The great German philosopher Emmanuel Kant objected to Abraham's sacrifice, saying that when Jehovah God told Abraham to sacrifice his dearest thing to me, Abraham did not obey God's command by holding a knife. We should have asked God: O God! Why are you putting me to the test? You are the Knower, the Knower of all things, so why this trial?
Abraham's act of stabbing his son Isaac or Ishmael in the neck with a sharp knife is an immoral act in Kant's view of human beings. And only a short-sighted, mentally ill person can do that. Abraham had fulfilled his obligation to God by stabbing his own son in the neck, but he had deviated from his obligation to mankind by not questioning God. It would not be out of place to call it a great crime of humanity.
Another philosopher, Derrida, in his book The Gift of Death, echoes Kant's point. And giving priority to human support, he says that if a prophet had asked God not to put me to this test, it would have been a great favor to his humanity. Derrida's argument is that the fulfillment of responsibility on the one hand is possible only on the condition of irresponsibility on the part of the other. Either you keep God or you keep humanity. And if Abraham had been a shrewd and far-sighted prophet, innocent and speechless animals would not be sacrificed today in the name of a futile and barbaric ritual. Whenever humanity reaches its ascension, the slaughter of animals, which has been going on for thousands of years, will be imposed on Hazrat Ibrahim. And he will be called a mental patient instead of a kind father.
No comments:
Post a Comment