Although the Qur'an recognizes the right to retribution its adherents, it is also a reward for forgiveness. So in ash-Shura it says: The retribution of a bad action is one equivalent to it. However, whoever pardons and makes reconciliation, his reward lies with Allah. He does not love the unjust. This principie is so important in Islam that even if the enemy becomes cowardly, it does not endorse the deviation from human values.
So after the conquest of Mecca, the Prophet of Islam said instead of revenge and bloodshed today is a day of mercy. Therefore, the distinction between aggression and defense must be distinguished; aggression is unlawful but defense is permissible under certain circumstances. The Qur'an has even forbidden Muslims from re- proaching.
We made attractive to every com- munity their deeds. In his defensive battles, the Prophet of Islam best practiced human and moral principles, even treating his most vicious enemies with humane behavior. During the Hunayn war, he granted the majority of captives mercy and returned their property to them.
In the conquest of Mecca that some Muslims used to chant that today is the day of vengeance, but the Prophet said to them today is a day of mercy, then told the people of Mecca and the leaders of their war, you are all free and there is no worry for you. The Prophet of Islam during the wars never deprived the enemy of drinking water. In the Kheybar battle he was strongly opposed when he was offered the opportunity to close the waterway or poison the drinking water in the fortress, and forbade the spread of poison in the city of enemies and in general everywhere.
During the war, the Prophet said: Do not kill women, children and the elders and do not burn palm trees and crops. Imam Ali PBUH also commands his soldiers: Never start a war with the enemy unless they start, do not kill the fugitives, do not attack the wounded, don't go into their homes, don't attack women, and don't scold anyone. Ibn al-Jouzi, : The teachings of Islam invite people to live a peaceful life based on theism, justice and purity.
Therefore, peace in Islam is an eternal constitution. Even the nature of war in Islam is a defensive one, not an offensive one, because the principle of Islam is peace and coexistence, not conflict, violence and war. In many verses of the Qur'an, God has allowed Muslims to fight only for defense.
Therefore, war in Islam is a secondary principle, not a primary one. The third principle in creating a culture of peace and a non-violent society is to pay attention to the spiritual self-awareness inherent in our human nature that can move people away from violence. Human nature has a tendency for peace and friendship. Enjoying compassion, and love for others is part of our human nature.
Violence is not our nature. Basically, non-violent relationships can bring us closer to our nature and help us connect and return to what is truly a pleasing way of life, one that con tributes to one another's well-being and comfort. Human nature tends to peace, and not violence; violence comes from how we learn, not from our human nature. The Islamic teachings attempt to invite people to global peace and a peaceful life on the basis of theism, justice and piety.
So, in Islam peace is an immortal and primary law. Allah loveth not aggressors. This interpretation of peace which is based on Qur'anic teachings can develop a widespread peace around the world and terminate conflicts in many places.
In spite of these principles of peace in Islamic cultural heritage, we question the reason behind the violence in some Islamic societies; violence in various dimensions of direct or structural violence or cultural violence.
To respond to this question, I would say that since there are many types of interpretation of Islamic doctrines from different points of view, and within different Islamic communities, hence, we are faced with the conflicting voices in some fields.
However, we should not forget that there are conflicting voices within other religions as well. It must be stressed at this point that the problem is not with religion per se.
It is not the philosophy or the doctrines, it is not the practices or the rituals, which are the issue. Rather, it is our interpretation of religion which constitutes the problem. It is the meaning we attach to certain doctrines and rituals which creates difficulties.
Over the centuries, most adherents of most of the faiths have developed an exclusive view of their particular religious tradition. God is seen as the God of their particular group. Truth and justice, love and compassion, are perceived as values which are exclusive to their religion. The unity that they seek is invariably the unity of their own kind. Their religion -they are passionately convinced- is superior to other religions.
This Islamic theory of peace culture is misused in some Islamic societies because of poor knowledge of Islamic teachings or due to wrong education. And there are different interpretations of religion and its foundations among Muslims and there are also misunderstandings of Islamic teachings. There is no question that the problem is not with the essence of Islam but with the problem of understanding and interpreting Islam.
As a result, people are drawn into violence, war and strife because of some misunderstandings and misinterpretations of Islam's teachings. One of the main causes of misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the Islamic teachings, is Fundamentalism, and the avoidance of rationality.
