The Value of Prayer in Building a Better World for Children

Originally a dialogue at Hartford Seminary (13 November 2016). The event was co-hosted by Arigatou International and Hartford Seminary.

As I grow older, I see, more clearly, the necessity to question the words and symbols whose meanings we take for granted. This is particularly true of the religious terminology that we use to communicate the meaning of our traditions to those within and outside of those traditions. My critical concerns about language are the result of anxieties that are both intra and interreligious.

In this context, I want to highlight the two words that are at the center of our dialogue this afternoon: prayer and action. At one level, the meaning of these words may seem fairly obvious. In the theistic traditions, broadly speaking, we understand prayer to be an action, (karma) mental, oral or physical, communicating a desire or wish that we hope will be fulfilled. The object of prayer is a being, God or Ishvara in the case of the Hindu tradition, capable of granting the requested outcome. If prayer is a request to a higher being for a specific result (and I understand that this is just one description of the meaning of prayer), action is a series of events that we implement in the world in the hope of generating a specific outcome.

These words, prayer and action, are like infinitely malleable vessels into which a variety of contents can be poured. We do not know their specific meaning until we examine the contents and the contents are not the same within a tradition or across traditions. Prayer and action are like Powerpoint placeholders, dotted lines in a box awaiting our input.

Whether prayer and action contribute to the prevention of violence against children and promote their dignity and wellbeing depend on the content that we add – how we fill the dotted lines in the box. But what determines our content? It is not an easy question to answer, but I want to emphasize two determining factors. In theistic traditions, one of these factors certainly has to be our understanding of the nature of the Being to whom our prayers are oriented. For non-theistic traditions, we may substitute the nature of ultimate reality and its relationship to the world. Let me give you an example to clarify why this is important and, for the sake of self-criticism, I will use one from my own tradition. I do not intend to politicize our dialogue in any partisan way, but recently some of my co-religionists in India offered prayer for an electoral victory for Donald Trump citing, among other things, his “tough stance” against Muslim immigration in the US. They prayed using a ritual that I am very familiar with and use often in my worship – the agnihotra, or offerings into the sacred fire representing divinity. Among the many refugees seeking home in the United States are children, displaced and terrorized by violence and here is a group of my fellow Hindus praying for a result that will keep such children out. Behind their prayer is an understanding of the Being to whom it is addressed. What is the nature of that Being and that Being’s relationship with the Muslim child fleeing terror and violence? Does this Being privilege in some special way the interests of specific communities? Certainly, the nature of the Being to whom we pray is relevant for what we pray. Our understanding of the nature of this Being cannot be assumed or taken for granted and our critical interrogation must be continuous. There is too much prayer and action in our world that assumes the identity of our own narrow interests with those of God and thinks of God as the cheerleader for our nation, our community, our religion.

Second, the content that we give to the meaning of prayer and action is determined by our understanding of our own identities. Religion continues to be a powerful determinant of identities, even in era of globalization. While identities helpfully define and explain, there are lurking dangers in a world of diversity. The identities formed by religion have not always been good for those who did not share those identities. Religious identities are still, in many parts of our world professed exclusively, divisively and aggressively, with violent consequences for children. These are often inseparable from national, political and ethnic identities and concerned more with power than the overcoming of suffering. Religious identities have not always successfully defined commitment while also inclusively championing the dignity and worth of all. No religious tradition is innocent in this regard. The meaning of prayer and action in a tradition where identity is both particular and universal will be different from one that stops at the particular.

I am convinced that prayer and action has much to contribute to the wellbeing of children and to their flourishing. Prayer can awaken compassion, and a profound understanding of the unity of life. It can be the source of a powerful and sustaining energy for justice and for the overcoming of suffering.

I wanted to use my time today, however, to say what is perhaps obvious to this group, but nevertheless worth saying: Whether prayer and action serves the universal common good, that which we speak of in the Hindu tradition as lokasangraha, depends on how we identify the Being to whom we pray and how we identify ourselves.

———

Copyright © Anantanand Rambachan 2019. All rights reserved. Nothing on this website can be used, reproduced, or published without the author’s explicit written permission. Contact author for questions.