James 4:17 – Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth not, to him it is sin.”
As per a recent pedagogue at a legal lecture I heard “Crime is an act of violation of other person(s)’ rights which in furtherance transforms into a potential threat to society.”. Is this right? Apart from the constitutional definition, I read the Holy Bible for the ‘religious’ definition and astoundingly there’s nothing sort of crime in the world’s largest ‘selling’ non-fiction book, a holy scripture. Pass onto the Koran, Gita and Gurugranth sahib and *Number of religions minus four* more scriptures and shockingly there’s no definition of ‘crime’. Sundry of other journals and symposiums juxtaposed in on my table and I sense a deficiency, for what is crime? Does the legal definition fulfill it? Answer, as it might seem predictive, is “No.”. Crime in its most cardinal sense is “concomitant knowledge of our misdeeds and its consequences”. Knowing you’re doing wrong but continues doing it, which makes us commit a sin.
In the hindsight of the Nairobi Mall shootout, we see brazen madness, horrendous killings that has shivered the world, a horrific act of not Terrorists, but the “Malaise” as one of the shooters in the mall was made to “abjure” his killings by a four year old kid, the kid interrupted the atrocity of the killer and called him a “bad person” to which the man reacted with tears in his eyes and lamenting that he is not a bad person. While some of the people might speculate with the happening of this event with sense of sympathy, pathos or even empathize in utmost cordial sense or in contrast, call him off as a monster, a terrorist, while it saddens me to understand the person as a victim of the malaise of “‘adopted’ definition of religion”, it simply occurs in the mind that what strength did that innocent child had that had pushed a cruel man like that to fall on his knees and cry bitterly? That was not innocence for we ourselves cannot define innocence. What led to such impassioned deplore of that person was that the child was an unbiased judge. A person with no knowledge or relation with ‘religion’ but the simple intellect of being in cognizance with what’s right and standing up for it. For he was the true follower of ‘God’ and true religious being, and the shooter, knowing that, still murdered ruthlessly the other men and women in the mall? Killing on the basis of religion but giving up the arms and hatred in the absence of it? Or is it not?
This analysis does not lead to him being called a person of “intrinsic” monstrous nature no matter he sheds tears or shoots bullets for we are not in any position to judge. What this shows is even upon the knowledge and intellect of judging what’s right and wrong, the person still committing the wrong shows not evil but a disease, a malaise that shows fear, cowardice and an escapist tendency. That such “men of god” take holy words like Religion, Creed, Caste and use them to defend their vile misdeeds. “That the Jihadists take a few verses of Koran, mend and twist it our way and kill “innocents” in the name of it”, said a “hafiz”, the one who memorized all 6,236 verses of Koran, upon which I asked who the “innocents” are. The weak? The Women? The Children? The powerless?
That even we, the common men and women are non-amended. That the juvenile law isn’t still amended and what not? That we love to keep the knowledge of the wrong but never fail to do it. Doesn’t that make us all sinners? Religion is an organized collection of beliefs and world views that leads humanity to the supernatural. Right and wrong and its enforcement is what duty is and that is the supreme religion. That is “God”. So next time someone conducts wrong knowing that it is wrong, know that there are 4200 religions and you don’t need a single one to perform your duty and stand up to distinguish right from wrong. “God” as a supreme ideology is enough.