The use of reason in understanding, and interpreting religion, has always been the subject of serious disputes among scholars throughout the history of religion. As a result of Fundamentalism, and the avoidance of rationality in the religious teachings, the individual has adopted a religious exclusivist approach and considers himself just and salvable, and that all other religions are void and misleading.
One prominent example is the idea of Salafist religious exclusivist. There is no doubt that education in any society can play a key role in human development and consequently in the growth and development of that society. Education in any society will play an important role in the cultivation of knowledgeable people and in the development of culture, social order and cohesion, the development of civic institutions and thus the development, progress and excellence of society.
The human factor is the most important factor in the development, growth and development of a society. Therefore, in our age of information explosion, education can be the most effective factor in solving political and social challenges. It is so important that some social science experts have said that without cultural and social development, economic development would not be possible.
Sadovnik, : 7. My definite suggestion for the realization of a society free of violence and a culture of peace is primarily to teach peace discourse in society. It has to become a public culture. The discourse of peace must be incorporated as an approach to the educational system.
As a matter of fact, some countries have incorporated the discourse of peace into their educational system literature. From kindergarten and elementary school to university level, where there should be a department of peace and conflict resolution. To avoid conflicts and violence in societies on the one hand, cultural and religious pluralism must be accepted, interactions and friendship must be pursued, and on the other hand to reject exclusivism.
Religious tolerance, which is based on the teachings of Islam must be followed. We must learn to embrace cultural and religious pluralism on the one hand, and pursue interactions, friendships and rejection of exclusivism on the other hand to tolerate dissent. In our time, there is an urgent need for good philosophical arguments for religious toleration in the encounter with religious diversity.
They might reinforce settled habits of toleration and justify teaching toleration to people in society. The Kantian response to religious diversity is the view that all religious claims are on a par with respect to truth, because all teach the same thing or make the same claim.
The essential content of the former, of pure religious faith, is the understanding of all moral duties as given by God. Kant held that this content -the claim that all moral duties are given by God- is present in all particular religions. This fundamental religious claim is discoverable and justifiable by reason alone, unaided by revelation, scripture and the like. The Kantian strategy has two essential parts: one is the reduction of all religious claims to a single fundamental claim, and second is the view that the claims of all actual religious communities bear approximately the same relation to this fundamental claim.
There is no public evidence that any one religion is unique or superior to others and thus has closer access to Ulti- mate Reality. John Hick, a contemporary advocator of a broadly Kantian strategy on religious diversity holds that there are indeed genuine differences and at least apparent incompatibilities among the claims of different religious communities.
He divides these differences into three categories: incompatibilities with respect to historical matters, quasi-historical or trans-historical matters, and the ways of conceiving and experiencing religious beliefs. Hick holds that these incompatibilities that different religions claim are not important in religious regards.
Hick describes the Real in terms of the following functions:. Hick, : Muhammed Legenhausen has argued that in the Qur'an we have a pluralist position that tries to explain contradictions, better than Hick does:.
Various means to resolve the contradictions are suggested in the Qur'an itself. See: , , It is also claimed that what was revealed to the different prophets was the same, so that contradictions among creeds must be due to content apart from what was revealed. See: , , , Religious differences are generally explained in the Qur'an as having arisen from sin: from pride in the partial truth each of the different groups has possessed and form envy.
See: , , , Legenhausen, : According to Qur'an, God ordained other religions by means of His prophets prior to His final revelation.
However, the teaching of Judaism and Christianity were not incorrect. They were different paths towards God in different circumstances. For this reason, all of the divine religions are called Islam in the general sense of complete submission to the com- mands of Allah.
While Muhammdian Islam used for the final revelation which is a specific sense of Islam. This seems to articulate an exclusivist position but some theologians interpreted the verse as a form of Islamic pluralism and remarked that by Islam here meant the general sense of complete submission to the commands of Al- lah; so all of the divine religions are called Islam. Since the tradition we are most familiar with is Islam, we shall draw our arguments from that tradition, though it must be emphasized that most of the other religions have an equally strong com- mitment to a unity transcending the boundaries of class, community and creed.
The fact that the primary purpose of Islam is to achieve the unity of humankind is clearly enunciated in the Qur'an itself. The Qur'an says that this was the truth that was revealed to Abraham and to Noah and to Moses and to Jesus. In fact, it makes it very clear that every community on earth has received this universal truth. In the words of the Qur'an, there is not a nation but a warner has passed among them And what is this universal truth? It is belief in God and doing good.
