The Pernicious Idea of Exclusive Belonging

Context: The idea that each human being belongs to only one single culture or a unique civilization (exclusive belongingness) erases the diversity and fluidity necessary for self­-development and cultural growth.

Arguments against the ubiquitous push towards exclusive belongingness:

• Identity is multi-layered: The argument of exclusive belongingness is not feasible since our overall identity is multilayers and complex than we articulate or led others to believe.
  • We live much better when we are open to multiple influences, enriched by varied values.
  • A person’s identity is defined by his orientation to an incomparably higher good, but can also have multiple allegiances.
    • Many scientists and philosophers are loyal to both religious and rational outlooks feeling that something would be lost if either is snatched away from them. (Dual allegiance)
  • Presence of intersecting cultures: Different cultures in India have mixed up so firmly that even people don’t recognize the true origins of their culture.
    • E.g. people living in Delhi have heirs from a myriad stream of Hindi/Urdu/Punjabi, shaped by Sanskrit and Persian (similar words like asura/ahura or yajna/yasna).
    • Several words of the normal tongue are of Arabic origin in Hindi; E.g. Aadmi, Malik.
    • Moral framework has been shaped by different cultures like Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Islam, Christian, teachings of Nanak and Kabir and western values since Vasco Da Gama.
  • Mutual transformation in ethical tradition: has been observed among different traditions –
    • While the ethics of the Vedic people comprised of kama, artha and dharma, it needed the teachings of the Buddha to add a fourth value, Moksha.
    • Similarly, the Arya Samaj challenged idol worship, but can one deny that it was also influenced by the Islamic conception of a formless god
  • Most of us are powered by multiple moral sources: E.g. there are Muslims today who are inspired by both the Ramayana and the Koran. (similar to the Meo community in Haryana.)

Conclusion: The demand to ‘purify’ ourselves, rid ourselves of anything ‘foreign’ that contaminates is not only hard to meet but, if we are to lead better, richer lives, is not worth compliance.