Tarek
Fatah, in his remarkably courageous and forthright book, The
Jew Is Not My Enemy, rightly urges his fellow Muslims to
shun their visceral hatred of the Jewish people. Published by
McClelland and Stewart, it is a groundbreaking work in several
respects. Muslims rarely, if ever, speak out against the rising
tide of anti-Semitism among their co-religionists for fear of
being labeled Zionist agents and neocon supporters. They also
risk being seen as traitors to the Muslim cause if they recognize
Israel’s right to exist and thrive in the Middle East.
In Fatah’s own words, “Few Muslims dare to state
publicly that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state.
Those of us who do, incur huge risks. Not only are we wrongfully
portrayed as endorsing Israel’s continued occupation of
Palestinian territories, but it is claimed we are the ultimate
enemies of Islam.”
Fatah
is right. Too many Muslims are now governed by an apocalyptic
zeal with an expansionist mission. They perceive the Jewish
nation as a roadblock to achieving a global Islamic caliphate
configured around the tenets of sharia.
Fatah’s
call is sincere and earnest. Rooted in the conviction that anti-Semitism
leads to self-destruction, the author makes an impassioned plea
to his brethren in faith to repudiate attitudes that reflect
so negatively on their collective psyche. Not only does rampant
anti-Semitism reflect poorly on Muslims, it obstructs the peace
process and the goal of nationhood for the Palestinian people.
In
appealing to his co-religionists, Fatah invokes Islam’s
historical tolerance towards Jews, which eroded in the latter
half of the last century. Here the author is careful to acknowledge
that virulent anti-Semitism is a comparatively recent phenomenon,
but expresses concern that it may very well be a growing one.
The author states: “The last quarter of the twentieth
century would slowly undo the progress we Muslims had made in
the preceding century. Our intellectual and cultural revival
was stifled by the forces unleashed in Saudi Arabia and which
are perhaps best captured by the late Saudi king Ibn Saud, who
told an Anglo-American delegation: ‘The Jews are our enemies
everywhere. Wherever they are found, they intrigue and work
against us.’ ”
The
author delves into history to understand better the causes of
the conflict in the Middle East. He attributes contemporary
Muslim anti-Semitism partly to the purported Banu Quraizah massacre
as depicted in Islamic history. As the subtitle of the book
reads, Unveiling the myths that fuel Muslim anti-Semitism, the
author effectively refutes the historical claims associated
with the fictitious murder of 900 Buna Quraizah Jews.
Fatah
also partly blames Israel for fueling anti-Semitism but his
disdainful gaze falls mainly upon fellow Muslims as he provides
numerous examples of Muslim anti-Semitism. However, the examples
vary contextually, and thus Fatah’s definition of anti-Semitism
is unclear. For example, is all, some, or one particular criticism
of Israel rooted in anti-Semitism? Is support for a Palestinian
state anti-Semitic? Is it possible that such support is based,
more objectively, on an acknowledgement of the right of any
nation to determine its own destiny? Is virulent anti-Semitism
prevalent in populous Muslim countries like Indonesia? Readers
must have a conceptual framework of Muslim anti-Semitism to
be able to decide whether the author’s perceptions of
it are accurate and plausible. One must also question Fatah’s
interpretation of verse 5: 21 of the Koran, in which he claims
Allah conferred the Holy Land to Jews unconditionally and permanently.
To support his claim, the author relies heavily on the interpretation
of Professor Khaleel Mohammad of the University of California.
Fatah states:
Khaleel
Mohammed says that among the verses of the Quran that are pertinent
to the issue of the Holy Land, 5: 21 is the most significant
. . . To elucidate his point, he rendered verse 5: 21 in as
literal a manner as possible, translating the Arabic word kataba
as “written” . . . it conveys the idea of decisiveness,
finality, and immutability.
Agreed.
But my objection to this interpretation is not over the meaning
of the word, but the theological context Fatah associates with
it.
Israel
has a compelling enough case to exist without requiring evidence
from scripture. Invoking scripture to validate territorial claims
is an anachronism subject to interpretation. Subjective interpretations
of religious texts in fact weaken rather than strengthen Israel’s
case because they invite hostile counter-claims.
For
example, Islamists also use the Bible to strengthen their claims
to the Holy Land and many suggest God made his covenant with
all of Abraham’s progeny. They offer Ishmael’s circumcision
as proof of his inclusion in the covenant. The children of Ishmael
are therefore just as entitled to the Holy Land according to
this view.
