I've recently realized that some readers of this blog have interesting blogs of their own. If you are one of them, send me an email and I'll begin a list of "blogs that I follow" or something like that (after all, isn't that what bloggers do?).
I'm not referring to personal or family blogs, or makers of the world's best cupcakes or omelettes. I'm also not very interested in politics, economics, or comparative religions. I'm talking in particular about people (both Muslims and non-Muslims, which does include everybody!) who are thinking about Islam and its Prophet, who are learning on their own and want to engage "the other" (that is the Muslim for the non-Muslim and the non-Muslim for the Muslim) in meaningful discussion. I'm not talking about people so set in beliefs and opinions they learned as a child that they are not open to seeing things, even very important things, in a new way.
So if you are one of those and have a blog you are working on, or one that you like, that falls in the above category, let me know. Bloggers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your _______."
(Sorry, Mr. Marx, I just couldn't think of a good word to finish that sentence)
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Saturday, October 2, 2010
2010 and the Copts
2010 has not been a good year for Egypt's Copts, and there are still three months to go. It actually began before Rass As Senna, the New Year, when Al Azhar University published an article in the December 09 edition of its monthly magazine entitled "A Scientific Report". The article, which I analyzed here, was an attack on the Taurat and the Injil, the Old and New Testaments, that was anything but scientific.
A few weeks afterwards, young Copts were gunned down in the Egyptian town of Nag Hammadi as they left church on Christmas Eve (I wrote about this here, questioning how the Muslims who murdered them could claim to worship the same Deity). I wonder if anyone even made the likely connection between the murders and the contents of the Al Azhar article as well as similar books such as Fitnat al-Takfir in which the author claimed that "the blood and the money of the Copts is fair game".
Two months later, 24 Copts were injured and 17 houses were looted and set afire in the Mediterranean coastal town of Marsa Matrouh after hundreds of Muslims stormed out of a local mosque inflamed by calls of jihad against the "enemies of Islam".
Fast forward to July, when a young woman named Camillia Shehata left home following a dispute with her husband, a Coptic priest. An Egyptian blogger gave the full story here and here (an excellent blog, by the way), and I wrote about it here. Another Mosque Imam (why do so many of these stories begin in mosques?) claimed she had converted to Islam and been forcibly kidnapped by the church. Thousands of Muslims with nothing better to do with their lives predictably went shouting on the streets. The situation only calmed down when Camillia herself produced this youtube video denying she had ever converted to Islam, although of course there were the inevitable Muslim claims that even the video was a fake.
Ahmed Mansour took advantage of the uproar to devote an entire September episode of his popular Al Jazeera TV progam Beyond the Borders to attacking and threatening the Copts. He accused them, among other things, of importing explosives from Israel and stockpiling weapons in churches. I thought the program significant enough to translate it in its entirety here.
Ahmed particularly attacked the number two official in the Coptic church, Father Bishoy, for daring to welcome Muslims "as guests in our churches" and suggesting Copts were willing to die "as martyrs for our faith". Ahmed was offended that Muslims could ever be described "as guests" in their own country and, like most Muslims, unable to conceive of martyrdom in any other but the Muslim sense of the Shaheed who is killed while engaged in Jihad.
Father Bishoy is still not off the hook. In late September Al Jazeera devoted yet another program, available here in Arabic, to crucify him (pardon the pun; the Quran denies Jesus died on the cross) for daring to suggest in a lecture not even given that some verses in the Quran most critical of Jews and Christians might have been inserted not by Muhammad but later by the Caliph Umar bin Khattab.
Comment: this calls for a historical note. The first copies of the Quran available today were written 150-200 years after the death of Muhammad. Although Muslims believe the Quran was preserved perfectly in its entirety as revealed to Muhammad, that is a matter of faith and not scholarly research (which Islam does not allow). Muhammad conducted treaties with the Jews of Khaybar and the Christians of Najran in which he allowed them to live on their land without converting to Islam. After his death, Umar bin Khattab abolished those treaties and expelled the "People of the Book" from Arabia. Some scholars have questioned whether some of the most anti-Christian and anti-Jewish passages of the Quran might have been added by Umar to justify those expulsions.
The guests on this Al Jazeera program were Coptic lawyer Naguib Gabriel and veteran Muslim writer Fahmy Howeidy. The host first asked Naguib whether the apology given that day by Pope Shenouda was enough (yes, the beleaguered Pope once again went on Egyptian TV to apologize to offended Muslims (sniff, sniff) whose oh-so-sensitive feelings had once again been hurt). Naguib replied he thought the apology was sufficient, but the host pressed on; did Naguib not believe that Father Bishoy should be removed from his position? Naguib responded that Copts were not the only ones saying offensive things, and quoted the claim of several recent Muslim authors that the Bible was corrupted.
It was now Fahmy's turn. His first sentence was, "This was a wise response from the Pope, one that we respect and appreciate."
Comment number two: I've learned something from the Arab media. Muslims either come out guns blazing or with honey-coated words of sweetness. When the guns are blazing, it is not to destroy the target but simply to distract you by the noise. When they begin with words of appreciation, as Fahmy did here, that is the time to be most careful because you can be sure they are sharpening the knives under the table.
Fahmy then launched into an tear-jerking story of how Father Bishoy was not just an ordinary man, he was number two in the church for God's sake, and how could the Pope think the wounded sentiments of Muslims would be assuaged by a simple apology? Naguib tried to respond that the Muslims who wrote that the Injil was corrupted and the blood of the Copts was Halal were also not just ordinary authors but members of the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs whose books had been published by Egypt's Ministry of Religious Affairs. Fahmy would have none of it. Father Bishoy was a member of the Pope's inner circle, he argued, and how could he possibly remain there after saying such scandalous things?
The host next suggested to Naguib that dialogue should take place between Muslims and Copts to put an end to the "current impasse". Naguib responded, "I agree there is a place for constructive dialogue, but how can that take place when 15 million Egyptians feel they are living as second-class citizens? Are you happy that the law allowing us to build new churches has been stuck in Parliament for 15 years? We can't repair a leaking toilet without permission from the Governor, and it takes a Presidential decree to build a new church. Are you happy that Copts are marginalized on the sidelines of Egypt's political life? Let's be honest enough to admit that dialogue cannot take place when even rational Muslims admit the Copts are not given full human rights in Egypt. If you give me the rights that any other Egyptian enjoys, you won't have the problem of this impasse in the future."
Comment number three: Remember what I said about guns blazing? Not to shoot down a real target, but to construct a straw man you can dismiss with a lot of noise. Did you think for a minute that Fahmy was interested in a serious discussion about Coptic human rights in Egypt? If so, read on:
Fahmy was quick to respond, "I really don't think that a TV show is the place to discuss these details, and I have no idea where he came up with 15 million Copts! The ratio of the Copts has remained unchanged since the British occupation, and they are nowhere near 15 million. There's no need to exaggerate figures, and anyone who is interested can go to the Census Bureau and obtain the true figures. But the number of Copts is not the issue, the human being is the issue. If there were only five Copts in Egypt, they should have their full rights (WTF!!). That's the first thing. The second thing is that he is talking about the Copts not enjoying their rights. I say that the Muslims are not enjoying their rights! If both the Copts and the Muslims are not enjoying their rights, the problem is not a religious but a political issue. If Egypt was a true democracy with free and open elections, there would be no sectarian problems. But for him to complain about a leaking toilet requiring permission to fix is silly. Where does he come up with this?"
Comment number four: Ahmed Mansour complained in the Beyond the Borders program mentioned above that Father Bishoy had declined an invitation to appear on his show. Does anyone wonder why? The dice are thrown before the conversation even begins.
The host next asked Naguib why he was inserting human rights into a discussion about respecting Islam, especially since, as Fahmy had pointed out, the real problem in Egypt was political.
Naguib responded, "We do not refuse dialogue, and we respect the doctrines of Islam. The problem is that our religion is not respected by the Ulema. I am saying we should look at the root of the problem, not the branches. People always want to look at the symptoms and deny the reasons. Let's not just talk about something that Father Bishoy said, let's examine the problem in its fullness.
That of course was the end of the discussion. The last thing most Muslims are interested in is looking honestly at the root of the problem. That would require them to examine what the Quran and the Sunnah really say about the relationship between the Moumin and the Kafir, the Muslim and the non-Muslim, and to make any changes necessary to bring that relationship into the 21st century. It's much easier to riot in the streets and pontificate on Al Jazeera.
A few weeks afterwards, young Copts were gunned down in the Egyptian town of Nag Hammadi as they left church on Christmas Eve (I wrote about this here, questioning how the Muslims who murdered them could claim to worship the same Deity). I wonder if anyone even made the likely connection between the murders and the contents of the Al Azhar article as well as similar books such as Fitnat al-Takfir in which the author claimed that "the blood and the money of the Copts is fair game".
Two months later, 24 Copts were injured and 17 houses were looted and set afire in the Mediterranean coastal town of Marsa Matrouh after hundreds of Muslims stormed out of a local mosque inflamed by calls of jihad against the "enemies of Islam".
Fast forward to July, when a young woman named Camillia Shehata left home following a dispute with her husband, a Coptic priest. An Egyptian blogger gave the full story here and here (an excellent blog, by the way), and I wrote about it here. Another Mosque Imam (why do so many of these stories begin in mosques?) claimed she had converted to Islam and been forcibly kidnapped by the church. Thousands of Muslims with nothing better to do with their lives predictably went shouting on the streets. The situation only calmed down when Camillia herself produced this youtube video denying she had ever converted to Islam, although of course there were the inevitable Muslim claims that even the video was a fake.
Ahmed Mansour took advantage of the uproar to devote an entire September episode of his popular Al Jazeera TV progam Beyond the Borders to attacking and threatening the Copts. He accused them, among other things, of importing explosives from Israel and stockpiling weapons in churches. I thought the program significant enough to translate it in its entirety here.
Ahmed particularly attacked the number two official in the Coptic church, Father Bishoy, for daring to welcome Muslims "as guests in our churches" and suggesting Copts were willing to die "as martyrs for our faith". Ahmed was offended that Muslims could ever be described "as guests" in their own country and, like most Muslims, unable to conceive of martyrdom in any other but the Muslim sense of the Shaheed who is killed while engaged in Jihad.
