Maaro, magar pyar se maaro (John 7:53- 8:11)

John 7:53- 8:11- ...while Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2 Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him and he sat down and began to teach them. 3 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery; and making her stand before all of them, 4 they said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. 5 Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They said this to test him, so that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground.[a] 9 When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders; and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. 10 Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” 11 She said, “No one, sir.”[b] And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again.”]][c]

The passage John 7:53- 8:11 talks of a woman who is wrongfully confined and held by a group of people, who want Jesus to answer what punishment she should get for the indictment they have given her.

We see Jesus being questioned by the scribes and Pharisees. The bait they use here is a woman who they say has been caught in adultery. The people present along with the scribes and Pharisees therefore want Jesus to say that the woman has committed a mistake and should be stoned in accordance with the law of Moses. But does this happen or does Jesus do something not expected? The said passage fascinated me because it was included in the gospel of John very late. So much that biblical researchers would even say that it is not Johanine in style. This itself makes it interesting to look at because it could have been a resistance or protest passage within the entire scheme of events. Almost like being pushed through in the heaviness of the gospel. This therefore gives an indication that it may also contain something equally explosive which could have been of concern to the church. When we look at the passage we notice several things.

There are several gaps in the story which actually may be intentional. Where is the man caught in adultery along with the woman, why did the crowd wait for Jesus to come, was their concern adultery or trapping Jesus? Three major characterisations exist in the story. From the perspective of the men, the woman and Jesus are the enemies. More Jesus and less the woman. They are therefore to be done away with. The woman is slapped with an allegation of adultery. This is made as an excuse to engage Jesus. This is for defeating him and getting him out of the equation. So there is a reason for them to do what they did. A reason from their perspective. They used a law and twisted it in their favour to do away with the threat of Jesus. The situation could even have turned out into an early end of Jesus’ public ministry. The atmosphere is volatile and could have had a very ugly end. But what happens is completely different from what they had planned.

The second perspective is that of the woman who is accused of adultery. This is a woman who is wrongfully held against her will. She is a woman who is maybe caught in the crossfire. But it also shows as to how the men treat her as an object to lure Jesus. She is helpless in the entire incident and awaits her judgement at the hand of the moralists. Her wait may have been agonisingly slow and makes one wonder whether that was worse than the accusation made against her. She is embarrassed and humiliated in the company of many males who are preaching morality to her. So much that she has lost all energy to complain and say anything at all. Her silence is not an admission of her guilt but an admission of how she has been subjected to violence, pain and humiliation. This silence speaks more than the words used by the others. Her silence is also the judgement of a society who continued to ravage her life instead of showing empathy to her and supporting her.

The third perspective is that of Jesus. He is faced with several predicaments. Should he affirm the lawless law and even the misinterpreted law, should he judge the woman or fight for her, should he support or condemn the men, should he wish away the uncomfortable situation along with the people present, or should he say what is right and save the situation without bringing about bloodshed? The tension in the passage is so strong that one cannot predict which way it will go. Blood shed seems imminent.
As mentioned before, the bible passage attains new meaning as a subversive text because it was never a part of the text and still confuses those who read it. This is because the text is packaged brilliantly that the meaning lies hidden somewhere inside.

Maaro, magar pyar se maaro, is the conceptual framework in which I would like to see this passage. People are quick to unassumingly use the thought in the passage “first one to throw a stone” and “anyone without sin” so much that it is seen as practically impossible to follow. The killer instinct of the passage has been made toothless by the fact that it has been allowed to stand still without reflection.

