|
mansal damha <mdamha@yahoo.com>
To: prowaris@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Fwd: Don't say it is impossible to make
peace
Date: Sun 09/24/06 04:37 PM
Assalamualaikum Semua,
Bersama-sama ini disertakan maklumat berkaitan
dengan ucapan Pope Benedict XVI yang menyelar
perjuangan Nabi Muhammad SAW dan menimbulkan
kemarahan umat Islam seluruh dunia baru-baru ini.
Nukilan yang disertakan ini bukan saja merupakan
sesuatu yang infomatif dari segi faktanya, tetapi
juga menyedarkan Pope tersebut tentang "kebodohannya"
mengenai sejarah perjuangan Islam yang sebanrnya.
Kecuali sepertimana yang diktakan oleh penulis,
ucapan beliau tersebut ada muslihat tertentu,
sepertimana yang pernah berlaku di antara Empror
Roma dan penganut Roman Ktholik di suatu ketika dulu,
samalah seperti Pope itu bersekongkolan dengan Bush
II dengan agenda yang tersiratnya.
mansal damha.
[Hereafter: Avnery on the pope. NB:
See also the attached call for protest letters from
the human rights organizations]
Gush Shalom ad in Haaretz, Sept. 22
eve of the Jewish New Year
עברית / Hebrew http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/he
The essence of peace is to connect two opposites.
If you see somebody whose opinion is the very
opposite of yours, don't believe that it is
impossible to be at peace with him.
Also, if you see two people (peoples) that are two
opposites - don't say it is impossible to make peace
between them.
On the contrary, that is the essence of the
completeness of peace - to make peace prevail
between two opposites.
Rabbi Nachman of Bratislav
Rabbi Nachman , 1772-1811, a mystic and ascetic, was
one of the most celebrated Ukrainian Hassidic
rabbis. He has many followers in Israel and
elsewhere
***
Uri Avnery
23.9.06
Muhammad's Sword
עברית / Hebrew attached
Since the days when Roman Emperors threw Christians
to the lions, the relations between the emperors and
the heads of the church have undergone many changes.
Constantine the Great, who became Emperor in the
year 306 - exactly 1700 years ago - encouraged the
practice of Christianity in the empire, which
included Palestine. Centuries later, the church
split into an Eastern (Orthodox) and a Western
(Catholic) part. In the West, the Bishop of Rome,
who acquired the title of Pope, demanded that the
Emperor accept his superiority.
The struggle between the Emperors and the Popes
played a central role in European history and
divided the peoples. It knew ups and downs. Some
Emperors dismissed or expelled a Pope, some Popes
dismissed or excommunicated an Emperor. One of the
Emperors, Henry IV, "walked to Canossa", standing
for three days barefoot in the snow in front of the
Pope's castle, until the Pope deigned to annul his
excommunication.
But there were times when Emperors and Popes lived
in peace with each other. We are witnessing such a
period today. Between the present Pope, Benedict
XVI, and the present Emperor, George Bush II, there
exists a wonderful harmony. Last week's speech by
the Pope, which aroused a world-wide storm, went
well with Bush's crusade against "Islamofascism", in
the context of the "Clash of Civilizations".
IN HIS lecture at a German university, the 265th
Pope described what he sees as a huge difference
between Christianity and Islam: while Christianity
is based on reason, Islam denies it. While
Christians see the logic of God's actions, Muslims
deny that there is any such logic in the actions of
Allah.
As a Jewish atheist, I do not intend to enter the
fray of this debate. It is much beyond my humble
abilities to understand the logic of the Pope. But I
cannot overlook one passage, which concerns me too,
as an Israeli living near the fault-line of this
"war of civilizations".
In order to prove the lack of reason in Islam, the
Pope asserts that the prophet Muhammad ordered his
followers to spread their religion by the sword.
According to the Pope, that is unreasonable, because
faith is born of the soul, not of the body. How can
the sword influence the soul?
To support his case, the Pope quoted - of all people
- a Byzantine Emperor, who belonged, of course, to
the competing Eastern Church. At the end of the 14th
century, the Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus told of a
debate he had - or so he said (its occurrence is in
doubt) - with an unnamed Persian Muslim scholar. In
the heat of the argument, the Emperor (according to
himself) flung the following words at his adversary:
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new,
and there you will find things only evil and
inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword
the faith he preached".
These words give rise to three questions: (a) Why
did the Emperor say them? (b) Are they true? (c) Why
did the present Pope quote them?
WHEN MANUEL II wrote his treatise, he was the head
of a dying empire. He assumed power in 1391, when
only a few provinces of the once illustrious empire
remained. These, too, were already under Turkish
threat.
At that point in time, the Ottoman Turks had reached
the banks of the Danube. They had conquered Bulgaria
and the north of Greece, and had twice defeated
relieving armies sent by Europe to save the Eastern
Empire. On May 29, 1453, only a few years after
Manuel's death, his capital, Constantinople (the
present Istanbul) fell to the Turks, putting an end
to the Empire that had lasted for more than a
thousand years.
During his reign, Manuel made the rounds of the
capitals of Europe in an attempt to drum up support.
He promised to reunite the church. There is no doubt
that he wrote his religious treatise in order to
incite the Christian countries against the Turks and
convince them to start a new crusade. The aim was
practical, theology was serving politics.
In this sense, the quote serves exactly the
requirements of the present Emperor, George Bush II.
He, too, wants to unite the Christian world against
the mainly Muslim "Axis of Evil". Moreover, the
Turks are again knocking on the doors of Europe,
this time peacefully. It is well known that the Pope
supports the forces that object to the entry of
Turkey into the European Union.
IS THERE any truth in Manuel's argument?
The pope himself threw in a word of caution. As a
serious and renowned theologian, he could not afford
to falsify written texts. Therefore, he admitted
that the Qur'an specifically forbade the spreading
of the faith by force. He quoted the second Sura,
verse 256 (strangely fallible, for a pope, he meant
verse 257) which says: "There must be no coercion in
matters of faith".
How can one ignore such an unequivocal statement?
The Pope simply argues that this commandment was
laid down by the prophet when he was at the
beginning of his career, still weak and powerless,
but that later on he ordered the use of the sword in
the service of the faith. Such an order does not
exist in the Qur'an. True, Muhammad called for the
use of the sword in his war against opposing tribes
- Christian, Jewish and others - in Arabia, when he
was building his state. But that was a political
act, not a religious one; basically a fight for
territory, not for the spreading of the faith.
Jesus said: "You will recognize them by their
fruits." The treatment of other religions by Islam
must be judged by a simple test: How did the Muslim
rulers behave for more than a thousand years, when
they had the power to "spread the faith by the
sword"?
Well, they just did not.
For many centuries, the Muslims ruled Greece. Did
the Greeks become Muslims? Did anyone even try to
Islamize them? On the contrary, Christian Greeks
held the highest positions in the Ottoman
administration. The Bulgarians, Serbs, Romanians,
Hungarians and other European nations lived at one
time or another under Ottoman rule and clung to
their Christian faith. Nobody compelled them to
become Muslims and all of them remained devoutly
Christian.
True, the Albanians did convert to Islam, and so did
the Bosniaks. But nobody argues that they did this
under duress. They adopted Islam in order to become
favorites of the government and enjoy the fruits.
In 1099, the Crusaders conquered Jerusalem and
massacred its Muslim and Jewish inhabitants
indiscriminately, in the name of the gentle Jesus.
At that time, 400 years into the occupation of
Palestine by the Muslims, Christians were still the
majority in the country. Throughout this long
period, no effort was made to impose Islam on them.
Only after the expulsion of the Crusaders from the
country, did the majority of the inhabitants start
to adopt the Arabic language and the Muslim faith -
and they were the forefathers of most of today's
Palestinians.
THERE IS no evidence whatsoever of any attempt to
impose Islam on the Jews. As is well known, under
Muslim rule the Jews of Spain enjoyed a bloom the
like of which the Jews did not enjoy anywhere else
until almost our time. Poets like Yehuda Halevy
wrote in Arabic, as did the great Maimonides. In
Muslim Spain, Jews were ministers, poets,
scientists. In Muslim Toledo, Christian, Jewish and
Muslim scholars worked together and translated the
ancient Greek philosophical and scientific texts.
That was, indeed, the Golden Age. How would this
have been possible, had the Prophet decreed the
"spreading of the faith by the sword"?
What happened afterwards is even more telling. When
the Catholics re-conquered Spain from the Muslims,
they instituted a reign of religious terror. The
Jews and the Muslims were presented with a cruel
choice: to become Christians, to be massacred or to
leave. And where did the hundreds of thousand of
Jews, who refused to abandon their faith, escape?
Almost all of them were received with open arms in
the Muslim countries. The Sephardi ("Spanish") Jews
settled all over the Muslim world, from Morocco in
the west to Iraq in the east, from Bulgaria (then
part of the Ottoman Empire) in the north to Sudan in
the south. Nowhere were they persecuted. They knew
nothing like the tortures of the Inquisition, the
flames of the auto-da-fe, the pogroms, the terrible
mass-expulsions that took place in almost all
Christian countries, up to the Holocaust.
WHY? Because Islam expressly prohibited any
persecution of the "peoples of the book". In Islamic
society, a special place was reserved for Jews and
Christians. They did not enjoy completely equal
rights, but almost. They had to pay a special
poll-tax, but were exempted from military service -
a trade-off that was quite welcome to many Jews. It
has been said that Muslim rulers frowned upon any
attempt to convert Jews to Islam even by gentle
persuasion - because it entailed the loss of taxes.
Every honest Jew who knows the history of his people
cannot but feel a deep sense of gratitude to Islam,
which has protected the Jews for fifty generations,
while the Christian world persecuted the Jews and
tried many times "by the sword" to get them to
abandon their faith.
THE STORY about "spreading the faith by the sword"
is an evil legend, one of the myths that grew up in
Europe during the great wars against the Muslims -
the reconquista of Spain by the Christians, the
Crusades and the repulsion of the Turks, who almost
conquered Vienna. I suspect that the German Pope,
too, honestly believes in these fables. That means
that the leader of the Catholic world, who is a
Christian theologian in his own right, did not make
the effort to study the history of other religions.
Why did he utter these words in public? And why now?
There is no escape from viewing them against the
background of the new Crusade of Bush and his
evangelist supporters, with his slogans of "Islamofascism"
and the "Global War on Terrorism" - when "terrorism"
has become a synonym for Muslims. For Bush's
handlers, this is a cynical attempt to justify the
domination of the world's oil resources. Not for the
first time in history, a religious robe is spread to
cover the nakedness of economic interests; not for
the first time, a robbers' expedition becomes a
Crusade.
The speech of the Pope blends into this effort. Who
can foretell the dire consequences?
GUSH SHALOM p.o.b. 3322 Tel Aviv 61033
Your donation helps make our voice heard
Please, send checks in your own currency – for
confirmation of receipt include email address
In several countries tax-exemption can be obtained
by donating throug local charities
info@gush-shalom.org w w w , g u s h - s h a l o m -
o r g
-
|