Father Bishoy is still not off the hook. In late September Al Jazeera devoted yet another program, available here in Arabic, to crucify him (pardon the pun; the Quran denies Jesus died on the cross) for daring to suggest in a lecture not even given that some verses in the Quran most critical of Jews and Christians might have been inserted not by Muhammad but later by the Caliph Umar bin Khattab.
Comment: this calls for a historical note. The first copies of the Quran available today were written 150-200 years after the death of Muhammad. Although Muslims believe the Quran was preserved perfectly in its entirety as revealed to Muhammad, that is a matter of faith and not scholarly research (which Islam does not allow). Muhammad conducted treaties with the Jews of Khaybar and the Christians of Najran in which he allowed them to live on their land without converting to Islam. After his death, Umar bin Khattab abolished those treaties and expelled the "People of the Book" from Arabia. Some scholars have questioned whether some of the most anti-Christian and anti-Jewish passages of the Quran might have been added by Umar to justify those expulsions.
The guests on this Al Jazeera program were Coptic lawyer Naguib Gabriel and veteran Muslim writer Fahmy Howeidy. The host first asked Naguib whether the apology given that day by Pope Shenouda was enough (yes, the beleaguered Pope once again went on Egyptian TV to apologize to offended Muslims (sniff, sniff) whose oh-so-sensitive feelings had once again been hurt). Naguib replied he thought the apology was sufficient, but the host pressed on; did Naguib not believe that Father Bishoy should be removed from his position? Naguib responded that Copts were not the only ones saying offensive things, and quoted the claim of several recent Muslim authors that the Bible was corrupted.
It was now Fahmy's turn. His first sentence was, "This was a wise response from the Pope, one that we respect and appreciate."
Comment number two: I've learned something from the Arab media. Muslims either come out guns blazing or with honey-coated words of sweetness. When the guns are blazing, it is not to destroy the target but simply to distract you by the noise. When they begin with words of appreciation, as Fahmy did here, that is the time to be most careful because you can be sure they are sharpening the knives under the table.
Fahmy then launched into an tear-jerking story of how Father Bishoy was not just an ordinary man, he was number two in the church for God's sake, and how could the Pope think the wounded sentiments of Muslims would be assuaged by a simple apology? Naguib tried to respond that the Muslims who wrote that the Injil was corrupted and the blood of the Copts was Halal were also not just ordinary authors but members of the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs whose books had been published by Egypt's Ministry of Religious Affairs. Fahmy would have none of it. Father Bishoy was a member of the Pope's inner circle, he argued, and how could he possibly remain there after saying such scandalous things?
The host next suggested to Naguib that dialogue should take place between Muslims and Copts to put an end to the "current impasse". Naguib responded, "I agree there is a place for constructive dialogue, but how can that take place when 15 million Egyptians feel they are living as second-class citizens? Are you happy that the law allowing us to build new churches has been stuck in Parliament for 15 years? We can't repair a leaking toilet without permission from the Governor, and it takes a Presidential decree to build a new church. Are you happy that Copts are marginalized on the sidelines of Egypt's political life? Let's be honest enough to admit that dialogue cannot take place when even rational Muslims admit the Copts are not given full human rights in Egypt. If you give me the rights that any other Egyptian enjoys, you won't have the problem of this impasse in the future."
Comment number three: Remember what I said about guns blazing? Not to shoot down a real target, but to construct a straw man you can dismiss with a lot of noise. Did you think for a minute that Fahmy was interested in a serious discussion about Coptic human rights in Egypt? If so, read on:
Fahmy was quick to respond, "I really don't think that a TV show is the place to discuss these details, and I have no idea where he came up with 15 million Copts! The ratio of the Copts has remained unchanged since the British occupation, and they are nowhere near 15 million. There's no need to exaggerate figures, and anyone who is interested can go to the Census Bureau and obtain the true figures. But the number of Copts is not the issue, the human being is the issue. If there were only five Copts in Egypt, they should have their full rights (WTF!!). That's the first thing. The second thing is that he is talking about the Copts not enjoying their rights. I say that the Muslims are not enjoying their rights! If both the Copts and the Muslims are not enjoying their rights, the problem is not a religious but a political issue. If Egypt was a true democracy with free and open elections, there would be no sectarian problems. But for him to complain about a leaking toilet requiring permission to fix is silly. Where does he come up with this?"
Comment number four: Ahmed Mansour complained in the Beyond the Borders program mentioned above that Father Bishoy had declined an invitation to appear on his show. Does anyone wonder why? The dice are thrown before the conversation even begins.
The host next asked Naguib why he was inserting human rights into a discussion about respecting Islam, especially since, as Fahmy had pointed out, the real problem in Egypt was political.
Naguib responded, "We do not refuse dialogue, and we respect the doctrines of Islam. The problem is that our religion is not respected by the Ulema. I am saying we should look at the root of the problem, not the branches. People always want to look at the symptoms and deny the reasons. Let's not just talk about something that Father Bishoy said, let's examine the problem in its fullness.
That of course was the end of the discussion. The last thing most Muslims are interested in is looking honestly at the root of the problem. That would require them to examine what the Quran and the Sunnah really say about the relationship between the Moumin and the Kafir, the Muslim and the non-Muslim, and to make any changes necessary to bring that relationship into the 21st century. It's much easier to riot in the streets and pontificate on Al Jazeera.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Do Muslims Deify Muhammad?
A friend asked in a recent discussion if Muslims worship Muhammad. As with all good questions, the answer is not as simple as it might appear. It took me back to the Asool, the basic texts of Islam as exemplified in the Quran, the Sunnah, and the books of Fiqh.
On the surface, of course, the theological answer is an unequivocal "No". To associate anything at all with Allah is Shirk, the greatest of all Kaba-eer, the major sins. Muhammad himself proclaimed in Surat Al Kahf (Quran 18:110), "I am only a man like you, to whom it has been revealed that God is One."
At the same time, the Quran sends a mixed message. Surat Al Maidah (Quran 5:92) is one of many verses that enjoins Muslims to "obey Allah and obey his Messenger". Muhammad never once told Muslims to obey God without tacking on, "and me as well". If there was any doubt that obeying Muhammad was equivalent to obeying God, the Quran specifies in Surat Al Nisa (4:80), "He who obeys the Messenger has indeed obeyed Allah." Similarly, there is not a single verse in the Quran that condemns disobedience against Allah without equating it to disobedience against Muhammad. This warning in Surat Al Nisa (4:14) is only one of many, "Whoever disobeys Allah and his Messenger will be cast into the Fire to suffer a disgraceful torment."
If obedience to Muhammad is equivalent to obedience to God, and disobedience to him is the same as disobedience against God, does not the Prophet have a position equal to God?
Christians are known to finish their prayers with the expression, "In the name of Jesus." The reason is that Christians believe Jesus is God, and he promised that prayers made in his name would be answered. Could anyone imagine Muslims similarly praying, "In the name of Muhammad?"
Well, yes. An authentic Hadith that occurred after the death of Muhammad, and which can be read here, noted that whenever there was a drought Caliph Umar bin Al Khattab would ask Abbas to do the rain prayer. The prayer was, "Oh Allah, we seek intercession with you by your Prophet and we ask you for rain." The Hadith ends by saying, "And they were given rain."
During his years in Mecca Muhammad had condemned the Quraysh for their belief that their gods Allat, Uzzah, and Minat were effective intercessors in obtaining favors from God. Only a few years after his death, his followers were invoking his name to receive these same favors.
Not only the name of Muhammad but even his grave was used to evoke rain. A Hadith that can be read here describes the people of Medina pleading with Ayesha, wife of the deceased Prophet, to remove the ceiling over Muhammad's tomb in a time of drought so that nothing would separate his corpse from the throne of God. As soon as they did so, rain poured down. Even the decayed body of the Apostle, according to Muslims, was effective in persuading Allah to send rain.
Perhaps the greatest indication that the position of Muhammad is greater than the place of God is the punishment given to those who offend either the Prophet or Allah. Many Hadith are similar to the one that can be read here. Caliph Umar bin Khattab was informed that a man had been executed for apostatizing from Islam. When the Caliph asked if the man had been given three days to change his mind, he was informed he had not. The Caliph became angry, explaining that a Murtadd should be put in prison for three days and fed bread and water to see if he would recant. Only then should he be executed.
There is no three day grace period granted in Islamic law to those who offend the Prophet. They are to be killed immediately. An Arabic Manual of Law entitled Kitab Ahkam Al Quran (The Book of Quranic Rulings) repeats that the apostate Murtadd is not to be killed until he has been given the opportunity to repent and return to Islam (the reference is available here). Those who insult Muhammad, however, are given no such opportunity to change their minds.
Atheist websites, artists, filmmakers, and authors by the thousands mock God, but Muslims are not up in arms about that. Thousands of people are leaving Islam behind, and even the strictest Salifists agree they should be given a few days to recant. But the cartoonist who draws an unfavorable image of Muhammad, or the scholar who concludes after careful analysis of the original texts that the 62 year old Prophet's sexual conquest of a 17 year old Jewish girl named Sofiya, after torturing and beheading her husband, father, and brother, could only be described as rape, is not even given three minutes, much less three days, to reconsider.
So back to the original question, do Muslims worship Muhammad? Theologically, they can argue they do not. On a practical level, I'm not so sure.
(For readers who know Arabic, this subject was discussed by Rashid in his program Daring Question here and some of the material was adapted from that program).
On the surface, of course, the theological answer is an unequivocal "No". To associate anything at all with Allah is Shirk, the greatest of all Kaba-eer, the major sins. Muhammad himself proclaimed in Surat Al Kahf (Quran 18:110), "I am only a man like you, to whom it has been revealed that God is One."
At the same time, the Quran sends a mixed message. Surat Al Maidah (Quran 5:92) is one of many verses that enjoins Muslims to "obey Allah and obey his Messenger". Muhammad never once told Muslims to obey God without tacking on, "and me as well". If there was any doubt that obeying Muhammad was equivalent to obeying God, the Quran specifies in Surat Al Nisa (4:80), "He who obeys the Messenger has indeed obeyed Allah." Similarly, there is not a single verse in the Quran that condemns disobedience against Allah without equating it to disobedience against Muhammad. This warning in Surat Al Nisa (4:14) is only one of many, "Whoever disobeys Allah and his Messenger will be cast into the Fire to suffer a disgraceful torment."
