Leadership Issue: World Religious Leaders - Essay Example

Religion can bring about peace or lead to violence; religion can encourage or discourage world change. Religion can be used for personal gains or religion can be used for transformation. Much depends upon the leader who initiates the change. It depends upon his objectives in bringing about a world change; it also depends upon how the word ‘religion’ is perceived. The relationship between religion and world change has been a social issue. Social science emphasizes the role of religion in maintaining tradition, and in preserving and justifying the present social structure (Silberman, Higgins, & Dweck, 2005). This paper will discuss the changes that several world religious leaders have attempted and have an insight into their leadership styles. Marx defines religion as an opiate for the masses, undermining any motivation to change society for the better. (Silberman, Higgins & Dweck). Leadership has traditionally been associated with power. Leader enjoys political or organizational authority. While there are many types of leadership, two are distinct and interrelated. Transactional leadership grants the same liberty and opportunity to others as to oneself like speaking the truth, keeping promises and imposing sanctions. It is more about punishments. Transformational leadership on the other hand has a more realistic and reasonable concept of the self. This self is connected to friends, family and community whose welfare is more important than one’s own. Transactional leadership manages outcomes and aims for behavioral compliance while transformational leadership, through values, justice, honesty, truth and human rights, enables one to embrace a change of heart (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1998). Transactional leadership would call it moral values if promises are kept, negotiations are fair and truth is told but it does not take into account the ideals the follower may happen to have. There are inherent difference across religious groups and consequently across leaders. Siblerman, Higgins and Dweck further quote that “any religion that professes to be concerned with the souls of men and is not concerned with the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them and the social conditions that cripple them is a dry-as-dust religion”. While Mahatma Gandhi and Aga Khan were transformational leaders, Pope and Dalai Lama impose sanctions and punishments and views social equality as a spiritualism struggle to realize God’s kingdom on earth. Nazarali-Stranieri (2005) says the greatest leader of twentieth century, Mahatma Gandhi, had no political title, he commanded no army, amassed no wealth but had tremendous influence. He gave cognizance to what the citizens wanted and derived power from that. His ideals and philosophies influenced millions across the world including great American civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. Gandhi could identify with the economically and politically marginalized people. Similarly, Aga Khan was not elected by a Council of Cardinals like the Pope, nor is he elected by the people. Yet like Gandhi he is the beacon of light for the millions underprivileged across the globe. Aga Khan too believed in uplifting the masses that entered the world in poverty. Dalai Lama is referred to as the spiritual and temporal Leader of the Tibetan people (FOT, n.d.). Dalai Lamas are a succession of incarnation. They are not elected or appointed; they are born to the position (Tenzin, 1996). Gandhi fought for enslavement, caste and gender oppression, religious hatred and most importantly he fought against poverty, which he believed was the root cause of violence. Aga Khan too, remains unaffected by the leaders trying to resolve differences between people. His institutions were the first to attack global poverty and he continues to work for eradication of mass poverty. Gandhi never imposed values, and his philosophy of non-violence even left an indelible mark on the South African struggle for racial justice. Even to awaken the consciousness of the British to their unjust domination over India, Gandhi did not resort to war. He believed in organized non-violent civil resistance. His leadership brought about irreversible change in Britain’s policy towards India. Truth was used as the tool to awaken the consciousness of humanity and liberate them from oppression and slavery. Dalai Lama is also an advocate of non-violence and believes the truth, courage and determination should be the weapons for liberation (CNN, 2001). Aga Khan too believed that humanity can be touched with the spark which ignites the spirit of individual enterprise and determination, to save them from degradation. Like Gandhi, Aga Khan too was against communalism and racism. Both these leaders believed in the dignity of an individual and all efforts and resources were directed towards their economic independence. The aim is to teach the person how to catch a fish rather than provide him with one (Giradet, n.d.). Both these transformational leaders did not use religion or religious beliefs to bring about world change. They viewed humanity as one universal brotherhood above religion, caste and creed. The Pope is elected by a Council of Cardinals but Gandhi was never elected to be a leader. Christianity uses the religion to first bring everyone under a common umbrella and then provide benefits which was not the policy of either Gandhi or Aga Khan. The Pope directs that the pagans of Asia and Africa be first converted to Christianity by building hospitals and educational institutions for them. Aga Khan and Gandhi had no political aspirations. The humanitarian projects funded by the Aga Khan Foundation are not meant for the Ismaili community. In fact they are the minority beneficiary. Humanity at large is the beneficiary, which demonstrates the principles of Aga Khan that humanity is above religion. Aga Khan believed in educating the masses which gives empowerment. He wants to educate the brightest but the underprivileged around the world. The Aga Khan Foundation (AKF) believes in taking emergency steps and then making the individual or the nation self-sufficient as was demonstrated when Tajikistan was left without food or fuel to fight the harsh winter. They were immediately supplied with food and sustenance and then knowledge and seeds to plan for food so that they would not have to depend upon others. They soon became self-sufficient. The world today is in dire need of governance lessons and pluralism provides this strength. Aga Khan is the pioneer in thinking along the lines of a Global Center for Pluralism in partnership with Canada. Pluralist factions or sects in third world countries have found ways to