Yesterday I was having a bit of discussion with a member on how we conduct ourselves in the Religion Forum, and the reason why I stopped coming here as much as I used to. And then I remembered that at one time I had posted a similar thing in this forum (it was Oct 25, 2000). So, here it is again. I hope it is relevant and useful for members, even today. The purpose is not to criticize anyone, but just to allow us to step back and take a look and see who are we and where are we going. This was written at a time, when this forum was full of shia-sunni fightings.
=== Original article ===
People can here for different reasons. Lets see what sort of person we are. Are we
A. Preaching,
B. Fighting,
C. Learning, or
D. Discussing
All of these have different etiquettes and characteristics.
A.. A preacher must be soft spoken, and convince the audience by his actions as much as by his words, his information and his logic. He’s is not there to be convinced himself. He is authoritative in information and knows when to give up and move on to another audience (and another topic). He is not there to fight. He will never hurt his audience by his words or actions. He listens as much as he talks. He first seeks to understand than be understood. He is there as a messanger, who delivers his message and pray for help from the Almighty in convincing the other person. They always remember that providing the information alone will not convince the other person, rather the will of the Almighty must be there to guide the deviated person. For them, Iqbal wrote “Nigah-e-mard-e-momin say badal ja’tee hain taqdeerain”.
B. A fighter comes in with rolled up sleeves (figuratively speaking); with information as his shield and words as his sword. Their misson is to slay the opponent and cry “Victory”. Else they run away (saying “You are deviated. No one can cure you”). They treat every topic as jehad. They think that every other participant is deficient in knowledge and hence, take it as their God-given responsibility to rectify the “wrong” beliefs. Some of them feel totally defensive about their own beliefs and have “aggression is the best defence” as their motto.
C. Those who are here to learn, look at a topic, do their research and ‘paste’ the opinion of a scholar whom they feel they can trust. They are the ones who ask questions and try to satisfy themselves as to what is the correct approach. They feel they are learning all the time. Mostly are one-liner types, who use
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/ok.gif
and
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif
a lot.
D. The last category is the ones who feel they are mature enough to remain loyal to their own beliefs and at the same time try to get better insight into the beliefs of other people. They are not here to do holy war, rather they are here to present their own beliefs and get into the minds of the others to understand how the other is thinking. They feel they can distinguish between truth and a lie. Keep a level head, not be ruffled by attacks and may try to deflect criticism with wit and humour. They also think they know when to keep quiet.
None of these categories work in isolation. Each of us probably has a little of everything. But the trait that dominates most makes us either a preacher or a fighter; a student or a mature person. Many ppl change their traits, but once a person is labled a 'fighter; then it is quite difficult for him to become a ‘preacher’.
What is maturity? It is not that you have attained a certain age or have complete information about your beliefs and feel confident about your abilities. To me, maturity means the tact to talk to people in a way that you gain insight in how they think and then to present your opinion in a way that convinces rather than incites.
Remember, each of us feel passionate about things close to our hearts, religion is one of them. We always feel we are right in our beliefs and those who disagree are deviated/ignorant/kaffir/non-believers. This is a dangerous attitude as it makes us close our mind. Again, first seek to understand and then be understood.
Then again we should remember that there are somethings which are suitable to certain surroundings.
For example if a shia lamblasts a sahabi in a majlis, he will be revered and appreciated and there will be those who will cry “Ya Ali Madad” and “Nara-e-Takbeer” in devotion and appreciation. However, the same utterations in a neutral surrounding will cause other participants to say “Lets kick him out of here!”. Similarly when a sunni presents his research on the deviations of shia madhab to his group of friends, they might praise him for his effort and knowledge. In a neutral surrounding, he may get a “warning for inciting trouble”.
Now tell me, out of the above 4 broad categories, which one fits you the most?
PS. The above categories are to emphasize the purpose of this forum. Those who have the intelligence will understand without being told.