In the present day world, agenda-setting
is for the most part done by
the mass media. They have been the primary
agency to raise issues and
provide the forum to discuss issues. More
important, they determine what
issues are to be raised and when, what
issues are relevant, what issues
to be focused upon and discussed. By raising
and focusing on some issues
while deliberately ignoring others, they
help influence the thinking of
the people.
Much of what the world thinks of Islam
and Muslims today may be traced
to how the western media exploited the
all too critical agenda setting
function to portray them since the Khomenian
Revolution of February
1979. Their portrayal becomes all too
crucial in view of the fact that
except for the western media networks,
there is almost no alternative
source which the consumer could turn to
for his daily diet of hard news
and news analyses. And as Edward Said
has pointed out (as have several
research studies), the major western media
networks tend to reflect in
their news coverage, news presentation
and news perspectives the global
strategic interests of their respective
nations.
It is therefore not too surprising that
if only to give point and force
to the collective and cumulative western
hostile posturing to the
overthrow of "their man" and the rise
of a homegrown Islamic revolution
in Iran, the western media tried to present
Islam and reported the
Muslim world in the most negative strains.
Thus Islam became militant,
intolerant, retrogressive, out of tune
with the modern spirit and
requirements, and Muslims fanatics, fundamentalists,
terrorists and what
not.
The ubiquity and persistence of the western
media propaganda for the
past eighteen years have obviously made
dents, in some measure, even, in
the thinking of the Muslims themselves.
This is chiefly because we are
not too conversant with our own ethos,
with the core Islamic teachings
and with its overriding spirit.
A glance at the core tenets and precepts
of Islam would indicate that it
is almost the opposite of what it is portrayed
to be in the western
media, that it is rational, human, peace-loving,
tolerant and
accommodative. As is well known, the core
teachings of Islam is
encapsulated by the doctrine of Tawhid
— i.e., the Oneness and Unity of
God. It means loyalty only to Allah, not
to any man, not to the throne,
not to the powers that be. This principle
demands loyalty only to
certain spiritual values rather than to
the artificial bonds of blood,
race, color or country. Thus, the conception
of Tawhid envisages the
dignity of man.
In that principle, Islam also denies the
potential or actual power of
any other being or thing, and in so doing
Islam affirms the principle of
human freedom. The criterion of Taqwa
(righteousness) for evaluating an
individual's status in society reinforces
this principle. So does the
conception of the finality of prophethood,
"an ideal unique in the
history of all human religious development."
It lifted the dead weight
of blind allegiance to authority (whether
religious or temporal), and
restored to man his native power of thinking
and judging for himself; it
bestowed on man the freedom to devise
measures in the light of the
Quranic teachings and his own dynamism
and initiative to meet the ever
new situations and requirements of the
future.
To consider all mankind to be a single
people is, above all, a human
approach, and this is the Quranic approach.
The humankind is sought to
be united not on the basis of any divisive
and narrow criteria, but on
the basis of certain universally acclaimed
basic moral and spiritual
values which anyone can own up without
let or hindrance, despite any
racial, colour, linguistic or geographical
disabilities. The concept of
human brotherhood in Islam also stems
from a human approach. Likewise,
the Allah is Rabb al-Alimin and Prophet
Muhammad is Rahmatul-al-alimin:
they belong to the entire mankind, and
not to Muslims alone.
It is a measure of Islam's universalism
and liberalism that it claims no
originality for its core principle of
Tawhid. Rather it is claimed to be
a continuity of revelation. Says the Quran,
"We believe / In God, and in
what / Has been revealed to us / And to
What was revealed / To Abrahim,
Ismail / Issac, Jacob, and the Tribes,
/ And in (the Books) / Given to
Moses, Jesus, / And the Prophets, / From
their Lord: / We make no
distinction / Between one another / Among
them, and to God do we / Bow
our will (In Islam)." (3:84). And since
Islam rejects the concept of a
chosen people, it does not restrict salvation
to the Muslims, but
includes within its ambit all those who
do "good deeds" (Amal-i-Salih):
"Those who believe and those who are the
Jews and the Christian and the
Sabians — whoever believes in God and
the Last Day and does good works —
they have their reward with God, and no
fear shall come on them nor
shall they grieve." (al-Quran, 5:72) Such
a religion can by no standards
be termed intolerant. Indeed, Islam is
a faith that is based on
persuasion rather than compulsion: "Let
him who will, believe, and let
him who will, reject (it)" (al-Quran,
18:29). Indeed, the Quran
categorically lays down that there should
be "no compulsion in
religion". (2:256)
Furthermore, Islam exhorts its followers
to resolve differences through
debate and discussion, and not through
sheer force. Nor should bigotry
and intransigence inform such discussions
— not only amongst themselves,
but also in their dealings with other
communities. Islam also rejects
the culture of enmity, violence and terrorism,
and of aggression against
human beings.
