All Comments (166)

I wish to clarify what I meant by "Pray to God, but lock your door..." Faith and reason must go together. God does not send angels to do what He has given human beings the capacity to do. Faith in God does not deny human reasoning in the way God's will is interpreted and religions are practised.

So it is in the best interest of humanity to study religions also from the perspective of human reason, which is after all God given.

No other religion has a political system embedded in it as Islam in this day. Hence it ought to be studied as a political system as well, considering there are 1.3-1.5 billion Muslims around the globe and Sharia Law has a big say in countries where there is Muslim majority. The practise of Islam in the West where Muslims have never been in the majority, and Sharia Law has had no say nor has say, is a different matter. The impact of Islam is best assessed when the progress of countries where there was no previous culture that counts as a major culture, before the arrival of Islam is carefully examined. Babylon, Iran, Egypt etc were ancient cultures with an impressive history and cultural background that were a few millennia old before the birth of Islam. So the glory attributed to Islamic culture in the Middle East is not based on Islam alone. The culture that went before it must be taken into consideration. Similarly India's rule of Islam which is a mere three hundred years accounts only for a small period of time in Indian history, when compared to the history of the country with a rich culture and religious basis in Hinduism and Buddhism spanning many centuries.

Study of Islamic history must be done based on these considerations.

Another area of study could be anthropology of Islam.

Only when Islam is studied under these different aspects: Politics, Law (especially with regard to human rights), religion, history, anthropology... will we begin to fully understand the religion for what it is and its impact on current society. With Islamic fundamentalism on the rise worldwide, such a study is a necessity, no longer an academic luxury.

When Islam is studied with the detachment of scientific vigour, the facts, observations and conclusions can be presented to all Muslim and non-Muslim communities alike.

The great drawback in having only religious scholars assess Islam is that there seems to be a compelling need to whitewash aspects of its history (which a historian, political scientist or legal expert in human rights would not be obliged to do) or political impact. All religions must own up to its history and undertake corrections. The Catholic Church did it, there is no reason why Islam shouldn't, based on facts alone.

God should not be created in our image and likeness. I'm sure God is big enough to survive false interpretations by human beings of who He is and what He would like human beings to do in His name. I'm sure God would have no objections to having the Quran and Hadiths studied scientifically.

A Modest Proposal

Since Islam has 1.3 billion adherents, its Sharia Law being the basis of politics and law in Islamic countries (or with Muslim majority) even to this day, it ought to be studied in the university by (by non-Muslim) students of political science and law. (Comparing it with Jewish law would add additional insight, since Mohammad was influenced by Jewish teaching.) Leaving study of Sharia Law to religious scholars alone dimishes its understanding as a political and legal (especially from the perspective of human rights) system and its direct impact on society.

Islamic extremism has become a fact of life involving the safety of non-Muslims around the world. It is therefore vital to study the political and legal system embedded in the religion. It is no longer sufficient for interfaith religious scholars to engage with Shariah Law.

There is a wisdom saying: "Pray to God, but lock your door if you don't want thieves to break in and steal." It is laudable to expect Islam to be a religion of peace. But if Islamic history, the claim of Islamic extremists, some unpleasant incidents in the recent past, have even a remote basis in the Quran, it is essential to examine it objectively under the microscope, without relying entirely on a purely Islamic religious interpretation that stem from those who are peace loving Muslims who have every reason to interpret their religion with bias.

A nicely written piece. I do think that we can't all see things as black and white; we must see things through the perspective of others. How else are we to try and understand them? I ask many of those who commented here to please seek knowledge from sources other than the media. It's the only way to obtain a balanced perspective.

peace

The two most important issues that Christians and Muslims could use for dialogue:

1. Human rights according to the Bible and the Quran

2. Faith in God and good works as per the Bible and the Quran

Ms. Mubarak's eloquent analysis of our country's current policy is something our policymakers should listen to, carefully, and take into account as we try to better the current mess in the Middle East, including important parts of our own creation. On the other side, I think Americans, trying to appreciate moderate views of people like the author, are dismayed that such writings don't also call for Muslims to loudly reject the hopefully minority but seemingly growing jihadist mindset and teachings espoused by so many willing suicide bombers who have been systematically taught that to kill Westerners is to gain eternal bliss. I can only hope that Ms. Mubarak is also speaking to the Muslim media with lessons for them as well as she does lessons for us. But it would help her noble cause and more acceptance of her opinion to make this point equally in her messages to Americans.

