|
Gaybriel
|
(cont...)
The unity of race, color or language is not an inevitable necessity without which mutual understanding cannot be achieved. It is therefore necessary in order to establish relations built on the bases of love and respect and to have a dialogue based on the bases of these differences, created and intended by Allah. Reflecting on such differences, Freud called the state of humanity ‘the narcissism of the differences’, as “no matter how small they are, we make them into the core of our personality”.
Here, it is worth mentioning that the holy Qur’an calls in the second chapter, Aal-Imran, for holding fast to Allah’s bond and not falling apart when it says :And hold fast, all of you together, to the cable of Allah, and do not separate” (3:103). He did not say ‘do not differ’, because holding fast to Allah, to Allah’s bond can be achieved with differing, but not with ‘falling apart’ because falling apart is one thing and differing is something else.
In a multi-religion, multi-sectarians and multi-ethnicity world continuous, open and enlightened dialogue becomes a cardinal principle of human understanding, mutual respect and cooperation between peoples and nations. For, dialogue cannot be expect with the other; otherwise it will become a self-dialogue excluding the ‘other’ and his difference(s); or else, the dialogue loses it meaning. Therefore, the first condition for dialogue is acceptance both facts of life: plurality and difference. This acceptance is one of the characteristics of Islamic jurisprudence.
The society of Medina during the time of the prophet Muhammad (P.B.H.) has set the rule for establishing a cooperative system between the groups of believers and the People of Book. The prophet’s charter (also known as the constitution of Madina) allowed people to keep their beliefs and guaranteed their protection as they are. The society of Medina was built on the basis of spreading the message while embracing difference rather than ignoring it or attempting to eliminate it.
More than that, the prophet conducted a dialogue with the Christians tribe of Najran and extended his hospitality to them in his house at medina. That was the first Muslim-Christian dialogue in history. It is true he did not conduct a religious dialogue with them, but when it was time for them to pray, the prophet found nothing wrong with inviting them, as reliable sources report, to perform their beliefs. Belief in Islam settles in the mind by choice and is not to be forced. The Qur’anic verse says :”there is no compulsion in religion”(2:256). The ‘no’ here is a prohibitive one. That is, it does not mean do not compel people in religion but rather that religion is not complete, or cannot essentially be, by compulsion.
On the basis of this prophetic precedence in the first state of Islam and in the first constitution, Islam embraces a diversity in the nature of society, then dialogue comes in as the only way which leads--through free choice and respect--to agreement, understanding, love and unity. That is because the opposite of dialogue is isolation and developing a closed culture of caution, suspicion and animosity towards the ‘other’.
One of the foundations of the Islamic civilization is respect for the other and embracing openness and rapprochement, rather than ignoring, eliminating or dissolving him. The multiplicity of religious and ethnic minorities in the Islamic world and the retention of these minorities of their racial characteristics, doctrinal and religious heritage, languages and cultures is a proof to this fact and its strength. Islam’s recognition of the other and the need for a ‘dialogue’ in ways that are best and excepting him ‘as he is’ is not necessarily attributable to the tolerance of Muslims but rather to the essence of Islamic shari’a and doctrine.
The elements of Islamic culture and traditions were formed and developed in basic harmony with ‘religion’. This means that the disengagement between Islamic religion and culture deprives this culture of its identity and uproots it form its spiritual roots. The English orientalist Montgomery Watt says :
“ if we look more generally at the relation between religion and politics, it is helpful to consider first the place of religion in the life of an individual, in the case of a person to whom religion means something and is not a merely nominal adherence, two points may be emphasized. First, the idea of this religion constitutes the intellectual frameworks within which he sees all his activity taking place. It is from this relationship to a wider context that his activities gain their significance, and a consideration of this relationship may influence his general plan for his life in particular ways. Secondly, because religion brings an awareness of this wider context in which the possible aims for a man’s life are set, it may often generate the motives for his activity; indeed, without the motives given by religion some activities cannot be carried out. From these two points it is seen that religion has a central position in man’s life, not because it determines many of the details (though in some cases it may), but because it gives him general aims in life and helps to concentrate his energies in the pursuit of these aims.”
(cont...)
|
Forum
Pages: 1
coexistence (Read 4492 times)
