True religion is an inner activity, not an outer one

Dr Imtiyaz Yusuf is to be commended for his opposition to what he calls religious nationalism. But since nations are not involved, perhaps a better term would be religious chauvinism. This is an attitude that ranges from its mildest form, (1) “My religion is the best, but yours is okay too”, through (2) “My religion is the best, and yours is inferior, but I’ll let you live”, to its harshest form, (3) “My religion is the only true religion, yours is false, and I’m going to kill you.”
It is this third attitude that is causing so much trouble in the world today. It makes many people think, with good reason, that maybe we’d be better off with no religion at all. Its most virulently active form is Salafism, also known as extreme Islamist terrorism, and by association it gives all religion a bad name.
Dr Yusuf has a solution: “The secularists must learn to accommodate religion in the public sphere, while the religious leaders must help balance the public role of religion with spirituality.” This is a bit abstract, but it seems to mean two things. 
First, secularists should tolerate the public display of religious sentiment. The Hare Krishnas can sing and dance in the streets, the Christians can display creches on their lawns at Christmas time, Muslim women can wear the hijab, and religious people can wear pendants featuring the name of Allah in Arabic, the Hindu Omkar, the Buddhist Dharmachakra, the Jewish Star of David, and the Christian cross. So long as religious people aren’t pushy, the secularists have no reason to complain. 
But I would add that turnabout is fair play. Fairness requires the religious people to accord the same tolerance to secularists. If the secularists wish to make a public display of their secularism, in whatever form, they should be allowed to do so, just so long as they’re not pushy. “Show but don’t push” would be a civilised rule for both sides.
Second, in Dr Yusuf’s view, the religious people must balance their public displays of piety with – wait for it, this is my favourite fuzzword – spirituality. What precisely is “spirituality”? Nobody ever defines this elusive term. It is dreamy and gooey, smarmy and vague.  I prefer the term religiosity, and define it as a non-sectarian, non-dogmatic openness to a multitude of religious views, while adhering to one’s own views and doing one’s religious practices in private.  Hinduism gives us the word sadhana, meaning religious practices; Chinese Buddhism gives us the term xiu xin, cultivating the heart/mind. The religious person tries to purify his heart and mind through practices like prayer, meditation, chanting, singing hymns, studying scripture, attending religious ceremonies, and keeping holy company. In doing so, he hopes to become a better person and make of himself a channel through which whatever he believes to be the ultimate reality can express itself.
If religious people would stick to this – to self-cultivation and reaching out to whatever they regard as ultimate reality – and give up trying to control or dominate others, we would have a better world. I think this is what Dr Yusuf is driving at, and it should be encouraged.  Religion is an inner, not an outer, activity; and until we have perfected ourselves, we have no business trying to perfect others.
William Page