عنوان مقاله [English]
Is religious tolerance an intrinsic value or is it due to expediency and inevitability? Why a person or school of thought allow to tolerate when it considers itself right? One of the accusations made by some analysts of the history of religions, especially against the Abrahamic religions, is that religions are inherently agents of violence and have resorted to violence and coercion in pursuit of their goals. There is no doubt that some religions have resorted to this tool, but is it the essence of the Abrahamic religions or have some of their own adherents resorted to it? In examining the case of Christianity it is clear that there are some positive points in this religion regarding religious tolerance, but its history is full of violence and, toleration has only been practiced in the contemporary era, and this is a fundamental departure from Islam and the Islamic world. The influence of the "tradition" and policy and practice of the Prophet (PBUH) and Imams (AS) has formed tolerance in such a way that Muslim rulers more or less adhered to it over time, but this is not a denial of violent deviant currents in the Muslim world. As a global necessity and the most important means of peace and security in the world, it must take a firm form; it must rely on a solid basis, not on emergency and expediency.