One
can also easily argue that neither the Koran nor the Bible promised
the Holy Land to the Jews unconditionally. God’s promise
to Israel was contingent upon His people staying true to the
covenant, an idea expressed in verses 7-8 of the chapter entitled
“The children of Israel.” The verses state:
If you did well,
you did well for yourselves, if you did evil, (you did it)
against yourselves. So when the second of the warnings came
to pass, (We permitted your enemies) to disfigure your faces,
and to enter your Temple as they had entered it before, and
to visit with destruction all that fell into their power.
It may be that
your Lord may (yet) show Mercy to you, but if you revert (to
your sins), We shall revert (to Our punishments): and We have
made Hell a prison for those who reject (All faith). (Koran
17: 7-8).
The
verse cited above is pivotal to the debate. Rather than unconditional
reward, Allah in this verse promises retribution if the Israelites
break the covenant.
Let
us return to the word kataba in verse 5: 21. While
it certainly connotes permanence, one must question why Allah,
in verse 5:26, revokes his own commandment to the children of
Israel consequent to their reluctance to enter the Holy Land
for fear of being vanquished.
Muslims
believe that it is indeed the same God who spoke to the Israelites
in the Tanakh. For Muslims then, the Tanakh would also confirm
the contention that God revoked his commandment contained in
verse 5:21 on other occasions during the course of Jewish history.
The Assyrian invasion of the northern kingdom of Israel resulted
in the deportation of ten Israelite tribes in 722 BCE. The Jews
of Judah (Judea) were later exiled to Babylon in 589 BCE. Events
following the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD also
resulted in similar deportations of the Jews. The conclusion?
Given the transitory nature of human existence and endeavour,
“permanence” must be seen as a term relative to
changing circumstances and evolving political contexts, rather
than Fatah’s literal and absolutist interpretation of
the concept.
The
Mohammed/Fatah interpretation is also fallacious in ignoring
the Koranic concept of religious continuity. The Islamic scripture
treats believers of old as God’s people in a generic sense.
The new believers, the Muslims, are treated with the same respect
in the Koran as the rightful heirs to God’s bounty. The
Israelites of old were certainly believers commanded to enter
the land at a specific point in history. When they rejected
God’s command, they forfeited their right to enter the
land and, according to 5:26, wandered the wilderness of Sinai
for forty years. Fatah ignores the philosophical underpinnings
of the Koranic view of belief and godliness. According to the
Koran, it is only believers who are seen as rightful inheritors
of the bounty of heaven and earth. God in fact promises them
the whole earth, rather than small territories of it as verse
6: 165 states.
In
addressing the believers the verse reads:
It is He Who has made you (His) agents, inheritors of the earth:
He has raised you in ranks, some above others: that He may try
you in the gifts he has given you: for your Lord is quick in
punishment: yet He is indeed Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful (Koran
6: 165).
The
above extract in no way invalidates Israel’s right to
exist. As stated earlier, Israel’s legality is not in
question and territorial claims need
not rely on scripture for validation. And scripture
or not, it is indeed in the interest of Muslims and Jews to
make peace with each other. It is to the mutual benefit of both
religious communities to adopt a path of peace and progress,
not only in the region but in the entire world. This path necessitates
Israeli withdrawal from Palestinian territories and Arab repudiation
of terror and violence.
The
author prescribes the following for Israel: “For Israel
the only action that matters is a specific and tangible step:
end the occupation of the Palestinian territories and cooperate
in creating a sovereign Palestinian state.”
In
addressing Palestinians and Muslims he states: “Muslims
today need to wake up from their hate-induced slumber of distrust,
suspicion, superstition, misogyny, racism, homophobia, and tribalism
. . . ”
Indeed
Arabs and Muslims have much to learn from Jews, who have a four
thousand year old tradition of enlightenment and democracy.
They formed the intellectual vanguard of ancient times, articulating
principles of universal justice and democracy in ideas and institutions
such as the rule of law and the Sanhedrin, something unheard
of in pagan cities of the time. In acknowledging this, Muslims
can revive their own tradition of tolerance, universal justice
and pluralism. Fatah is also right to appeal to Jews to appreciate
Islam’s contributions to human civilization so that the
two religious communities, so similar and yet so distinct, can
foster a climate of tolerance, understanding and peace-building.
The
book is a must-read for Muslims and Jews. In particular, the
message must be heeded by Muslims of all ethnic and cultural
backgrounds. Fatah is first to start the reconciliation with
the declaration: “The Jew is not my enemy.” He rightly
hopes the rest of the Islamic world will follow suit and embrace
this message of peace wholeheartedly.
Related
articles:
To
Ban the Hijab?
Upsets,
Threats and Minarets
Tolerance
Misplaced
Situating
Honorcide
Letter
to a Muslim - Tariq Ali
Virus
of Immigrantitis
Female
Genital Mutilation
Phyllis
Chesler: Secular Islam on the Rise
Ayaan Hirsi Ali Interview
