|
|
A proposito delle
"vignette"
FAX - 17/9/2006
A proposito delle “vignette”
La chiarezza di Magdi Allam va incoraggiata in tutti
modi:esprime quello che molti pensano ma pochi dicono ad alta
voce; ragione per la quale è sotto tiro proprio da parte di
quelli che si sentono in colpa: sono i musulmani che negano il
dato di fatto storico e che ignorano il contenuto spirituale del
corano. La storia continua a ripetersi. A mio parere soltanto un
ferma presa di posizione del proprio convincimento culturale e
dell’identità propria ci faranno rispettare da i nostri
“avversari”. Senza tentennamenti e senza scuse. Anzi, sono
convinto che molti intellettuali dei paesi arabi avrebbero
sottoscritto le verità storiche dichiarate dal papa Ratzinger,
ma non possono farlo apertamente: non tutti hanno la voglia di
vivere sotto scorta.
In conclusione: da ricordare che il papa è a capo di uno stato
con relazioni diplomatiche con quasi tutti gli stati del mondo,
la sua struttura diplomatica dovrebbe pretendere da i rispettivi
governi le pubbliche smentite da parte dei predicatori di odio
che hanno aizzato gli animi contro persone inerme e infangato un
capo di stato minacciandolo di morte. farlo sapere.
Domando: a) quale è stato l'atteggiamento dei nostri politici
europei? B) quale interesse avrebbe avuto il prestigioso New
York Times ad accendere il fuoco?
La verità della storia
Articolo coraggioso che mette in risalto l’ignoranza di molti
personaggi che fanno dichiarazioni che infiammano i popoli
semplicemente sul sentito dire oppure senza approfondire i
pensieri basandosi sui titoli dei giornali. Almenoche alcuni in
malafede vogliano farsi scudo di qualsiasi pretesto per erigersi
a detentore della verità. Sarebbe interessante conoscere le
reazioni dei media arabi sul rifiuto della motivazione religiosa
della violenza. Mi auspico che le apprensioni di Magdi Allam non
si realizzino.
Propongo di dare risalto sul Corriere a queste reazioni da parte
degli intellettuali musulmani che fanno audience:
“E mi spaventa constatare che anche i cosiddetti musulmani
moderati hanno rinunciato al senno della ragione e si siano
allineati alla "guerra santa" di cui loro saranno le principali
vittime”.
Grazie
Domenica 1 ottobre 2006, 20.30
Dear Galal:
I have received the article you sent me from Chief al azhar
which I read while in Egypt. While in Egypt i read regularly al
Ahram and the daily comments from moslem intellectuals about the
speech of Pope Benedict XVI's.
A day later this week I was struck by Mohamed Salmawy comment
of, I did not keep the papers, that he found writers of high
profile who wrote their attacks on the Pope based on “entendu
dire” or on extracts from other journals. None of them read the
original text fully! I found that very childish and a
superficial way to educate the readers, knowing how students and
others are influenced by religious leaders.
Galal, I am not familiar with theology, esegesi or philosophy,
neither is English my mother tongue, but I am able though to
summarize my understanding of the Pope speech as follows:
The context of the speech is high academical; free to express
his opinion although not acceptable to many people but still
free to express his belief without fear of retaliation. Although
he subsequently explained in simpler words his thinking, he
received increased attacks from “offended” Islam: threats,
demonstrations, burning in effigy, governments demanding
retractions, the recall of ambassadors, churches burned, a
religious sister killed, arab Christians denigrated, examples
are numerous, etc… .
This freedom of expression is repeatedly retaliated by the arab
world under the cover of “religious offense” and mobs moved by
national institutions, leaders etc. only too glad to find a
pretext to accuse somebody else for their own weaknesses.
I did not find in al ahram or publicity made to the explanations
given by the pope to the ambassadors from the arableague, except
that al ahram cited the council of ulemas as still requiring and
excuse.
