See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/377536116

SUFISM: A POTENTIAL REINFORCEMENT TO EXISTING APPROACHES TO

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

Preprint · January 2024

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29001.31848

CITATIONS READS
0 67

1 author:

Mahesh Paudyal
Tribhuvan University
7 PUBLICATIONS 4 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mahesh Paudyal on 20 January 2024.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 SUFISM: A POTENTIAL REINFORCEMENT TO
EXISTING APPROACHES TO CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
Mahesh Paudyal
[Link]@[Link]

Abstract

Attempts to academically understand and address conflict is an old affair, but humanity has not, till
date, been able to strike at a universally valid approach to permanently resolve conflicts. Existing
approaches to conflict managements, including conflict resolution and conflict transformation, have
exhibited enough limitations. The protraction of conflict in many volatile zones of the world is a proof of
the same. Scholars believe that existing approaches to conflict resolution, which basically involve political
and psychological dialogue, lack a consideration for the culture and spirituality of the parties involved.
Without taking spirituality into consideration, the transformation of the soul cannot be ensured, and if
that doesn’t happen, conflicts once thawed retain the potential to flare up again. An amalgamation of
Sufi ideals—which have the potential to accommodate the lessons of peace and compassion from virtually
all religions of the world—with the existing theories of conflict can probably posit an alternative to the
existing theories of conflict management. While other political and psychological approaches tend to
address the external or cognitive causes of conflict, the Sufi approach will transform the soul and replace
conflict with lasting love and compassion. This paper reviews existing models of conflict resolution and
peacekeeping, revisits their impacts, and argues that infusion of Sufi ideas can give a better edge to the
peace-keeping approach.

SUFISM: A POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE TO

EXISTING APPROACHES TO CONFLICT
MANAGEMENT

All wars signify the failure of conflict resolution mechanisms, and they need post-war rebuilding of
faith, trust and confidence1.

— A. P. J. Abdul Kalam

CONFLICT, defined as “an existing state of disagreement or hostility between two or

more people,” has always been in existence in one form or the other (Nicholson, 1992).
Sheriff F. Folarin claims: “Conflict is as old as mankind. It is a salient feature of the
human society” (2).
Granted that history of conflict in human civilization is ancient; equally old is the
academic attempt to understand and resolve conflict. Otomar J. Parlos and Paul Wehr
write:
Homo sapiens has been learning about conflict throughout its development.
That knowledge is spread across humanity, residing wherever humans live,

1 Dr. Kalam, former President of India, said so in an interview with The Hindu, on the eve of his

visit to Sri Lanka on Jan 21, 2002.

The interview can be read at [Link]
to-promote-peace-in-sri-lanka-kalam/[Link]>

Paudyal 1
 work, and play. It is folk knowledge, used continuously in everyday life – in
commerce, family relations, government, sport, child rearing. The ways of
dealing with human conflict around the world are legion. They are passed
down from parent to child, from generation to generation. They are
transmitted from one life experience to the next. That knowledge is created
within generations, as humans learn better how to interact with minimal cost.
(1)
Of all classifications of the causes of conflict, the one made by Kevin Avruch seems still
plausible. Conflict has several causes; Kevin Avruch identifies them as “struggle over
values and claims to scarce status, power and resources, a struggle in which the aims of
opponents are to neutralize, injure or eliminate rivals” (24). To his definition was added
a psychological complement by Burton, according to whom, there exists “a collection of
psychological needs such as identity, recognition, and security that must be fulfilled
amongst individuals” (32-40). He contends that if these lacks remain unfulfilled,
conflict rises.
Though personal and political conflicts are equally unwanted, the relative
impact they exert on mass level is different. The personal conflicts are easier to address
and less pervasive; those that are political tend to spread and engulf a huge mass of
people, leading to colossal destruction and death. Political conflicts have the potential to
develop into imperialism and neo-imperialism leading to escalation of violence, and
even war. On the other hand, ideological conflicts, including those based on political
philosophies and religion, too are on the rise, in consonance with the predictions made
by Huntington: contemporary conflicts are clashes of civilizations. Such conflicts
disrupt peace and lead to religious and communal riots (Huntington, 1996).
Much of the conflict in the world today is either political or religious. Peace-
keeping attempts, including those by the UN, or by international or regional peace
missions, seem to be eclipsed by political interests. Experiences show, permanent return
of peace along conflicting cleft-lines has remained a far cry, if resolution strategies
applied to arrive at the same have been ‘political’ in nature. Israel-Palestine case maybe
cited as a classic example.
The world has a number of test-cases that validate the claim that political tools to
restore peace largely remain ineffective. The Middle-East case, heavily beleaguered by
political interest, is an instant that emboldens the claims of scholars like us that attempts
dotted by political favouritism do not offer permanent solution to incumbent conflicts.
African conflicts, including internal domestic rows, have provided a pretext for the
Western powers to intrude, and leave Africa even more divided. Instances in Southern
belt of Russia, Far-eastern islands in the Pacific, and Nepal confirm, international
military intervention do not offer lasting peace to any place in the world. It thaws the
episodes and creates false peace; it does not transform the epicentre.
The complexity characterising conflict is intricate; its solution, resolution or
transformation, however, has always been a chimera. This is mainly because, in most
conflict-resolution bids, the parties overlook the underlying complexity: “Complexity is
disregarded; let alone the need for systemic thinking” (Gallo 2).
The patrons of conflict transformation find fault with approaches to conflict
resolution, with the rejoinder that all resolution approaches deal with ‘episodes’, but
they seldom resolve the ‘epicentre’ of conflict. They contend: “[Conflict
transformation] goes beyond a process focused on the resolution of a particular
problem or episode of conflict to seek the epicentre of conflict” (Lederach 31).
By ‘epicentre’, they mean the subtle, underlying but invisible cause of a conflict that
flares out in different manifestations. John Paul Lederach writes: “The epicentre of
conflict is the web of relational pattern, often providing a history of lived episodes,
from which new episodes and issues emerge” (31).
Lederach’s transformational approach calls for the inclusion of local knowledge
into already existing conflict transformation mechanism to make the approach ‘holistic’
by incorporating what he calls “the voice of identity” (55). But this ‘local’ differs with
place and it should invariably incorporate cultural approaches, which in the case of the
Eastern society (at least), necessarily trickle down to their spiritual bases.

