the Nepal border[27]. But did not until four centuries after Gautama’s death was the cannon of Buddhism written down.[28] Councils have characterized the Buddhist movement. “Gautama as the son of King Suddhodana and Queen Maha-Maya of the sakya clan, knew only luxury and protective care during his childhood”[29]. Gautama turned his back on all of these luxuries, pursuing a life as a wondering monk.

There is no doubt to the fact that over the last 2, 500 years ago the Buddhist society is often praised for its peace teachings and exceptional record for nonviolence. While the exceptional record for peace teaching on nonviolence by the Buddhist are justified. According to Christopher S. Queen, it is important to know that “Buddhism’s contribution lies not primarily in its commitment to peace, per se most world religions are committed to “peace” in some fashion but in the unique perspectives and techniques Buddhists have developed for achieving peace within and between individuals and groups”[30].

The Buddhist tradition has offered rich resources for peacemaking and the cultivation of nonviolence. This rich Buddhist source tradition for peacemaking, according to Queen, includes:

Its founding manifesto, the Four Noble Truths (Pali ariya sacca), offering relief from the causes of human suffering; its cardinal moral precept, to refrain from harming living beings (ahimsa); the practices of lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity (brahmaviharas); the doctrines of selflessness (anatta), interdependence (paticcasamuppada), and non-dualism (sunyata); the paradigm of enlightened beings (bodhisattvas) who employ skillful devices (upaya) to liberate others from suffering; and the image of the great “wheel-turner” (cakravartin) and moral leaders (dhammaraja) who conquer hearts and minds-not enemies and territories by their exceptional wisdom and kindness.”[31]

From the beginning, Buddhist formed followers into an order or Sangha. Urging new converts to affirm the following: Take refuge in the Buddha, take refuge in the Dharma, and take refuge in the order of the Sangha .[32] In light of the forgoing, I have no doubt that these Buddhist teachings have found ardent champions in every culture touched by the Buddhist dharma (Pali dhamma, “teaching,” “truth,” “path”), an example would be those of Japan, Korea, Tibet, China, Asia, Southeast, India and Sri Lanka.[33]

Furthermore, Queen claim that:

In the modern world, nonviolent struggles for human rights and social justice have found Buddhist supporters in Asia and the West, spawning a new “engaged” style of Buddhist activism. Perhaps most notably, the Nobel Peace Prize has twice been conferred on Buddhist leaders during the past decade for their tireless efforts to liberate their compatriots from totalitarian regimes: His Holiness the Dalai Lama of Tibet in 1989 and Aung San Suu Kyi of Burma in 1991.[34]

From the above, it is obvious that Buddhist tradition has contributed a lot for preaching nonviolence and peacemaking.

Nonviolent activism in the Buddhist tradition is shown in the concept of the Peace Wheel. Clearly, with the tradition of the Buddha’s first sermon on “Turning of the Wheel of Law” (i.e. dharma-chaka-pravartana), spoke of the nation that Buddha transformed an ancient symbol of military conquest into a metaphor of nonviolence a Peace Wheel, was well established by the appearance of the first Buddhist art and architecture in the third century B.C.E. [35].

Nonviolence scholars believes that for centuries the radical shift in social values wrought by Buddha and Asoka from violence to reconciliation was symbolized in stone art and architecture, from the low-relief sculptures representing the Buddha himself as a Peace Wheel, revered by followers at stupa sites (giant reliquary mounds) at Sanchi and Bharhut (circa 100 B.C.E.), to the well-known Preaching Buddha, in which the sitting Buddha demonstrates the wheel-turning hand gesture, and how the Peace Wheel is venerated by the Lord’s disciples .[36]

Turning the Wheel of Peace is a core teaching in the Buddhist tradition. An Early study of the Buddhist literature reveals the fact that the concept of peace appears as the pivotal point in the Buddhist system of social ethics. While the nations of peace and nonviolence in Western cultures are generally identified with inter-group relations where the primary emphasis is on the individual aspect of peace, and its social consequences are held to follow only from the center of the individual's own psychology.[37] 

As noted by Scholars, in the ancient world no less than today, the practice of non-injury as observed that the Buddhist tradition of nonviolence involved a complex calculus of intention and result.  For instance, though there is the need for self-defense, law enforcement, and national defense toward living beings. The Buddhist approach was to practice the Middle Way of moderation, which means avoiding professions involving killing (hunting, butchering, military service), to practicing right livelihood, on the one hand, and the Jain extreme of protecting insects by wearing a mask and sweeping the ground ahead when walking, on the other.[38]

Another element of nonviolent in the Buddhist tradition is the Buddhist approach to non-harming was to stress the intention or state of mind of the actor. Animals were not hunted or slaughtered expressly. Similarly, a layperson might unintentionally harm another, say, in a household accident, without incurring the bad karma associated with premeditated assault or homicide.[39] In order words, nonviolence is seen as a way to attend nirvana.