If obedience to Muhammad is equivalent to obedience to God, and disobedience to him is the same as disobedience against God, does not the Prophet have a position equal to God?
Christians are known to finish their prayers with the expression, "In the name of Jesus." The reason is that Christians believe Jesus is God, and he promised that prayers made in his name would be answered. Could anyone imagine Muslims similarly praying, "In the name of Muhammad?"
Well, yes. An authentic Hadith that occurred after the death of Muhammad, and which can be read here, noted that whenever there was a drought Caliph Umar bin Al Khattab would ask Abbas to do the rain prayer. The prayer was, "Oh Allah, we seek intercession with you by your Prophet and we ask you for rain." The Hadith ends by saying, "And they were given rain."
During his years in Mecca Muhammad had condemned the Quraysh for their belief that their gods Allat, Uzzah, and Minat were effective intercessors in obtaining favors from God. Only a few years after his death, his followers were invoking his name to receive these same favors.
Not only the name of Muhammad but even his grave was used to evoke rain. A Hadith that can be read here describes the people of Medina pleading with Ayesha, wife of the deceased Prophet, to remove the ceiling over Muhammad's tomb in a time of drought so that nothing would separate his corpse from the throne of God. As soon as they did so, rain poured down. Even the decayed body of the Apostle, according to Muslims, was effective in persuading Allah to send rain.
Perhaps the greatest indication that the position of Muhammad is greater than the place of God is the punishment given to those who offend either the Prophet or Allah. Many Hadith are similar to the one that can be read here. Caliph Umar bin Khattab was informed that a man had been executed for apostatizing from Islam. When the Caliph asked if the man had been given three days to change his mind, he was informed he had not. The Caliph became angry, explaining that a Murtadd should be put in prison for three days and fed bread and water to see if he would recant. Only then should he be executed.
There is no three day grace period granted in Islamic law to those who offend the Prophet. They are to be killed immediately. An Arabic Manual of Law entitled Kitab Ahkam Al Quran (The Book of Quranic Rulings) repeats that the apostate Murtadd is not to be killed until he has been given the opportunity to repent and return to Islam (the reference is available here). Those who insult Muhammad, however, are given no such opportunity to change their minds.
Atheist websites, artists, filmmakers, and authors by the thousands mock God, but Muslims are not up in arms about that. Thousands of people are leaving Islam behind, and even the strictest Salifists agree they should be given a few days to recant. But the cartoonist who draws an unfavorable image of Muhammad, or the scholar who concludes after careful analysis of the original texts that the 62 year old Prophet's sexual conquest of a 17 year old Jewish girl named Sofiya, after torturing and beheading her husband, father, and brother, could only be described as rape, is not even given three minutes, much less three days, to reconsider.
So back to the original question, do Muslims worship Muhammad? Theologically, they can argue they do not. On a practical level, I'm not so sure.
(For readers who know Arabic, this subject was discussed by Rashid in his program Daring Question here and some of the material was adapted from that program).
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Part 2 - Islam's Threats Against Egypt's Copts
This is part 2 of the translation of a recent Al Jazeera interview "Accusations the Coptic Church is Aggressively Encroaching Against Egypt and its Laws." Part 1 is available here. My own comments will come at the end of the interview.
Ahmad: In light of all this disturbing news, there is a scheduled referendum in the Sudan that will divide it into two countries, one in the north and another in the south. This plan has been hatched for 20 years, and maps have already been drawn to do the same thing in Egypt. Could it happen here?
Muhammad: There are indications of that in incidents taking place here and there throughout the country. These incidents seem small, but they are not random. Sometimes they are represented in monasteries agitating against the state about property rights and things like that. They represent a concentrated effort to prepare the way for the day when the Copts will demand that Egypt be divided so they can have their own country. There might even be demands for numerous states; the Nubians could demand their own state was well!
Ahmad: Invaders throughout history have tried to divide Egypt, but without success.
Muhammad: Egypt has always maintained its unity. For the first time a scientific, organized, ongoing effort is taking place. It has been continual since President Sadat first placed Pope Shenouda under arrest. We are facing a concentrated effort to prepare the way to divide Egypt into two countries.
Ahmad: Would it not be in the interest of the Copts to have their own country?
Muhammad: No, that would be the most dangerous thing they could do.
Ahmad: Why?
Muhammad: The Copts only represent, as you said, 6 % percent of the population. How could they have a country equivalent in size to 6 %? How would they access the Nile, the Red Sea, and the Mediterranean? How could they remain in contact with the outside world? Where would this little country be located with its 6% of the population?
Ahmad: By the way, this 6% is taken from an old census. For years, neither the Copts nor the Egyptian government have officially announced the percentage.
Muhammad: The ratio has not changed. From the time of the British Empire until now, the percentage of Copts has ranged from 4-6%.
Ahmad: They say they are more than 12%!
Muhammad: They say that, but if it were true they would request the government to release the official census. I call upon any Copt to ask the government to do that. The reason they do not is that they know the official statistics are against them. It would not be in their interest to establish their own state.
Ahmad: Many articles have discussed the merger of power and wealth in Egypt, but the discussion is now the merger of power and the Copts. It is described as a marriage between the top officials in the government and the leaders of the church that plays a major role in the inability of the government to confront the church. The minority benefits at the expense of the majority. How do you see this?
Muhammad: I don't know who is marrying whom, since I don't have the marriage register at my fingertips, but I do know that the weakness of the government in confronting the church is greatly inciting the Muslims.
Ahmad: Why is the government so weak in confronting the Copts?
Muhammad: As I said before, the government is tyrannical. An oppressive government retains its strength by forming alliances with strong elements inside it, as this government has with the Copts. The government cannot oppress everyone, so it oppresses the weak and forms alliances with the powerful.
Ahmad: Are we heading into a dark tunnel? Are there not reasonable people in the church and the government who can stall this off?
Muhammad: There are reasonable people on both sides, but in a time of sectarian sedition no one listens to reason. When the loudest voices are those such as Father Bishoy calling for supremacy, no one listens to the voice of reason.
Ahmad: We invited Father Bishoy to appear on this show with you, but he declined.
Muhammad: I wish Pope Shenouda himself would come on.
Ahmad: I've been asking him ever since the program began, but he always refuses.
Muhammad: I would just like to hear him explain how he has the audacity to say repeatedly that he cannot be judged by the Egyptian judicial system. Once a woman asked him about the Islamic ruling that two women from the same family cannot nurse the same child. He had the gall to tell her that was a stupid prohibition! How can he say something like that and have it published in the press? The only people who reply to him are those the government considers extremists and terrorists. There is not a single official voice to confront them.
Ahmad: Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa recently issued a fatwa that it was imperative to turn over religious converts to the community they came from, because that is what the Prophet Muhammad did.
Muhammad: The Prophet never did that!
Ahmad: Are you aware of the fatwa?
Muhammad: No, but you are telling me he said the Prophet did that.
Ahmad: He was talking about turning Wafa Constantine over to the church.
Muhammad: OK, you are talking about Christians who convert to Islam, and he is saying the Prophet did that. That information is not correct; the Prophet never did that. The Grand Mufti was talking about the special terms of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah between Muhammad and the people of Mecca when he returned in victory to the city. Among the terms of the treaty was that if anyone converted to Islam in Mecca and then subsequently migrated to Medina, they would be returned to the people of Mecca.
But the Quran says in Surat Al-Mumtahanah (60:10), "When Muslim women come to you as immigrants, do not send them back to the unbelievers. The unbelievers are not allowed to marry them, but if they were previously engaged to unbelievers pay their dowry for them. You are then allowed to marry them." Not a single female convert to Islam was ever returned to her people in the entire history of Islam until Wafa Constantine was turned over to the church! For 11 days an intense debate took place on whether she should be rendered back to the Coptic church. May God reward the courageous men who argued she should not be, and may God judge those who forced them to do so. Not a single Muslim convert had been been turned over in 14 centuries, no matter what the Grand Mufti said.
Ahmad: I have an email suggesting that the Grand Mufti works for the Coptic church!
Muhammad: No, Ali Gomaa is an honorable man.
Ahmad: Why do the Grand Mufti and the Shaykh of Al Azhar not come out and make official statements against these things?
Muhammad: If the Grand Mufti said that the Prophet allowed Muslim converts to be turned over to their people, he should correct his mistake. The Prophet never said that.
Ahmad: Father Bishoy leads the church's Clerical Court that judges errant priests, and some people say he will succeed Pope Shenouda.
Muhammad: Coptic papal succession is determined by lot, and no one knows how the lot will be cast.
Ahmad: Egypt Today did an interview with Father Taklah, a priest exiled to a monastery in Wadi Natroun where priests who run afoul of the church are sentenced for years in small, cell-like rooms until they finally pardoned by Pope Shenouda. Father Taklah has been there for years. Is the church allowed to imprison people independent of a legal trial?
Muhammad: According to Egyptian law, if the problem is related to an infraction of church policy the church has the right to do that. Even government organizations provide disciplinary measures for people who break their laws. But if a crime is committed against the law of the land, the government must be informed. Father Bishoy said in his interview today that some people illegally exaggerate their church contributions for tax benefits, but they do not inform the government of this fraud because they do not want to embarrass those people. If people are doing that, it is a crime and the government must be informed.
In the Hadith the Prophet gave the order that Christian leaders of Yemen should not be replaced. In the same way, we are not calling for the replacement of Coptic officials, but we are saying that if crimes have been committed, the state must be called in to impose justice.
Ahmad: Father Taklah was asked in the interview what he would do if he met with Pope Shenouda. He replied that he would kneel at his feet and plead, "Forgive me, master, for I have sinned." Would the Pope allow him to do that?
Muhammad: Not only that, but the Pope might or might not forgive him. He has absolute power in this. The purpose of interviews like this is to terrorize the Christians, to make them ask, "If a priest who made a mistake was exiled for years and years, what might happen to me?" It was right of the newspaper to publish the interview, but we cannot just say this is an internal church matter that we Muslims have no right to talk about. This is a humanitarian and national issue, related to human dignity. That man was exiled to the desert for years, and I must defend his honor as a Christian just as I would defend the honor of a Muslim.
