Getting Jews and Muslims talking
A reader sent me this link on the Economist:
This week saw the latest such attempt at an exchange of ideas, as an open letter from leading Muslim scholars to the Jewish community was unveiled in Cambridge, Britain. It follows a somewhat similar initiative that was launched last October, when 138 leading Muslims wrote to the leaders of the Christian world, proposing a formal dialogue based on the commandments of Jesus to love God and one another. The original letter was entitled “A Common Word between Us and You”. At first the Vatican reacted coolly, but Pope Benedict XVI eventually agreed to receive some of the signatories.
The signatories of this week’s letter include Tariq Ramadan, an influential scholar and teacher among Western (especially west European) Muslims; Mustafa Ceric, the grand mufti of Bosnia; and Sari Nusseibeh, a Palestinian professor from al-Quds university in Jerusalem. “As Muslims and Jews we share core doctrinal beliefs, the most important of which is strict monotheism”, the missive states—after explaining that it is being published “as a gesture of goodwill towards rabbinic leaders and the wider Jewish communities of the world.”
Bizarrely, I haven’t seen much coverage of this. Here’s the website for The Centre for the study of Muslim-Jewish Relations.
Keith Kahn-Harris has a related article about peace in the Middle East on Liberal Conspiracy.
This only reflects what happens (in my area at least) all the time. My friends have always included Jews, Muslims, Hindus and Christians and we’ve always managed to get along without taking over each other’s houses or stoning each other in the street. I find this insistence in the media that Jews and Muslims can’t be in each other’s company ridiculous, but clearly it makes for good copy.
So I’m not really that surprised about the lack of coverage but I’m very glad that you’ve mentioned it – otherwise I wouldn’t hear of it before Friday, which is when the JC comes out.
I was in the JC! Being cussed, apparently. Heh.
Why do Muslims and Jews need to talk together?
Why should the underlying problems between Israel/Palestine initiate and/or dominate Muslim/Jewish dialogue?
Why they need to talk is because over the past 50 years or so their talking has been solely about I/P which has caused a deterioration in community relations.
This is a good move like some of the others such as Aliph-Aleph.
Mr. Hundall – isn’t odd that LC links the left and the Palestinians but doesn’t link the right and Israel – which is odd. It links the Jews and Israel whereas many Jews also aspire for peace. Amazing how right wing sites are selective how thinbsg are portrayed.
The JC cussed you? I should read more than just the marriage and engagement notices, clearly. What did you do, Sunny? WHAT DID YOU DO?
Interesting story in the same vein:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/02/AR2008030201239_2.html?hpid=sec-religion
Slightly more worrying is this commentary from Mehri Niknam who is well-respected for her work in this area:
http://www.thejc.com/home.aspx?ParentId=m13&SecId=13&AId=58477&ATypeId=1
She doubts the letter is produced by Muslim scholars.
Never the less the idea should be encouraged.
Lol. Ahem, they didn’t like my piece on CIF saying al-Qaradawi should be let into the country.
hehe, the JC cussed sunny – now he’s a somebody, eh!
avi:
that is quite a worrying set of comments by mehri (who i have known for a long time and is a very savvy lady in most respects)… but, on the other hand, it raises a number of questions:
a) mehri’s pretty eminent – why wasn’t she at the conference in cambridge?
b) even if she wasn’t, there were a *bunch* of people there who know her very well, like r. jonathan magonet for example; it strikes me that she could very well have got her point across privately without going into print.
c) it also strikes me that what comes across as quite a serious set of criticisms could be possibly read as implying that the muslim scholars were able to put one over on the jews.
d) given that practically the same week, one of the signatories, tariq ramadan, called for a boycott of an italian literary event where israel was the guest of honour, we can’t rule the “doublespeak” explanation out
i’m actually going to try and find out, because on one hand this could be sour grapes, but on the other it could be quite a serious issue. mehri can easily criticise the cambridge declaration for being a bit teenage but you could equally well criticise her joseph foundation’s approach as being too academic and highbrow – incidentally, if you’re not familiar with the bananabrain “3-tier” approach to interfaith dialogue:
1. “ceremonial” dialogue: consists of people like sir sigmund sternberg and prince hassan of jordan giving each other awards and making declarations
2. “practitioner” dialogue: mostly, academic conferences attended by clergy and theology students who have a lot in common
3. “grass-roots” dialogue: face-to-face encounters with non-professionals, for example alif-aleph and the new MUJU initiative which is currently being promoted on facebook.