According to Queen, the most important contributions of early Buddhism to the practice of nonviolence were its techniques to counter the three evil roots namely:

Hatred, greed, and delusion (dosa, lobha, moha) the seed of violent itself. Each of these reactions has its antidote: lovingkindness (metta) to counter hatred, generosity (dana) to counter greed, and wisdom (panna) to counter delusion. While it may be argued that greed and delusion are indeed equal partners with hatred in the instigation of violence, it is irrational anger and hatred toward other individuals and groups that most often fuels the flare-up of violence and mayhem.[40]

From the forgoing, Queen explains it is loving-kindness meditation (metta bhavana), cultivating goodwill toward oneself and others that may be called the root practice of Buddhist nonviolence. In a fashion similar to Christians endeavor meditative training as recommended for the cultivation of compassion, joy, and self-control. Also, to love others as one self, the Buddhist extend the wish for freedom from enmity, ill will, and distress, and for happiness to others. 

The Buddhist approach to nonviolence, then, is grounded in a systematic attitude adjustment in which negative, reactive states such as hatred, greed, and delusion are transformed into active social orientations through meditative self-training. This reorientation to inner and outer peace has several paths. These paths are:

Right views that establish a conceptual framework for meditative and ethical practice, right aspiration and right effort that motivate and sustain the practice; right mindfulness, by which the new attitudes was applied to situations and relationships in moment-to-moment living; and right concentration, by which the practitioner moves from merely performance peace, as it were, to what the Vietnamese Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh calls being peace involuntarily exemplifying the enlightened mind of nirvana.[41]

The above highlights the most significant contributions of the early Buddhism to the practice of nonviolence over the years.

Another teaching of the Buddhist that has supported the ethics of nonviolence is that of dependent orientation. According to Queen, the "interdependence of all actions and beings in the cycle of rebirth, and thus the profound interconnectedness of the moral universe. It is the nations of selflessness and rebirth, it was developed in the later Buddhist philosophy in the teaching of emptiness".[42]    

Although, there are different expressions of Buddhism but for the sake of this general introduction, this paper attempts to present the middle path and the general semiotics of nonviolence and conflict transformation. I am also sticking with the broad overview of Buddhism. And I will attempt to expound on the different expression of Buddhism such as Theravada Buddhism, Mahayana Buddhism, and Zen Buddhism, in my subsequent chapter.

SIKHISM
            Sikhism is a Religion of uniqueness. It has beliefs from two other religions; Hinduism and Islam founded on the believe that “Hindus and Muslims did not have to live in an atmosphere of violence and hostility.”[43] The founder Guru Nanak (1469-1533) was born into a Hindu Punjabi family and was educated by a Muslim teacher. Nanak’s upbringing compel him to proclaim “there is no Muslim and there is no Hindu”.[44] For God as a supreme being and has universal powers and truth backed by compassion and good deeds resulting in Nanak’s preaching of unity for all of humanity.

Sikhism dates back to the 15th Century. Making it a more modern religion, , making it a minority group. The Sikhs are found around northwest India, or Punjab, but could also be located anywhere in the world. “It was said that Nanak wore a combination of Hindu and Muslim clothing as he preached his message throughout India.”[45] As a religion with the mixture of the two religions, this joining is known as syncretism but today one becomes Sikh by baptism, and congregational worship. Lay leaders lead men and women worship together as do members of different cast, although there is no priests, worship.

The authorities of the Sikh worship today comes from the Golden Temple Complex, which stands in stack contrast to Nanak’s pacifist concept from inception. Guru Gobin Sign introduced other styles of worship in (1675-1708). Gobin also introduce the five K’s.[46]  

The five K’s are thus as follows:

Kesh; worn on an uncut hair, which is kept covered by a turban. The Kesh also serve as a traditional symbol of holiness, and the turban is man and some women to cover their long hair wear a symbol of leadership the Kesh.