Dear Victoria

Let me assure you that it does not matter at all to me whether you were once a fully professed nun or did or did not live in a convent. I recall now that Karen Armstrong the panelist was a fully professed nun before she became a Muslim. In hindsight I must concede that I was probably upset at an unconscious level that you gave up Christianity in favour of Islam. As a person who has not even remotely been tempted to give up Christianity for Islam I could not understand you fully (and still do not), hence the seemingly harsh stand. I have felt differently about persons who was born into a Muslim family or converted to Islam from atheism. But I realize now that God alone knows each one's heart and He alone is worthy of passing any judgment on anyone. But how easily and blindly I would draw conclusions. Sorry about all judgmental comments, conscious and unconscious.

BTW, when I mentioned that I know no Muslims personally in Sydney, it does not mean that I do not come across them in the course of my daily life. This is a world city (not quite so large and international as New York, but large and international enough) and there are many Muslims. I do not pay any extra attention because they are Muslims. I would recognize a woman as one only if she wore the hijab. To me they are simply Aussies, or human beings like any other. I relate to each person as a human being. As for knowing Muslims in India, there was a large Muslim community in my father's village where I lived for the first eight years of my life. I could differentiate them from the Hindus only because they dressed differently. My father had direct dealing with several Muslims. As for me, after moving out of my father's village, I have known Muslims who were dressed like the rest. For a short while I even shared a room at the Uni hostel with a Muslim and we got along quite well.

I would strongly encourage you to write about your spiritual journey, privately, even if not on this forum. Maybe you could even get it published one day because you do write beautifully and your journey has been unusual in many ways. It must make an interesting read for others and give you greater clarity about your spiritual path.

As the Quran says, to God all must return. Our journey on this earth is a journey back to God from whom we have come. How each one makes that journey is unique and God, who knows our secret thoughts and intentions will judge according to His standards that we know very little about. Religions have given an indication of what they might be.

Best wishes
Soja

well america is no different in its reverence for sports- im an extreme atheist in that respect-
to be honest- sports fanaticism creeps me out

because i most admire the franciscans and have worked with them i listed franciscans- but it could just as easily been carmelites as that was where i was headed-

its a long and circuitous story- that doesnt need elaborating- actually to be more specific- its te poor claires-

but its easy to find franciscans in calif - especially north

i didnt live in a convent

it wasnt the franciscan part - it was the convent part

which is why i considered seriously the carmelites-

but i was too active and dont get me started on sexism in the church-

id say im about as anti-competition anti-sports as it is possible to be without getting lynched :)

BTW, sports is supposedly the national religion in Australia. It is a pity I am almost an atheist in that regard. But I do admire the great sportsmen and women of my country and like to scream 'Aussie, Aussie, oy, oy!' when they do Australia proud. However the only sports I like to watch sometimes is long distance cycling, eg Tour de France. The sport encourages environment friendly mode of transport and shows how one can reconnect with nature and admire the beautiful landscape.

Dear Victoria

You realise I'm a bit of a literalist. My assumption that you were once a Fransciscan novice (you refer to as noviciate)for many years without actually taking the vows of a nun, is what I concluded from your own posts. I have not invested the time to reread all the blogs on the forum in which you have mentioned them. But I will provide just one to provide my source of information:

'actually ross im an ex-franciscan novitiate who is trying to become a humble authority on islam.' (Posted 21 January 2007, at 4:25 PM on Akbar Ahmed's thread titled, 'Islam and Women.')

You might like to refer to your posts, among others, on Pamela Taylor's blog: 'God made me do it' (Posted by her 18 February 2007 10:23 AM), 'Catholics more likely to face Ethnic bias than Religious discrimination' (posted by her 16 March 2007 7:22 AM), Eboo Patel's thread, 'Discrimation against Muslims (posted by him 20 March 2007, 9:41 AM), 'On admiring the religious other,' (posted by him in answer to the moderator's question dated 11 April 2007)...

I may yet get around someday to posting some of your comments that caught my attention so that you are convinced that I base my impressions only on what you have written and not someting I pulled out of my fictive imagination.

Once again I wish to affirm that I respect your your person and your choice of Islam. Although I would never choose Islam for myself (I have always been a Christian and remain so by conviction even after reading the Quran), I respect the choice 1.5 billion Muslims around the world have made. Sufi Islam I understand developed parallel to Wahaabi Islam integrating other streams of religious thought into it. Sufi Islam I am made to understand is oftentimes considered a different religion by members of Wahaabi Islam, although Sufi mystics have used the Quran as their spiritual basis. Kabir, the Indian Sufi mystic, would probably not be accepted without problems by Wahaabi Muslims. That is probably one reason Fr Bede referred to Sufi Islam as the basis for religious dialogue. Since no other religion has a political component integral to it, it would be more difficult for other religions to dialogue with the political element of Wahaabi Islam. IMHO the political branch of Islam must enter into dialogue with other political systems, eg democracy, monarchies etc.

