Islamophobia in western media is based on false premises Thursday, January 21, 2021

Although anti-Muslim sentiments certainly existed long before 2001, the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the response to them intensified anti-Muslim tropes, namely the presumption that Islam is inherently violent or that Muslims have a propensity for terrorism. Since 9/11, specific individuals have turned Islamophobia into an industry, scapegoating Muslims to further their own agendas.

Like other forms of intolerance, however, Islamophobia can be objectively assessed. Empirical studies are an effective means of exposing this prejudice, one that plagues both sides of the political spectrum.

Anti-Muslim rhetoric

The rhetoric of Canadian conservative author Mark Steyn is typical of right-wing Islamophobia. For instance, Steyn claims that “most Muslims either wish or are indifferent to the death of the societies in which they live.”

Likewise, Dutch politician and right-wing populist Geert Wilders refers to the Qur’an as “a source of inspiration for, and justification of, hatred, violence and terrorism in the world, Europe and America.” British conservative political commentator Douglas Murray suggests that to reduce terrorism, the United Kingdom requires “a bit less Islam.”

Prominent left-wing commentators also contribute to the same scaremongering stereotypes as their conservative counterparts. For example, American neuroscientist and new atheist Sam Harris asserts that “there is a direct link between the doctrine of Islam and Muslim terrorism.”

Similarly, American comedian and television producer Bill Maher believes that there is a “connecting tissue” of intolerance and brutality that binds 1.6 billion Muslims to terrorist groups like ISIS. And Somali-born Dutch American activist and writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali states that “violence is inherent in the doctrine of Islam.”

None of these characterizations, however, are sufficient from a scholarly viewpoint. Self-evident positions and gross exaggerations tend to detract from the main issue: whether the depiction of Muslims as violent extremists is misleading.

Most Muslims reject violent extremism

Globally speaking, Muslims overwhelmingly reject suicide bombings and other forms of violence against civilians in defence of Islam. Studies found that Muslims view such extremism as rarely or never justified, including 96 per cent in Azerbaijan, 95 per cent in Kazakhstan, 92 per cent in Indonesia and 91 per cent in Iraq.

The 2016 report What Muslims Want, the most extensive research of British Muslims ever conducted, found that nine of 10 British Muslims reject terrorism outright. When asked “To what extent do you sympathize with or condemn people who commit terrorist actions as a form of political protest,” 90 per cent condemned these actions, five per cent didn’t know and three per cent neither condemned nor condoned political acts of terror.

That’s hardly “most Muslims,” as Steyn contends.

Protestors at a public rally carrying an anti-racism banner on Sept. 5, 2020 in Newcastle, U.K. (Shutterstock)

When a large-scale global survey asked if “attacks on civilians are morally justified,” similar results were found when comparing Muslim attitudes to the general public in France, Germany and the United Kingdom. In fact, the responses were almost indistinguishable: French public (one per cent) versus Muslims in Paris (two per cent); German public (one per cent) versus Muslims in Berlin (0.5 per cent); and British public (three per cent) versus Muslims in London (two per cent).

In North America, research outcomes were strikingly similar. In a 2016 Environics Institute survey, only one per cent of Canadian Muslims endorsed the following statement: “many” or “most” Muslims in Canada support violent extremism. When asked if killing civilians for political, social or religious reasons can ever be justified, a 2017 Pew Research Center survey found that 84 per cent of American Muslims confirmed that it is “never/rarely” justifiable.

Because 12 per cent of American Muslims replied that violence against civilians can be “sometimes/often” justified, anti-Muslim activists argue that hundreds of thousands of Muslims remain radicalized. The qualitative responses of Muslims are quite revealing in this regard: violence is permitted if attacked, both as individuals and as a nation. In other words, in self-defense. When the U.S. general public was surveyed, their answers were practically identical: 83 per cent and 14 per cent respectively.

Contrary to Maher’s belief that the world’s Muslims support terrorist organizations like ISIS, most people in countries with significant Muslim populations have an overwhelmingly negative view of ISIS, including virtually 100 per cent of respondents in Lebanon, 94 per cent in Jordan and 84 per cent in the Palestinian territories (10 per cent of Palestinians had no opinion of ISIS).

False assumptions

Islamophobia is an apt term for classifying inaccurate assumptions concerning Muslims and Islam. Those forwarding an anti-Muslim agenda believe that their viewpoints are coherent, but as Eli Massey and Nathan J. Robinson point out, the function of a prejudice “leads us to believe that our generalizations are based on reason and evidence, even when reason and evidence actually point in an entirely different direction.”