My conceptual framework was picked up in Mumbai from a story that a pastor shared. It is a different setting involving different characters but which nevertheless speaks to us and inspires us. The setting is a suburban railway station in Mumbai where a long queue is broken by a heavily built and tall man. The short person behind him complains and asks him to stand at his right place in the queue. Both of them get into a fight and the winner is clear because of the might at the hand of the first man. He raises his hand and says “Maroonga thuje”, meaning I will beat you/hit you. The short man is unsure as to what to say but nevertheless maintains his ground. The crowd anticipates a good fight and instead of saying anything, watches intensely for the first move from the giant. Just as the huge man raises his hand to swipe away the small man like a fly, comes a voice far off but crystal clear. It says “Maaro, bhaiya maaro….magar pyaar se maaro” meaning “beat him/hit him man, beat/hit him with love.” The crowd is unsure as to which direction to look to and pay attention. They don’t want to miss a thing. A few seconds of silence follows and then the big man, small person and the crowd burst out laughing. A fatal situation turns to a situation where everyone says, take it easy. The big man shakes the other person’s hand, says sorry and joins the queue at his rightful place. The crowd in true Mumbai Bollywood style claps.

How can we see the passage of the woman, the adulterous woman as she is called and what Jesus does? It is a common scene or setting in our lives when the power of intervention could work wonders. I would pick a few points from the passage for our reflection today.

1. Kill the bill or kill the attitude?
The women’s reservation bill was one of the promises made by the United Progressive Alliance II in its election manifesto. Despite the passing of other bills this has stayed in the back burner. The upcoming national elections in 2014 would have been a time to bring this into effect but the parliament cannot get it passed because of some men who group themselves into a mob whenever this is discussed. Killing the bill or Kill Bill, following the famous Hollywood movie seems to be the attitude of male politicians. Interestingly the movie portrays a woman killing a man. Several reasons are given for the negation of the bill and they involve reasons which are never really out in the open. It resembles the attitude of the crowd to the woman. They alleged that she had done something and therefore should be stoned or killed. A similar reasoning is used to say that the reservation bill should be killed. But Jesus in the passage turns around the argument. He writes on the ground and it looks like he is writing a new bill to be passed. The bill involves telling the mob that if anything/anyone should be stoned or killed it is their attitude and not the woman. If anything is sin, it is what they are doing. It is time that we also took stock of our lives and saw ourselves and located ourselves in the said passage. Who are we in the passage? The crowd, the woman or Jesus? Who should we be? Are we sinning?

2. The silence of the lambs.
Silence has been much written about and always is used to suggest that those who are silent are the reason for the state of affairs in our country. They include women, ordinary people and the poor. Their silence is seen as the problem instead of the solution. The woman in the text is also silent. Does that mean that she had nothing to say, was guilty as charged, accepted the sentencing of the crowd or does it mean that her silence was speaking against what she was charged for. This is the silence that Jesus notices. It is a silence of communities who are oppressed into silence. It is a silence which is even more powerful than speech. The woman is fighting her battle with silence. Even as the others shout, she remains silent. Maybe it was a silent defiance against the men who teamed up against her. It is noteworthy that the silence and not the accusation moves Jesus. It is the silence of the lambs. He moves over to the role of the shepherd who takes the side of one sheep while leaving the 99 on the other side. Even as the other sheep complain, the one is silently exploring new ground and territory. The shepherd goes in search of this one.

3. Writing and shedding one’s blood to prevent bloodshed.
Jesus is under a clear predicament. The crowd was ready to stone him using the woman as bait. They were waiting for him and finally got him. The answer to their question on the law and what should be done to the woman is interestingly given by writing on the ground. He basically puts his life on the line and is prepared to shed his blood to prevent bloodshed and to prevent injustice to the woman. At no point does this seem as something benefitting him. As theologians this gives a clear indication that we have to write and rewrite for the benefit of oppressed individuals and communities. Seeing oneself as the oppressed and writing for oneself may not come under such protest writing. Unfortunately we sometimes write for ourselves. We should be able to transcend this and write for the benefit of others and for the rightful justice of others. It is also interesting to note that Jesus prevents violence through his act of writing instead of doing vice versa. We can notice in the society that we live in that a lot of hate literature is passed on. The communal violence in Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh was fuelled by such hate literature and images being circulated over the internet and through mobile phones. Such messages divided communities and brought about conflict which became very difficult to handle. Fanning the fire and adding fuel to the fire is easier than stopping the fire. Jesus is asked to fan the fire and sign the death sentence of the woman. He puts his life at risk to do the opposite.

