|
With respect to the perception of truth,
disagreement is an ancient phenomenon in
the intellectual history of mankind. The
belief that Truth is one does not detract
from the possibility that how it is arrived
at is a matter open to everyone, each to
pursue within his or her social and intellectual
means. This pursuit however, should not
be to serve selfish or particularistic ends.
We must take cognizance of the fact that
our intellectual life is based on an exchange
of opinions, ideas that vary and often reflect
distinct cultural, sociological, psychological
and intellectual influences.
This diversity surely leads to differences
in perspective, differences in understanding
and naturally to some disagreement. Differences
of opinion are inevitable wherever people
possess intellect and honesty.
Accepting differences
When analyzing our history, it
appears obvious that advanced and intellectually
'honest societies were able to profit from
disagreement precisely because diversity
fosters variety and thus a myriad of potentialities.
Civilized individuals respect other people
and therefore have the tendency to respect
the opinions of others.
Those who are ethically impoverished, emotionally
overcharged and intellectually barren, have
an inclination to be so dogmatic as to use
differences of opinion as a barrier between
themselves and others with whom they differ,
often leading to disputes that cause disrespect
for others and of others.
It is only gross ignorance and egoism that
leads any person to blasphemously believe
that there is no room for disputing his
or her opinion.
It is unfortunate that this inability to
accept and respect other people's opinion
is so deep rooted in our socio-political
environment that it is often considered
part of religiosity.
Many religious leaders, organizations and
institutions seem not to have rid themselves
of that destructive and predictable legacy
of desiring to be contentious rather than
conciliatory.
Moderation
Balance and moderation are not
only supposed to be inherent characteristics
of true Believers, they are fundamental
landmarks of Islam. Allah says: "Thus
have We made you an Ummah justly balanced,
that you may be a testimony to the world
community". (Q002:143)
The lack of moderation often manifests
itself through harshness in treatment of
people, arrogance in attitude, roughness
in manner and crudeness in expression. The
communicative method of those who are immoderate
tends to be abusive, always criticizing,
sermonizing or even berating others well
past the point of legitimate communication
and disregarding the moral obligation of
respect. Their communication transgresses
a reasonable attempt to inform or even persuade
-- it becomes a harangue. It is as if the
speaker is engaged in a campaign to beat
those, who differ with him into submission
rather than simply convey a point of view,
pummeling them with repetitive opinion,
complaints or demands. And if the desired
response is not given the speaker simply
restates the point more loudly or aggressively.
Telling one of these ardently opinionated
people that their position has been heard,
understood and considered, rarely stops
the onslaught. The only way such people
will believe that their point is understood
is if everyone agrees with it. They can
become so self-righteous that they truly
believe disagreement with them is proof
of confusion, ignorance, stupidity, treachery,
hypocrisy or even kufr.
It is one thing to assert the primacy of
universal virtues like goodness and justice;
it is quite another to exclusively claim
the cloak of universal truth on opinions
dealing with matters on which knowledgeable
people disagree.
Differing as Muslims
in an un-Islamic manner
The Qur'an has declared the followers
of Prophet Muhammad as Ummatan Waahidah
(single global community), as Ikhwa (a
fraternity); and has distinctly warned against
infighting (Q008:046). It is ironic that
the present-day Muslim society often manifests
the very antithesis of these descriptions
and pays no heed to this warning.
| "My
opinion is correct but the possibility
of error exists." Imam Shafi'i
|
The vast majority of our internal battles
are as a consequence of dogmatism and narrowly
defined self interests. We have made that
universal and ever relevant Islam a source
and cause of major conflicts and infighting
over insignificant issues and turning minor
points of jurisprudence into major ideological
conflicts. Sadly, all of this is in the
holy name of Islam.
Betraying a noble
tradition
The Mujtahideen (experts in Islamic
Law) differed and disagreed yet maintained
a high regard for one another Imam Abu
Hanifah said, "If
it were not for the two years that I accompanied
Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq, I would have perished."
These exemplary scholars were neither self-righteous
nor dogmatic. When the Abbasid Caliph al-Mansur
expressed his intention of attaching Imam
Malik's Al-Muwatta to the Ka'bah and obliging
people to follow it, Imam Malik himself
opposed the idea saying people in different
parts of the Muslim world may have received
differering information. He urged the Caliph
al-Mansur to leave people to follow in accordance
with the knowledge they had received and
not to narrow down nor to limit that which
Allah and His Messenger have left without
bounds.
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal pleaded, "Do
not follow me nor Malik nor Shafi'i nor
Awzaai nor Thawri, rather take from the
source (Qur'an and Sunnah) from which we
have taken." The great jurist Imam
Shafi'i is reported to have said: "I
never argue with anyone without praying
that Allah may put the truth on the tongue
of that person." He also
said: "My opinion
is correct but the possibility of error
exists." The differing opinions
of great scholars and those well-versed
help to illuminate the multi-dimensions
of an issue and varying interpretations
bring about a degree of flexibility that
the law requires to meet the needs demanded
by the vicissitudes of ever-changing times.
Etiquette and
social interest
Problems usually arise due to
four main reasons:
- People overstate their differences.
- They attribute to themselves a degree
of infallibility and consider their opinion
to be the ultimate view, almost as if
God's revelation is merely a substantiation
of their perspective.
- Vested interests that cause people to
undermine others (particularly those who
are more successful than themselves or
to deflect criticism of their own shortcomings).
- When groups become excessively partisan
to one opinion over another.
As Muslims we need to realize that differing
does not necessarily imply opposing; that
within the broad spectrum of shared knowledge
and difference of opinion there is also
the uniting factor of mutual respect and
the greater interest of the community.
And Allah knows best.
|