The main assertion that Muslims largely support extremist violence is groundless. Because Islamophobia distorts the western image of Muslims, scientific studies serve as an important corrective in two important ways. First, they expose Islamophobic attitudes that have gripped the West since 9/11 and second, they help to decrease the spread of anti-Muslim vitriol by providing a rational forum for discussion.

Stuart Chambers

Professor, Sociological and Anthropological Studies, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa -  The Conversation

Paul and His Thoughts Monday, September 7, 2020

A comprehensive compilation of analitical studies about Paul and his significant role in forming the Christianity from the very beginning until his tragic death, beheaded by Caesar Nero's executioner.

Paul And His Thoughts

What is Ilm Al Hadith (Science of Hadith) Monday, March 2, 2020

Define Ilm Al Hadith (Science of Hadith)

Ilm al hadith means Science of Hadith, which refers to the Knowledge of the scrutiny of hadith literature. Basically every hadith has a chain (isnad) of narrators that are going all the way back to the Prophet ﷺ. Studying biography of each narrator in a chain who transmits the hadith, in addition to comparing it with other chains of that same hadith, if any, including studying linguists of text as well as circumstances involved when particular hadith was narrated and others factors involved in recording are all included in the subject of ilm al hadith. There exists a few common misconceptions that the collection of hadith took place many years, in most cases 200 years, after the Prophet's death or that its initial collection was started by the students of the companions, and Prophet Muhammad ﷺ and his companions never supported or indulged in this activity. Such misconceptions are false because there is evidence that hadith were being collected during the Prophet's life (discussed in subsequent posts) and in fact the foundation and practice of Ilm Al hadith (Science of Hadith) was initiated by his companions, in a more organized manner especially during the rule of Umar ibn Khattab (r.a), the 2nd successor of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.

Foundation of Ilm Al Hadith (Science of Hadith)

Umar (r.a) was the first to realize the necessity of the proper sifting of the hadith narrations. Those who narrated any hadith were required to produce some witnesses in support of the tradition. In this way a rich corpus of Hadith was built up. Umar (r.a) classified the traditions in two broad categories. One category of traditions pertained to religious, moral and social affairs pertaining to the community at large. The other traditions revolved round the person of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and pertained to his words and deeds as a human being i.e. the Prophet's Sunnah. Umar (r.a) distinguished between these two categories.[1] All matters falling in the first category were binding and had the status of law. Umar (r.a) evolved the following principles on the basis of which the traditions were to be accepted:

(1) The report should be literally faithful;

(2) Every Hadith narrated should carry with it the name of the narrator and the chain of narrators;

(3) The narrators must be men of proven faith and integrity;

(4) In judging the veracity of a report the occasion and circumstances involved should be taken into consideration;

(5) The report should not be repugnant to the Holy Quran;

(6) The report should be rational.

Subsequent Developments in Ilm Al hadith (Science of Hadith)

By the end of 1st century Hijrah (100 AH - 720 CE) majority Companions passed away leaving their compilations behind including the framework and process for hadith evaluation taught to Tabi’een (their students). However this process needed to be a bit more supervised especially to avoid and separate the unauthentic traditions that began circulation in subsequent years. Therefore, during the rule of Umar bin Abdul Aziz (r.a) (717 - 720 CE), one of the Ummayad Caliphs (also known as 2nd Umar due to his piety), ordered the collection of ahadith on a large scale. He assigned learned scholars and hadith experts of Madinah such as Abu Bakr Ibn Hazam (Qadi of Madinah) and famous Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri, who were also students of Prophet's companions, Ayesha (r.a) and Anas bin Malik (r.a), expert hadith specialists and teachers. During the mid of 2nd century Hijrah (150 AH), hadith centers came to exist and scholars like Imam Malik (Died 179 AH) and Sufyan Thauri (Died - 168 AH) and several others opened their centers to teach hadith with rules as laid down by their predecessors.

In subsequent years rules of hadith collection were expanded and further conditions were added such as ilm al rijal (names of narrators and their biographies) and each hadith that included a chain (isnad) of narrators was classified based on the reliability of the narrators such as their piety, intelligence, if they were of forgetful nature, or if they were known to ever have lied. It was based on the strength of the narrators is how each hadith came to be classified with a status such as Dhaeef (weak), Sahih (authentic), Mutawattur (narrated through several chains), Hassan (good - lesser than Sahih), Ghareeb (strange due to some interruption in chain). Based on each status later compilations were made such as Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, with sahih meaning they are very authentic due to evaluation involved in their chains. One of the authors of Hadith book comments on this unique process: “Every Muhaddith (hadith expert) even today, when describes a hadith, he suffixes it with a specific name of a hadith denoting its level of authenticity (such as ‘Hassan’ or ‘Sahih’), then quotes the book of hadith where its documented (such as Musnad of Ahmad) and then prefixes it with an unbroken chain of narrators spreading over the last 1400 years through whom he received the hadith. No other religion, nation, party or even small group of people can show the parallel of what early Muslims did to ensure the authenticity of hadith and Sunnah.”[2]