4. Maaro, magar pyar se maaro.
This motto sums it up. But one should not mistake what this means. It is not being a smiling assassin, or smiling while stabbing someone in the back. What it means rather, is that we should love one another first and if we still have hatred, then go on and do what you want. The first step and the first part has to be the love for the other. This is new territory, new culture, new understanding, new laws and new ways. Yet we enter into the newness with love in our minds. Jesus does not tell the group of men to not throw stones and not punish. He only says, let the one without sin throw the first stone. He does not discourage them, but tells them to do it if they have no wrong inside. In another way, he is saying, do it with love. But they are not able to because love does not involve violence and condemnation.

In our own communities this becomes a good example to follow. This is at the same time an outlet and an understanding of one’s limitations and the road that lies ahead. Jesus does not stop the scribes and Pharisees from making the accusation. Rather he allows them to make it so that the negative thoughts inside them come out. After this has happened he knows that they have it out of their minds. This is when he talks to them about sin, and then suggests that the filth is out. Now you can concentrate on something positive. This becomes an important element in our churches as well. People need an outlet to express themselves. This is important because without this expression the hatred will remain. The expression of this hatred will give an opportunity to people to be at peace with themselves and go their way. Jesus sends both parties their way. One goes with the understanding that hatred is not there anymore and they cannot sustain the relentless campaign against the woman and Jesus. The other party in the form of the woman also is send her way, with hope that Jesus does not condemn her. This is because Jesus does not have hatred for her.

Friends, in our haste in moving forward we have all become a mob, waiting to pounce on the next person who appears. Let us meditate on and allow the bible passage to speak to us, so that we realise it is time to express, time for getting an outlet but also time to let go. Amen.

(Preached this sermon in UTC Tagore Hall for Sunday evening worship on October 13, 2013.)

Communication in Theological Education

The word communication brings to mind words like commune, communion and community which suggest that it means bringing together or coming together. All forms of communication thus seek to bring people together for whatever purpose. Communication also brings to mind sharing, participating, giving, taking, co-operating and transmitting. Communication thus involves people and what they do. Communication is a basic human need like food, shelter and clothing. It is a right of people. ‘One cannot not communicate’ and ‘one cannot but communicate’ provides the essence of the importance of communication. Even if we are silent, we communicate something. Religious institutions are usually happy with providing food, shelter and clothing to people in need. But this does not give the right to speak and express ones thoughts and very being. A world and church without communication would be just this. A world confined to superficial charity while refusing to give the poor and needy what is their fundamental right. This is the right to communicate.

Some definitions of communication are
1. The English word communication is taken from the Latin noun ‘communis’ and the Latin verb ‘communicare’ that means ‘to make common.’
Making common also means having something in common. Usually only people who have something in common can talk to each other. But this cannot be a hard and fast rule making us think that people who don’t share anything common cannot interact with each other. But on the other hand an element of commonness is definitely essential. All human beings have something in common but one needs to look to find and feel this commonality. Commonality includes religious beliefs, colour, taste, region, education and the like. In a theological setting it is very essential that we look for things that bind us together rather than for things that separate us. In churches also this holds true. A pastor has the responsibility of finding common threads between people rather than dividing people based on superficial disagreements. A communicator would seek to bring people together in a church setting and try to include the aspirations of all.

2. Communication is a human relationship involving two or more persons who come together to share, to dialogue and to commune.
Communication seeks to make relationships. It is not an artificial act but a human act whereby we seek to create togetherness. The first act of communication was God’s creation. God reached out to human beings and got into a relationship with them. This still continues. This is what should happen during church services as well. People should not come to see and hear something and then leave. Rather they should come and be a part of the church and each other. Without relationships, we cease to become human and therefore communication becomes an integral part of our lives.