Kirpan; is a ceremonial sword, symbolizing readiness to protect the weak, and defend against injustice and persecution. The kirpan is commonly worn on the shoulder strap in their garment and also, serve as a visible reminder of the warrior character of the Sikh.

Kanga; is a small wooden comb to act as a symbol od cleanliness and in one’s uncut hair to keep the hair clean, in combing their hair daily which also have spiritual symbol of wisdom

As a Sikh combs their hair daily, he or she should also comb their mind with the Guru's wisdom

Kachhera; is Cotton boxer shorts to symbolize self-control and chastity.

Kara; a bracelet made of steel to symbolizing strength and integrity. The symbolism stands for strength yet resilient under stress.[47]

The Sikhs have many of their beliefs but also the ones coming from Hinduism and Islam. The opening lines in their Holy Book, or Guru Nanak’s teaching are focused on unity and the uniqueness of God, the creator lord of the universe, who governs the world with commands based on two main principles of justice and grace.”[48]  Therefore, there is one supreme eternal reality; the truth; immanent in all things; creator of all things; immanent in creation that has no fear and hatred; not subject to time; beyond birth and death; self-revealing.  The summary on the faith praxis of the Sikhs is thus summarizes in their basic teachings as outlined in their holy book.

CONCLUSION AND PRACTICAL APPLICATION

Religion is not merely a force that divides human affairs but stands to unite as well; in many instances it unites people across ethnic, racial, socio-economic, and political lines through a common allegiance to the ethos of that religion. Religious ties could, in fact, provide common ground between oppositions within national and ethnic interest groups.

Exploring the commonality that exists amongst these six religions has help me to understand the contributions each makes in advancing nonviolence and conflict transformation and can be used for positive good in today's environment of increasing disorder, the world can no longer afford to over look at the significant contributions  made by the religious leaders and their adherents. Not only do they do theologies of some version of the golden rule, but also they also incorporate warrants of peacemaking.

Religious peace, properly trained and supported in the field of nonviolence and conflict transformation, can add an important dimension to the work of peacemaking amongst these six religions that could prove beyond the reach of the traditional diplomacy.

My ministry context allows me the opportunity to help communities and groups that seek to transform conflict through nonviolence. This process brings people from different religious tradition together to have a deep look and reflection on their spiritual and theological heritage, seeing that all six of this religions view peacemaking as a key tenet of their faith.

This study would enable people of different religion to develop friendship with one another, helping to end the prejudices and stereotypes that have plagued the 21st Century. Even if, you are a Christian, a Jew, a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Muslim, or a Sikh. If you seek to help transform conflict, there is a place for you to join this effort of attempting to identify the semiotics at work. Through this study, I have dismiss the myth that existed amongst the different religions, portraying the other as being violently driven which results in the denial that such religion does not contain in their teachings the tenets of peace and nonviolence. Also, the myth that religion divides than unite as I have sought to show the intersection that commonly exists amongst these faiths.

The application of this study should also help readers to understand the golden rule that each faith teaches on the importance of dealing rightly with other people or care for humanity, and this is a shared value that as shown throughout my study. As can be seen through these similar quotes in all of the six religions, Sikhs, “no one is my enemy, and no one is a stranger. I get along with everyone” (Sri Guru Grant Sahip1299).

Islam, “no one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself” (An-Nawami’s Forty Hadith, 13). And Judaism continued by saying “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow man” (Talmud: Shabbat 13a).

Hinduism also states, “This is the sum of duty; do naught to others which if done to thee would cause thee pain.”(Mahabharata 5:1517) In the Christian tradition, “do to others as you would have them do to you” (Luke 6:31) and lastly Buddhism make a similar claim, “Just as a mother would protect her only child with her life, even so let one cultivate a boundless love towards all beings”(Khuddaka Patha, from Metta Sutta).

In sum, these six religions, each with its distinction yet they all share the value of common humanity and although religious differences amongst them may cause war. The standard teaching they share in common is as followers of the ways of peace. 

Abu-Nimer, Mohammed. Nonviolence and Peace Building in Islam: Theory and Practice. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2003.

Abu‐Nimer, Mohammed. Conflict resolution in an Islamic context: Some conceptual questions. Peace & Change 21, no. 1 1996: 22-40.

Armster, Michelle& Lorraine Stutzman Amstuz. Conflict Transformation and Restorative Justice Manual.Akron PA, 2008.