In subsequent centuries scholars studied these ahadith, added their comments to explanations given by their teachers and developed upon the wisdom and knowledge, resulting in science of Fiqh (practices/ruling) & Shariah (Islamic law). It is extremely sad to see that today many Muslims doubt the authenticity process of all hadith or some of it, without researching. And worst is that some even compare the uniquely systematic collection of this literature with collection of Christian Gospels that clearly lacked any consistent methodology and process in its compilation.

References:

[1] Masud-ul-Hasan, Professor. 1982. "Khalifa bin al-Khattab - Hadith and Fiqh." Alim - The world's most useful Islamic software. Accessed 03 05, 2019.  . (Masud-ul-Hasan 1982)

[2] Kazi, Mazhar. April 1, 2007. Guidance from Hadith & Sunnah. Al-Huda Publications - (Kazi April 1, 2007)

[Courtesy of  Zaid Shah | Rizqan Kareem | Most Excellent Sustenance]

The Quran on Jihad as Struggle vs Jihad as Fighting Sunday, March 1, 2020

Jihad means striving and struggle in the way of Allah ﷻ. Jihad does not mean to kill. Qitaal means to kill. The majority of Verses on Jihad mentioned in the Quran are not associated with Qitaal. The only Surah that mentions Jihad with Qitaal is Surah Taubah (chapter 9) and that also in regards to lawful defensive war and not aggression. Sheikh Irshad Soofi Siddiqui Chishti of South Africa, in his book Madinah to Karbala, mentions the following facts about Jihad and its revelation in the Quran: “There are 35 verses of the Holy Quran which contain the word Jihad ﺟﻬﺎﺩ or its derivatives. Of the 35 verses of the Holy Quran which contain the word Jihad ﺟﻬﺎﺩ or its derivatives, not a single verse contain Jihad ﺟﻬﺎﺩ as suggesting aggressive fighting and killing. Not a single verse combines the word Jihad ﺟﻬﺎﺩ with qitaal (killing) fighting or warfare. This is with regard to the text of the Holy Quran. Putting the 35 verses which deals with Jihad ﺟﻬﺎﺩ into context, 30+ verses have no context or connection with fighting or warfare. There are only few verses which mention the word Jihad with Qitaal. They possess the context of lawful defensive warfare and they all appear in one chapter (Surah). They are in the 9th Surah, at-Tawbah (Repentance) and they refer to a lawful defensive war.”[1]

Many Quranic verses that contain the word Jihad were revealed in Makkah during the 1st ten years of Prophet’s preaching, and in Makkah the Prophet and His Companions never engaged in any combats. In fact they bore the persecution patiently. For example the following Verses revealed in Makkah contain the word Jihad and the context in which they were revealed has nothing to do with fighting or Qitaal. In the following Verse Allah ﷻ advises the believers to strive with the Quran (i.e. using knowledge as your weapon) and even refers to such struggle as Jihad Kabeera i.e. Great Struggle: … but strive hard against them, by means of this [Quran], with utmost striving (Jihad Kabeera)."[2] In the following Verse Allah ﷻ mentions that doing good and righteous deeds are a Jihad (struggle) His path: "...But We shall be sure to guide to Our ways those who strive hard (jahadoo) for Our cause: God is with those who do good.."[3[ Similar verses that mention Jihad (struggle), majority of them in the Quran are not in reference to Qitaal or killing, but inspire the believers to struggle in the way of righteousness and keep patience at what they experience when struggling, because suffering brings them spiritually closer to Allah ﷻ and impacts their enemies by making them realize their own errors. However, as a last resort if the enemy is hell bent on eliminating the believers and Islam, then in such extreme scenario there is room to Jihad (struggle) and fight the enemy for the sake of defending one's honor and faith.