This is lucidly explained in a Qur'anic verse. And they say none shall enter paradise unless he is a Jew or a Christian, these are their vain wishes. Say 'Bring your proof if you are truthful; yes! Whosoever submits himself to Allah and he is a doer of good, for him there shall be his reward with his Lord, on such shall be no fear nor shall they grieve.
The Jews say. Thus do those who know not [I. But Allah will Judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which they used to differ. While the Qur'an is opposed to sectarianism, it accepts that there are different ways of reaching the universal truth. Had God willed He could have made you one community.
But that He may try you by that which He hath given you. According to the Qur'an, revelation is universal, so God sent a revelation to all human beings and the main message of all revelations was one thing and it was monotheism. My father does not know I am a deist. If he knew, I fear he might prevent my little sister from having a graduate degree. I didn't ask God to create me, so God cannot ask anything from me in return. I have a right to live as free as a bird.
Turkey's top religious cleric, the head of Religious Affairs Directorate Ali Erbas, has also denied the spread of deism and atheism among the country's conservative youth.
Theology professor Hidayet Aybar is also adamant that there is no such shift towards deism. It rejects Koran and it rejects the prophet. It rejects heaven and hell, the angels, and reincarnation. These are all pillars of Islam. Deism only accepts the existence of God," he says. According to deist philosophy, God created the universe and all its creatures but does not intervene in what has been created, and does not lay out rules or principles.
I used to be a public worker. After the attempted coup in , I was sacked. I used to be a religious, conservative young man who strongly supported the governing party and its policies. When I got sacked, I started questioning God. I became estranged. I do not categorise myself as a deist yet. I hope to rebuild my relationship with Islam, but I do not know whether that is possible any more.
Turkey's only atheism association believes Prof Aybar is wrong about the current trend and claims that even atheist imams exist. His grimace displayed his displeasure. My husband told me later that his father had an aversion to skirts and saw my wearing one as a personal affront.
He had an aversion to many things, it would turn out. I had decided to double-barrel my surname, but when my father-in-law saw my mail, his rage knew no bounds. She told me that only actors double-barrelled their names. Cowed, I gave in. I now understand that the psychological manipulation that followed was gaslighting: my in-laws began slowly eroding my confidence.
A few months in, I was cooking all the meals and cleaning the house. It is difficult to explain to someone who has never experienced emotional abuse how words can destroy a person. A few more months in, my eldest sister-in-law sat me down for a formal talk. I had little say in the matter. I have no doubt that he loved me, that he wanted to spend time with me. We went on beautiful holidays and he bought me lavish gifts, as well as small thoughtful trinkets.
I would go so far as to say he adored me. But there was another side to him, the side his parents would rile into a rage, and I would bear the brunt of it. They had a word with him just before leaving, following which he raged and spewed venom at me.
I remember dropping down the wall of the bathroom, unable to breathe, my foundation washing off into my hands. His sister came to get me and I had to clean myself up and go to the wedding, where he was suddenly apologetic and loving. Exhausted and empty, I accepted his apology. His parents would wind him up like a clockwork toy with great regularity. I remember sitting by a pool in Morocco, watching helplessly as he sobbed.
Their list of petty issues grew. In the winter of , I visited my parents for Eid. My husband rang and something in his tone told me all was not well.
He said he wanted me to apologise to his youngest sister, the sister to whom I had given a Christian Dior compact before I left, the sister I had hugged, whom I treated as my own. But she needed an apology.
She was upset about the way I had spoken to her in front of my cousin. I refused, telling him it was none of his business. He shouted. I refused again. Maybe it was because I was home, safe with my parents, or maybe I had taken all I could bear. Whatever it was, I was done.
And so I applied for khula, the Islamic form of divorce that is granted when a woman wishes to leave her husband. Seated in a small room in the mosque, my parents beside me, and my husband and his father in front, I asked for a divorce. There is a misconception that Islam does not allow a woman the right to divorce her husband.
This lie is spread and made powerful by the halting of the education of girls and women by men, by cultural stigma, and by the mullahs who want to maintain power. It was the first time I had felt such resolve. A stunned expression spread across his face. He had assumed me to be weak, that a woman who was divorced once would be oppressed and beaten into submission, that I would do anything to avoid the shame again.
They had taken my kindness for weakness. But I knew what it meant to be happy, and I knew I deserved better. Outwardly, I merged my eastern and western wardrobes, mixing kurtas with jeans and shawls. Inwardly, I stopped giving a damn about gossip.
0コメント