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.

b’shalom

bananabrain

your 3-tier approach bb is a good evaluation tool ..

Details why peace has eluded us so far…

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/oslo/

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.

i’ll call some of the people involved and see if i can dig up some info.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

precisely my point – this is something that people have to start pushing within their own communities.

b’shalom

bananabrain

best leave it to folks who walk their talk. like Fantazia
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=92338786

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.

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

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.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/02/AR2008030201239_2.html?hpid=sec-religion

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.

Why should the underlying problems between Israel/Palestine initiate and/or dominate Muslim/Jewish dialogue?

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.