References:

[1] Chishti, Irshad Soofi Siddiqui. 2010. Madinah to Karbala Holy Blood on Unholy Hands Volume One. Abd al-Qadir Soofi Publications - (Chishti 2010)

[2] Al Quran 25:52 - Asad Translation

[3] Al Quran 29:69 - www.Quran.com

[Courtesy of  Zaid Shah | Rizqan Kareem | Most Excellent Sustenance]

Hadith Collections in Early Islam

​Hadith are the Prophetic words and Sunnah are the Prophet's actions. Alongside memorizing and writing the Quran, many companions of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ memorized and copied his hadith and sunnah in to writing format, especially those that had very close interactions with him and spent more time with his blessed personality. The companions memorized and collected the Prophetic traditions when accompanying him, and after his passing away learned those that were missed from other more learned companions.

The collection of Abu Bakr (r.a)

According to Ayesha (r.a), Abu Bakr (r.a) had originally a collection of over five hundred traditions, and he deposited the compilation with her for custody. Ayesha (r.a) relates that one night she noticed that Abu Bakr (r.a) felt very restless. He tossed about in the bed, and could not sleep. Ayesha (r.a) got worried whether he was suffering or was worried. He made no reply, but remained restless throughout the night. The following morning he asked Ayesha (r.a) to bring him the collections that he had deposited with her. She brought the compilation and he set fire to it. On the inquiry of Ayesha (r.a), Abu Bakr (r.a) explained his conduct: "The collection contained many traditions that I had heard from other people. I thought that if I died and left behind traditions accepted by me as sahih (authentic), but really not so, then I would have to answer for that."[1] Thus Abu Bakr (r.a) collected himself and in fact did not condemn in any way this act of collecting traditions but burned them only due to fear of personal accountability before Allah ﷻ, if even one of them resulted in being incorrect. Therefore its not the collection he disliked but his personal accountability due to deep consciousness of Allah ﷻ that he feared.

Hadith collection during Umar's rule

It was during his rule that Umar (r.a) laid the foundation for the practice of ilm al hadith (science of hadith), process used for the hadith preservation by subsequent generations of Islamic scholars. The practice with Umar (r.a) was that if any new problem cropped up, he announced the issue in the public assembly, and inquired if any of them remembered any tradition of the Holy Prophet ﷺ on the subject. Those who narrated any tradition were required to produce some witnesses in support of the tradition. If such statement was duly corroborated and was in accordance with the spirit of the Quran as well as common sense it was adopted and applied to the facts of the case in hand. In this way a rich corpus of Hadith was built up. To read more on the agreed principles for acceptance of a hadith in his era please read: ​What is Ilm Al Hadith (Science of Hadith).

Hadith collections by prominent sahabas (companions)

​Its stated the Abu Ayyub Ansari (r.a), the famous Ansari companion, traveled for a month’s journey to Egypt listen to a hadith of the Prophet ﷺ directly from its narrator Uqba ibn Amir (r.a) who said that Prophet ﷺ said: “Whoever cover the faults of the believer Allah will cover his faults on Judgment day.” (Bukhari & Muslim). After hearing he did not even change his saddle of the horse and immediately left to come back. Jabir bin Abdullah (r.a) went a month’s journey from Madinah to Syria to secure authenticity of a tradition from Abdullah ibn Amr (r.a) as Abdullah used to himself write hadith. Abdullah (r.a) reports: "I used to write everything i heard from the Messenger (saw) as i wanted to Preserve it. The Quraish forbade me, saying "Do you write down everything that you hear (from him) and The Messenger ﷺ is a human being who sometimes speaks in anger and joy? (that is that he may say something emotionally that may not be worth writing)." So I stopped. Then i mentioned this to Allah's Messenger ﷺ. He pointed with his finger to his mouth and said "Write! By the One in Whose Hand is My Life! Nothing comes out of it (His Mouth) except the Truth!" [2]

Said ibn Al Musayyib (r.a) used to travel days and nights to listen to a single hadith from its original narrator. It is on record that companions like Ali ibn Abi Talib (r.a), Abu Huraria (r.a) and other companions collected their own sahifa (scripture) of Prophetic Hadith such as:

• Sahifah (scripture) of Ali ibn Abu Talib (r.a)
• Sahifah of Abdullah ibn Abi Auf (r.a)
• Nuskah of Samurah Jundab (r.a)
• Kitab of Abu Huraira (r.a)
• Sahifah of Jabir Bin Abdullah (r.a) [3]

It was these books from which was derived most of the hadith literature later found in the authentic collections that we famously know today as Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Tirmidhi etc.