Arnold, Johann Christoph, and Karl Tiedemann. Seeking Peace. NorthStar Publishing Company, 1999.

Bauman, Zygmunt. Community: Seeking safety in an insecure world. John Wiley & Sons, 2013.

Berndt, Hagen. Non-violence in the World Religions: Vision and Reality. London: SCM Press, 2000.

Berger, Arthur A. Signs in contemporary culture: An introduction to semiotics. Sheffield Publishing, Wisconsin,1998. 

Berger, Arthur A. Seeing Is Believing: An Introduction to Visual Communication. Mayfield Publishing Company, California, 1989.

Burke, Kenneth. The rhetoric of religion: Studies in logology. Vol. 188. Univ of California Press, 1970

Childers, R. C. Art. VII.Khuddaka Páṭha, a Páli Text, with a Translation and Notes. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland New Series 4, no. 02

Corrington, Robert S. A semiotic theory of theology and philosophy. Cambridge University Press, 2000.

David E. Westbrook Comparative analysis of conflict resolution and nonviolent activism leading to an integrated model for peaceful social change, 2003.

David A. Rausch & Carl Herman Voss, World Religion Our Quest for Meaning, Trinity Press International, 1993.

Douglas Johnson and Cynthia Sampson, Religion, the Missing Dimension of Statecraft, New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Dear, John. Seeds of nonviolence. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2008.

Dear, John. The God of peace: Toward a theology of nonviolence. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2005.

Douglass, Susan L., and Munir A. Shaikh. Defining Islamic Education: Differentiation and Applications. Current Issues in Comparative Education 7, no. 1 2004

Eco, Umberto. A Theory of Semiotics. Vol. 217. Indiana University Press, 1976

Galtung, Johan. Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of peace research 6, no. 3, 1969: 167-191.

Gandhi, Mahatma. All men are brothers: Autobiographical reflections. A&C Black, 1980.

Hastings, Tom H. The Lessons of Nonviolence: Theory and Practice in a World of Conflict. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland, 2006.

Halverson, Jeffry R. Searching for a King: Muslim Nonviolence and the Future of Islam. 1st ed. Washington, D.C.: Potomac Books, 2012.

Katongole, Emmanuel, and Chris Rice. Reconciling all things: A Christian vision for justice, peace, and healing. InterVarsity Press, 2009.

Katongole, Emmanuel. Greeting Beyond Racial Reconciliation. The Blackwell Companion to Christian Ethics, 2004.

Kurlansky, Mark. Nonviolence: The history of a dangerous idea. Modern Library, 2009.

Lederach, John Paul. Preparing for peace: Conflict transformation across cultures. Syracuse University Press, 1995.

Lederach, John Paul. The moral imagination: The art and soul of building peace. Vol. 3. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Lederach, John Paul. The Little Book of Conflict Transformation. Clear articulation of the guiding principles by a pioneer in the field. Intercourse.PA, 2003.

Lippy, Charles H. Pluralism comes of age: American religious culture in the twentieth century. ME Sharpe, 2000.

McDaniel, Jay Byrd. Gandhi's Hope: Learning from Other Religions as a Path to Peace. Orbis Books, 2005.

MacNair, Rachel M. Religions and Nonviolence: The Rise of Effective Advocacy for Peace: The Rise of Effective Advocacy for Peace. ABC-CLIO, 2015.

McNeil, Brenda Salter. Roadmap to Reconciliation: Moving Communities Into Unity,Wholeness and Justice. InterVarsity Press, 2016. 

Mackenzie, Don, Ted Falcon, and Sheikh Rahman. Getting to the Heart of Interfaith. Skylight Paths, Publishing, Woodstock, Vermont, 2010.

Mann, Gurinder Singh, Paul Numrich, and Raymond Williams. Buddhists, Hindus and Sikhs in America: A Short History. Oxford University Press, 2007. 

Moeschberger, Scott L., and Rebekah A. Phillips DeZalia. Symbols that Bind, Symbols that Divide. Springer Publishing Switzerland, 2014.

Moses, Rafael. The leader and the led: A dyadic relationship. The psychodynamics of international relationships 1, 1990: 205-217.

Myers, Joseph R. The search to belong: Rethinking intimacy, community, and small groups. Zondervan, 2003.