3. Communication is the process that links discontinuous parts of the living world to one another.
We are a broken world trying to live together in hope. As pastors, care givers and social activists the hope we share is the hope given to us by the resurrected Christ. Communication forms the medium of experiencing and living this hope. How many times have we heard in theological institutions and churches that “it is a problem of communication”? Any breakdown in relationships is immediately attributed to the lack of communication and miscommunication and urgent calls are made for this to be rectified. Communication should not be seen as something using the latest technology but should be seen as the importance of doing simple things. Pastors looking at and greeting people in church, listening to people and holding their hands are all simple yet effective means of communication. This makes us a community who holds hands together, knowing fully well that we are broken and imperfect and yet coming together in the hope offered to us by God. This then should be extended to all people, of all races, castes, class, colour and gender.

4. Communication occurs when an individual assigns significance or meaning to an internal or external stimulus.
There are two types of stimulus. They are internal and external. An internal stimulus gives a signal to our brain that we need something or should do something. An external stimulus will be from someone else who wants something from us. When we are hungry, a signal is passed to the brain and we are informed of the hunger of the stomach. In Indian culture, peculiar movements of the hands and feet suggest various things at various times. This then makes us react in a certain way. Pastors/priests have to read various messages from stimuli from various sources. The need is to make out the correct meaning from what we see and feel. Many people in church will be silent and will not talk about their real feelings. Pastors should read the stimulus from silence and gather the need of people.

5. Communication is a process by which senders and receivers of messages interact in given social contexts.
We are all part of one or the other context. The social context decides how we should behave and what all conventions we should follow. This differs in each context. A pastor has to first of all understand her/his context before speaking. Only this will bring about effective interaction. The early history of modern communication hinged on the propaganda wars played out by various nations during the first and second world wars. This propaganda concentrated on transportation of messages. But mere transportation without knowledge of the social context will not ensure the intended goal. Communication as a process is much closer to understanding communication as relationships.

6. Communication is the transmission of information, ideas, emotions, skills, etc by the use of symbols, words, pictures, figures, graphs, etc.
Communication makes use of several things at the same time. It is not just words, but a plethora of other things which make the message clear to the audience. Even in churches it is not enough that we use just words to preach a sermon. A sermon should make use of all means and methods to introduce and explore the message which is being preached. Still and moving images, music, pictures, figures and graphs should all be made use of to make people understand what is being said. Take for instance the feeding of the five thousand in the bible. The message can be explained much better if we use an LCD projector to show a picture of thousands of people sitting together for food, playing appropriate music in the background through the same laptop used for projecting the picture, showing official figures of poverty in India and using graphs to show a break down of food production and distribution in India over the past decade. This will give a link between the biblical story and present day reality. There has to be a visual impact along with other things. This visual impact is present in the liturgy in churches and happens especially during the breaking of bread. This same impact should then be carried forward into the sermon and other parts of the service as well.
(to be continued...)

From debating conflicts to actions of sense

Doing my theological studies in Bangalore in the United Theological College, has been one of the highlights in my academic life. It was not about discipline, punctuality or anything else that one may associate with studying in such an atmosphere. It was about being real, and learning from various experiences to be real. There were for those who chose to open their eyes, plenty of opportunities to take off the unreal mask that many of us are used to wearing. The problem with these masks is that we then become so comfortable with it, that we never take it off, even in the presence of friends and family.

For the purpose of the stimulation of the mind and to test and develop one’s oratorical skills, we had the option of attending either the hostel general body or the student’s general body. This was a place where we would discuss our problems, sometimes for hours unending, mount a verbal assault on each other and then finally shake hands in mutual admiration. You could call it the parliament of theologians. It was not that every solution was hammered out with ease and every problem would be looked into, but that there was a space for discussion.