References:

[1] Masud-ul-Hasan, Professor. 1982. "Khalifa Abu Bakr - Mushaf, Hadith, Tasawwuf, Fiqh, and Poetry." Alim - The world's most useful Islamic software. Accessed 03 05, 2019. . (Masud-ul-Hasan 1982)

[2] Sunan Abu Daud of Imam Abu Daud, Hadith #3161

[3] Kazi, Mazhar. April 1, 2007. Guidance from Hadith & Sunnah. Al-Huda Publications - (Kazi April 1, 2007)

[Courtesy of  Zaid Shah | Rizqan Kareem | Most Excellent Sustenance]

Can Jews and Christians Truly Reconsile? Friday, February 7, 2020

"We Curse Christianity Three Times a Day"

Can Jews and Christians Truly Reconsile?

The 1965 Vatican Council, and subsequent attempts by the Church to make peace with Judaism, did not win over Orthodox Jews who believed that their reading of the Scriptures was correct - not Christian reading. A new book discusses this uncomfortable relationship

After Esau hated Jacob for years, the brothers met. Esau rushed to Jacob, hugged him, fell on his neck, kissed him, both of them weeping. Thrilling reconciliation. But the Jewish sages, according to Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 78, were not attracted to this reconciliation. They placed dots above the Hebrew word vayeshakehu ("he kissed her," Genesis 33: 4), signifying abolition. But erasure was not an obvious choice - it was, after all, a word in the Torah - so they performed "sham" abolition. They claim that Esau's kiss was a hoax, and that his intention was not to kiss (nishek) him but to bite (nashakh) - a nice play on words.

Then, why are they crying? Because a miracle happened and Jacob's neck hardened and prevented the bite from being damaged; one cried for his neck while the other cried for his teeth. Funny? Of course not. For the sages of the rabbinical period, Esau was a metonym for Rome and later for Christianity. The possibility that Rome would reconcile with the descendants of Jacob, the Jews, had never occurred to them.

But it happened in Rome, in 1965. The Second Vatican Council published "Nostra aetate," a document in which the Catholic Church declares neglect of its anti-Jewish heritage and its desire to make peace with Judaism.

An enlightening and important new book by historian Karma Ben Johanan, "Reconciliation and Its Dissatisfaction: Unresolved Tensions in Judeo-Christian Relations," examines the reciprocal conceptions of Catholicism and Orthodox Jewry in an era of reconciliation. The first part is devoted to the enthusiasm of the Christians in approaching the Jewish people, as well as to the internal debates that arose in the Church after the reconciliation. In the second part, the book discusses the cold response of Orthodox Judaism, including the suspicion raised by the desire of Christians to turn a new leaf, and the concerns of the rabbis at the possibility of excessive closeness.

The captivating book by Ben Johanan, a Jewish-Christian relations and theology scholar currently teaching at Berlin's Humboldt University, is based on library research and personal interviews with some of its protagonists. It is written with scientific momentum and enriches readers with essential information to help us understand ourselves and others. Authors should be congratulated on their good writing, fresh style, and fluent and convincing phrasing.

As noted, early in the book, Ben Johanan described the intense efforts of Catholic theologians to understand the meaning of the Holocaust and the Church's anti-Jewish heritage. On the one hand, there is a feeling of guilt and an acceptance of responsibility; on the other hand, fear of a collapse of the theological infrastructure that has crystallized for nearly 2,000 years. The Declaration of the Second Vatican Council concludes a chapter in the history of Christianity and opens a new one. The decisions taken, however, raised new questions, which remain unresolved today.

The declaration involved the withdrawal of two fundamental postulates regarding the Jewish people: guilt at the crucifixion of Jesus and the claim that they were no longer the so-called elect. The third idea, the aspiration to see their conversion in the End Times, gives in to the hope that in the future all people will be united in belief in one God, a formula that has a familiar biblical twist. Two issues remain open: Jewish exile and the creation of the State of Israel.

• What Promotes Christian Evangelical Love-Hate Relationships With Jews
• Why Netanyahus Embraced 'Christian Europe'
• Are American Catholics Attacked by Extremist Nostalgia for Anti-Jewish Teaching?
• Why Jesus Was Really a Hebrew Speaker

After the Jews were liberated from Jesus' murder, and after it had been determined that they would continue to be loved by God, questions arose about why they were punished by exile and what it means to re-establish the Jewish state. If the Jews are still loved, what is the validity of the dogma of the ancient Church which states that "there is no salvation outside the Church"? Are Jews exempt from this rule?

The author points to the rise of conservative trends after the Second Vatican Council, not only as a natural response to the reformists' victories in the body, but also against the backdrop of the 1968 student revolts in Western Europe and the United States. , which raises concerns about the erosion of belief that will lead believers to abandon their faith.

