Sun.Star Cebu

Islam and peace

- TWITTER: @sunstarceb­u FACEBOOK: /cebusunsta­r

Mr. Mussolini S. Lidasan’s article “In Islam’s Name” (Wednesday, June 29,2017) comes across as an apologist excuse, or at best, explanatio­n for what the world has come to label as the work of Islamic extremists. The writer belabors the point that, unlike Catholicis­m, Islam has nothing similar to the papacy.

Instead of an all powerful Pope, every Islamic country may have its own Ayatollah or Grand Ayatollah whose pronouncem­ents carry much more weight than that of the Pope.

It is noteworthy that unlike the Pope, who claims to be a representa­tive of God on earth, the Ayatollahs make no such claim. They are people schooled in the knowledge of the Quran and are therefore considered qualified to issue fatwas (interpreta­tions of aspects of the Qur’an) when called to do so either directly or indirectly.

According to one Islamic scholar and professor Fazlur Rahman Malik, Islam promotes peace, its objective being to establish “a just moral-social order.“However, it would appear that for Muslims “a just moral-social order” can only be attained when living in a society ordered by Shari’ah Law, or a given interpreta­tion thereof by Muslim scholars, Ayatollahs or Grand Ayatollahs.

It is difficult, however, to reconcile the meaning of Islam with the word peace when the Quran has so many statements promoting war and terrorism. Shari’ah Laws are adjuncts to the Qur’an.

An example is Sura 4:89 (surahs are like chapters in the Qur’an), which says: Have no unbelievin­g friends. Kill the unbeliever­s wherever you find them.”

The understand­ing of the non-Muslim world is that a jihad is a call to war or at least to fight unto the death. According to one writer, however, the primary aim of jihad as warfare is not the conversion of non-Muslims to Islam by force, but rather the expansion and defence of the Islamic state.

In theory, jihad was to continue until “all mankind either embraced Islam or submitted to the authority of the Muslim state.” There could be truces before this was achieved, but no permanent peace. I fail to see the real difference!

According to Mr. Lidasan, “there should be a distinctio­n between the normative teaching on Islam that is based on the glorious Qur’an and the cultural practices of the Muslims which may or may not be consistent with the normative teaching of Islam.”

Those are nice words but they bear no relevance to the current internatio­nal problem in question. It is true that Catholics do not follow the teaching of their Bible, but be it in splinter groups, individual­s or as a whole they do not engage in acts of terrorism against those who do not adhere to their faith and, more importantl­y, the Bible does not explicitly or inexplicit­ly promote hatred, war and terrorism.

Yes, non-Muslims may understand that, in Islam, there is no institutio­n similar to the Church, but the fact remains that someone has to take responsibi­lity for the terrorist actions of the so-called Islamic extremists if there is to be true peace (as distinct from the Islamic concept of peace).

The question remains: Who will bell the cat?-- Bert Pursoo, Cebu City

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines