Editorial

Salaam alei kum!

Communal violence against Dalits and Muslims has a long history in India. In the recent decades Christians too are at the receiving end. The Hindu nationalists in recent times have stepped up violence against Christians in Orissa, a poor state of eastern seaboard since August 24. The extremists who belong to Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS) and Bajrag Dal (BD) have destroyed 300 Christian villages and burnt down 4400 Christian houses. More than 50,000 people are made homeless and driven into jungles and relief camps. 59 Christians have been killed and around 18,000 were injured in the violence. Churches, schools and dispensaries have been destroyed. In one particularly brutal attack a young woman was burnt alive and another young religious nun was gang raped by the RSS and BD cadres. Elsewhere in Assam, the communal violence between Bodos and Muslims has brought death and destruction. The recent spate of bomb blasts in Delhi and other Indian cities continue to threaten security and well being of all Indian citizens. In these troubled times many people of good will like from different religious traditions, who have a secular frame of mind work tirelessly to promote peace and harmony.


Every sane person in the country realises the importance of Inter-religious dialogue. In June 2008 the Rabita al- Alami al-Islami (World Muslim Council) organized an international conference on inter-faith dialogue. This was a major initiative. At the conference it was decided that an international institution would be established to promote inter-faith dialogue. With such initiatives, our Muslims brothers and sisters will play a vital role in establishing, promoting inter-faith understanding and peaceful dialogue.

According to Maulana Waris Mazhari (editor of Tarjuman Dar ul – Ulum, official organ of the Old Boy’s Association of the Dar ul-Ilum, Deoband) the biggest challenge facing Muslim throughout the world today is the dissemination of negative and distorted images of Islam. There are certain extremist elements in politics and media continue to spread lies about madrasas and the curricula in madrasas. Maulana Waris Mazhari feels that all suspicions could be healed by honesty, openness and genuine dialogue. It is important to note and affirm the very positive signal that come from the religious scholars like Maulana Waris Mazhari. Madrasas can indeed play a vital role in the promotion of inter-faith dialogue to combat communal hatred, violence and fundamentalism.

In a meeting with interfaith leaders at the Pope John Paul II Cultural Centre in Washington, D.C Pope Benedict XVI encouraged inter-faith cooperation and dialogue as a way of both building mutual understanding and the strengthening society. To bring to the youth the message of Interreligious dialogue, the recently concluded World Youth Day celebrations in Sydney the Australian the Jesuits organized an inter religious programme for the participants.

In the article “Beware of the Conversion Bogey” Dr. I. Vempany, with his vast knowledge and experience in the field of dialogue, reminds the readers that the Hindus by and large misunderstand the real meaning of conversion. They continue to attack the Christians blaming them of forceful conversion. In spite of sustained persecutions, the church continues and will continue to work for Justice, Freedom and Love, the values Christ and his Gospel.

In fact Inter religious dialogue has become a priority to many of the religious congregations. Dr.John Borelli in his article “Frontiers of Dialogue for Discovery and Renewal” brings out how Interreligious dialogue is integral to Jesuit service of Christ's mission. This was the core message of the General Congregation 34 of Jesuits. The GC 35 again reiterated the Society’s commitment to interfaith dialogue.

Ashar Ali Engineer is a well known Indian Islamic scholar. Quoting the Holy Quran and the Hadith (Traditions of the Prophet) extensively, the scholar brings out the point that Islam is a tolerant religion and from its beginning it has encountered Christianity and Judaism in an amicable and harmonious manner. There are many Indian Muslim thinkers, who have written and have expressed their positive attitude towards other religions. For example: Dara Shikoh, translated the Upanishads from Sanskrit to Persian, which exhibits his religious tolerance and understanding with Hinduism. He argued that Hinduism is a monotheistic religion as he found the concept of tawhid (monotheism) in Upanishads. He even compared the Hindu concept of mukti (liberation) to that of the Sufi concept of fana (annihilation in Allah). In general, Muslims today need to adapt to the present modern lifestyle wherever possible as the Quran does not say anything against such way of life.

‘Christian-Muslim Relations; Guidelines for Catholics in the Diocese of Parramatta’ is a useful guide prepared by Fr. Herman Roborgh SJ for the purpose of establishing and practicing Interreligious dialogue ministry in the Australian diocese of Parramatta. It shows that dialogue ministry is a pressing need of the society all over. Today Jihad is the most misunderstood word. Herman Roborgh explains Jihad in an interview he gave to Victor Edwin.

Khuda Hafiz!

BEWARE OF THE CONVERSION BOGEY

Dr. Ishanand Vempeny
In 1970 I was a P.G. student in M. S. University, Vadodara. At that time there was a popular Christian priest in the university doing PG studies in the department of psychology. When he had finished his supper at about 9.00 pm, two hostelites, natives of UP, came shouting using all sorts of abusive words against those who were having their meal. These two students were fully drunk. They began to pick-up puris and sweets from the dishes of other students without washing their soiled hands. They even over-turned the plate of one student when he expressed his displeasure at their behaviour. He was sitting near this priest. After pacifying the student he mildly advised the drunkards not to disturb the others. One of the drunkards caught hold of the collar of the priest and slapped him twice until other students intervened. They kept on abusing the priest and the students.
On the following day the priest with two other students reported the matter to the warden. According to the rules of the hostels in Gujarat anybody caught drinking alcoholic beverages could be expelled. Besides, their beating another student could have incurred serious punishment. But the UP boys knowing the seriousness of beating up a Christian Priest got the advice of a couple of RSS leaders and went about saying that in order to prevent his conversion activities they beat him up. Perhaps the priest might not have even thought of or talked about conversion during his 1.5 years of stay in the university hostel. But the conversion-bogey in some of the states like Gujarat was so viciously powerful even at that time that no action was taken against the UP students. Today, the all-powerful Sangh Parivar (SP) with numerous specialists, lying and lynching innocent people around, gang-raping consecrated Christian nuns as in Orissa or desecrating churches and crucifixes as in Mangalore, can easily escape punishment with the conversion-bogey.
In 2003 an international peace conference was held in the Gujarat University. There were many foreigners including quite a few NRI god-men with many Western, White Disciples with them. When one of the sadhus spoke against conversion by the Christian missionaries, a professor asked him how he could speak against conversion to Christianity while he himself was converting American and European Christians to Hinduism. His thoughtless answer with an air of infallibility made some professors laugh: "Christian Missionaries are CONVERTING people but we Hindu sadhus are TRANSFORMING people". The sadhu did not realize that the original Biblical word for conversion is metanoia (Greek), which etymologically means transformation.
About the conversion activities of the Hindu Missionaries in the West, a liberal Hindu professor in an IIT, Ram Puniyani writes:
While our VHP brethren decry the transparently beneficial Christian services in India, they have no word of criticism about their co-religionists engaging themselves in proselytization work in the most degrading manner in the West, or becoming billion dollar Bhagavans…. They offer the experience of levitation for 1500$. They promise Nirvana for 100$ a day. They assure you of instant salvation…. Acharya Rajneesh is supposed to have converted hundreds of thousands of Westerners to Hinduism. So did Maharshi Mahesh Yogi. So did other sanyasis, Godmen, Bhagavans, Acharyas… and Hare Krishna propagators…. Gopal Krishna Goswami Maharaj is quoted in Times of India, 2.9.1999 as saying that "devotees living in temples are engaged in full time missionary activities" (Conversion and Missionary, P. Ram and I. Vempeny, Varanasi: Satya Manthan Sanstha, 2000, pp.15-16).
Let us take the example of another incident which adds to this verbal weapon many nuances. In 1999 in Gujarat, when anti-Christian propaganda and attacks were going on in full swing, in January, some six hundred people from the Dalit Families of a village called Undhai, near Mehsana, declared that they were going to convert themselves to Christianity. They began to decorate their homes with Christian symbols like the pictures of Jesus and Rosaries. There were no Christian missionaries nearby to entice or motivate them. The Indian Express reported: "The saffron brigade has been affected by a deeper shade of red. For, tired of the continued harassment and social boycott by upper-caste Patels, a large clutch of Dalit families in Gujarat has decided to convert to Christianity. The Dalits have little or no idea of what Christianity is" (Jan.31, 1999, p.2). The mass conversion of a large number of Dalits, in Meenakshipuram, Tamil Nadu, some years back had the same story to tell. (For a more elaborate study on this topic, cfr. Ishanand Vempeny, Conversion, Anand: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1999, pp.12-19).
Recently when I was in Mumbai during the first week of September (2008), I read a report in the Malayalam daily, Manorama, that the Orissa Christians who ran for their lives into the forest were forced to convert themselves into Hinduism. They were told menacingly by the weapon-wielding activists of the SP that if they wanted to get back to their villages alive, first get converted into Hinduism. For this, there and then they should submit themselves to the ritual of getting their hair shaved off ritualistically. In the villages they would undergo some other rituals the end of which would be a puja before a Hindu Idol, offering a coconut each. Then they would be publicly declared Hindus. In spite of the threats only few of them submitted themselves to these conversion rituals. Was it not conversion to Hinduism for these tribals who were Christians for two or three generations? Not at all. It is called shuddhikaran or gharvapasi. Incidentally Christian baptism with water is a ritual of shuddhikaran and gharvapasi, returning to "God's Family" accepting God as their Father-Mother and all human beings as brothers and sisters. The SP act of gharvapasi by force is a patriotic act whereas the free gharvapasi by baptism would be an anti-national act of conversion.
Reflections on the Conversion Bogey
Let us have a 'camera-check' of some of the allegations by the SP. If conversion of the Hindus is going on in full swing, how is it that the percentage of Christians is going down from census to census? For example, if the percentage of Christians in the 1971 census was 2.8% it was going down gradually from census to census until it reached 2.3% in the latest. Some years ago the Mother Teresa Sisters were attacked in North Kerala, by the RSS activists on the plea that they were indulging in conversion. But the truth is that both Mother Teresa and her followers had decided right from the beginning of their congregation not to convert anybody. Even today they stick to that policy. Similarly the contemplative Carmelite Sisters (Cloistered Carmelites) mostly remain within the walls of the convent spending most of the time in meditation and in necessary household works. But one of the chapels vandalized by the SP recently in Karnataka belonged to these sisters accusing them of conversion. In these instances, is the SP opposing only conversion or the good works of these Christians which attract people to them?
The Bogey of Conversion by Force
More than 95% of roughly 200 crores of Christians belong to the Main Line Churches (MLC). These churches come under the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches and the Protestant or Reformation Churches. The modern and the most authoritative views of the Catholic Church can be found in the documents of Second Vatican Council (Vat.II) and of the non-Catholic MLCs, in the documents of the World Council of Churches (WCC). Vat.II unequivocally opposes conversion by force or allurement as it can be seen in the following statement:
The Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. Freedom of this kind means that all men should be immune from coercion on the part of individuals, social groups and every human power, so that within due limits nobody is forced to act against his convictions in religious matters in private or in public, alone or in associations with others. The Council further declares that the right to religious freedom is based on the very dignity of the human person as known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself. This right of the human person to religious freedom must be given such recognition in the constitutional order of society as will make it a civil right (Dignitatis Humanae, No.2).
The WCC is equally emphatic in upholding religious freedom and opposing conversion by force:
Christian churches as well as community of other faiths cannot be faithful to their vocation without the freedom and right to maintain their institutional form and confessional identity in a society and to transmit their faith from one generation to another. In those difficult situations Christians should find a way, along with others, to enter into dialogue with the civil authorities in order to reach a common definition of religious freedom. With that freedom comes the responsibility to defend through common actions all human rights in those societies (J. A. Scherer and S. B. Bevans, (eds.), No.44, p.50).
True, during the colonial period the Western Colonial Powers used for conversion some intimidating techniques in Asia, including India, and in South America. At that time they followed the medieval axiom cuijus regio eijus religio (= the religion of the ruler is the religion of the ruled). This will partly explain some incident of forced conversion by the Portuguese in Goa.
It is difficult to say the exact number or the types of doctrines held by the Fringe Group Churches (FRG). Some of them have very exotic doctrines like the church led by Alexander Jones who committed suicide a few decades back together with almost a thousand followers in Georgetown in British Guyana. The New Life Church, accused of writing derogative remarks on Hinduism belongs to the FRGs. Even in these groups, because of their profession of fundamental human rights, human freedom and the dignity of man, no instance of forced conversion has been proved by the governments of Orissa, Gujarat, MP or Karnataka where allegations of forced conversions are at their loudest.
Conversion and Christian Works of Compassion & Love
It is a fact that the missionaries usually go to the economically poor and the socially marginalized. The Biblical word, in the Hebrew original to indicate such people is anawim (anawim literary means a person who cannot stand straight, a person with diminished human dignity due to economic poverty and social marginalization). In India most Dalits and Tribals belong to the category of anawim. Why do the missionaries go with such enthusiasm for the well-being of the anawim while the Hindu Missionaries in the West go for the rich and the affluent?
One of the most unnegotiable teachings by Jesus for Christian life and Christian struggles for salvation is compassionate help for the anawim. One of the typical texts in the Bible is Mt. 25: 31-46. It is a description of the scene of Last Judgement (kayamat) by Jesus himself as the Eternal Judge or Eternal King. This is what the Heavenly Judge tells the good people who would be made to stand on his right side as considered worthy of salvation:
The King will say to those on his right. Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food. I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me… (Then he replies to their query how they did such things to him). Amen. I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me (Mt. 25:34-36 and 40).
At the beginning of Christ's Public Life, in his inaugural speech (Lk 4: 16-22) He declares that His primary mission is to liberate the anawim from all sorts of oppression and slavery. This is the chief reason, if may not be the only reason, why missionaries in India have been going after the SC and ST, especially when untouchability and bonded labour were rampant.
Soon after the Korean War, an American nun was cleansing the foul smelling sores of a leper in South Korea. Her brother who came to visit her happened to see this work. He said: "Judy, if I were to get 50,000 dollars a month I won't do such a work". Pat came the reply: "Tony, neither would I have done this work had I been offered hundred thousand dollars. But for the sake of Jesus who loves me and makes me experience his resurrection every day, I will do even more repulsive works than this".
The Covert Reasons of SP for opposing Conversion
The SP is all out to capture power in the Centre and in the States. In a democracy like India number counts. In today's situation of hate-campaign and minority-bashing no thinking Christian or Muslim will vote for the SP. Hence the efforts by the SP to stop by hook or crook, by fair or foul means, any conversion from Hinduism to these two religions.
In the tribal belt in Gujarat there had been cases of the business community and some industrialists paying money to the parents of the tribal children for not sending their children to school especially to the Mission Schools. Conversion to Christianity meant good education, effective health care, socio-economic upgradation. These vote-bank groups of the SP want cheap labour and captive voters for the SP, but good education thwarts these designs.
To Conclude
The Great Hindu Reformer Sri Narayana Guru wrote in his famous Aatmopadesa Satakam:
Victory by fight is impossible here; one as against one,
No religion by attacking it gets uprooted;
Not knowing this the opponent of another faith,
Invites his own doom by a futile fight, beware!
(Free Translation from Malayalam)
The saintly Guruji must have been aware of the history of the spread of Christianity in Europe. The first three centuries of Christianity until the Edict of Milan by Emperor Constantine, Christianity was outlawed by the ruthless Roman Emperors like Nero. Any Christian could be killed with impunity during this period. But lo and behold! When one Christian was killed a thousand became Christians, until the whole of the Roman Empire became Christian. Emperor Theodosius the Great declared Christianity as the State Religion at the latter part of the fourth century. A great Christian Philosopher of the third century Tertullian wrote: "sanguis martyrum semina ecclesiae" (= "The blood of martyrs is the seed of Christianity"). Does the SP in Orissa know this when it is presiding over the most cruel of the persecutions of Christians in India?

FRONTIERS OF DIALOGUE FOR DISCOVERY AND RENEWAL

John Borelli
Interreligious dialogue is integral to Jesuit service of Christ's mission. GC 35's unambiguous reiteration of this core message of GC 34 should be written large in the hearts and minds of Jesuits and those privileged to serve as their collaborators.
On this matter, GC 34 had been eloquent: "no service of faith without promotion of justice, entry into cultures, openness to other religious experiences; no promotion of justice without communicating faith, transforming cultures, collaboration with other traditions; no inculturation without communicating faith with others, dialogue with other traditions, commitment to justice; no dialogue without sharing faith with others, evaluating cultures, concern for justice." (GC 34, d. 2)
Thirteen years later, GC 35 rejoices that "in a decisive manner Benedict XVI confirmed what our previous General Congregations have said of our specific mission of service to the Church." (Decree 1, 5) Expressly, Decree 1 recalls the papal address to the General Congregation on February 21, 2008, when he reaffirmed how the church counts on Jesuits "to reach the geographical and spiritual places where others do not reach or find it difficult to reach." The pope mentioned particularly the heroic examples of Matteo Ricci in China, Roberto de Nobili in India, and the "Reductions" in Latin America—individuals and communities truly on the far frontiers of interreligious and intercultural exchange for their times. Pope Benedict, then, strongly encouraged Jesuits and their collaborators to recognize the signs of the presence and work of God in every part of the world, even beyond the confines of the visible Church, to build bridges of understanding and dialogue with those who do not belong to the Church or who have difficulty in accepting its position and message, and to adhere to the word of God and teachings of the church while doing so.
With passion borne of prayer and discernment, Decree 2 on Jesuit identity and the Ignatian charism declares new frontiers beckoning us to "plunge ourselves more deeply into that dialogue with religions that may show us that the Holy Spirit is at work all over the world that God loves." (24) In our contemporary globalized world, where technology and environmental and other concerns challenge traditional boundaries, the Society's mission of faith and justice and of dialogue of religions and cultures gives new meaning to the frontiers of knowledge and human encounter. (20) "All men and women are our concern for dialogue and for proclamation . . . to discover Jesus Christ where we have not noticed him before and to reveal him where he has not been seen before." (24)
This all-embracing mission directs us to reach out "to persons who differ from us in culture and religion, aware that dialogue with them is integral also to our service of Christ's mission." (15) Scripture serves as our guide to enter dialogue in places where others did not look or even avoided, as Jesus did with the Samaritan woman, Zacchaeus, a Syro-Phoenician woman, Roman centurions and repentant thieves and sinners. (12)
Even in collaboration itself, Decree 6 recognizes a frontier with new challenges: "We are enriched by members of our own faith, but also by people from other religious traditions, those women and men of good will from all nations and cultures, with whom we labor in seeking a more just world."(3) If the heart of an Ignatian work is the Spiritual Exercises, which many of us Catholic and other Christian collaborators have had the privilege to follow and live, how can the dialogue of religious experience be genuinely mutual, adapting the Exercises to other religious traditions and spiritualities and allowing these traditions and spiritualities to enrich our practice of the Exercises? (9) For many Christians and non-Christians, interreligious dialogue has become a spiritual practice. How can such spiritual companionship influence formation for Ignatian work? (15)
Decree 3 on the challenges to mission today reviews how the Jesuit history of interreligious encounters and dialogue predates Vatican II by 400 years. (15-17) Only with the documents of Vatican II did the Catholic Church formally adopt dialogue as a primary outreach to other Christians, to Jews, to followers of other religions, and to all people; yet, forty-three years after its close, dialogue, even ecumenical dialogue with other Christians, remains on the margins of ministry, theological study, and spiritual formation in the church. These margins are frontiers for Jesuits and their collaborators.
Decree 3 identifies fresh challenges on these borders: globalization, a wide-spread thirst for spiritual experience often sought outside institutional religion, "religious fundamentalism," the growing gap between rich and poor due to social, economic, and political forces, and transnational and other forms of exploitation fomenting conflict and violence. The wisdom of those in Jesuit ministries on these and other frontiers, for the last 40 years, even for the past 400 years, should be a resource for Jesuits and their collaborators and for the universal church.
Fr. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, when asked to define "catholic" by the Board of Trustees of Georgetown University visiting Rome in May 2007, replied in this way: "I have always understood 'catholic' to mean bringing the experience of those at the frontiers of the church's mission back to renew the center."
Fr. Adolfo Nicholás, in his homily at the closure of GC 35, recalled how they have spoken and written about frontiers during their deliberations. "We have indeed gone," he said, "and we have encountered many problems and made many mistakes at the frontiers." He admitted he could tell of his mistakes. "Going," he said, means "entering into the culture." "Going," he continued, "means study, research, entering into the life of the people, solidarity, empathy, inculturation, respect for others. "Going to the whole world turns out to be more difficult than we had thought. We feel like children. Perhaps we have discovered the Kingdom of God."
Dr. John Borelli, National Coordinator for Interreligious Dialogue and Mission for the U.S. Jesuit Conference, is Special Assistant for Interreligious Initiative to President John J. DeGioia of Georgetown University. After receiving a Ph.D. in theology and history of religions (Fordham University, 1976) and teaching for 12 years, he served more than 16 years in ecumenical and interreligious affairs for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
This article appeared in the October 2008 issue of National Jesuit News (USA).

ISLAM AND INTER-FAITH ENGAGEMENT

Asghar Ali Engineer
Islam is being projected as intolerant of other faiths. This perception of Islam is based on certain selected events, not on Qur'anic teachings or Prophet's ahadith. It is one thing to judge a religion by its teachings and another to see it in the light of some instances of intolerance by some individuals. Also, such events are picked up selectively to suit certain assumptions, often politically motivated.
First of all it is necessary to closely study the Qur'anic position both normative and contextual. Then we have to study certain historical event of tolerance or intolerance, also in proper historical context. Also, one has to study the Qur'anic approach of engaging with other religions. What Qur'an emphasizes as common with other religions and what it differs with. Does it find anything in common with other religions or totally rejects them? And what is its position where it totally rejects any religion?
Qur'an and other Religions
Qur'an was revealed over a period of twenty-three years in two cities Mecca and Madina. The revelations began in Mecca and ended in Madina. Mecca was an international trade centre of great significance in that area and the main tribes of Mecca, particularly the Quraysh, a leading tribe of Mecca, was among those carrying on trade with Roman Empire who pursued Christianity. Then in Madina and in some other parts of Arabia, there were Jews. Thus Arabs were in touch with these two great Biblical religions. Arabs, for various reasons, had refrained from adopting these religions, though few Arabs on border region had embraced Christianity in its monophysite form, one different from Roman version.
In Mecca of course there were no Christians or Jews. The Meccan Arabs were all idol worshippers, having no revealed truth or scripture. The Prophet (PBUH) was also borne and brought up in Mecca. He seems to have instinctively rejected idol worship and began to meditate in the cave of Hira in search of truth when he receives revelation and he proclaims himself as the Prophet of Allah (Rasulallah or Messenger of Allah). He faced stiff opposition from his own tribe and his own close relatives.
However, he was deeply committed to his mission and readily faces severe persecution from his opponents. Despite this he proposes to his persecutors that "for you is your religion and for me is mine" (109:6). Thus Qur'an never imposed anything on unwilling hearts. It also pronounces same principle in surah revealed in Madina, "There is no compulsion in religion – the right way is indeed clearly distinct from error. So whoever disbelieves in the devil and believes in Allah, he indeed lays hold on the firmest handle which shall never break.(2:256)
Thus the Qur'an lays down a principle here: there is no compulsion in religion. Religion has something to do with ones heart and soul and appeals to ones inner conscience; and thus can never be imposed. All Qur'an does is to make right path distinct from path of error and leave it to people to accept right path or that of error. Those who accept right path are laying their hand on a firmest handle which will never break.
Thus both in Meccan and Madinian revelation Qur'an is firm about one thing, there cannot be any forcible imposition of religion, one can only show right path or warn about consequences of pursuing path of error and then leave it to the choice of the person concerned. Thus an individual and his/her conscience is at the centre of decision making. There is no mistaking about it.
The Meccans did not possess higher truth; they were immersed in superstition woven around various gods and goddesses on one hand, and, the upper class Meccan merchants were by and large hedonists – making super profits, enjoying life and hardly cared for morality and truth. The masses suffered due to poverty and neglect and found some solace in superstitious beliefs. The Qur'an tried to address this situation in Mecca and exhorted the Meccans to believe in revealed truth and not to consider this worldly life as an end in itself. The upper class Meccan merchants ridiculed the very idea of any revealed truth. Material pleasure was an end in itself for them.
However, there were other religions present in the area i.e. Judaism and Christianity. While Qur'an termed Meccans who possessed no higher truth as unbelievers (kafirs – literally those who hide truth) and Christians and Jews who possessed revealed scriptures as ahl al-Kitab (i.e. people of the book). The Qur'an accepts all Biblical prophets from Adam to Christ and those in between as prophets of Allah and calls them all either as anbiya' (plural of nabi – prophet) or rusul (plural of rasul – messenger).
In fact Qur'an requires Muslims to believe in all the prophets and forbids to believe in some and not to believe in others. Thus Qur'an says: "Those who disbelieve in Allah and His messengers and desire to make a distinction between Allah and His messengers and say: We believe in some and disbelieve in others; and desire to take a course in between – these are truly disbelievers and We have prepared for disbelievers an abasing chastisement." (4:150-51) that one should not make distinction between one prophet and the other is repeated in verses like 2:136, 2:285 and 3:86.
Thus Qur'an accepts truth content of all previous religions as this truth was brought by Allah's messengers. Thus Qur'an mentions various prophets by name in chapters like "The Family of al-Imran" (chapter 3), "Yunus", - Jonah (chapter 10), "Ibrahim – Abraham (chapter 14), "Al-Qasas", The Narrative (Chapter 28 and so on. The running thread of the Qur'an is the concept of what many Qur'anic scholars like Shah Waliyullah, Maulana Azad and others have called wahdat al-din i.e. unity of religions.
Shah Waliyullah has developed this concept in his opus magnum Hujjat Allah-i- al-Balighah 1 He extensively argues on the basis of various Qur'an which says, "To every nation We appointed acts of devotion; which they observe, so let them not dispute with thee in the matter, and call to thy Lord. Surely thou art on a right guidance." (22:61). This is again repeated in the verse 2:148 which says, "Everyone has a direction to which he turns (himself), so vie with one another in good deeds."
The clear implication of this verse is that there are different directions (and also different ways) of saying ones prayer. That is not the essence, it at best is symbolic. However, what is of substance is good deeds. Thus different communities may continue to pursue their ways and directions of prayer but what is more important is to excel each other in good deeds.
The Qur'an has expressed this in yet another way in verse 5:48 wherein it says: "For every one of you We appointed a law and a way. And if Allah had pleased He would have made you a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you. So vie one with another in virtuous deeds".
This verse clearly implies that Allah did not create all human beings as one community but created them as different sects and communities with distinct ways. If Allah had willed He could have created them all as one community but He did not do so to test them whether they can live in peace and harmony despite these differences and vie one with the other in good deeds.
Thus Qur'an clearly accepts plurality of religions and ways of life and different laws and treats it as a challenge for humanity to live and coexist with tolerance towards each other and strengthen forces of peace and moral order. Values and moral order is much more basic than differences of faith and devotion. So Qur'an in no way adopts hostile attitude towards other religions.
It also exhorts its followers "Abuse not those, whom they call upon besides Allah, lest, exceeding the limits, they abuse Allah through ignorance. Thus to every people; have We made their deeds fair-seeming. (6:109)
In this verse Qur'an adopts very practical view towards other belief systems. It says one should not abuse those who worship other than Allah as they will also abuse Allah out of ignorance and thus it would lead to conflict or violence and spirit of coexistence will be destroyed. It then makes very important statement that for every people or community we have made their deeds fair-seeming i.e. every people think their way of belief and their way of living is best. Let everyone believe what they want to believe and all of you will ultimately return to Him and He will decide who was right and who was wrong.
This is very practical approach to maintain peace and promote coexistence in the world as world is plural and any belief system which exerts its superiority is bound to result in conflict. Each religion and religious belief system is unique. There may be outward differences but there is inward unity and it is this inward unity which is emphasized by the Qur'an on the basis that all religions have been brought by Allah's prophets and each people have their own law and their own road. According to ones hadith Allah has sent in all 1, 24000 prophets and he has sent His prophet's to all nations (13:7).
It is interesting to note that on the basis of the verse 13:7 many Sufi saints in India maintained that Allah must have sent His prophet's to India too. How can he forget a great country like India? Thus they concluded that Ram and Krishna who are highly revered in India might have been guides sent by Allah to Hindus. Mazhar Jan-i-Janan, a great Sufi saint of Qadiriya silsila in 18th century India had cogently argued that Hindus are monotheists as according to Hindu Shashtra (scriptures) Ishwar (god) is nirankar and nirgun (i.e. without shape and without attributes) and according to Mazhar Jan-i-Janan it is highest form of tawheed (i.e. oneness of God) He also argues we should not take Hindus to be kafirs just because they worship idols.
He then argues that kafir is one who possesses no truth as pre-Islamic Arabs possessed none and refused to accept it when it was revealed to the Prophet (PBUH) and hence they were denounced as kafirs. But Hindus possess truth in the form of Bedas (Vedas) and Hindu scriptures do not prescribe idol worship. It is popular practice among Hindus who cannot conceive of abstract God and hence need idols to reach God who has no shape or attributes. Thus according to Mazhar Jan-i-Janan these idols are like Sheikh for Sufis who act as a guide to reach God.2
Thus it is very helpful attitude for living together and respecting each others faith on the basis of inner unity of all religions. There were other religious thinkers in India who promoted mutual understanding. The most important thinker was Dara Shikoh who studied Hindu religion through its original sources. Dara Shikoh was a Moghul prince appointed as successor to the throne of India by his illustrious father Shah Jahan but ultimately lost to Aurangzeb, his brother who defeated Dara Shikoh and became Emperor of India.
Dara Shikoh translated The Upanishads from Sanskrit into Persian and named it Sirr-e-Akbar (The Great Mystery). He argued in this Persian translation that Hindus are monotheists and he said after Qur'an he found concept of tawheedi in Upanishads. He maintains that the Qur'anic verses 56:77-79 refer to Upanishads. He feels certain that the hidden book (kitab-i-maknun) is a reference to this very ancient book.3 Dara's Majma'ul Bahrayn is a classical work of Islam's engagement with other religions in India.
In this book Dara Shikoh compares religious terminology of Islam with Hinduism and conclusively shows that difference is of language, not of actual ideas behind it. He often refers to Hindus as muwahhidun-i-Hind i.e. monotheists of India. He says that mootheists of India also believe in qiyamat-i-kubra (i.e. the Great Day of Judgment) and in Hindu scriptures it is referred to as mahapralay. According to Dara Shikoh; Hindus also believe in heaven and hell and that after residing in heaven and hell mahapralay will occur. He also quotes verses from Qur'an like 72:9, 34:79, 68:39, 55:26-27 and 72:9 to prove his point.4
Dara Shikoh also compares the concept of mukti with the Sufi concept of fana fi' Allah i.e. annihilation in Allah as ultimate liberation and quotes the verse from Qur'an 72:9. He then throws detailed light on the concept of mukti (liberation) in Hindu religion and considers brahmanda (the Universe) as the God. According to him brahmanda in Islam is referred to as Alam-i-Kubra which manifestation of Allah.5
Thus there have been very positive efforts by some Muslim thinkers to engage with other religions. They upheld the Qur'anic spirit in this regard. While the Qur'an differs from Christians and Jews on certain crucial points, yet advises Muslims to engage with them in a manner which will promote understanding, not conflict. Thus Qur'an says, "And argue not with the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) except by what is best." And this verse further emphasizes commonness among these religions when it says, "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him we submit." (29:46)
Again emphasizing commonness between Islam and people of the book, Qur'an says, "O People of the Book, come to an equitable word between us and you, that we shall serve none but Allah and that we shall not associate aught with Him, and that some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah: bear witness. But if they turn away, then say: Bear witness, we are Muslims.
The prophet wrote letters to Heraculeus in the year 6 A.H. (Bukhari 1:1) and similar letters were written to other potentates among whom was Muqauqis, the king of Egypt. According to Maulana Muhammad Ali, "In this verse the Jews and the Christians are called upon the basic principles of the faith of Islam. The reference in the sentence some of us shall not take others for lords is to the practice prevailing then among Jews and Christians, and at present among Muslims too, to take religious leaders as invested with Divine powers, which is more clearly enunciated in 9:31: 'They have taken their doctors of law and their monks for lords besides Allah (9:31)".6
We find in Qur'an verse like 2:136 which states, "Say, we believe in Allah and (in) that which has been revealed to us, and (in) that which was revealed to Abraham, and Ishmael and Issac and Jacob and the tribes, and (in) that which was given to Moses and Jesus, and (in) that which was given to the prophets from their Lord, we do not make any distinction between an of them and to Him do we submit." (2:136)
This is very significant verse which shows commonness between these faiths and respect in which Muslims should hold all these prophets and are told not to make any distinction between one prophet and the other. It is part of their belief and one must act accordingly. Those who show any distinction cannot be true Muslims.
However, there are verses in the Qur'an which some can cite to show differences from Jews and Muslims and Christians too. Thus there is verse in the Qur'an which states regarding Jews, "Thou wilt certainly find the most violent of people in enmity against the believers to be the Jews and the idolaters; and thou wilt find nearest in friendship to the believers to be those who say, We are Christians. That is because there are priests and monks among them and because they are not proud." (5:82)
Why Christians are described as friends and Jews as violent the reason is clearly explained. It is not because Jewish religion is more inimical to Islam and Christianity less so. Reason is more political struggle between Muslims and Jews. The Holy Prophet had tried his best to woe Jews when he migrated to Madina. He entered into a covenant with them and gave them full freedom to follow their own religion. He even prayed in the direction of Jerusalem. But Jews never took kindly to the Prophet or to the Muslims.
They saw Prophet and Muslims as those who were dominating Madina over which they had hegemony so far. The Meccan Muhajirs also were expert traders and the Jews feared these migrants will capture their trade. The Jews also often acted as arbiters between Aus and Khazraj, the two main tribes of Madina.
The Jews violated the covenant and conspired with the kuffar (unbelievers) of Mecca who attacked Madina. As per the covenant the Jews should have cooperated with the Muslims in defending Madina. Instead they helped Meccan kuffar and thus earned enmity with Muslims. On the other hand Christians so far had cooperated with Muslims. The Negus of Abyssinia had given refuge to Muslim migrants to Ethiopia before they migrated to Madina. Also, when a Christian delegation from Najran met the Prophet (PBUH) led by Abdul Masih, he (Prophet) met them inside his mosque and Prophet treated them with respect and in friendly way.
The verse also refers to Christian priests and monks who are not proud and always engaged in worshipping God and so there was no question of any clash in political sense. So controversy with Jews and calling them violent in enmity is not on account of their religion but on account of their socio-economic and political clash with Muslims in Madina. The Jews of Madina never extended hand of friendship towards Muslims despite all sincere efforts prophet made for friendship with them.
At one level the Qur'an treats all human beings on equal plane whatever their creed or colour or nation or tribe. It considers all as equally honourable. Thus a verse in Qur'an declares, "And surely We have honored the children of Adam, and We carry them in the land and the sea, and We provide them with good things, and We have made them to excel highly most of those whom We have created." (17:70)
Here all human beings are equal. Qur'an also exhorts Muslims not to discriminate between people on any ground race, language, nation etc. All colours, languages and races are signs of God. Thus says the Qur'an "And of His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth and the diversity of your tongues and colours." (30:22). Thus black colour is as much creation of Allah as white and Arabic as much as other languages. So no one should claim superiority over the other.
The Qur'an also takes very practical view that all human beings cannot believe in one religion or the other. They are bound to incline towards different faiths. It poses question to the prophet "If thy Lord had pleased, all those who are in the earth would have believed, all of them. Will thou then force them till they are believers?" (10:99). In another verse Qur'an puts the same thing little differently: May be thou will kill thyself with grief, sorrowing after them, if they believe not in this announcement." (18:6) Read these two above verses with "there is no compulsion in religion" (2:256) and Qur'anic approach in plurality of faiths becomes very clear.
The Qur'an no where intends that all should accept Islam. It is not practical at all. Thus only way is to ensure freedom of faith, on one hand, and, coexistence, harmoniously, on the other. The truth of this assertion we are discovering in the contemporary world. Plurality of faiths is on the increase due mainly to economic migrations from poorer underdeveloped to highly developed nations.
Islam and Western World
At one time Europe and North America were mono-religious, mono cultural though Europe was multi-lingual. Today both Europe and North America have become multi-religious and they have developed theory of multi-culturalism as people of different religions and cultures are on the increase and they are substantial minorities in these regions now. The days of mono-religion are a history now.
Among others Muslims are the largest minority both in Europe and in North America. Naturally it leads to religious tensions. In European history there have been political clashes between Muslims and Christians. Crusades are part of European history and it is on account of these crusades that stereotype "sword in one hand and Qur'an in the other" persists in the European psyche even today. And thanks to the ongoing conflict between USA and the Middle East, this conflict has still not been resolved.
If anything it is getting exacerbated in recent times and 9/11 attack has further intensified it. The extremists among Muslims resort to violence in response to violence by the West in Middle East and it has become a vicious circle. Strong prejudices have been created against Islam in this region. The Muslim extremists invoke slogan of jihad (wrongly of course) to commit violence in western countries and this strengthens the stereotype that Islam is religion of violence and war and does not want to co-exist with other religions, especially Christianity.
We have seen above how wrong this impression is. But this is very widespread impression throughout non-Muslim world. What happens in history cannot be ascribed to Islam. I have already discussed in detail elsewhere7 that what happens in history is empirical reality, not religious truth and that religious teachings should be compared with religious teachings and history of religion with history of another religion and not with teachings of that religion.
Islam always coexisted with Judaism and Christianity peacefully on religious plane though there were clashes between Muslims and Christians in medieval ages (and not between Islam and Christianity). These clashes were among the ruling classes and not among Muslim and Christian masses. The Western press projects clash of interests as clash of religions and on the other hand, the Muslim 'fundamentalists'8 too make it appear as religious clash.
There is no clash of civilizations either as Prof. Huntington9 would like us to believe. The main thesis of Huntington is fundamentally based on wars and clashes between Christian and Muslim rulers, and not on clash of religious teachings. Even in medieval ages there were no clashes of religion, mostly clashes of empires – Christian and Muslim. Both Jews and Christians held important posts in Muslim administrations. Jews and Christians always lived in peace in Muslim countries though they were persecuted in Europe and were forced to live in ghettos. They never faced such persecution in Islamic countries.
Ahmed M.H.Shboul observes in his paper "Arab Islamic Perceptions of Byzantine Religion and culture", "Given the religio-political and military character of the rise of the Arab Islamic power, the sympathetic and tolerant attitude of Islam toward Christianity and Christians, and the actual history of the Arab-Byzantine military conflict, can one describe this conflict, during the period of the Arab conquest and after, as simply or even principally a religious conflict? It is my submission that such a description would be inaccurate and misleading." He then quotes Norman Daniel 'it is already to beg the question to speak of a religious war, before we have established that that is what it was.'"10
Mr. Ahmed further points out, referring to complex issues involved in Arab-Byzantine wars of conquest, “It is also true that Arab-Byzantine sources speak of economic, political, and tribal factors in this conflict. In a real sense, early Arab Islamic sources seem to depict the war more as a conflict between 'Arab and Byzantines' rather than; between 'Muslims and Christians' – a fact that is also confirmed by Syriac sources. At the practical level large numbers of Christian Arab warriors from Syria joined the Muslim armies against the Byzantines, while other Christians (and Samaritans) cooperated in several ways with the advancing Muslim Arabs.11
Thus we see even in medieval ages the wars fought between Christians and Muslims were not of religious but political and ethnic nature in which Christian Arabs cooperated with Muslim Arabs. We need to change erroneous perceptions of these wars between Christians and Muslims. It will have far reaching consequences for contemporary nature of conflict. Islam as a religion engages tolerantly and meaningfully with other religions, especially Christianity and Judaism.
Today a large number of Muslims live in Europe and North America. A substantial number of Muslims live as minority in the world, mostly under democratic dispensations. Thus there is great change between medieval and contemporary reality. In medieval ages Muslim empire was spread in large parts of the world and most of the Muslims lived under Islamic dispensation though there were some Muslims living in minority as well during those days.
Thus whole fiqh (jurisprudence) literature developed then by the Muslim jurists had its own context. Firstly Muslims were in majority. Secondly Muslims were rulers and Muslim regimes were monarchical and non-democratic. Thus whole corpus of fiqh in respect of Muslim and non-Muslim minorities must be reviewed and new fiqh should be evolved which should fit into new context. The concepts of darul harb (domain of war) and darul Islam (domain of peace) are totally outdated today.
The new fiqh has to be evolved keeping in mind democratic regime, on one hand, and on the other human rights and minority rights regimes, on the other. Our jurists should not mechanically repeat the opinion of medieval jurists who were working in very different context. They responded to various problems in the light of their own experience. We have to respond in the light of our own context.
The Quranic concept of ahl dhimma (people whose responsibility was on Muslim rulers for their safety) for the people of the book was very creative and responsible one. For these services to protect them, Qur'an suggested what is called jizyah (a levy for protection of the dhimmis). However, it does not hold any more. The very concept of ahl dhimma cannot be applied today in the changed context. The Qur'anic concept of dhimmi was contextual, not normative.
Today all minorities have been guaranteed equal political rights under the second generation of UNO charter of rights and international law. The new minority fiqh (jurisprudence) has to take this into account. Non-Muslim minorities are as much entitled to these rights as much as the Muslim minorities in non-Muslim countries like European countries, North America, India and several other countries.
The minority regime also guarantees religious and cultural rights. Of course under Qur'anic concept of ahl-dhimma also religious and cultural rights were guaranteed but not political rights. Now even political rights also have to be guaranteed. At one level, minorities are accorded full citizenship and in addition cultural and religious rights. Thus new minority fiqh has to take all this into account and Muslim countries also should make these rights available to their Christian or Jewish or other minorities.
At one level they all should be treated as citizens with full political rights and also they should be given full religious and cultural rights. Unfortunately in some Muslim states non-Muslim minorities do not enjoy full citizenship rights and though they are free to practice their religion they are still treated as secondary citizens. And in some Muslim countries they are not free to maintain their religious places or establish places of worship.
The Qur'an, on the other hand, wants all religious places to be equally protected and allowed to be flourished. It says, "Those who are driven from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah. And if Allah did not repel some people by others, cloisters, and churches, and synagogues, and mosques in which Allah's name is much remembered, would have been pulled down. And surely Allah will help him who helps Him. (22:40).
This the Qur'an guarantees perfect religious freedom not only of Muslims but of all other religions like Christianity and Judaism. Synagogues and churches should be protected along with the mosques. Minority rights must be guaranteed both when Muslims are a minority and when non-Muslims are in a minority. In medieval fiqh this spirit of Qur'anic injunction, clear as crystal, was lost more because of arrogance of power, than anything else.
In minority fiqh which I am suggesting this Qur'anic spirit needs to be revived. Large number of Muslims live as minority today in this globalised world and in most of the countries of West they enjoy equal citizenship rights. Islam today is flourishing in secular democratic countries though in practice there are some problems also.
Secular democracy has its own impact on laws and belief systems which have evolved under secular democracy. Thus secular democracy in western countries is impacting on Islam too. There is interesting parallel with communism. Communism also developed authoritarian system in Soviet Union. People did not enjoy basic freedoms. But communism in Europe was greatly influenced by democratic west and some communists developed the concept of Euro-communism which was more open and respectful of other systems and democratic in nature.
There is, similarly great need for developing concept of Euro-Islam which will respect pluralism, multi-culturalism and will be open to other faiths and would respect other faiths. It will also adjust itself to western way of life though not necessarily accept it. There is also question of practicing Shari'ah law. Most of the Muslims insist on practicing Shari'ah law as they have inherited. This creates complex problems.
The hijab controversy has rocked many European countries including France and England. French government has banned hijab in educational institutions which itself goes against concept of multi-culturalism, but Muslims also have to re-think some of their practices. In U.K., for example a school teacher refused to take off her niqab (which covered her face and only two eyes peeping out) even inside the class room insisting it is her religious belief.
This is simply not true. The Qur'an no where requires women to cover their face. It only insists on lowering the gaze and dress modestly (see 24:31). No Islamic jurists have insisted on covering face. All agree that face and hands could be kept open. At the most it is cultural practice developed in highly feudalized society and is being forced on their women folk.
In minority fiqh a review of such cultural practices which are practiced under religious garb, there should be re-think on these issues. No one suggests that Muslim women should adopt western way of dressing (which men have readily adopted without any Shar'I problems), but that they should go for modest dressing which will not make their sexuality focus of attention.
However, traditional Muslims go by opinion of certain jurists rather than by the injunctions of the Qur'an. The niqab is not at all in keeping with the Qur'anic injunction nor has it anything to do with Islamic teachings on sexual conduct. It is part of culture in certain Arab countries like Saudi Arabia which is mechanically imitated by Muslims in other countries as they think Saudi Arabia is a model Islamic state.
Such behavior creates problems between westerners and migrant culture. Of course, Europe and other western countries of North America have accepted multi-culturalism, and even religious pluralism, yet if one insists one would not go for any compromise or give and take spirit, tensions will arise between two cultures. One should not violate basic principles but should work for give and take.
In medieval fiqh there are surely feudal cultural elements which do not suit modern democratic culture based on human rights and women's rights. The new fiqh, if based only on normative Qur'anic injunctions is developed it will go a great way in accommodating modern values and Muslim women will have much greater latitude. In western society basic freedoms play very crucial role and medieval culture, being feudal, limits role of basic freedoms in life and imposes authoritarian culture, calling it 'divine'.
However, Euro-Islam will have to come to terms with role of basic freedoms in western society and shall have to develop a new fiqh fit for democratic culture. As Qur'an requires Muslims to respect other religions, it also requires them to respect other cultures, if they do not violate core Islamic morality. The Muslim intellectuals will have to play creative role in non-Muslim societies for developing its new fiqh.
In Muslim countries traditional 'ulama have great influence and hence it is very difficult to bring about any change but in European countries conditions are different. No doubt traditional 'ulama are being imported to these countries also and they deliver their traditional sermons in the mosques. And many Muslims do get influenced by these sermons and want to practice traditional Shari'ah.
Traditional Islam appeals to them for another reason also. That reason is sense of alienation and this sense of alienation pulls them back to their traditional native culture. Also racial attacks further aggravate this sense of alienation and it becomes very difficult to bring about accommodation between two different cultures. Of late political situation has also become quite hostile to Islam and Muslims.
Some Muslim youth are getting drawn to al-Qaeda network for very complex reasons and who are responsible for political policies towards Islamic world, particularly the Middle East. Today Islam is being equated with violence and fanaticism, thanks to these acts of violence.
The Qur'an lays great stress on wisdom so much so that it says, "And whoever is given wisdom, he indeed is given great good" (2:269) Why Muslims do not use wisdom to respond to the situation they are faced with? Responding with violence results in great loss of innocent lives and creates more hostility for them. You can match ability of western powers to use violence with bomb explosions here and there. It does no good at all. Instead if they use wisdom they can work to build favorable opinion in these countries and isolate the western rulers in the world opinion.
There are thousands of people in the western countries who oppose neo-imperialist wars by America. One must build on their support. By resorting to violence they earn media hostility too and in democratic era media make and unmake opinion. Wisdom lies using media sympathy through peaceful means. Thus there should be zero tolerance for violence. Wisdom lies in that.
The medieval Islamic fiqh lays more stress on jihad (through concept of jihad). Jihad also got distorted in the medieval environs wherein things were decided by sword and there was no concept of rights of people. This fiqh should be rejected and new fiqh should lay stress on peace and human rights. Peace is very central to Islam. Salam (peace) is integral to Islam as it is Allah's name also.
Thus in new fiqh salam, rahmah, hikmah and 'adl (peace, compassion, wisdom and justice) should be central values. And these values as integral part of new fiqh should be taught in all madrasas. These are most fundamental Qur'anic values. This will change entire image of Islam. It will be more humane and will command respect from its worst enemies. A new leadership should replace traditional ulama who will find difficult to develop new approach.
This might appear utopian to many but it is this Islam which will lead to honourable solution for our complex problems and will ensure peaceful coexistence in this war torn world due mainly to powerful American interests. But we should remember we strengthen American hands by responding through sporadic violence. Let us hope these ideas will generate response from new generation living in western countries.
----------------------------------------------------
1 - See chapter on "Essence of religions is one and laws and ways are different" in Shah Waliyullah Al-Hujjat al-Balighah (Deoband, India, nd) vol. I. pp-212-216.
2 - see Mirza Jan-i-Janan ke Khutut tr. From Persian into Urdu by Khaliq Anjm (Deli, 1989) pp-131. And also see pp- 131-34.
3 - See Introduction to Dara Shikoh's Majma'ul Bahrayn (Co-mingling of Two Oceans) by M.Mahfuz al-Haq (reprinted by The Asiatic Society, Calcutta, 1982), pp-13
4 - See Asghar Ali Engineer "A Muslim View of Hinduism" presented at a seminar in Glasgow University, Scotland (to be published in a book soon)
5 - Majma'ul Bahrayn op.cit. pp-106-107 quoted in Asghar Ali Engineer ibid.
6 -The Holy Qur'an tr. By Maulana Muhammad Ali (Lahore, Pakistan 1973) pp-150, footnote 446.
7 -see "Islam as Religion and Islam as History" in Islam and Modern Age vol. X. No.4 April 2007.
8 - Here I am using 'fundamentalism' in the pejorative sense in which western media uses though in Islam fundamentalism has positive connotation.
9 - Samuel P. Huntington The Clash of Civilizations and The Remaking of World Order (Penguin Books,1996).
10 - see Jacque Waardenburg ed. Muslim Perceptions of Other Religions – A Historical Survey (Oxford University Press, 1999) pp-125.
11 - quoted from Azdi Futuh al-Sham, pp-111 and 130 in "Arab Islamic perceptions of Byzantine Religion and Culture" pp-126.

CHRISTIAN-MUSLIM RELATIONS: GUIDELINES FOR CATHOLICS IN THE DIOCESE OF PARRAMATTA

Victor Edwin SJ
Christian-Muslim Relations: Guidelines for Catholics in the Diocese of Parramatta was launched in Australia on 11 September 2008 in the presence of the Bishop of the diocese, Kevin Manning, who had asked Fr. Herman Roborgh SJ and Sr. Vivienne to write a small book that would help Catholics to develop good relations with Muslims in his diocese near Sydney, Australia. Fr Herman completed his PhD at Aligarh Muslim University (India) last year. He made an analysis of a commentary on the Holy Qur'an (tafsir) written by the Pakistani scholar Amin Ahsan Islahi (d. 1997) called Tadabbur-i-Qur'an. Fr. Herman has a long association with Muslims in South Asia. While living in Lahore, Pakistan, he attended Qur'an classes regularly together with Muslims. On returning to Australia, Herman felt that Christian-Muslim dialogue was perceived by many people as either too difficult and or simply futile. In response to such perceptions regarding Christian-Muslim dialogue, Herman wrote this little book which he hopes "may help to clear the way for the practice and experience of interreligious dialogue. It may remove some of the blocks and obstructions and some of the misunderstandings. I hope it may prepare the way for a deeper encounter."
He feels that the religions, including Islam, can make a contribution to our society. Christians need to know that other religions besides Christianity teach justice, freedom and love. By neglecting interreligious dialogue, he says, "we may become arrogant and think that we can solve the problems of the world by ourselves. We could even be unaware of the positive contribution that the religions could make to the issues facing our planet today."
He told the audience who were present during the book launch that there was much to be done. "We need to talk at a deeper level, a more personal level. But we will need greater trust in order to do this. More than ever, we need to learn to listen. It is not easy to move over to the other person's perspective. It means we will have to leave the safety of our own point of view – our well-formulated doctrines and established formulas. It means we will have to respond to questions."
For Herman, dialogue does not have any particular or hidden agenda. It simply means allowing oneself to be questioned and to be ready to delve more deeply into one's own experience of faith. He is convinced that interreligious dialogue requires a willingness to re-examine the foundations of one's own faith. Interreligious conversation should bring us back constantly to the basic inspiration of our own faith.
He insists that we need to do interreligious dialogue. "It is not enough to talk about it or to write articles about it or even to write a small book about it! It is only through the experience of the interreligious encounter that we will change. The experience itself changes us," he told his listeners.
He went on to say that interreligious dialogue can happen only among people who are confident without being arrogant, clear enough about their own position without feeling they have it all worked out and without giving the impression they have nothing more to learn. "As in any good conversation, interreligious dialogue does not seek to clarify my faith at the expense of the other. In good interreligious dialogue, the other person is affirmed in his or her faith as well", he added. “Why not rejoice if my Muslim partner grows in her perception of the beauty of Islam or in her self-esteem as a Muslim?" he asked. He said that his book is not really about Islam but rather about Inter-Faith relations and how to foster good relations between Christians and Muslims. It does not try to answer theological questions. He feels that Christians can discuss theological questions today only in the light of the reality in which we live, that is, by acknowledging and accepting the reality of other faiths, especially the reality of Islam in the world. "Gone are the days when Christians could do theology as if they were the only people who lived on earth. Today Christians must examine theological questions in the context of interreligious dialogue. The sacred Scriptures could not be contradicting one another. Christians who engage in theological discussions about God and about Christ should listen to the viewpoints of others who are not Christians, including the viewpoints of Muslims. Similarly, Muslims should try to understand the viewpoint of Christians, especially in their study of Christianity. This is the honest way to do theology and it is the only way that we can do theology in a useful way today" he said.

Understanding Jihad

Victor Edwin: What do Muslims really think when they speak about jihad?
Herman Roborgh: In Arabic, jihad literally means 'effort', that is, to exert oneself in some way or another. Within the context of Islam, jihad has the meaning of exerting oneself for the sake of God and this exertion can be made in many different ways. For example, by giving charity and feeding the poor, by giving more attention to prayer, by controlling one's self and showing patience and forgiveness in the face of offenses, or by gaining authentic knowledge. Another way of exerting oneself in the way of God is by physical fighting to stop oppression and injustice

VE: David Cook comments that in reading Muslim literature - both contemporary and classical – one can see that the evidence for the primacy of spiritual jihad is negligible. Is the claim of spiritual jihad made only by western scholars who study Sufism and by those who work for interfaith dialogue?
HR: References to spiritual jihad are to be found in the earliest traditions of Islam itself and do not originate from western scholars who study Sufism or from those who work for interfaith dialogue. For example, after his companions had returned from a military campaign in defense of the community in Medina, the Prophet Muhammad said: "We have returned from the lesser (asghar) jihad to the greater (akbar) jihad."1 This is a clear indication from the time of the Prophet Muhammad himself that the so-called 'spiritual' form of jihad was considered greater (akbar) than the military form of jihad, which was considered 'lesser' (asghar).
Furthermore, the earliest commentators on the Qur'an state clearly that references to military forms of jihad in the Qur'an are always made within a specific context and relate to specific groups of people. References to jihad in the Qur'an are never meant to provide Muslims with a general permission to attack Jews and Christians.2 After the Prophet Muhammad's death, the two factors most influential in accounting for conversion to Islam were not military jihad but Sufism and trade. "The mystic and the merchant were the most successful 'missionaries' of Islam."3 Only in recent times has the relationship between Zionist and jihadi groups become strained. According to Shah-Kazemi, "even so fierce a critic of Islam as Bernard Lewis cannot but confirm the facts of history as regards the true character of Muslim-Jewish relations until recent times."4 I would say the evidence goes against the view that the overwhelming majority of classical theologians, jurists and traditionalists understood the obligation of jihad in a military sense. In other words, throughout the history of Islam, jihad has been more often understood as 'struggle' or 'effort' in the widest sense of the term, as I explained earlier.

VE: What could be the underlying reasons for what is referred to as Islamic terrorism in India and the rest of the world?
HR: The term 'Islamic terrorism' does not refer to anything that can be documented and so should not be used to describe what some Muslims do who resort to acts of terror. The underlying reasons for what some Muslim do when they commit acts of terror could be the intense anger many Muslims feel about the political and military aggression of the developed West towards Middle Eastern countries, especially towards Palestine and Iraq. A common perception of Muslims is that these Western powers are motivated by their own need for power and influence in the world in order to guarantee the supply of energy. Western powers are also perceived to operate according to double standards, advocating democracy and human rights in Muslim countries provided these support and bolster Western national interests. While no form of terrorism can ever be justified, terrorism by Muslims could perhaps be understood as an ex-pression of the intense frustration felt by oppressed and humiliated Muslims who resort to extreme acts of terror as the only response that is left for them to make
Military or violent jihad is not the product of the classical tradition of Islam but a creation of modern ideological thinking. Although the causes of terrorism cannot be found in the classical tradition of Islam, the detrimental effects of globalisation may contribute to an understanding of the roots of terrorism. The recent Congregation of the Society of Jesus found the roots of violence in the loss of sovereignty and national respect. Perhaps violence perpetrated by Muslims could be explained in these terms as well: A political consequence of globalisation has been the weakening of political sovereignty experienced by many nation-states all over the world. Some states feel this phenomenon as a particular type of global marginalisation and the loss of national respect. Transnational interests, unconstrained by national laws and often abetted by corruption, frequently exploit the natural resources of the poor. Powerful economic groups foment violence, war, and arms trafficking. The Decrees of General Congregation 35, Decree 3, par 26.

VE: Are Muslims doing enough to counter terrorism? What have they done so far?
HR: Many Muslims themselves feel they are not doing enough to counter terrorism. During one of the recent Doha debates (http://www.rediffmail.com/cgi-bin/red.cgi?red=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ethedohadebates%2Ecom%2F&isImage=0&BlockImage=0), Muslims who won the debate were arguing that many Arab countries were not doing enough to promote democracy and education or to speak out against the misappropriation of Islam by Islamist movements. Many Muslims reject the way that the classical sources of Islam are being misinterpreted in the world today and are expressing their views on the web
(http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/).

VE: In what ways can the government and civil society respond to the problem of terrorism?
HR: Terrorism takes on a different form in each country or region. There is, therefore, no single response to the phenomenon of terrorism. Governments should never lose sight of the fact that the majority of people (in this case, Muslims) are opposed to violence and would cooperate with any suitable methods of responding to terrorism that do not end up oppressing people and using the same violent methods that the terrorists themselves use.

VE: Recently, you have studied the work of a scholar from Azamgarh in India called Amin Ahsan Islahi, who later moved to Lahore in Pakistan and wrote a nine-volume commentary on the Qur'an that is well known throughout the Muslim world of the sub-continent. What does this commentary say about the military form of jihad ('fighting in the way of God') mentioned in the Qur'an (Surah Baqarah, verse 190)?
HR: Islahi understands the Qur'an against the background of the moral and political victory of the Muslims over their enemies, the Quraysh, who were the political leaders of Mecca during the lifetime of the Prophet. Islahi sees the Qur'an as providing the 'action-plan'5 for the moral and political victory of Muslims in the modern world. For Islahi, the Qur'an contains important instructions that contemporary Muslims need to follow in order to achieve a similar political victory. However, Islahi attributes such victory to rather narrow religious categories of piety and obedience to the will of God rather than to broader considerations of moral integrity and professional competency. Consequently, readers of Islahi's commentary on the Qur'an could conclude that, just as the Prophet Muhammad achieved victory in his lifetime, Muslims in the world today can and should achieve a similar political victory. Furthermore, they could assume that moral and political victory should be achieved only by political or military means and overlook the fact that the Prophet spent many years undergoing various kinds of hardship in Mecca during which he did not engage in political or military activities at all but displayed such human qualities as understanding, tolerance and patience. Professor Siddiqui, who teaches at Aligarh Muslim University, argues that the patience and tolerance of the Prophet during this early period of his life should be an example for Muslims in countries where they form the minority today.6 Even after the Prophet left Mecca and moved to Medina, he used a variety of means to deal with the on-going conflict between Muslims and unbelievers in a peaceful way. The jihad activity arising out of Medina was not primarily of a military nature. According to David Dakake, "the notion of a militant Islam cannot be supported by any educated reading of the source materials, be they the Qur'an and its commentaries, the hadith tradition, or the early Islamic historical works."7 Readers of the commentary by Islahi that I studied should be careful not to draw conclusions about jihad that are not based on the earliest source materials. If not read carefully, Islahi's commentary could lead a hasty reader to conclude that the jihad advocated in the Qur'an is primarily of a political or military nature.
Furthermore, students of Islahi's commentary could assume that the Prophet Muhammad's subsequent victorious return to Mecca could be repeated in the modern world simply by the strength of one's religious conviction and commitment – thereby neglecting the political and social competency that such a victory demands. Real competence is based on adequate knowledge and experience. The Prophet Muhammad was successful because of the delicate combination of his human qualities with his religious faith. His followers will not be successful without combining human and religious qualities and skills in a similar way. Relying on religious fervour alone and neglecting to cultivate other essential human qualities will not result in true progress. In the multicultural societies of today, any 'victory' or success that tries to bypass efforts to promote inter- religious understanding and harmony will be short lived

END – NOTES
1 A hadith quoted in David Dakake, "The Myth of a Militant Islam", in Islam, Fundamentalism, and the Betrayal of Tradition – Essays by Western Muslim Scholars, edited by Joseph E.B. Lumbard, Indiana: World Wisdom, 2004, p. 3.
2 Cf. David Dakake, ibid, p. 10, where he explicitly mentions al-Tabari (839-923 C.E), one of the earliest and most famous of the Qur'anic commentators.
3 "Recollecting the Spirit of Jihad", by Reza Shah-Kazemi in Islam, Fundamentalism, and the Betrayal of Tradition, ibid, p. 126.
4 Ibid, pp. 127-28.
5 Islahi uses the Urdu word 'naqsha' which I have translated as 'action plan'. Cf. Islahi's commentary on the Qur'an: Tadabbur-i-Qur'an, by Amin Ahsan Islahi, Lahore: Faran Foundation, 1984, Surah Al Hud, volume 4, p. 137.
6 Cf. The Prophet Muhammad – A Role Model for Muslim Minorities, by Muhammad Yasin Mazhar Siddiqui, Leicestershire: The Islamic Foundation, 2006.
7 David Dakake, "The Myth of a Militant Islam", in ibid, p. 28.

VATICAN’S GEETINGS TO MUSLIMS FOR END OF RAMADAN

The Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue issued the following message on the occasion of the end of Ramadan:
Christians and Muslims: Together for the dignity of the family
Dear Muslim friends,
1. As the end of the month of Ramadan approaches, and following a now well-established tradition, I am pleased to send you the best wishes of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue. During this month Christians close to you have shared your reflections and your family celebrations; dialogue and friendship have been strengthened. Praise be to God!
2. As in the past, this friendly rendezvous also gives us an opportunity to reflect together on a mutually topical subject which will enrich our exchange and help us to get to know each other better, in our shared values as well as in our differences. This y ear we would like to propose the subject of the family.
3. One of the documents of the Second Council Vatican, Gaudium et Spes, which deals with the Church in the modern world, states: 'The well-being of the individual person and of human and Christian society is intimately linked with the healthy condition of that community produced by marriage and family. Hence Christians and all men who hold this community in high esteem sincerely rejoice in the various ways by which men today find help in fostering this community of love and perfecting its life, and by which parents are assisted in their lofty calling. Those who rejoice in such aids look for additional benefits from them and labour to bring them about.' (n. 47)
4. These words give us an opportune reminder that the development of both the human person and of society depends largely on the healthiness of the family! How many people carry, sometimes for the whole of their life, the weight of the wounds of a difficult or dramatic family background? How many men and women now in the abyss of drugs or violence are vainly seeking to make up for a traumatic childhood? Christians and Muslims can and must work together to safeguard the dignity of the family, today and in the future.
5. Given the high esteem in which both Muslims and Christians hold the family, we have already had many occasions, from the local to the international level, to work together in this field. The family, that place where love and life, respect for the other and hospitality are encountered and transmitted, is truly the 'fundamental cell of society.'
6. Muslims and Christians must never hesitate, not only to come to the aid of families in difficulty, but also to collaborate with all those who support the stability of the family as an institution and the exercise of parental responsibility, in particular in the field of education. I need only remind you that the family is the first school in which h one learns respect for others, mindful of the identity and the difference of each one. Interreligious dialogue and the exercise of citizenship cannot but benefit from this.
7. Dear friends, now that your fast comes to an end, I hope that you, with your families and those close to you, purified and renewed by those practices dear to your religion, may know serenity and prosperity in your life! May Almighty God fill you with His Mercy and Peace!
Jean-Louis Cardinal Tauran, President;
Archbishop Pier Luigi Celata, Secretary