Indeed, safeguarding of human life is one
of the fundamental principles
of Islam, and it considers an attack on
a human person as an attack on
humanity as a whole. Moreover, the Qur'an
considers enmity as a mere
passing phenomenon: "it may be that God
will grant love (and friendship)
between you and those whom you (now) hold
as enemies. For God has power
(over all things); and God is oft-forgiving.
Most Merciful" (60:7).
Thus, in Islam, peace is the rule rather
than an exception. It permits
war only in case of aggression, "but if
the enemy inclines towards
peace, you should also incline towards
peace, and trust in God"
(al-Quran, 8:61). Again: "But if they
cease let there be no hostility
except to those who practise oppression"
(al-Quran, 2:193). Thus the
faithful are commanded to respond positively
to any peace initiatives.
More important, these edicts were strictly
followed in early Islamic
history. To it the charter of Madina and
the charter given to the
Christians of Najran bear testimony; so
does the conquest of Makkah in
632 A.D. On this last occasion it was
laid down that no unarmed person
or those taking refuge in a place of worship
should be harmed nor any
place of worship or private home violated.
Indeed, it was a bloodless
conquest.
During his life-time, the Prophet (PBUH)
sanctified religious tolerance
by word and deed. Consider, for instance,
what he wrote to Abul Haris,
and Christian priest and the accredited
representative of the Christians
of Najrans. Inter alia, it read as follows:
"In the name of God, most Gracious, most
compassionate.
>From Mohammad the Prophet to Bishop Abul
Haris and other
Bishops of Najran and Priests and Monks
and Padres and their
slaves and men and servants. "Everything
big or small which is
in their hands is under the protection
of God and His Prophet.
"No Bishops shall be sent away from their
Bishoprics, nor
Monks from their Monasteries nor Padres
from their churches.
"And of their rights not one shall be
interfered with. "Nor their
Government, nor the conditions under which
they live. "This
Agreement shall have the sanction of Allah
and His Prophet
as long as the Christians do not turn
on their heels and substitute
tyranny for their covenants." "Najran
and its outskirts are in
the protection of God. "And on Mohammad
the Prophet is the
responsibility for the protection of their
persons and their
religion; for their lands and property:
their visible and invisible
rights; their families and followers.
"No Bishop shall be removed
from His Bishopric, no monk from His Monastery,
no Padre
from His Parish. "If anyone seeks justice
against them he shall
have justice so that they shall be neither
the oppressors nor the
oppressed. "No one from amongst them shall
be apprehended for
the wrong deeds of others. "And behind
whatever is contained in
this document is the sanction of Allah
and His Prophet until
God's will prevails."
Not only in early Islam but also down the
centuries the Muslim rulers
generally followed these edicts. Nothing
dramatizes the tolerance of
Muslim rulers versus the intolerance of
non-Muslim rulers as the seizure
of Jerusalem by the Romans and the Crusaders
in 1099 A.D., and its
recapture by Sultan Salahuddin in 1187
A.D. When the Crusaders invaded
Jerusalem, thousands of Jews and Arabs
were slaughtered including about
10,000 Muslims who had fled to the al-Aqsa
mosque for sanctuary, while
Salahuddin had ordered his troops to spare
the unarmed and those taking
refuge in a place of worship, and not
to violate any place of worship or
private home.
In view of the above, is it too much to
claim that Islam promotes a
"culture of tolerance", not in the seventh-century
but even in the
present twentieth-century terms, that
it believes in co-existence?