Ahmad: Last year the press reported that the church established its first institution to evangelize Muslims. It is called "Jesus Set Me Free", and is led by a female Egyptian lawyer named Nagla Imam who converted to Christianity from Islam. A former Al Azhar professor named Muhammmad Rahouma who also converted to Christianity said that the American army would not remain silent if those Muslims who wanted to become Christians were oppressed.
Muhammad: And Father Bishoy claims that the Church is not being strengthened from abroad! Is not announcing that the American army will support you an example of receiving strength from abroad? Where is this professor and this lawyer now? If they are living in Egypt, then Egypt must be a land of complete freedom. And if they are living abroad, Egypt gave them the passports to travel freely. Who are these people to claim that the American army would come to support a handful of recanters and converts?
Ahmad: Father Markos, who is the Coptic Minister of Information, said in an interview to the German media in 2008 that the Egyptian government does not allow Muslims to convert to Christianity.
Muhammad: Where are these converts? I wish they would present themselves one by one. I challenge the church to openly announce the names of those who convert to Christianity, just as we do with those who convert to Islam. Give me one example of someone who was oppressed or killed because they converted to Christianity! Let Nagdi Imam or Muhammad Rahouma come forward and tell us how they were persecuted! The real persecution is done by the Church to those Christians who accept Islam. I would like to have one single person tell me he or she was a Muslim and converted to Christianity!
Ahmad: What about those Christians who revert to Islam and are then turned over to the church?
Muhammad: Their rendition is a punishable crime because it infringes upon their freedom and the constitution does not allow it.
Ahmad: It is against their freedom of religious choice?
Muhammad: It is more than that, it is against their human rights. For the Pope or anyone else to exile or imprison anyone in violation of their human rights is a crime punishable by the constitution. Not only that, but the constitution does not place a statute of limitations upon these crimes. If our constitution remains as it is, perpetrators of these crimes can be judged even after 100 years. By the way, there is a complete file prepared of those Copts who have committed those crimes, and they will be judged!
Ahmad: We are facing some serious problems, not simply the rendition of a woman who converted to Islam!
Muhammad: Yes indeed, it is a matter of not respecting the constitution and destroying personal freedom. It is not just a matter of freedom of religious choice. Let anyone convert to Islam who wants to, and let anyone become an unbeliever who wants to! By the way, I proposed a solution to the problem of religious affiliation on our identity cards in a book I wrote that is being studied in universities today.
Ahmad: Just issue ID cards that do not mention religion at all?
Muhammad: No, that would not be a solution. How would we then know who can marry whom, or who can be buried where? The solution is simply to write the original religion, followed by the new religion and date of conversion. For a Christian convert to Islam, it would record the date of conversion, and for a Muslim it would record the date of apostasy. One of the Egyptian courts that agreed with my suggestion even took it a step further. It said that the ID card should represent the true identify of its bearer. If the person carrying that card had changed from one religion to another, their ID card should represent that change, because their current religion and the religion they were born into are both part of who they are. The MOI has begun this, but the backlash is from the Copts who do not want ID cards of converts to represent their former religion. They do not want the cards to indicate that these people jumped from one religion to another, or that they were not firm in their faith. A man whose ID card shows he changed his religion will find it more difficult to find a bride because people will think he is unstable. These people want to hide the true identify of the converts.
Ahmad: The MOI is always announcing the discovery of this or that extremist group, all Muslim of course. Sometimes it is true, and sometimes it is false. Now we learn of weapons being stored in churches and Coptic demonstration all over the place, but we never hear a word of any extremist Coptic organization in Egypt!
Muhammad: We don't even hear anything about Joseph Gabalwi and his father who smuggled explosives from Israel.
Ahmad: But if a Muslim is arrested for anything, all hell breaks loose!
Muhammad: Of course. Let a Muslim be arrested on a drugs or weapons or smuggling charge and see what happens.
Ahmad: And Israel is involved!
Muhammad: Israel is not only involved, it is at the heart of the matter. For a long time Israel has been at the heart of the Copt problem, the Nile water crisis, and Egyptian-Arab relations. The Egyptian people are aware of all this, but the government remains silent in the face of the enormous pressure being put upon it.
Ahmad: Why does Al Azhar University not respond to all this? Perhaps the late Shaykh Tantawi was right when he reportedly said he would be the last Shaykh of Al Azhar and it would die after him!
Muhammad: No, the newly-appointed Shaykh of Al Azhar Dr. Ahmed Al Tayeb is a good man, a Sufi, and perhaps he will revive some (Sufi-related) courses some people have been wishing would be taught there. By the way, there is a second woman who converted to Islam and was turned over to the church by an Islamic organization, may God judge it! She was the wife of a priest and her name is Mariam Abdallah. To this day, no one knows where she is or what happened to her. There is also the recent story of Camellia Shahata (whose story is told here), but she did not convert to Islam. The first two women however, Wafa Constantine and Mariam Abdallah, did convert and what happened to them was a crime for which there is no statute of limitations.
Ahmad: The Copts are vocal and the Muslims are silent! Is there no solution apart from the demonstrations that could result in chaos no one has the power to stop? How can relations be restored to where they were for the past 14 centuries?
Muhammad: I call upon Coptic leaders to work for what is best for the Copts. I call them to the voice of reason. I call upon them to sit and discuss the calamity that will befall them if they continue their present course of action. I still remember Pope Shenouda saying to me in our first meeting years ago, "Dr. Muhammad, if the Muslims stop going to the Coptic grocers, barbers, doctors, and pharmacists, how will the Copts survive?
Ahmad: Twenty-five percent of Egypt's doctors and pharmacists are Copts.
Muhammad: He said to me, "How will those grocers, barbers, doctors, and pharmacists stay alive? We Copts can only survive in the midst of Muslims." He was correct. Where we are today, with Copts ignoring the rulings of judges, threatening martyrdom, storing weapons in their churches, and claiming that the 94% Muslims are the guests of the 6 % Copts, will start a fire that no one will be able to put out! The poem will come true that says:
When the voice of reason cannot extinguish the flame,
Its fuel will be the bodies of its victims.
My comments:
1. Everything in Islam, including the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, goes back to Muhammad. Some of the Jewish women whom Muhammad expelled from Medina after beheading their male family members went to the agricultural region of Khaybar. As soon as Muhammad established a truce with the people of Mecca, thus eliminating his final enemy, he led his 10,000 soldier army to Khaybar and informed the farmers they could stay alive if they gave him 50% of all their produce. This was the first example of the dhimmi, the non-Muslims who are allowed to live in a Muslim society if they accept the restrictions placed upon them by the majority.
For 14 centuries in Egypt the Copts lived as good dhimmis. For the first time in their history, they are demanding all the rights and privileges granted the Muslim majority. This is what Ahmad and Muhammad are strenuously objecting to in the above interview.
2. Ahmad complained that Egypt's billionaires are all Copts, and that Copts own Egypt's main industrial and communications companies. There are, however, few if any Copts who are department heads in Egypt's government universities, directors of Egypt's government hospitals, and judges in Egypt's courts. The simple fact is that Muslims do not like Copts in positions of legal authority over them. It is impossible to imagine a Coptic President or Prime Minister of Egypt. Copts thrive in the areas in which they are allowed to grow.
3. Muhammad and Ahmad threw out unverified "facts", such as that of the Christians smuggling explosives into Egypt and stockpiling weapons in churches. According to one report I read, the explosives were simply fireworks. American forces in Iraq often found weapons stored in mosques, but I have never heard of a church in Egypt being used to store weapons.
4. Muslims have no understanding of Christian theology, and often impose a Muslim understanding on Christian history. Because martyrs in Islam are people killed in battle, Muhammad and Ahmad assume Christian martyrs are the same thing. They are totally unaware of the 2000 year Christian history of martyrs who die for their faith.
5. The burden of restoring Coptic-Muslim relations was presented in this interview as being solely upon the shoulders of the Christians. No awareness at all was expressed of what Muslims could do to improve these relations.
6. Perhaps the greatest irony of the interview was Muhammad's description of the arrogance of Pope Shenouda. What did the Pope do that Muhammad saw as extremely arrogant? Pope Shenouda dared to suggest that the ruling of a 7th century Arab warlord concerning who could or could not breastfeed a child was silly. Now that's Coptic arrogance for you!
Ahmad: In light of all this disturbing news, there is a scheduled referendum in the Sudan that will divide it into two countries, one in the north and another in the south. This plan has been hatched for 20 years, and maps have already been drawn to do the same thing in Egypt. Could it happen here?
Muhammad: There are indications of that in incidents taking place here and there throughout the country. These incidents seem small, but they are not random. Sometimes they are represented in monasteries agitating against the state about property rights and things like that. They represent a concentrated effort to prepare the way for the day when the Copts will demand that Egypt be divided so they can have their own country. There might even be demands for numerous states; the Nubians could demand their own state was well!
Ahmad: Invaders throughout history have tried to divide Egypt, but without success.
Muhammad: Egypt has always maintained its unity. For the first time a scientific, organized, ongoing effort is taking place. It has been continual since President Sadat first placed Pope Shenouda under arrest. We are facing a concentrated effort to prepare the way to divide Egypt into two countries.
Ahmad: Would it not be in the interest of the Copts to have their own country?
Muhammad: No, that would be the most dangerous thing they could do.
Ahmad: Why?
Muhammad: The Copts only represent, as you said, 6 % percent of the population. How could they have a country equivalent in size to 6 %? How would they access the Nile, the Red Sea, and the Mediterranean? How could they remain in contact with the outside world? Where would this little country be located with its 6% of the population?
Ahmad: By the way, this 6% is taken from an old census. For years, neither the Copts nor the Egyptian government have officially announced the percentage.
Muhammad: The ratio has not changed. From the time of the British Empire until now, the percentage of Copts has ranged from 4-6%.
Ahmad: They say they are more than 12%!
Muhammad: They say that, but if it were true they would request the government to release the official census. I call upon any Copt to ask the government to do that. The reason they do not is that they know the official statistics are against them. It would not be in their interest to establish their own state.