Paudyal 2
 True solution to conflicts comes out not with the resolution of an episode; it comes
from elimination of the epicentre, and this happens with the refinement of the soul.
Most political approaches to conflict resolution—including conflict transformation—
overlook the need to transform the soul by eliminating clash of interests. Of the few
important barriers to conflict resolution Joe Epstein recognises, “partisan perception,
judgmental overconfidence, and wrong baselines,” is one, and “insufficient focus on
underlying interest” is another (1). Both these causes make a subtle hint on ideological
cleft-lines for protracted conflicts without solution. The true solution, therefore, seems
to be lying in spiritual endeavour, because, as Dennis C. Rittle contends, earlier
approaches to conflict lacked “a super-ordinate concern” which is, “the concern for
spirituality” (1). F Peter Fillips too agrees:
[H]uman history includes, among its core motivating determinants, spiritual (as
distinct from religious or logical) impulses. And it seeks to gather examples of
conflict resolution methods that arise from the spirit, hold those methods to
the light, and consider how they may compare with other, more rational, more
modern structures. (1)
Among scholars of conflict, opinions for the need for incorporating spiritual
counterpart into the existing structural schema of conflict management are growing.
Elinor Powell agrees: “Enhanced spiritual awareness can become a central piece in both
personal and societal transformation; it can act as a vehicle through which individuals
learn to recognize their underlying narratives and, as a result, find new and profound life
meanings” (133).
The concern for spirituality undertakes to rinse man of petty interests, and raises
the soul up to the realm of the selflessness and universal compassion. A soul that
transcends the worldly quicksand of selfishness ascends to the realm of the occult, and
it offers one of the best ways to attain the same.
Spirituality, in the context of conflict, has two-edged benefits. First, since it sees
humanity above the plane of ideational and identity barriers, it is holistic. So, each
person will see the other as a similar component of creation, thereby striking an
empathetic bond between the two. Secondly, spirituality makes the peacemaker
“integrated men” and such men can, through the exercise of their spiritual insight, forge
better peace (254). As Arasteh believes, such well-integrated people are naturally
equipped with conflict resolution mechanisms, which they can utilize based on the
dispute at hand. He writes, such men can make a “valuable contribution by serving as
trouble shooters or mediators of disputes” (254).
The societies and countries that have spirituality as one of the foundational
components of their civilizations have always refuted monolithic and decidedly political
mechanisms to restore peace. Sri Lanka, notably a Buddhist country ultimately said a
‘go’ to the western forces and mediators during the state-LTTE conflict. The western
peace mission, arbitrated by Norway, was considered a “failed mission” (Jegannathan 1).
Jegannathan sees it as “failure of the liberal peace-building model of conflict resolution”
which is “built on Westphalian notions of sovereignty and non-interference, a strong
developmental state and a military solution for ‘terrorism’” (1).
Nepal’s decision to send back United Mission to Nepal (UNMIN), a peace mission
of the UN working in Nepal in the aftermath of the state-Maoist conflict is another case
in point. The Mission returned before its ‘mission’ was accomplished. An article
published in Nepal Telegraph remarks:
In reality, UNMIN has proven itself worse than even the simple International
Non-Governmental Organizations (INGO) in Nepal. At least the INGOs are
trying to meet some of the aspirations of ailing Nepalese souls. But, UNMIN,
in contrast is rather fully and solely occupied with its own survival and
expansion and is slandering the hopes of the Nepalese people. (1)
A touch of the conflicts in Nepal, perhaps, can offer a case in point. Nepal is a buffer
between two conflicting nations: India and China that have been in conflict not only
because of troubled borders, but also because of their political ideologies, one claiming
to the largest democracy of the world, and the other, an epitome of communist success.
Moreover, Nepal squeezed obliquely between arch-rivals India and Pakistan, does

Paudyal 3
possess the potential to be used by both the countries for their personal benefit. The
comparative military weakness of Nepal, its poor economic stance and its porous
borderline at least with India makes it potentially vulnerable to be used for international
violence and terrorism.
However, betraying almost all the theories of peace and conflict, Nepal has resisted
the penetration of international terrorists and rioters. Except one single regrettable case
of the hijack of Indian Airline from Kathmandu, no major instance boosting
international terrorism has occurred from Nepal.
Secondly, Nepal that passed through domestic violence about two decades of
domestic conflict arrived at peace on its own model. Western intervention, in the name
of United Mission to Nepal (UNMIN), stayed here for a long time, until the
government had to send it back, stating, it’s relevance in Nepal was over. The way
Nepal forged peace among conflicting political parties, was totally modelled on Nepal’s
innate and domestic experiences, and not on UN’s experience of peace-keeping
anywhere else in the world.
I am of the opinion that cultural make-up of Nepal itself inspired the parties to
strike peace through a domestic model. Nepal’s civilizational status-quo needs a
mention here. Nepal is home to three great religions of the world: Hinduism,
Buddhism and Kirat. These three civilizations, that grew hand-in-hand, do not have any
history of religious conflict or crusade. They share deities and festivals; their temples
show the portraits of others’ pantheon. The Hindus consider the Buddha as the tenth
incarnation of their saviour god Vishnu, whereas Kirateshor, the chief deity of the
Kirats, is considered an incarnation of Lord Shiva, and the same is mentioned in Shiva
Mahapuran.
In practice too, the religions have complemented one another. In the hills of
Eastern Nepal, the non-Mangoloid Aryan Hindus have borrowed the Mongoloid Kirat’s
deities like ‘Budhiboju Maharani’ and ‘Shikari’, and during every festival, they worship
these deities. Much of divine healing in Nepal is derived from Kirat practices. The
Buddhists, on the other hand, have flourished in peaceful coexistence with the Hindus.
The later history of Nepal too sees a significant rise of the Muslims, who are living in
great harmony with people of other religions. And to highlight with emphasis, Nepal
has seen no religious conflict till date among the practitioners of these three Himalayan
religions who have a history of centuries here.
If violence for imperial expansion, which is a universal phenomenon with kings
everywhere, is to be overlooked, Nepal has never been in big conflicts for domestic
reasons. The recent turmoil in Nepal that resulted into a decade of conflict was inspired
by an imported political ideology foreign to Nepal. Its internal cohesive and spiritual
make up does not allow protracted violence to last in its territory. The harmonious
amalgamation of the three religions that share common mythological bases is the
guarantee of the same. Recognition of commonality among religious groups and
celebrating the same, instead of calculating the differences and politicizing them, offer
an alternative way to resolve conflict in the world. And this approach to identify,
foreground and enact the common mission of all religions—namely peace and universal
compassion—is constant with the basic principle of Sufism. After all, peace can spring
from existing peace; it cannot be forged out of turmoil. Nhat Hanh, a Buddhist monk,
and peace activist, believes that “peace is made out of peace” (63). He implies, those
mediating for peace should themselves be peaceful people, and his hints are clear: be
spiritual!
This Oriental version of peace-keeping, which sees common mythological roots in
apparently different but essentially similar religious traditions, is rooted in lessons of
peace, spiritual purity and self-restraint. Their standing grounds come from
amalgamation of religious ideals: Buddha’s eight-fold path and messages of peace and
non-violence, the Hindu way of conceiving the world as a family (vasudaiva
kutumbakam)2 and yat pinde tat brahmande3, and the Kirats idea of harmony between man