Pal, Amitabh. Islam Means Peace: Understanding the Muslim Principle of Nonviolence Today. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Praeger, 2011

Porter, Thomas W. The Spirit and Art of Conflict Transformation: Creating a Culture Of  JustPeace. Upper Room Books, 2010.

Quinn, Robert E. Change the world: How ordinary people can accomplish extraordinary things. Jossey-Bass, 2000.

Said, Abdul Aziz, Nathan C. Funk, and Ayse S. Kadayifci. Peace and conflict resolution in Islam: Precept and practice. Univ Pr of Amer, 2001. 

Scott, Alex. Christian Semiotics and the Language of Faith. iUniverse Inc New York, 2007.

Schmidt-Leukel, Perry, ed. War and peace in world religions: the Gerald Weisfeld Lectures 2003. Vol. 2003. Scm Press, 2004. 

Sharma, Arvind, ed. The World's Religions: A Contemporary Reader. Fortress Press, 2010.

Sharp, Gene, and Marina Finkelstein. The politics of nonviolent action. Vol. 3. Boston: P. Sargent Publisher, 1973.

Shilhav, Yosseph. Principles for the location of synagogues: symbolism and functionalism in a spatial context. The Professional Geographer 35, no. 3, 1983 

Silverman, Kaja. The subject of semiotics. Oxford University Press, 1984. 

Smith-Christopher, Daniel L. Subverting Hatred: The Challenge of Nonviolence in Religious Traditions. Faith Meets Faith. New York: Cambridge, MA: Orbis Books; in Association with Boston Research Center for the 21st Century, 2000.

Stassen, Glen H. Just Peacemaking as the New Paradigm for the Ethics of Peace and War. Formation for Life: Just Peacemaking and Twenty-First-Century Discipleship (2013) 

Sri Guru Granth Sahib, Vol. 4. Vol. 4. Allied Publishers, 1962.

Thomas Matyok, Maureen Flaherty, Hamdesa Tuso, Jessica Senehi, and Sean Byrne, Peace on Earth, The role of Religion in Peace and Conflict Studies, Lexinton Books, 2014.

Thomas, Scott. The global resurgence of religion and the transformation of international relations: The struggle for the soul of the twenty-first century. Springer, 2005.

Wiesel, Elie. Against Silence; The Voice and Vision of Elie Wiesel. Edited by Irving Abrahamson. Holocaust Library, 1985. 

Wink, Walter. Jesus and nonviolence: A third way. Fortress Press, 2003.

Yelle, Robert. Semiotics of Religion: signs of the sacred in history. A&C Black, 2012. 

[1] Christopher-Smith, Daniel L. Subverting Hatred 2000, 144

[2] Ibid., 144

[3] Ibid., 145

[4] Ibid., 145

[5] Ibid., 146

[6] Ibid., 147

[7] Arvind Sharma, World Religion  A Contemporary Reader.53

[8] Christopher-Smith, Daniel L. Subverting Hatred. 96

[9] Ibid., 96

[10] Ibid,. 96

[11] World religion. Our Quest for Meaning. 53

[12] Ibid., 53

[13] Ibid., 53

[14] Arvind Sharma, World Religion A Contemporary Reader. 54

[15] ibid., 55

[16] Ibid., 55

[17] Ibid,. 54

[18]  Christopher-Smith, Daniel L. Subverting Hatred .128

[19] Ibid., 129

[20] Ibid., 130

[21] Ibid., 130

[22] Ibid., 131

[23] Ibid., 131

[24] Ibid., 132

[25] Ibid., 132

[26] Religion in a Changing World. 163

[27] Ibid,. 163

[28] Ibid., 165

[29] World religion quest for meaning, Our quest for meaning. 66

[30] Christopher-Smith, Daniel L. Subverting Hatred.25

[31] Ibid, 25-26

[32] Religion in a Changing World.167

[33] Christopher-Smith, Daniel L. Subverting Hatred.26

[34] Ibid., 26

[35] Ibid,. 27

[36] Ibid ., 28

[37] Ibid., 28

[38] Ibid,. 29-30

[39] Ibid,. 30

[40] Ibid., 30

[41] Ibid., 31

[42] Ibid,. 31

[43] David Rausch and Carl Voss, World Religion, our quest for meaning. 52

[44] Ibid., 52

[45] Ibid., 53

[46] Ibid., 53

[47] Ibid., 53

[48]  Buddhist, Hindus, and Sikhs in America 99