Ahmad: Many articles have discussed the merger of power and wealth in Egypt, but the discussion is now the merger of power and the Copts. It is described as a marriage between the top officials in the government and the leaders of the church that plays a major role in the inability of the government to confront the church. The minority benefits at the expense of the majority. How do you see this?
Muhammad: I don't know who is marrying whom, since I don't have the marriage register at my fingertips, but I do know that the weakness of the government in confronting the church is greatly inciting the Muslims.
Ahmad: Why is the government so weak in confronting the Copts?
Muhammad: As I said before, the government is tyrannical. An oppressive government retains its strength by forming alliances with strong elements inside it, as this government has with the Copts. The government cannot oppress everyone, so it oppresses the weak and forms alliances with the powerful.
Ahmad: Are we heading into a dark tunnel? Are there not reasonable people in the church and the government who can stall this off?
Muhammad: There are reasonable people on both sides, but in a time of sectarian sedition no one listens to reason. When the loudest voices are those such as Father Bishoy calling for supremacy, no one listens to the voice of reason.
Ahmad: We invited Father Bishoy to appear on this show with you, but he declined.
Muhammad: I wish Pope Shenouda himself would come on.
Ahmad: I've been asking him ever since the program began, but he always refuses.
Muhammad: I would just like to hear him explain how he has the audacity to say repeatedly that he cannot be judged by the Egyptian judicial system. Once a woman asked him about the Islamic ruling that two women from the same family cannot nurse the same child. He had the gall to tell her that was a stupid prohibition! How can he say something like that and have it published in the press? The only people who reply to him are those the government considers extremists and terrorists. There is not a single official voice to confront them.
Ahmad: Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa recently issued a fatwa that it was imperative to turn over religious converts to the community they came from, because that is what the Prophet Muhammad did.
Muhammad: The Prophet never did that!
Ahmad: Are you aware of the fatwa?
Muhammad: No, but you are telling me he said the Prophet did that.
Ahmad: He was talking about turning Wafa Constantine over to the church.
Muhammad: OK, you are talking about Christians who convert to Islam, and he is saying the Prophet did that. That information is not correct; the Prophet never did that. The Grand Mufti was talking about the special terms of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah between Muhammad and the people of Mecca when he returned in victory to the city. Among the terms of the treaty was that if anyone converted to Islam in Mecca and then subsequently migrated to Medina, they would be returned to the people of Mecca.
But the Quran says in Surat Al-Mumtahanah (60:10), "When Muslim women come to you as immigrants, do not send them back to the unbelievers. The unbelievers are not allowed to marry them, but if they were previously engaged to unbelievers pay their dowry for them. You are then allowed to marry them." Not a single female convert to Islam was ever returned to her people in the entire history of Islam until Wafa Constantine was turned over to the church! For 11 days an intense debate took place on whether she should be rendered back to the Coptic church. May God reward the courageous men who argued she should not be, and may God judge those who forced them to do so. Not a single Muslim convert had been been turned over in 14 centuries, no matter what the Grand Mufti said.
Ahmad: I have an email suggesting that the Grand Mufti works for the Coptic church!
Muhammad: No, Ali Gomaa is an honorable man.
Ahmad: Why do the Grand Mufti and the Shaykh of Al Azhar not come out and make official statements against these things?
Muhammad: If the Grand Mufti said that the Prophet allowed Muslim converts to be turned over to their people, he should correct his mistake. The Prophet never said that.
Ahmad: Father Bishoy leads the church's Clerical Court that judges errant priests, and some people say he will succeed Pope Shenouda.
Muhammad: Coptic papal succession is determined by lot, and no one knows how the lot will be cast.
Ahmad: Egypt Today did an interview with Father Taklah, a priest exiled to a monastery in Wadi Natroun where priests who run afoul of the church are sentenced for years in small, cell-like rooms until they finally pardoned by Pope Shenouda. Father Taklah has been there for years. Is the church allowed to imprison people independent of a legal trial?
Muhammad: According to Egyptian law, if the problem is related to an infraction of church policy the church has the right to do that. Even government organizations provide disciplinary measures for people who break their laws. But if a crime is committed against the law of the land, the government must be informed. Father Bishoy said in his interview today that some people illegally exaggerate their church contributions for tax benefits, but they do not inform the government of this fraud because they do not want to embarrass those people. If people are doing that, it is a crime and the government must be informed.
In the Hadith the Prophet gave the order that Christian leaders of Yemen should not be replaced. In the same way, we are not calling for the replacement of Coptic officials, but we are saying that if crimes have been committed, the state must be called in to impose justice.
Ahmad: Father Taklah was asked in the interview what he would do if he met with Pope Shenouda. He replied that he would kneel at his feet and plead, "Forgive me, master, for I have sinned." Would the Pope allow him to do that?
Muhammad: Not only that, but the Pope might or might not forgive him. He has absolute power in this. The purpose of interviews like this is to terrorize the Christians, to make them ask, "If a priest who made a mistake was exiled for years and years, what might happen to me?" It was right of the newspaper to publish the interview, but we cannot just say this is an internal church matter that we Muslims have no right to talk about. This is a humanitarian and national issue, related to human dignity. That man was exiled to the desert for years, and I must defend his honor as a Christian just as I would defend the honor of a Muslim.
Ahmad: Last year the press reported that the church established its first institution to evangelize Muslims. It is called "Jesus Set Me Free", and is led by a female Egyptian lawyer named Nagla Imam who converted to Christianity from Islam. A former Al Azhar professor named Muhammmad Rahouma who also converted to Christianity said that the American army would not remain silent if those Muslims who wanted to become Christians were oppressed.
Muhammad: And Father Bishoy claims that the Church is not being strengthened from abroad! Is not announcing that the American army will support you an example of receiving strength from abroad? Where is this professor and this lawyer now? If they are living in Egypt, then Egypt must be a land of complete freedom. And if they are living abroad, Egypt gave them the passports to travel freely. Who are these people to claim that the American army would come to support a handful of recanters and converts?
Ahmad: Father Markos, who is the Coptic Minister of Information, said in an interview to the German media in 2008 that the Egyptian government does not allow Muslims to convert to Christianity.
Muhammad: Where are these converts? I wish they would present themselves one by one. I challenge the church to openly announce the names of those who convert to Christianity, just as we do with those who convert to Islam. Give me one example of someone who was oppressed or killed because they converted to Christianity! Let Nagdi Imam or Muhammad Rahouma come forward and tell us how they were persecuted! The real persecution is done by the Church to those Christians who accept Islam. I would like to have one single person tell me he or she was a Muslim and converted to Christianity!
Ahmad: What about those Christians who revert to Islam and are then turned over to the church?
Muhammad: Their rendition is a punishable crime because it infringes upon their freedom and the constitution does not allow it.
Ahmad: It is against their freedom of religious choice?
Muhammad: It is more than that, it is against their human rights. For the Pope or anyone else to exile or imprison anyone in violation of their human rights is a crime punishable by the constitution. Not only that, but the constitution does not place a statute of limitations upon these crimes. If our constitution remains as it is, perpetrators of these crimes can be judged even after 100 years. By the way, there is a complete file prepared of those Copts who have committed those crimes, and they will be judged!
Ahmad: We are facing some serious problems, not simply the rendition of a woman who converted to Islam!
Muhammad: Yes indeed, it is a matter of not respecting the constitution and destroying personal freedom. It is not just a matter of freedom of religious choice. Let anyone convert to Islam who wants to, and let anyone become an unbeliever who wants to! By the way, I proposed a solution to the problem of religious affiliation on our identity cards in a book I wrote that is being studied in universities today.
Ahmad: Just issue ID cards that do not mention religion at all?
Muhammad: No, that would not be a solution. How would we then know who can marry whom, or who can be buried where? The solution is simply to write the original religion, followed by the new religion and date of conversion. For a Christian convert to Islam, it would record the date of conversion, and for a Muslim it would record the date of apostasy. One of the Egyptian courts that agreed with my suggestion even took it a step further. It said that the ID card should represent the true identify of its bearer. If the person carrying that card had changed from one religion to another, their ID card should represent that change, because their current religion and the religion they were born into are both part of who they are. The MOI has begun this, but the backlash is from the Copts who do not want ID cards of converts to represent their former religion. They do not want the cards to indicate that these people jumped from one religion to another, or that they were not firm in their faith. A man whose ID card shows he changed his religion will find it more difficult to find a bride because people will think he is unstable. These people want to hide the true identify of the converts.
Ahmad: The MOI is always announcing the discovery of this or that extremist group, all Muslim of course. Sometimes it is true, and sometimes it is false. Now we learn of weapons being stored in churches and Coptic demonstration all over the place, but we never hear a word of any extremist Coptic organization in Egypt!
Muhammad: We don't even hear anything about Joseph Gabalwi and his father who smuggled explosives from Israel.
Ahmad: But if a Muslim is arrested for anything, all hell breaks loose!
Muhammad: Of course. Let a Muslim be arrested on a drugs or weapons or smuggling charge and see what happens.
Ahmad: And Israel is involved!
Muhammad: Israel is not only involved, it is at the heart of the matter. For a long time Israel has been at the heart of the Copt problem, the Nile water crisis, and Egyptian-Arab relations. The Egyptian people are aware of all this, but the government remains silent in the face of the enormous pressure being put upon it.
Ahmad: Why does Al Azhar University not respond to all this? Perhaps the late Shaykh Tantawi was right when he reportedly said he would be the last Shaykh of Al Azhar and it would die after him!
Muhammad: No, the newly-appointed Shaykh of Al Azhar Dr. Ahmed Al Tayeb is a good man, a Sufi, and perhaps he will revive some (Sufi-related) courses some people have been wishing would be taught there. By the way, there is a second woman who converted to Islam and was turned over to the church by an Islamic organization, may God judge it! She was the wife of a priest and her name is Mariam Abdallah. To this day, no one knows where she is or what happened to her. There is also the recent story of Camellia Shahata (whose story is told here), but she did not convert to Islam. The first two women however, Wafa Constantine and Mariam Abdallah, did convert and what happened to them was a crime for which there is no statute of limitations.