fight each other rather than work together. On the Global Center for Pluralism, Aga Khan says, “…we cannot make the world safe for democracy unless we also make the world safe for diversity.” According to him, pluralism is a deliberate set of choices that a society must make if it is to avoid costly conflict and harness the power of its diversity in solving human problems. This Center would aid in research, education and exchange about the values, practices and policies that underpin pluralist societies. It will function as a global repository and source for knowledge about fostering pluralistic values, policies, and practices. The objectives are similar to Gandhi – to enable every citizen, irrespective of cultural, religious or ethnic differences, to realize his or her full potential. Its sole objective is to improve the living conditions and opportunities for the poor, irrespective of the faith, origin and gender. Both Gandhi and Aga Khan believe that violence and religion are not linked. Terrorism is due to frustration, ignorance and unresolved political conflicts (Spiegel, 2006). Gandhi was against using violence to fight violence as it can debase the noblest causes. This is evidenced from the bloodshed that has been left behind by the various revolutionary movements towards liberation. Gandhi wanted injustice to be visible to the world and for this he and his followers were even willing to die. Aga Khan believes that world ethics has its origin in all world religions. Aga Khan is attempting to transform the world by ameliorating ignorance through education and creativity. Gandhi knew fear and ignorance could be won over through truth, forgiveness and love. He was an effective leader as he had the ability to bridge gap between communities and between religions. He possessed the tremendous ability to provincial and religious hatred that people nurtured against each other. Gandhi could promote religious harmony through his public and personal actions. He would fast to end violence. He worked towards independence of the mass from economic servitude and not just for a few elitists. While Gandhi was willing to fast but determined not to resort to violence, Dalai Lama too has stuck to his principles of non-violence and has been in exile in India since 1959. Both have been trying to free their nation from foreign rule but Gandhi has always been referred to as leader of humanity but the Dalai Lama as spiritual leader of Tibet. The Pope on the other hand, held power too closely to him for too long. He practiced contradictory leadership at different places. While like all other leaders he espoused human rights globally, within the church he resented disagreement. He fought for religious tolerance and political freedom but he was a conservative fostering the traditional Catholicism (Hampson, 2005). He was rigid and refused to reconsider Church doctrines. Like all other leaders, the Pope too spoke against capitalism and poverty but the principles were always to grant charity and aid against converting them to Christianity. Like Gandhi and the Dalai Lama, the Pope too proclaimed that non-violent faith could change the world. He had the conviction that his message was applicable universally to all men and women, irrespective of their religion. He made the world his parish. Like Gandhi and Aga Khan, the Pope too believed in dignity of the individual but he did not change with the flow of the times. He was rigid about the ban on contraception which led to the birth of unwanted children in poverty and that too amidst HIV/AIDs (Ash, 2005). Both Aga Khan and Gandhi provide leadership by example. Many international figures were influenced by Gandhi’s philosophy of non-violence. Even today this principle guides the actions of millions of average citizens across nations who fight participate in civil society movements. Dalai Lama is considered the most skilled and successful of all religious leaders; he is tolerant and informed and can enchant anyone at the very first instance but he is intent upon forcibly subjecting the world to its law. Dalai Lama has attempted to mix state and religion, which Gandhi and Aga Khan have not. Religion and history are not separated from one another in the Tibetan world view, nor politics and ritual, symbol and reality (Victor & Trimondi, 2003). Dalai Lama uses religion and his meditative power to influence people. Today a culturally diverse society requires transformational leadership as they morally uplift the humanity, who enable and empower them and not make them dependent citizens, who encourage them to convert their visions into reality. All the four leaders have traveled round the world to foster universal brotherhood. While Gandhi and the Pope changed the lives of the people in the country where they visited, the Dalai Lama has the liberation of Tibet at heart. All of these leaders believe that non-violence alone can change the world. People need to be transformed and not given temporary relief. Truth and love are the basic nature of all beings and it is through these characteristics that transformation can be brought. Aga Khan spreads the message through philanthropic activities especially in the field of education through the AKF, while the Pope uses the religion to educate the masses. Gandhi toiled personally through satyagraha and other movements to awaken the consciousness of the people. Each leader has been serving the people of the world in his own way but the greatest influence on humanity without the use of power and religion have been Gandhi and Aga Khan. All believe in equal human rights but the leadership and approach differs. Gandhi and Aga Khan want to make the people self-sufficient, which in essence is liberation and independence and which in essence is fostering equal human rights. References: Ash, T. G., (2005), The first world leader, 25 Nov 2006 Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1998), ETHICS, CHARACTER, AND AUTHENTIC TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP, 24 Nov 2006 CNN (2001), The Dalai Lama: a spiritual leader in exile, 25 Nov 2006 FOT (n.d.), His Holiness: the Dalai Lama, 25 Nov 2006 Giradet, E. (n.d.), The Christian Science Monitor, Hampson, R. (2005), Pope changed the world, 25 Nov 2006 Nazarali-Stranieri, F., (2005), The Most Influential Leader of the 20th Century, 24 Nov 2006 Silberman, I., Higgins, E. T., & Dweck, C. S. (2005), Religion and World Change: Violence and Terrorism versus Peace, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 61, No. 4, 2005, pp. 761--784 Spiegel Der (2006), BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom Tenzin (1996), A Brief Biography of the Dalai Lama, 25 Nov 2006 Victor & Trimondi, V. (2003), Politics as ritual, 25 Nov 2006 Read More