2 The world is a family

3 The same life force that drives an atom, drives the universe too.

Paudyal 4
and nature4 providing reinforcement to the same idea. Their collective approach
integrates in the highest ideal of Sufism.
There is little room for doubt that the philosophy that integrates these lessons of
love and compassion from all religion into one, and flourishes above the plane of
personified god-centric faiths is Sufism. These approaches to peace culminate is the
sayings of Sufi saint Ibn al-Arabi: “I follow the religion of Love: whatever way Love’s
camels take, that is my religion and my faith” (The Tarjuman al-Ashwaq XI). The idea
circles around a nirguna force—a formless governor of the cosmos, which provides the
potential for the conglomeration of the teachings of all the religions of the world. It also
is consistent with Saint Kabir said:

Sataguru purna Brahma ha nita nirguna niraakar

Unki sata sphurti se, rachyo sakal samsar.

[That formless creator, the Brahma, with his self-inspired will, created the
universe]

The fact that Reza Arasteh, whose revision of existing conflict resolution theories
by inserting spirituality in it, has acknowledge the influence of Sufism in his thoughts.
This has been confirmed by Anat Ben Nun, who writes, “Arasteh’s Sufi background
highly influenced his writings on final integration” (28).
Thus, Sufism, with rooms for the amalgamation of all high ideals of love and
universal compassion inherent in almost all the religions of the world can be
reinforcement, an alternative, or at least an additional element, to models of conflict
management practiced till date all over the world.

References

Al-Arabi, Ibn. The Tarjuman al-Ashwaq – XI. Trans. Reynold A. Nicholson. <
[Link]
Anjum, Tanvir. “Sufism in History and its Relationship with Power.” Islamic Studies
45.2 (Summer 2006): 221-268.
Arasteh, A. Reza. Toward Final Personality Integration, a Measure for Health, Social
Change, and Leadership. Halsted Press, 1975.
Bartos, Otomar J. and Paul Wehr. Using Conflict Theory. Cambridge University
Press, 2002.
Burton, John W. Conflict: Resolution and Prevention. New York: St. Martin’s Press,
1990.
Epstein, Joe. “The Top Ten Barriers to Dispute Resolution.” April 2006.
<[Link] 25 Aug 2016.
Folarin, F. Sheriff. “Types and Cause of Conflict.”
<[Link] 25 Aug
2016. 1-12.
Hatina, Meir. “Where East Meets West: Sufism, Cultural Rapprochement, and
Politics.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 39.3 (Aug., 2007): 389-409.
Heck, Paul L. “Sufism – What Is It Exactly?” Religion Compass 1.1 (2007): 148–164.
Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.
Simon & Schuster, 1996.
Husain, Adnan A. “The Heritage of Sufism.” Middle East Studies Association Bulletin.
Vol. 35.2 (Winter 2001): 204-207.

4 They believe, the primordial mother Suminima gave birth to eight progenies, including man, flora, fauna and
birds.

Paudyal 5
 Jeganaathan, J. “Norway in Sri Lanka: A Tale of the Failed Peace Process.”
Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.
<[Link]
[Link]>
Kabir. One Hundred Poems of Kabir. Trans. Rabindranath Tagore. Macmillan and Co
Ltd., 1948.
Kabir. The Ocean of Love. Ed and Trans. Sant Aijab Singh. Sant Bani Ashram, 1995.
Kevin, Avrush. Culture and Conflict Resolution. United States Institute of Peace
Process, 1998.
Lederach, John Paul. The Little Book of Conflict Transformation. Good Books, 2003.
Nhat Hanh, Thich. “Call Me by My True Names.” Mindful Politics: A Buddhist Guide
to Making the World a Better Place. Ed. Melvin McLeod. Wisdom Publications,
2006. 39-43.
Nicholson, M. Rationality and the Analysis of International Conflict. Cambridge
University Press, 1992.
Nun, Anat Ben. The Spirit of Peace: Spirituality as a Motivator for Conflict Resolution Work.
Unpublished Dissertation. Faculty of the School of International Service of
American University, 2011.
Philips, F. Peter. “Spirituality and Conflict Resolution”. Business Conflict Management.
<[Link]
spirituality-and-conflict-resolution/>. 23 Aug 2016.
Powell, Elinor D. U. The Heart of Conflict: A Spirituality of Transformation. Northstone,
2003.
Rittle, Dennis C. “Managing the Conflict from Within: A Spiritual Model.” Biblical
Perspective (May 2008): 1-13.
<[Link]
Rittle> 25 Aug 2016.
“UNMIN: The UN Mistake in Nepal.” Telegraph Nepal. Nov 15, 2007.
<[Link]
subarticleclass=479> 23 Aug 2016.

Paudyal 6

View publication stats