Ahmad: The Copts are vocal and the Muslims are silent! Is there no solution apart from the demonstrations that could result in chaos no one has the power to stop? How can relations be restored to where they were for the past 14 centuries?
Muhammad: I call upon Coptic leaders to work for what is best for the Copts. I call them to the voice of reason. I call upon them to sit and discuss the calamity that will befall them if they continue their present course of action. I still remember Pope Shenouda saying to me in our first meeting years ago, "Dr. Muhammad, if the Muslims stop going to the Coptic grocers, barbers, doctors, and pharmacists, how will the Copts survive?
Ahmad: Twenty-five percent of Egypt's doctors and pharmacists are Copts.
Muhammad: He said to me, "How will those grocers, barbers, doctors, and pharmacists stay alive? We Copts can only survive in the midst of Muslims." He was correct. Where we are today, with Copts ignoring the rulings of judges, threatening martyrdom, storing weapons in their churches, and claiming that the 94% Muslims are the guests of the 6 % Copts, will start a fire that no one will be able to put out! The poem will come true that says:
When the voice of reason cannot extinguish the flame,
Its fuel will be the bodies of its victims.
My comments:
1. Everything in Islam, including the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, goes back to Muhammad. Some of the Jewish women whom Muhammad expelled from Medina after beheading their male family members went to the agricultural region of Khaybar. As soon as Muhammad established a truce with the people of Mecca, thus eliminating his final enemy, he led his 10,000 soldier army to Khaybar and informed the farmers they could stay alive if they gave him 50% of all their produce. This was the first example of the dhimmi, the non-Muslims who are allowed to live in a Muslim society if they accept the restrictions placed upon them by the majority.
For 14 centuries in Egypt the Copts lived as good dhimmis. For the first time in their history, they are demanding all the rights and privileges granted the Muslim majority. This is what Ahmad and Muhammad are strenuously objecting to in the above interview.
2. Ahmad complained that Egypt's billionaires are all Copts, and that Copts own Egypt's main industrial and communications companies. There are, however, few if any Copts who are department heads in Egypt's government universities, directors of Egypt's government hospitals, and judges in Egypt's courts. The simple fact is that Muslims do not like Copts in positions of legal authority over them. It is impossible to imagine a Coptic President or Prime Minister of Egypt. Copts thrive in the areas in which they are allowed to grow.
3. Muhammad and Ahmad threw out unverified "facts", such as that of the Christians smuggling explosives into Egypt and stockpiling weapons in churches. According to one report I read, the explosives were simply fireworks. American forces in Iraq often found weapons stored in mosques, but I have never heard of a church in Egypt being used to store weapons.
4. Muslims have no understanding of Christian theology, and often impose a Muslim understanding on Christian history. Because martyrs in Islam are people killed in battle, Muhammad and Ahmad assume Christian martyrs are the same thing. They are totally unaware of the 2000 year Christian history of martyrs who die for their faith.
5. The burden of restoring Coptic-Muslim relations was presented in this interview as being solely upon the shoulders of the Christians. No awareness at all was expressed of what Muslims could do to improve these relations.
6. Perhaps the greatest irony of the interview was Muhammad's description of the arrogance of Pope Shenouda. What did the Pope do that Muhammad saw as extremely arrogant? Pope Shenouda dared to suggest that the ruling of a 7th century Arab warlord concerning who could or could not breastfeed a child was silly. Now that's Coptic arrogance for you!
Monday, September 27, 2010
Part 1 - Islam's Threat Against Egypt's Copts
On 23 September the popular Al Jazeera program Beyond the Borders featured the interview, available here in Arabic, "Accusations the Coptic Church Is Aggressively Encroaching Against Egypt and its Laws." Because I believe the interview represents a threat against the Copts, I am translating it rather than merely presenting a summary (which has already been done here). The translation is abridged only to avoid repetition and statements not germane to the main topic. It is quite long and will be divided into two parts, with part two available here.
My own comments will follow the interview, which was held between host Ahmed Mansour and Muslim scholar Muhammad Salim Awah.
Ahmad: Greetings from Cairo. Egypt is experiencing a period of unprecedented religious polarization with the Copts demanding their right to evangelize Muslims, build churches freely, and occupy high positions in the government while at the same time motivating international organizations and Western governments to take action against the Egyptian government. The government says it is giving more to the Copts every day, especially following Pope Shenouda's announcement last year that the Church supports the transfer of power from President Mubarak to his son Gamal. Some observers have gone so far as to say that the government's acquiescence to Coptic demands could threaten national stability. Others fear it will result in Egypt's Muslim majority having to seek their own rights in their own country. In a response to these Coptic demands in 2007, the Minister of Manpower announced that the Copts, who form only 6 percent of Egypt's population, possess one-third of the country's wealth and own Egypt's largest automobile, communications, and construction companies. She pointed out that a recent edition of Forbes magazine noted that 3 Copts were on the list of the Middle East's top billionaires, whereas not a single Egyptian Muslim was on the list. The Copts also occupy many important positions in the Egyptian government, including two Ministries, and are 25% of the members in the pharmaceutical and medical unions. According to some reports, Copts hold 40% of the capital in Egyptian banks.
The situation reached a new level when the Copts began demanding their right to proselytize Muslims and protect new converts, especially women. This raises an entire new set of questions for the Pope related to the freedom of religious choice, compliance to the laws of Egypt, and the strong relationship that has linked Copts and Muslims in Egypt for 14 centuries. Our guest for this interview is one who has closely followed this subject, scholar and legal professor Dr. Muhammad Salim Al Awah. Greetings.
Muhammad: Greetings to you.
Ahmad: In a 2009 interview Pope Shenouda described Coptic-Muslim relations in Egypt as abnormal. What brought this relationship, which was strong for 14 centuries except for isolated incidents of unrest, to this low level?
Muhammad: Let me begin by saying that the Coptic-Muslim relationship in Egypt is a brotherly, long lasting, humanitarian one that cannot be broken or divided. It cannot be broken in the sense that it has existed throughout history. It cannot be divided in the sense that anyone who imagines the Copts leaving the fabric of Egyptian society to establish their own state, or anyone who fancies forcing the Copts out to form a new country is deceiving himself. This long-standing relationship can be damaged by corruption, neglect, and mistakes made on both sides, but it will endure.
If the Pope were speaking today, his words would be even more pessimistic. Coptic-Muslim relations have been deteriorating since 2003 when Wafa Constantine, the wife of a Coptic Priest, was forcibly returned to the church by the state following her conversion to Islam. Following counseling sessions that were unsuccessful in convincing her to leave Islam, she was taken to a monastery that we always suspected was the Father Maqar Monastery. The second-highest official in the Coptic Church, Father Bishoy, recently confirmed she is indeed there working as a translator, and that anyone is free to visit her. The first part is true, but the second part is a bald-faced lie. No one can visit her!
Ahmad: But Father Bishoy added that the Ministry of the Interior (MOI) knows where she is, and that she has retained her Christianity.
Muhammad: Again, the first part is correct. the MOI knows where she is and how she spends every second of her day. They monitor the activities of the monasteries. But his statement that she is still a Christian is a complete lie. Wafa converted to Islam and she remained a Muslim after she was turned over to the church by the state in spite of the immense pressure put on her.
Ahmad: The government prohibited her freedom of choice when it turned her over to the church. Why is the government powerless in front of the church?
Muhammad: The government is weak because it is a dictatorship of tyranny, oppression, and corruption. When it is weak, it is subject to pressure. One of our political figures has said that because the government was weak, it concedes to the church in turning over converts to Islam. Where is our constitution that exists to protect freedom of chose? Those women who chose Islam and are now imprisoned have been denied their right to choose.
Ahmad: Even while preparing this program I noticed a daily escalation in the Coptic-Muslim polemic. Some Copts say the Pope and the church represent a red line that cannot be criticized, but even President Mubarak is criticized by the Egyptian press. Does the constitution allow anything in Egypt to be above criticism?
Muhammad: No one is above criticism, and everyone is accountable to the constitution.
Ahmad: But the church as a whole is above and beyond the limits of the constitution!
Muhammad: The church and some Copts want that, including the Father Bishoy you referred to earlier. He wants the church to be above the law and the constitution. That would be a tragic mistake which would put part of the state above the state itself, and cause the whole state to collapse. Their demand that the Pope not be accountable to the constitution is an impossible situation no one will accept.
Ahmad: I read several articles recently, including some written by Copts, that accuse the Pope of isolating the Copts. Who is really to blame? If the Coptic-Muslim relationship lasted 14 centuries, why is the reign of Pope Shenouda III bringing it to the brink of disintegration?
Muhammad: Ever since Pope Shenouda was exiled by President Sadat to the Monastery of Saint Bishoy in 1981 and only allowed to return to Cairo 5 years later, the church has increasingly confronted Muslim organizations to the point it insists Muslim medical and educational programs cease. From time to time it demands Islamic education be lessened in the schools. Ever since the Pope's return, church officials have been making irresponsible unfounded statements that inflame the Arab street. This reached a zenith with the Wafa Constantine frenzy in 2003, and since then Muslims have been unable to relax. How can they, when a convert to Islam can be turned over by the government to an institution that is above the law and can be imprisoned by that institution in an unknown location? From 2003 until just a few days ago no one even knew where Wafa Constantine was being held. That is more than seven years!
Ahmad: What would cause the Republic of Egypt to concede its authority and give equal power to what some have called the Republic of Pope Shenouda?
Muhammad: The church is more than a republic, it's an empire! A republic has laws and a constitution that provides rights and responsibilities to its citizens. But what happens inside the church is subject to the power of the church, and no one can do anything about it.
Ahmad: Father Bishoy confirmed that today, when he said that what happens inside the church concerns only the church, and all others are guests. Are Muslims only guests?
Muhammad: Can you imagine that more than 14 centuries after Islam entered Egypt a senior Coptic official like Father Bishoy, who is in charge of church discipline, could say something like that?
Ahmad: He was quoted as saying, "Do you Muslims want to govern us in our own churches?"
Muhammad: No, we do not want to govern the churches, but the legal system in Egypt governs all of Egypt's institutions including the Coptic church. Can you believe what he said? This Father Bishoy is saying, We welcome Muslims as guests - the Muslims who represent 94% of Egypt's population - but now they want to govern our churches! If you read the entire interview, you will see that these comments had nothing to do with the questions that were being asked him. Why would he go beyond the subject to say things like that? It is because there are hostilities suppressed in his mind, buried in his subconscious.