it seems to me we have here a tier 1 initiative being criticised by a tier 1.5 initiative and that, i feel is a little unhelpful, which is what makes me wonder why mehri wasn’t there in the first place.
ashik:
what avi said, with the proviso that you really ought to know each other quite well first or it can be a bit of a minefield. on the other hand, leave it too long and I/P can be the “elephant in the room”.
b’shalom
bananabrain
BB – I agree it is worrying and it would be good if you can find out more and I would appreciate your feedback.
The way I read it was she said that she didn’t think this letter came from Muslim scholars at all. Her points are interesting and fairly detailed.
Also please provide more info on Mehri and why you think her approach is too academic. I am interested because she left The Mainmonides Foundation run by Dr.Khalili because she said it wasn’t doing enough at the grassroots.
For myself in your 3-tier approach I think Tier 3 is the most important and hence I like organisations at that level.
Have to say I think that Sir Sigmund is more at all 3 levels and works across all 3. I think he does a lot quietly at level 2 and level 3 which often goes unnoticed.
However I think the biggest problem is everyone is trying to do too much at Levels 1 and 2 and not enough at 3. All these new initiatives at at Level 1 and 2, hardly anything for the man on the street.
‘getting people talking’ is such a policy wonk, artificial and shallow way of going about anything in real life.
best leave it to folks who walk their talk. like Fantazia
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=92338786
avi,
i’ll call some of the people involved and see if i can dig up some info.
they are good points, but i don’t think she’s saying that exactly; i think she’s saying that they’re ignoring the context of the quotes they’re using to support their statement (which i think they are) as well as glossing over some of the more realistic assessments of jewish-muslim relations (e.g. dhimmitude) – plus they’re making some *big* assumptions about the level of support they have worldwide – so the criticisms are quite cogent.
i don’t think it’s a problem with her attitude or approach – this was indeed why she left maimonides, but if you look at what the joseph foundation are doing:
http://www.josephinterfaithfoundation.org/forthcoming
then it is hard to avoid the conclusion that it’s still pretty academic when you see things like “development of philology and grammar and their centrality in textual exegesis” – doesn’t sound that grass-roots to *me*, although i do think it’s important to have a sound scholarly foundation to one’s work – so don’t think i’m dissing her; mehri’s cool.
oh, i’m not dissing siggi – he’s a dude. but i still haven’t seen anyone pushing, for example, a synagogue-mosque twinning initiative, which i’ve been banging on about for ages.
precisely my point – this is something that people have to start pushing within their own communities.
b’shalom
bananabrain
BB – Would appreciate it if you can get some more info.
Why I read it that she doubted scholars was involved was from this statement:
“I am fully aware of the several important Muslim names that are given as allegedly having written this letter..”
The words alledgedly having writtenb catching my attention.
It appears Maimonides has gone into hibernation since she left and I am disappointed with Dr. Khalili not pushing forward.
I knwo your not dissing Sir Sigmund but just wanted to point out that he also does a lot which people don’t notice.
“synagogue-mosque twinning”
Interesting and innovative idea – why don’t you push forward with it yourself maybe by doing as a project with Aliph-Aleph or 3-Faiths?
I think the best projects are just ones people get on with. I’m sure with the people you know such as Mehri you’d do well.
The fact that the letter has not been widely publicised is reflection of how dialogue and cooperation tend to be perceived as having poor news value. The ‘if it bleeds, it leads’ attitude tends to work against these kinds of stories.
Perhaps the finest documentary on the Israeli/Palestinian problem…..
Details why peace has eluded us so far…
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/oslo/
Good point from Katy right up top.
your 3-tier approach bb is a good evaluation tool ..
BB – any update from your sources regarding this and Mehri’s commentary in JC?
sorry, guys, have been a bit sidetracked as the rough mixes from my new album have arrived and i have to do some serious earbashing.
b’shalom
bananabrain
Shocking events in Jerusalem with many people being killed:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7282269.stm
It is madness and should be deplored. It highlights the need for an urgent solution. How many more deaths are needed before people see sense.