In reality, a major part of Benedict XVI’s lecture was addressed
to the Christian world, which in his view are so have lost the
“fear of God.” But here as well the pope’s words found their
confirmation in the facts. Hand in hand with the swell of verbal
and physical violence on the part of Muslims, on the other side,
the pope was the target of criticism from Christian area.
Freedom of creed and religious practice and adherence:
this does not exist in the Arabic world, except in Lebanon. All
citizens have not the same rights and duties under one country
law: non Moslems have a different legal treatment, I add, same
between women and men.
During my attendance in Cairo at the world Conference on
population in 1994, the Vatican had closer views on bioethics
and family values with Moslem representatives rather with the
Occident countries. Links between Christian and Moslem leaders
started to be tight and no offence is intended. It is
unfortunate that no moslem leader speak high against violences
perpetrated on the basis of religion when such is being
perpetrated.
Killing in the name of Allah is another point raised by
the pope . The dialogue with Islam that he wants to create is
not made of fearful silences and ceremonial embraces. It is not
made of mortifications which, in the Muslim camp, are
interpreted as acts of submission. He proposes to the Muslims
that they separate violence from faith, as prescribed by the
Qur’an itself.
He proposes to the Muslims that they separate violence from
faith, as prescribed by the Qur’an itself; John Paul II, who
prayed humbly in Assisi together Muslim mullahs, and when
visiting the Umayyad mosque in Damascus listened in silence to
the invectives his hosts hurled against the perfidious Jews. No
fatwa was issued for the slitting of Karol Wojtyla’s throat. It
was a mere coincidence that Ali Agca, who shot him, was a Muslim
– and that all terrorists as I call them are Moslem. Although
they do not represent islam of course, but disclaimers by
religious leaders are not being publicized, that I know.
Reason and religious belief: this covers a large part of
the conference but I am not in a position to discuss as outside
my intellectual capacity
I submit a comment I read that “Benedict XVI is hopeful. He
would not have been so daring if he did not believe in the real
possibility that an interpretation of the Qur’an that marries
faith with reason and freedom can be reopened within Islamic
thought. (reading Qoran in today’s context) But the voices in
the Muslim world that are accepting his offer of dialogue are
too weak and too few, and almost not to be found. And the pope
is too much alone in a wayward Europe. And then there is the
violence that hangs over Christians in Islamic countries, and
also outside of them – when, to silence the pope, members of his
flock are killed, and all the better if they are innocent, like
a religious sister, a woman.”
Dear Galal :
I am grateful to yr mail as it obliged me to reflect and to
think over a major problem of this century. But people like us
who know rather well both sides of the Mediterranean sea can
help to eliminate the misunderstandings. I am convinced that the
core of the spirit of the Pope, other than the philosophy, could
be summarized into a friendly voice to Moslem leaders to
exchange opinion with full reciprocal respect about:
freedom to express his opinion, Freedom of creed and
religious practice and adherence, bioethics and family values,
Killing in the name of Allah no offence is being intended.
Please feel free to circulate this message to whom you think
useful and also to the writers mentioned in this message.
As a conclusion I report what M.Salmawy has written:
L’essentiel n’est pas de savoir si un fou ou non a commis les
attentats d’Alexandrie. Le fou est une personne qui laisse libre
cours à ses pulsions déraisonnables. Mais malheureusement, les
motifs malades qui ont conduit le criminel à commettre son acte
ne sont pas propres à lui. Ils sont répandus chez les membres de
notre société, enracinés par l’enseignement religieux vétuste,
enseigné de longues années et cristallisé par la suite par nos
médias ignorants. Tout ceci a été confirmé par l’actuel message
religieux vétuste de notre institution religieuse. Agirons-nous
différemment cette fois-ci, ou nous contenterons-nous, une fois
de plus, d’arrêter le criminel et de dire qu’il est
déséquilibré, pour finalement classer l’affaire ? Comme toujours
|
 |