I must hasten to confess that I am not that fearless and courages as I claim. I have been a coward many times in my life. However sometimes I have taken a stand based on my courage, completely out of proportion with the power I had. I started very early by challenging the authoratative positions on many issues taken by my father and paternal grandmother (a matriarch). I am trying to learn the hard way that discretion and not bravado and recklessness is the better part of valour. (Critical assessment of Wahaabi Islam is definitely not my area of special interest, since I'm not a religious scholar.) Dicretion has been emphasised as a great spiritual virtue, but I must admit that I had not given it much thought or tried to practise it in my life.

Gandhi's genius is in combining the principles of the Bhagavad Gita and the Sermon on the Mount to form a political strategy that is both effective and based on non-violence. Civil disobedience based on "Satyaagraha' ('longing for truth') is a spiritually based political tactic to fight injustice. We need to put that tactic into use even more today because war with modern technology is not a very sensible option to resolve conflicts. The concept of just war was developed also in the Catholic church. How could someone like Hitler have been stopped with civil disobedience or diplomacy?

The great challenge is to discern good and evil.

The great dilemma is that sometimes one must choose the lesser of two evils to resolve a conflict because many times there are no black and white solutions to human problems.

I do not know any Islamic organisations in Australia. I not know any Muslim personally. There is nothing to suggest that Muslims are discriminated in Australia. Second generation Australian Muslims integrate well and become Aussie in most ways. As far as I can tell the Muslims keep their religious practise their private business. Any attempt to politicise Islam and cause division is strongly discouraged here and rightly so.

Best wishes
Soja

i dint live in a franciscan convent soja- that is why i keep getting upset

ill give a synopsis someday but i cant right now as im supposed to be doing other things but i get stuck and easily distracted when im here

as you see i get excitable

no i dont believe in pre-ewmptive stirkes at all in any way

on a microscosmic scale between individuals-
in america if one person makes a pre-emptive strike against another- we call it a sucker punch
and only the most cowardly yellow belllied baCKSTABBER DOES SUCH A THING

so its not more valid on a macrocosmic scale when a nation does it
actually its exponentially MORE invalid

as far as the comment about turning the other cheek only counts when the tcheekturner has the ability to break the others nose

thats a good one

from exreme pacifism to islam is not as big a jump as one might imagine
oh- im going off again i better go before i start

peace thanks for your very kind words and gentleness

does australia have a branch of the women in black?
http://www.womeninblack.net/

peace

Dear Victoria

I'm glad that the tension has let up. Many thanks for your kind words.

As to my English language skills, or the lack of it which caused the misunderstanding: I have enough excuses for not being able to keep up with your nuances in spite of being an Australian citizen.

I had not heard a word of English until the age of eight (attended the village schools in the home villages of my parents in Kerala and learnt only Malayalam). Then my mother's dream to have us learn English and have better education forced my dad to take the family to Tamil Nad, the neighbouring state. That is when I learnt the English alphabet in preparation to attend an English medium school. One does not learn all that much in two years between the ages of 8 - 10. Then I moved to a school with a national syllabus and was taught in English and Hindi medium (arts/social subjects in Hindi and science in English, and we also learnt Sanskrit for five years). English was not taught at a very high level. Always science oriented, I was not particularly interested in languages, and wrote atrocious English composition (the word we used for essays). Luckily not much language skill was expected of science students and I got away with minimum because we got to select our elective subjects in Class 9. At no time did I learn English or any other language as a major, and studied only basic English for the first year at Uni. I do happen to know a bit of several lanaguages though - Malayalam (my mother tongue), Tamil (can speak but cannot read or write), Hindi(can read and write better than my mother tongue but cannot speak), Sankrit (can read and understand only very little of what I studied in school) and German (the language I know next best after English).

Although I left India twenty years ago, I came to Australia only seven years ago. I did not attend any English classes in Australia. I make do with the little I learnt in India. English remains the language I happen to know best and I think and 'feel' in English. My thoughts include neither poetry nor nuances of American English or any other English (or any other language) for that matter.

So there you have it - my valid excuse for my limited knowledge of English.

Since I was focussed on answering your politically oriented questions, I forgot to mention that my sympathies are with you for being jailed with no charges. I admire your capacity for forgiveness, I really do. I have not yet reached the stage of forgiving all my enemies (while I am still hurting from the wounds), although I do them no harm. I have a long way to go in walking in the steps of the One I call my Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. I think of Gandhi who always expressed his grievances to the media and thus exposed evil, giving the public an opportunity to decide between right and wrong. Exposing evil is the first step to overcoming/fighting it, so I look upon the media as instruments of God in fighting evil. Gandhi had interpreted the meaning of 'turning the other cheek' quite wisely: In the sense he meant it, turning the other cheek makes no sense unless one has the strength to break the nose of the one who slapped one on the cheek. (So in any conflict, when the US chooses not to use violence, it is turning the other cheek in the highest Christian sense because it has the power to break anyone's nose. Using force to stop evil, like stopping genocide or a dictator, is another matter. Even though I do not believe in pre-emptive wars, I do believe in just war and using force in self defence. Killers must be stopped in order that they may not kill more innocent people. Not to stop a killer is evil, not pacifism.) What lesson does one teach a bully by turning the other cheek, if one is too weak to take on the bully anyway? So your forgiveness is great because you could have chosen another path, namely of seeking justice through the courts and monetary compensation.