Among the many matters that came up for heated discussion was the age old one on ‘water.’ The hostellers had an aqua guard for purifying water before consumption. Ten years ago, this was not the heavy duty one, or the one promising reverse osmosis and sweet tasting water, but one which did ordinary work, in ordinary time. For years, we had used water from it, shared water with one another with not a bother. But the complex question was finally raised. “How can we share this water with students from the family quarters when this is supposed to be only for the bachelor and spinster hostellers”? The question shook everyone out of their slumber and a vociferous debate followed. The pendulum swung from one side to the other. Allegations and counter allegations did the rounds with regional affiliations and sensitivity to the ‘other’ being used. There appeared no solution. Because of water, food became an issue as we had to stop the meeting to have dinner. But this was one issue that could not be done away with a closing argument. Even the two teachers could not do anything.

This day, we got our share of reality bites. We could gauge the different groups we were divided into and the reality that we were not willing to part with the water which we were sharing for such a long time.

Amid the growling stomachs and the ayes and the no’s, one hand was lifted. A very weak one I would say. But silence followed nevertheless, more because everyone would have been tired by then. The hand was followed by a question to the chairperson. The question itself ensured more silence. “Respected chairperson, how many litres does it take before we should change the filter of our aqua guard?” There were whispers in the background and a frenzied calculation followed. “3000 litres, replied the chairperson.” Then the weak hand continued, “That means at a minimum rate of 100 students we use 200 to 300 litres every day. And that means in ten days we would have crossed the 3000 litres limit.” More silence and then, “How long has it been since we changed the filter?” Atleast six months said the chairperson after checking with others. The voice concluded, “That means we are sitting here and fighting over water that isn’t purified anyway? So what is the point?” A few gasps here and there were followed by incessant laughter. The chairperson got up to conclude the heated debate and said, “Shall we pray?”

This was indeed a lesson I learnt and still keep close to my heart. We fight over things which are not there. Land which is not ours, water which comes and goes, religion which appears near yet is so distant. Maybe its time for a bit of sense!

The silence of my name.

I waited for God to call me, to yell out my name
For I thought that was my aim
I cried to God to call me, to shout out my name
Because I thought in it was no shame
I pleaded with God to call me, to sputter out my name
In it I saw my fame
I argued with God to call me, to bring out my name
Thinking that was the game
But maybe it’s not my aim, or fame, or game
And in it I find my answer, in the silence of my name

Shout the silence away!!!

Jerryyyyyyy…… My mother’s shrill cry cut through the layers of cement, and resonated onto my ears, like the loud sound of cymbals, shocking me out of my slumber. I woke up and tried my best to induce my shut eye lids to catch the morning light. Even as my senses slackened the trumpet sounded again and the theory that light travels faster than sound was challenged (at least in my case). The cause had its effect and I jumped up from my bed and exploded into action. It was Sunday and my mom had just given me the all important wake up call.

Jerryyyyyyy…… The Chemistry teacher was staring at me with eyes like a tiger on the prowl. Had I broken a test tube? , did I miss an equation? , was my tie out of place? , what was the question? A hundred thoughts came to my mind as to why the teacher was looking at me without an ounce of tenderness. I got a nudge from a friend and a calculated whisper, ‘Don’t sleep!!’

Jerryyyyyyy…… Will you go get the news paper? , said my wife in a soft and loving tone at first and upon my reluctance to shrug off my rest, the tone became a bit hoarse, getting me to recoil and jump like I had heard the sound of a gun.

Silence is godly, which is why one doesn’t get much of it. It is so difficult to have a few minutes of silence as it is always broken by something or the other, be it in our conscious state or sub conscious state. “A barking dog doesn’t bite”, so the saying goes. Wonder whether we are uncomfortable with silence because we are scared of it. It freaks us out, scares us out of our wits and our only defence is to shout!