The book vividly describes the readiness of the Church to face the challenges of modernity, to look in the mirror and carry out a self-examination without fear of shaking the foundations that stand. It is not easy for a 2,000 year old religion to retract the dogma that billions of people command to follow. It is no small matter to criticize respectable individuals who are canonized, on canonical books taught from generation to generation. A religion, in essence, finds it difficult to examine itself critically, because in doing so its aspirations for metaphysical truth are lost. A pope who sits on Peter's throne does not wish to claim that all his predecessors were wrong.

Pope Paul VI during the Second Vatican Council. [Photo: Peter Geymayer]

Ben Johanan describes the courage, sincerity and determination of the supporters of reform in the Church, who face the doubts and fears of conservatives. The most important point of his book is the vivid description of Pope John Paul II's visit to Israel in March 2000. The prayers he offered at the Western Wall, his speech at the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial and his request for forgiveness from the Jewish people. ignited a deep shift in the relationship between Jews and Christians. His symbolic movement created a new kind of dialogue, based on human and diplomatic friendship that pushed doctrinal arguments to the point of view of a handful of experts.

The 'idolatry' problem

In the second part, this book presents the internal discourse of Orthodox Jews on Christianity. The author deliberately chooses Orthodoxy, of all options, as a counterweight to the Catholic Church because of its hegemonic position in Israel and its important role in defining Jewish identity, although it is doubtful this choice will be favored by liberal American Jews. Ultimately, Ben Johanan concluded that, while Christian discourse was aimed at peace, Orthodox Jewish discourse responded to Christianity with increasing hostility, which preceded the Second Vatican Council and deepened thereafter.

One example is the halakhic discussion of whether Christianity includes the avoda zara - Hebrew for "idolatry." During the Middle Ages, there were differences of opinion on this issue. Some admit that Christians believe in the divine source of the Torah and their religious intentions are sincere. However, in the eyes of most rabbinical judges deciding on halakha matters, belief in the divinity of Jesus and the Holy Trinity was considered evidence of the multiplicity of gods, hence idolatry. The closer relationship between Jews and Christians in the modern era may have resulted in a softening of expectations for Christianity, but such as Yosef Salmon, a history professor, and Prof. Aviad Hacohen, a law scholar has shown, Modern Jewish orthodoxy continues to view Christianity as idolatry. Indeed, according to Ben Johanan,

An increasingly negative attitude towards Christianity is also seen in efforts to restore the expression of Jewish literature that contradicts Christianity and to reveal new truths that were hidden and censored since the invention of printing, for fear of incurring Christian wrath. Among censors in the past, some genuinely wanted to become enlightened Jews, as the Israeli historian Amnon Raz-Krakotzkin has pointed out. Normalization and political freedom eliminated fear of Christianity and served to compensate for the inferiority felt by Jews over the years.

It is not easy for a 2,000 year old religion to retract the dogma that billions of people command to follow.

Another question that the halakhic literature considers is whether, now that the Jews have come to power, the State of Israel should destroy the churches under its rule, or whether this act should be avoided simply for fear of angering the "goyim," such as Rabbi Yehuda Gershuni (disciple of the Rabbi. Abraham Isaac Kook) and Rabbi Menachem Kasher are defended.

A more extreme approach is also seen in the realm of music. In the 19th century, Rabbi Moshe Hazan praised Christian music effectively, while Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg (died 2006) expressed surprise at his approach. I must note that it is not only religious chants that disturb the Orthodox. On two occasions I have encountered hostile responses to Schiller's chant "Ode to Joy" ("Everyone becomes brothers") in Beethoven's Ninth, because it is considered "Christian music."

One of the important innovations of this book is its discussion of the religious meaning of Jewish history in the school of thought of Rabbi Yehuda Ashkenazi (nicknamed "Manitou") and the rabbis of his circle. They were mostly educated in France and immigrated to Israel after the Six Day War, approaching Mercaz Harav Yeshiva, a key institution of the national religious movement, founded by Rabbi Kook in Jerusalem. Ashkenazi is among the few figures in Orthodox Judaism who are relatively familiar with Christianity. He stated that for 2,000 years Christianity claimed that the Jews did not understand their own scriptures, that they were no longer the Israel of choice and that they were punished with exile for crucifying God's child. This accusation threatens the identity of the Jews.

According to Ashkenazi, things turned around after the founding of Israel. Today, Christianity is suffering from loss of identity. It was not the Jewish eyes covered by the veil that prevented them from understanding the Old Testament; it's a blind Christian who doesn't understand the New Testament. The re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty proves that the Jews were right in their prolonged dispute with Christianity. The realization of the prophetic return to Zion proves that the Jewish interpretation of the Bible, not the Christian one, is correct. Instead of Jews serving as "witnesses of faith" to the justification of Christianity, Ashkenazi said, Christians now serve as astonished witnesses to the rise of the Jewish people.