Ahmad: They want to do whatever they want with no accountability.
Muhammad: You are correct. This shows there is a deeply buried antagonism in the church that wants to create sectarian strife in this country and set it on fire. By God, any Muslim who would accept...
Ahmad: Father Bishoy is the second most powerful man in the church, and he can say things like this and no one takes him to task. But there is much more. Last year Pope Shenouda announced on the TV station owned by Coptic billionaire Naguib Suwaris that he favored Gamal Mubarak assuming the Presidency after his father, and that the Copts would follow suit. He said that the alternative to Gamal Mubarak was ignorance. Is there a tacit agreement between the government and the church about this?
Muhammad: This is not the first time the Pope made that announcement. It was first stated in 2005 at an international Coptic conference in Egypt with attendees from all over the world. They came together to determine only one matter, which was Coptic support for President Mubarak and his son. Of course anyone has the right to support Gamal Mubarak, but if the church votes as a bloc it will destroy the country.
From the time of Muslim reformer Saad Zaghloul until now, people have struggled to make Egypt a non-sectarian country. The main objection to the Muslim Brotherhood has always been their desire to have a religious state. If the Copts join the ruling party as a religious bloc, they will be able to elect candidates of their choice. Father Bishoy said in his interview that President Mubarak has been the best thing for the Copts. So why are they complaining?
Ahmad: He also said Gamal Mubarak loves the Copts.
Muhammad: Exactly. So why are they flooding the world with their demonstrations and complaints of persecution and discrimination? They want to create social unrest that will destroy everything. This dissension is being led by the church.
Ahmad: The church leaders aren't being blamed for anything and do whatever they want with impunity. If it is true that they have an agreement with the government, and can do whatever they want...
Muhammad: And if the country is set on fire as a result of this agreement?
Ahmad: Who said it will be set on fire?
Muhammad: It will be if things keep going the way they are.
Ahmad: They say they are oppressed and are demanding more rights. They want the right to build churches. They have established an organization to proselytize Muslims led by a woman who converted from Islam, and claim this is their right. Father Bishoy said in a previous interview they are even granting certificates to Christians who convert from Islam.
Muhammad: Muslim scholar Dr. Nabil Luka Bibawi just published a book about Muslims who become Christians, and vice versa. He said that efforts to convert Muslims are shrouded in complete secrecy with no government control, whereas dawah to Islam takes place in the open with full knowledge of the government and conversions publicly registered at Al Azhar University. These secret attempts to convert Muslims are serious and dangerous, but that is not the subject of our conversation today. We are now talking about their claim that we Muslims are their "guests", that only they have the right to govern inside their churches, and the statement of Pope Shenouda that no legal charge can be brought against them for anything they do that is in accordance with church doctrine. My God!
Ahmad: According to Christian tradition, the church does not get involved in politics. The election of Egypt's president, whether it be Gamal Mubarak or anyone else, is a political and not a religious issue. But all these Coptic statements are political statements.
Muhammad: They are clear political issues that have nothing to do with Christian teaching, which is to render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God. If you bring this up to Father Bishoy he replies, "This is our country. Do you want us to not speak about the politics of our country? And the Muslims are our guests!" This kind of talk will have repercussions and is very, very dangerous. God knows the fire that will be lit as a result of these statements. I call upon Pope Shenouda to renounce them rather than start a fire.
Ahmad: Are you calling on him to make a recorded statement?
Muhammad: Yes, and to renounce what Father Bishoy said. If these statements are not condemned, they will set the whole country on fire.
Ahmad: Matters are much more serious than that. Last month the Egyptian Security Forces interdicted a cargo ship coming from Israel with explosives hidden in its holds intended for Egypt. They arrested the owner of the ship, Joseph Gabalwi, who is son of the Deputy Bishop of Port Said, Boutros Gablawi. The public prosecutor wants to search the churches in Port Said, and there are many reports that the monasteries there are stockpiled with weapons. According to the Copts, however, their monasteries and churches are beyond state control and cannot be searched. Meanwhile Muslims are arrested daily on weapons and extremism charges.
Muhammad: That is correct.
Ahmad: No one can deny this information, which is public knowledge. There are many reports of weapons stored in monasteries, and these things coming from Israel.
Muhammad: First of all, I am extremely sorry that this involves Deputy Bishop Boutros Gabalwi. His father was the pastor of the church on the street where I grew up in Alexandria and his sons, including Boutros were all our childhood friends. In spite of this, he and his son got involved in this crime that reached the point of smuggling weapons from Israel to be stored in their churches that could only be used against the Muslims.
Father Bishoy said today they were even willing to seek martyrdom. Martyrdom can only be achieved in warfare. The church and some of its leaders are preparing for war against the Muslims. The tragedy is that these stories are not being followed in the press; even the story you mentioned of the intercepted ship was given hardly any media coverage after it was first reported although the press is full of stories every day about Muslims who supposedly do something wrong. Hardly a word was written about this Copt who is importing explosives from Israel!
Ahmad: I have many small clippings, such as the one you mentioned from 2005 where the Pope said they would support President Mubarak and his son. No one pays any attention to them, even though they are important and dangerous.
Muhammad: No one pays any attention to these attempts to spread sedition in the country. The media is frightened and cowardly and they only publish these items on a small side column where no one will read them. They do not realize that when Father Bishoy talks about martyrdom, he is talking about war!
My own comments will follow the interview, which was held between host Ahmed Mansour and Muslim scholar Muhammad Salim Awah.
Ahmad: Greetings from Cairo. Egypt is experiencing a period of unprecedented religious polarization with the Copts demanding their right to evangelize Muslims, build churches freely, and occupy high positions in the government while at the same time motivating international organizations and Western governments to take action against the Egyptian government. The government says it is giving more to the Copts every day, especially following Pope Shenouda's announcement last year that the Church supports the transfer of power from President Mubarak to his son Gamal. Some observers have gone so far as to say that the government's acquiescence to Coptic demands could threaten national stability. Others fear it will result in Egypt's Muslim majority having to seek their own rights in their own country. In a response to these Coptic demands in 2007, the Minister of Manpower announced that the Copts, who form only 6 percent of Egypt's population, possess one-third of the country's wealth and own Egypt's largest automobile, communications, and construction companies. She pointed out that a recent edition of Forbes magazine noted that 3 Copts were on the list of the Middle East's top billionaires, whereas not a single Egyptian Muslim was on the list. The Copts also occupy many important positions in the Egyptian government, including two Ministries, and are 25% of the members in the pharmaceutical and medical unions. According to some reports, Copts hold 40% of the capital in Egyptian banks.
The situation reached a new level when the Copts began demanding their right to proselytize Muslims and protect new converts, especially women. This raises an entire new set of questions for the Pope related to the freedom of religious choice, compliance to the laws of Egypt, and the strong relationship that has linked Copts and Muslims in Egypt for 14 centuries. Our guest for this interview is one who has closely followed this subject, scholar and legal professor Dr. Muhammad Salim Al Awah. Greetings.
Muhammad: Greetings to you.
Ahmad: In a 2009 interview Pope Shenouda described Coptic-Muslim relations in Egypt as abnormal. What brought this relationship, which was strong for 14 centuries except for isolated incidents of unrest, to this low level?
Muhammad: Let me begin by saying that the Coptic-Muslim relationship in Egypt is a brotherly, long lasting, humanitarian one that cannot be broken or divided. It cannot be broken in the sense that it has existed throughout history. It cannot be divided in the sense that anyone who imagines the Copts leaving the fabric of Egyptian society to establish their own state, or anyone who fancies forcing the Copts out to form a new country is deceiving himself. This long-standing relationship can be damaged by corruption, neglect, and mistakes made on both sides, but it will endure.
If the Pope were speaking today, his words would be even more pessimistic. Coptic-Muslim relations have been deteriorating since 2003 when Wafa Constantine, the wife of a Coptic Priest, was forcibly returned to the church by the state following her conversion to Islam. Following counseling sessions that were unsuccessful in convincing her to leave Islam, she was taken to a monastery that we always suspected was the Father Maqar Monastery. The second-highest official in the Coptic Church, Father Bishoy, recently confirmed she is indeed there working as a translator, and that anyone is free to visit her. The first part is true, but the second part is a bald-faced lie. No one can visit her!
Ahmad: But Father Bishoy added that the Ministry of the Interior (MOI) knows where she is, and that she has retained her Christianity.
Muhammad: Again, the first part is correct. the MOI knows where she is and how she spends every second of her day. They monitor the activities of the monasteries. But his statement that she is still a Christian is a complete lie. Wafa converted to Islam and she remained a Muslim after she was turned over to the church by the state in spite of the immense pressure put on her.
Ahmad: The government prohibited her freedom of choice when it turned her over to the church. Why is the government powerless in front of the church?
Muhammad: The government is weak because it is a dictatorship of tyranny, oppression, and corruption. When it is weak, it is subject to pressure. One of our political figures has said that because the government was weak, it concedes to the church in turning over converts to Islam. Where is our constitution that exists to protect freedom of chose? Those women who chose Islam and are now imprisoned have been denied their right to choose.
Ahmad: Even while preparing this program I noticed a daily escalation in the Coptic-Muslim polemic. Some Copts say the Pope and the church represent a red line that cannot be criticized, but even President Mubarak is criticized by the Egyptian press. Does the constitution allow anything in Egypt to be above criticism?
Muhammad: No one is above criticism, and everyone is accountable to the constitution.
Ahmad: But the church as a whole is above and beyond the limits of the constitution!
Muhammad: The church and some Copts want that, including the Father Bishoy you referred to earlier. He wants the church to be above the law and the constitution. That would be a tragic mistake which would put part of the state above the state itself, and cause the whole state to collapse. Their demand that the Pope not be accountable to the constitution is an impossible situation no one will accept.
Ahmad: I read several articles recently, including some written by Copts, that accuse the Pope of isolating the Copts. Who is really to blame? If the Coptic-Muslim relationship lasted 14 centuries, why is the reign of Pope Shenouda III bringing it to the brink of disintegration?
