該文提到ㄧ個教法觀點，“tawaqquf” (توقف 非立即給與承諾)。當教法學者面對許多證據並列，但無法立即決定何者正確時，不需要對特定議題立即表態，直到找到更有說服力的證據。文中另提到對百科全書式的名嘴看法。（名嘴到最後可能也不知道他們在講什麼！？）
＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
By Salman
Al-Oadah
Saudi scholar
Friday, 17 February 2012 13:57
Neutrality is something we should
cultivate as one of our good values.
It stems from a will for
balance, an acceptance of plurality, a practical spirit, and a desire to avoid
taking sides with anyone without having all the facts.
Our
Predecessors' Era
Our pious predecessors had a special way
of expressing their neutrality. They would say: “I don’t know.”
Indeed, some of them went so far as to declare:
“Half of all knowledge is to say: ‘I don’t know’.” Or: “Whoever abandons saying
‘I don’t know’ has put his knowledge in peril.”
Another way they expressed
their neutrality was to say: “Allah knows best.” In
this way, they defer knowledge to the One who truly knows all.
Scholars of Islamic theology and Islamic
legal theory have a technical term for it: “tawaqquf”
(non-commitment). This is the stance taken when various lines of evidence lead
in equally compelling directions so that the scholar or jurist is unable – or
too cautious – to determine which is more likely to be correct. This
stance of non-commitment is not a final resolution, but a provisional stance
that can be abandoned in the face of further evidence.
The Caliph `Umar, while preaching from
the pulpit, admitted he was unsure what the meaning of the word abb
meant in the verse: {And fruits and abb (fodder)} (Abasa
80: 31) The same thing was related from his predecessor Abu Bakr. Indeed,
nearly every scholar from every era has gone on record with a stance of
non-commitment on a number of questions, or with simply refusing to express an
opinion on certain matters.
Indeed, once a man approached Prophet
Muhammad (peace be upon him) and said:
“O Messenger of Allah! Which country is
most beloved to Allah?” The Prophet replied: “I will not know until I ask
Gabriel (peace be upon him).”
Thereafter, Gabriel came to the Prophet and
informed him: “The most beloved places to Allah are the mosques, and the most
disliked are the markets.” (Musnad Ahmad)
Our Situation Today
In stark contrast to this behavior, we find most people today willing to speak glibly and prattle
on about every issue, whether or not they have knowledge about it. They
seem to be aware that their opinions hold no real value, sometimes taking
diametrically opposite positions to others just for spite.
Moreover, their understanding the issues
or having solid background knowledge is no prerequisite for speaking. They might completely misconstrue the matter they are criticizing,
since they simply do not have the depth of understanding to grasp the matter
precisely or to properly critique the evidence and arguments that bear upon it.
The current proliferation of the media
encourages the general public to engage in such behavior to an unprecedented
level. People today regard a person’s silence or “no comment” as a sign of
weakness and low self-esteem. The social pressure to have an opinion is too
great, regardless of the topic, whether it be a matter of practical religious
teachings, theology, politics, economics, or what have you.
In such a climate, it does not matter
what opinion one holds today or tomorrow. No one is keeping track of all the
hubbub, so no one is going to be able to point out anyone else’s inconsistencies.
At the same time, every issue seems to polarize people
for the duration of its popularity. Everybody is identified with one camp, or
one faction, or another. You are either “with” them or “against” them.
People then waste huge amounts of time, energy, and resources in refuting each
other, even though those who are so earnestly engaged in it have at best a
superficial knowledge of the issues.
The issues themselves come and go. Some
discussion gets started that you expect to pass by without much bother. Then
you see it being talked about everywhere. People become obsessed with it,
preoccupied with it as if it was the only issue of importance in the world.
They make friends and enemies of their acquaintances on account of it. Then all
of the sudden, you hear no more about it. Something else has come along to
occupy their attention and that issue is completely forgotten. This leaves you
to wonder what they gained from all the time, effort, and emotional investment
they gave the matter.
What is worse, when the issue is a
religious one, people seek support from the sacred texts to back up their
opinions. Then they convince themselves of their righteousness of the
unwavering correctness of their stance. They mistake their interpretations to
be the indisputable world of Allah.
I once observed that some right-wing extremists in the West
say “You are either with us or against us.” However, some Muslim
extremists say what’s worse: “You are either with us or against Allah!”
When will we return to respecting
ourselves, others, and the values that we believe in? We should not abuse
everything we hold dear by employing it to score in our arguments. Even when we
have a valid point to make, there is no need to
exaggerate our argument to the level of a clash between ultimate truth and
falsehood.
This is a far cry from the cautious
neutrality favored by our Pious Predecessors.
Source: Islam Today - http://islamtoday.com
沒有留言:
張貼留言