Thus a new interpretation of the creation of the State of Israel developed. Not just a "national home" as others have, but a religious event meant to deny the Christian faith. Everything went awry, "and the time has come to reverse this method," wrote Manitou.

Rabbi Kook

One of the many virtues of Ben Johanan's book is his in-depth observation of the conceptual mosaic of the two religions, and how the idea of ​​a new religion develops amid the unbroken preservation of the coherence and inner balance of the totality of religious thought. In contrast to their frozen imagery, the two religions move and shift endlessly with full awareness of themselves, their historical circumstances and the ideas milling around them.

'Biblical program'

Many reflections have come to my mind while reading this book, and I would like to present three here. The first is the apparent and surprising similarity between the interpretation of history put forward by the "French", and that of the Church Fathers. Indeed, Augustinian doctrine seems to be enjoying a revival at Mercaz Harav Yeshiva. Almost at the same time the Catholic world is retreating from the old theology which saw in history the realization of the victory of the Church over Judaism - that same theology, in its opposite form, gained new life among the adherents of Jewish Zionist messianism. The turning point in Christendom occurred in 1965; in the Jewish community in 1967. According to Oury Cherki, one of the rabbis of the circle, The Six Day War is to be held with a higher regard than the War of Independence. It is a "biblical event in every sense of the word." Now it is the turn of the Jews to look at history as realizing Judaism's triumph over the Church.

Unfortunately, as the Church moved forward and called for interfaith and fraternal conciliation, the Jewish Orthodox circle revived old controversies and claimed victory. Rabbi Cherki even expects Christians to believe in Jews in the place of Jesus, because "Jews are divine"! Manitou wrote, "Gradually Christians discovered that Jews do not need to be Christians but Christians need to be Judai."

Granted, it may be pleasing to believe that the enemy is wrong, but is contemporary Judaism destined to repeat mistakes made by Christianity in its dishonorable past? Rather than aspiring to convert Christians to Jews and win over religious disputes, it would be better for Judaism to reconcile and respect the religions that human civilization has created.

While Christian discourse aims at conciliation, Orthodox Jewish discourse responds to Christianity with growing hostility, which preceded the Second Vatican Council and deepened thereafter.

This unconscious link to Christian thought patterns is also seen in the homeless and therefore universal Jewish conception of the Diaspora. Whereas in the eyes of the philosopher George Steiner and Satmar Rebbe this is the ideal Jew, according to the doctrine of Abraham Isaac Kook, Diaspora Jews appear almost like a Christian. The practical disconnect from political life made him an isolated, abstract being, just as Christianity prefers to abstain from material life, biblical commandments and sexuality, and become a religion of spirituality itself.

In doing so, new material - sacred territories - was added to the classic Zionist "Diaspora negation". The slogan adopted by Rabbi Kook's disciples, "Land of Israel, the people of Israel, the Torah of Israel," replaces the slogan of the 18th century Ramchal (Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto), "The Holy One, Praise Him, the Torah and Israel are one." God was removed, his place was taken over by the Land of Israel, and the Torah was sent down to the third place.

The religious-messianic approach of these supporters also gave a new dimension to the old dispute between Christianity and Judaism about the prophecies of redemption and comfort uttered by the Hebrew prophets. Christianity views it as a prophecy that was fulfilled at the coming of Jesus and in the Christianization of the Roman Empire. Jewish thought in the Middle Ages saw it as a promise of a future to come. Now the future has come true.

Yet one might wonder: If the prophetic destruction of the First Temple succeeded in predicting the destruction of Jerusalem that would occur close to their time, and if the consolation prophecies were able to predict events that would occur 2,500 years later - why didn't any prophet predict the destruction of the Second Temple? And what about the old exile of the Jews, which lasted 2,000, not 70, years, or the Shoah, the most terrible catastrophe to ever befall the Jewish people - why wasn't it foretold by prophets peering into the distant future? Any unbiased reader of comfort prophecy understands that it refers to a return to Zion after the only event of destruction in 586 BC known to the prophets. But faith and naivety are often intertwined.

The second reflection evoked by the book relates to his almost exclusive work with the rabbis. But hostility to Christianity was also found among Orthodox intellectuals. I will note here as a striking example of the late Yeshayahu Leibowitz, the "high priest" of the liberal left in Israel. The book “I Wanted to Ask You, Professor Leibowitz” (Hebrew) contains a letter that the professor wrote to David Flusser, who was a professor of early Christianity and Second Temple Judaism, during the period of Eichmann's trial (in Jerusalem in 1961).