Muhammad: Ever since Pope Shenouda was exiled by President Sadat to the Monastery of Saint Bishoy in 1981 and only allowed to return to Cairo 5 years later, the church has increasingly confronted Muslim organizations to the point it insists Muslim medical and educational programs cease. From time to time it demands Islamic education be lessened in the schools. Ever since the Pope's return, church officials have been making irresponsible unfounded statements that inflame the Arab street. This reached a zenith with the Wafa Constantine frenzy in 2003, and since then Muslims have been unable to relax. How can they, when a convert to Islam can be turned over by the government to an institution that is above the law and can be imprisoned by that institution in an unknown location? From 2003 until just a few days ago no one even knew where Wafa Constantine was being held. That is more than seven years!
Ahmad: What would cause the Republic of Egypt to concede its authority and give equal power to what some have called the Republic of Pope Shenouda?
Muhammad: The church is more than a republic, it's an empire! A republic has laws and a constitution that provides rights and responsibilities to its citizens. But what happens inside the church is subject to the power of the church, and no one can do anything about it.
Ahmad: Father Bishoy confirmed that today, when he said that what happens inside the church concerns only the church, and all others are guests. Are Muslims only guests?
Muhammad: Can you imagine that more than 14 centuries after Islam entered Egypt a senior Coptic official like Father Bishoy, who is in charge of church discipline, could say something like that?
Ahmad: He was quoted as saying, "Do you Muslims want to govern us in our own churches?"
Muhammad: No, we do not want to govern the churches, but the legal system in Egypt governs all of Egypt's institutions including the Coptic church. Can you believe what he said? This Father Bishoy is saying, We welcome Muslims as guests - the Muslims who represent 94% of Egypt's population - but now they want to govern our churches! If you read the entire interview, you will see that these comments had nothing to do with the questions that were being asked him. Why would he go beyond the subject to say things like that? It is because there are hostilities suppressed in his mind, buried in his subconscious.
Ahmad: They want to do whatever they want with no accountability.
Muhammad: You are correct. This shows there is a deeply buried antagonism in the church that wants to create sectarian strife in this country and set it on fire. By God, any Muslim who would accept...
Ahmad: Father Bishoy is the second most powerful man in the church, and he can say things like this and no one takes him to task. But there is much more. Last year Pope Shenouda announced on the TV station owned by Coptic billionaire Naguib Suwaris that he favored Gamal Mubarak assuming the Presidency after his father, and that the Copts would follow suit. He said that the alternative to Gamal Mubarak was ignorance. Is there a tacit agreement between the government and the church about this?
Muhammad: This is not the first time the Pope made that announcement. It was first stated in 2005 at an international Coptic conference in Egypt with attendees from all over the world. They came together to determine only one matter, which was Coptic support for President Mubarak and his son. Of course anyone has the right to support Gamal Mubarak, but if the church votes as a bloc it will destroy the country.
From the time of Muslim reformer Saad Zaghloul until now, people have struggled to make Egypt a non-sectarian country. The main objection to the Muslim Brotherhood has always been their desire to have a religious state. If the Copts join the ruling party as a religious bloc, they will be able to elect candidates of their choice. Father Bishoy said in his interview that President Mubarak has been the best thing for the Copts. So why are they complaining?
Ahmad: He also said Gamal Mubarak loves the Copts.
Muhammad: Exactly. So why are they flooding the world with their demonstrations and complaints of persecution and discrimination? They want to create social unrest that will destroy everything. This dissension is being led by the church.
Ahmad: The church leaders aren't being blamed for anything and do whatever they want with impunity. If it is true that they have an agreement with the government, and can do whatever they want...
Muhammad: And if the country is set on fire as a result of this agreement?
Ahmad: Who said it will be set on fire?
Muhammad: It will be if things keep going the way they are.
Ahmad: They say they are oppressed and are demanding more rights. They want the right to build churches. They have established an organization to proselytize Muslims led by a woman who converted from Islam, and claim this is their right. Father Bishoy said in a previous interview they are even granting certificates to Christians who convert from Islam.
Muhammad: Muslim scholar Dr. Nabil Luka Bibawi just published a book about Muslims who become Christians, and vice versa. He said that efforts to convert Muslims are shrouded in complete secrecy with no government control, whereas dawah to Islam takes place in the open with full knowledge of the government and conversions publicly registered at Al Azhar University. These secret attempts to convert Muslims are serious and dangerous, but that is not the subject of our conversation today. We are now talking about their claim that we Muslims are their "guests", that only they have the right to govern inside their churches, and the statement of Pope Shenouda that no legal charge can be brought against them for anything they do that is in accordance with church doctrine. My God!
Ahmad: According to Christian tradition, the church does not get involved in politics. The election of Egypt's president, whether it be Gamal Mubarak or anyone else, is a political and not a religious issue. But all these Coptic statements are political statements.
Muhammad: They are clear political issues that have nothing to do with Christian teaching, which is to render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God. If you bring this up to Father Bishoy he replies, "This is our country. Do you want us to not speak about the politics of our country? And the Muslims are our guests!" This kind of talk will have repercussions and is very, very dangerous. God knows the fire that will be lit as a result of these statements. I call upon Pope Shenouda to renounce them rather than start a fire.
Ahmad: Are you calling on him to make a recorded statement?
Muhammad: Yes, and to renounce what Father Bishoy said. If these statements are not condemned, they will set the whole country on fire.
Ahmad: Matters are much more serious than that. Last month the Egyptian Security Forces interdicted a cargo ship coming from Israel with explosives hidden in its holds intended for Egypt. They arrested the owner of the ship, Joseph Gabalwi, who is son of the Deputy Bishop of Port Said, Boutros Gablawi. The public prosecutor wants to search the churches in Port Said, and there are many reports that the monasteries there are stockpiled with weapons. According to the Copts, however, their monasteries and churches are beyond state control and cannot be searched. Meanwhile Muslims are arrested daily on weapons and extremism charges.
Muhammad: That is correct.
Ahmad: No one can deny this information, which is public knowledge. There are many reports of weapons stored in monasteries, and these things coming from Israel.
Muhammad: First of all, I am extremely sorry that this involves Deputy Bishop Boutros Gabalwi. His father was the pastor of the church on the street where I grew up in Alexandria and his sons, including Boutros were all our childhood friends. In spite of this, he and his son got involved in this crime that reached the point of smuggling weapons from Israel to be stored in their churches that could only be used against the Muslims.
Father Bishoy said today they were even willing to seek martyrdom. Martyrdom can only be achieved in warfare. The church and some of its leaders are preparing for war against the Muslims. The tragedy is that these stories are not being followed in the press; even the story you mentioned of the intercepted ship was given hardly any media coverage after it was first reported although the press is full of stories every day about Muslims who supposedly do something wrong. Hardly a word was written about this Copt who is importing explosives from Israel!
Ahmad: I have many small clippings, such as the one you mentioned from 2005 where the Pope said they would support President Mubarak and his son. No one pays any attention to them, even though they are important and dangerous.
Muhammad: No one pays any attention to these attempts to spread sedition in the country. The media is frightened and cowardly and they only publish these items on a small side column where no one will read them. They do not realize that when Father Bishoy talks about martyrdom, he is talking about war!
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
The War on Adjectives
Adjectives are vital to American cultural and political discourse. Pamela Geller is not just the owner of a blog, she is a "rabid, shrill, extreme, right-wing conservative, hate-mongering Islamophobic blogger." Barack Obama is not just our President, he is a "Muslim-appeasing, socialist, teleprompter bound, uncaring, empty suited, corporate America lackey, Chicago syndicate President".
I learned in high school that adjectives are words used to describe nouns. They are much more than that to those conveyers of opinions whose words tumble from our television screens and car radios, through our blogs, newspapers and magazines, and across the Internet. Adjectives are the soil used to grow an idea the communicator favors, the paint used to adorn the canvas of a personality he or she finds attractive. These same adjectives are the poison that tear down ideas and the darts that destroy the people this same communicator does not like.
Some people find it important to attach a label to everything, whether it be a person or an idea, like a scientist labelling a specimen in her laboratory. Having attached the label, they then relate to the person or concept in light of the label they have given it. Right or wrong, accurate or misguided, once labelled the target will never be viewed as anything else. Anything they have to say will be interpreted through the label put on them.
The result is that real communication does not take place. Speaker B waits impatiently for Speaker A to stop talking, so he can use his adjectives to tear down everything she has said without even being able to accurately rephrase it.
So my solution is to launch the War on Adjectives. Force talking heads and pundits to express their ideas clearly and succinctly without giving them an unlimited use of adjectives to cover the shallowness of what they are actually saying. It might take a while for them to learn to discuss Sarah Palin's ideas if they are unable to describe her as "polarizing", or to articulate Nancy Palosi's goals if they cannot minimize her as a "progressive liberal", but it would be worth the wait.
I learned in high school that adjectives are words used to describe nouns. They are much more than that to those conveyers of opinions whose words tumble from our television screens and car radios, through our blogs, newspapers and magazines, and across the Internet. Adjectives are the soil used to grow an idea the communicator favors, the paint used to adorn the canvas of a personality he or she finds attractive. These same adjectives are the poison that tear down ideas and the darts that destroy the people this same communicator does not like.
Some people find it important to attach a label to everything, whether it be a person or an idea, like a scientist labelling a specimen in her laboratory. Having attached the label, they then relate to the person or concept in light of the label they have given it. Right or wrong, accurate or misguided, once labelled the target will never be viewed as anything else. Anything they have to say will be interpreted through the label put on them.
The result is that real communication does not take place. Speaker B waits impatiently for Speaker A to stop talking, so he can use his adjectives to tear down everything she has said without even being able to accurately rephrase it.
So my solution is to launch the War on Adjectives. Force talking heads and pundits to express their ideas clearly and succinctly without giving them an unlimited use of adjectives to cover the shallowness of what they are actually saying. It might take a while for them to learn to discuss Sarah Palin's ideas if they are unable to describe her as "polarizing", or to articulate Nancy Palosi's goals if they cannot minimize her as a "progressive liberal", but it would be worth the wait.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Dedicated to Muslim Women Everywhere...
...who are looking for more freedom than they have experienced until now:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
