The question? How do warring gatherings with comparative ethnic foundations, however oppositely restricted belief systems, quit loathing and butchering each other? The pessimistic expressions of the American exile author who lived in Paris in the early part of the twentieth century keep on resonating: “There ain’t no reply. There ain’t going to be any reply. There never has been a reply. That is the reply.”- Gertrude Stein 1936.
In a past article on hiding any hint of failure face I proposed that representatives take a stab at exchanging focal points with their alternate extremes keeping in mind the end goal to better comprehend each other. We in the West regularly say “place yourself in the other person’s shoes,” which is truly a misrepresentation.
Arbitrators should live inside each other’s heads and hearts-with all the religious authoritative opinion and verifiable stuff such an attempt involves. There are various depictions of religious beliefs. I picked the least difficult I could discover for three of them.
1. Islam: A monotheistic religion described by the acknowledgment of the standards of Muhammad, the last prophet of God and whose statutes are contained in the Koran. (The prophet Ibrahim, whose child is called Ismail, assumes a key part in Islam.)