“True” and “False” is easier to determine in science than in ethics. If we disagree on the color of snow, whether white or red, then it is easy to reach to the correct unique answer (i.e., White) by showing snow physically, which brings down any dispute.
This simplistic solution is difficult to reach in ethics. Dispute about meta-physical, intangible issues is difficult to settle. Can I say –and gurantee the correctness of my saying- something is “good” and something is “bad” or something is true and something is false, or something is virtue and something is vice? Can I raise my voice saying something is “just” and something is “injustice”?
Plat in his Republic has a simple solution to this ethical problem. State dictates what is just and what is unjust, what is good and what is evil. Utopian state of Plato says: “one woman can be shared by many men” and it becomes –without questioning- just.
Quran tells us the story of Pharaoh with Moses. Pharaoh raised his voice –as if the sole reference which dictates ethical standards- and says:
Fir'aun (Pharaoh) said: "I show you only that which I see (correct), and I guide you only to the path of right policy!" [40:29]
So, Pharaoh –much earlier than Plato or Machiavelli- made it clear that he alone is the Grand Mufti when it comes to deciding which is ethical and which is not ethical. Once, this verdict was made clear, then he had no problem in passing the following fatwa:
"Leave me to kill Mûsa (Moses), and let him call his Lord (to stop me from killing him)! I fear that he may change your religion, or that he may cause mischief to appear in the land!" [40:26]
Pharaoh was a leading example for all those Pharoahs who came afterwards, till we have today George W. Bush. Bush has made it ethical to invade Iraq. Erratically, he initially tried to justify this decision using physical and tangible argument which can easily be verified for truthfulness or falsehood (i.e., Weapons of Mass Destruction).
If this ethical question is a difficult one in the arena of philosophy, it is not difficult under Islam. We do not have problem in reaching to a solution to an ethical question, and reach to unique answer with full satisfaction, that our answer is correct. We submit to the authentic information we receive from Quran or Hadith. To reach to conclusion in ethical issues based on the verdict of Allah and His messenger, and afterwards we submit from the innermost heart. If the people of Plato’s Utopia, or People of Pharaoh or People of Bush, decided to take the ethical decisions of their state and leader for granted, then we Muslims feel proud that we take the decision of Allah and Prophet Muhammad alone to be for-granted. Indeed, huge difference between the two groups.
But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you (O Muhammad (peace be upon him)) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission. [4:65]
Filter
No comments...
Write Comment
Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
Please don't use comments to plug your web site.. Such material will be removed
Do not become weak (against your enemy), nor be sad, and you will be superior (in victory) if you are indeed (true) believers. [Quran aal-Imran (3):139]