Prof. Yeshayahu Leibowitz [Photo: Alex Levac]

Flusser has expressed satisfaction that Eichmann is unwilling to take oath on a copy of the New Testament in court. "Eichmann separated himself from his Christian God and thus served Christianity," wrote Flusser. He added his hope that it "will be a historic change for my Christian brothers to clear their religious consciences and will allow the Church to be closer to our common Father in heaven."

Leibowitz was furious at Flusser's efforts "to purify the [sheretz] pest of Christianity for a number of reasons." In his view, it is the hatred of Judaism and Judaism that gave birth to Christianity, and "finds perfect expression in the sinful folio [in Hebrew avon, sinful, plus gelion, folio - wordplay on" Evangelion "] and the letters- apostasy though. "

Leibowitz uses harsh language against Christianity, refraining from calling Paul the Evangelist by name and calling him a heretic "by the way," in contrast to his conversion narrative of deep conviction and after Jesus was revealed to him. Christianity is an "abomination of destruction," a paganism that fabricates the forged symbols of Judaism. "We condemn Christianity three times every day," wrote Leibowitz.

He did not change his mind after the Second Vatican Council, but instead held fast to his view that Christianity is "paganism". In a 1987 letter to an unnamed correspondent, he wrote: "Your words make me suspect that you are an apostate, and I do not want to have discussions with apostates." Meshumad, the Hebrew term, is a derogatory idiom for a converted Jew. Leibowitz, for example, called Heinrich Heine "the most despicable and abominable figure in Jewish history." In a 1975 letter he called Meshumad "hated by the people, covenant breakers, blasphemers, blasphemers and the curse of God."

While dozens of theological students, clergy and monks, Catholics and Protestants, flock to Jerusalem each year to study Judaism there, one cannot even imagine Israeli schools teaching the New Testament as additional background for understanding the Talmud.

At the end of a class at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in 2000, where I was quoting passages from the New Testament, a student approached me and asked if I would quote more quotes in future classes. I told him I would give him two answers. First one: yes. Second: In all 2,700 pages of the Babylonian Talmud, there is only one quote from a Gentile book, namely from the New Testament (Babylonian Talmud Tractate Shabbat 116a-b). What is allowed for the Talmud is also permissible for a talmid (disciple). He never appeared in my class again.

The final comment refers to the nature of "Judaism" with which the Church seeks reconciliation. A reader of Ben Johanan's book has the impression that almost every step taken by Christian theologians refers to Judaism as the "Old Testament" religion, which predates Christianity. This shows that the dialogue between the two religions is still in its infancy, since Judaism is not a religion in the Bible but the religion of the Talmud, rabbinical literature, kabbala and prayer. Christian theology is still in dialogue with itself - not yet with the Judaism that has its parallels.

Against this background, pioneering academic research on both sides stands out. Over the last generation, Jewish and Christian scholars in academia have shown great interest in parallel developments in the two religions even after their paths split. The Hebrew University has established a center for the study of Christianity, and with symbolic parallelism, Cardinal Bea's Center for the Study of Judaism has been established at Rome's Pontifical Gregorian University. Dozens of books and hundreds of articles published over the past decades have been devoted to discussing the intimate and complex relationship between Judaism and Christianity throughout history. Ben Johanan's Karma book itself is an important milestone in this academic opening - which in my opinion is a direct result of the Second Vatican Council.

Thanks to the empathy the author shows for the subject, the final product is not only an enlightening research study but also an intellectual, cultural, and political challenge. It is an important book for Jews, separately, and for Christians, separately, and also for anyone for whom the Judeo-Christian story is an important element in defining their identity.

I will close with an excerpt from the book's epilogue: "The challenge to the establishment of the State of Israel against Judaism is similar to that posed by the Christianization of the empire to Christianity." For me, the author also hopes that the results will be different. The book proves that academics have the ability to bring people closer together and bring peace to the world.

“Reconciliation and Its Dissatisfaction: Unresolved Tensions in Judeo-Christian Relations,” by Karma Ben Johanan. Tel Aviv University Press (Hebrew), 460 pages, 98 shekels

[ Israel Jacob Yuval | Published on 14.08.2020]

Professor Israel Jacob Yuval is founder and academic director of the Mandel Scholion Research Center, and heads the Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Advanced Studies in Humanities at Hebrew University. His book "Two Nations in Your Womb: Perceptions of Jewish and Christians" (Magnes Press, 2000; in Hebrew) won the 2002 Bialik Prize in Jewish Studies and Literature.