As to US Congress discussing the Armenian genocide issue: I think it is unwise to bring up an issue after so many years, in the US. Let the people/nations concerned deal with it. Leave fact finding to historians, archeologists and criminal lawyers interested in the issue. If genocide can be established without a shadow of reasonable doubt, and anyone directly involved with it can be brought to justice, then it should be done by the wounded/related parties in the International Court of Justice in the Hague, set up to deal with such issues. Passing a motion in US Congress serves no purpose except to create diplomatic tension with Turkey, a country that is trying very hard to live up to European ideals of democracy.

By the way I have no reason to feel proud, only great grief that I have not fulfilled my goals in life, have made some really big blunders and been wronged in ways I never deserved. I have never been a "yes sir, yes sir, three bags full" kind of person, not even as a child. I like to think of myself as someone who is not afraid to speak the truth, to anyone. Some people mistake that for pride as you seem to have.

As to sharing personal stuff, I have done my share too. I would however have no one else to blame if someone made references to it in anyway they chose. This here is a public forum, and each one is responsible for the information they share. Secretly I have admired those who managed to express their thoughts without ever mentioning anything personal.

I will respect your desire and refrain from making any reference to anything personal, even I think I could use them to make some point clearer! :)

I already expressed my admiration for your communication skills on Eboo Patel's forum. I can only repeat that. Your spirit of service and fire to fight for justice is admirable too. As to your Islam, it is I who must get used to your Islamic thinking and forget that you lived in a Franciscan convent once upon a time.

Best wishes
Soja

ill tell you what soja- the only reason i come back here is to see what new surprises you have for me-
you sure got me this time

if nothing else you are certainly an interesting and intelligent woman

im sorry if i was so sharp
as you see- i take poetic license and get lost in words sometimes

many of your posts are really deep, and reaching for fineness and outstanding-

just thought id balance out all the dramatics of the last post
i really find nothing in your posts even coming close to anger let alone hatred or anything ugly

maybe ive been too quick in projecting an intolerance on you
i better look at myself alot more

see ya later- god willing

SOJA- i dont know whether to take you dead serious- or what.

are you really that literalist in your interpretations of things presented?

i am finding no evidence of deficiency in your english expression

heres the article you're referring to:

as you can see it starts out with an extension of libs bizarre characterizations of muslim women
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"liberated-
despite YOUR EFFORTS TO DEPICT ALL all muslim women as burkha blinded mole creatures hiding in caves-

o yes, and the men are sun baked fried brainless zombies wandering aimlessly around the deserts with their giant guns looking for americans to smite-

how do the two ever get together to make more muslim babies?

maybe its like when spock goes back to his home planet and goes sex-crazy for a few days-

lots of dark tanned baked terrorists fighting to the death for the opportnity of grabbing the sluggy mushroom colored flock of black crowlike clad mole women-

i WANT to be allowed to come out and see the sun- but the evil sunrays will kill me!!!
and my flabby gelatinous little daughters too!!

of course we mercilessly shove the boy babies out into the sun to get baked a nice raisin brown so their brains will only be fit for future brain washing-

o how i dream of freedom and coming out of my dark dirt living tomb!

well, i always have 7 years from now when i can come out of my misery and watch my some sinuous snakey leathery tanned maniac slit another maniacs throat for my pleasure-

IS THAT ABOUT HOW YOU VIEW US LIB?"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

sorry lib- i have to retreat back to the comforting darkness as the blazing light from the computer is blinding my weak red eyes............"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

how did you miss this at the end?
that it was a parody of what lib imagines?

then soon after that i posted in reference to this article
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"peace lib- i hope my teasing was taken in the spirit of silliness with which it was given"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

this is where i actually call it silly teasing, just on the very remote chance that sarcasm was lost on lib.

soja- are you sayng that you thought there were subtle shadings and nuances in that depiction?

it was an extreme and ridiculous caricature

there was no finesse to it- no elegant innuendo

it was fiercely and completely harsh

if you are so , well- literalist in how you perceive things-
why didnt you include the other elements and incorporate then into your developed bio of me?

if you can misunderstand so completely-
why only the grublike gelatinous girls?
what about the boys who are left mercilessly to fry until their little brains can be washed into some extreme servility?

do you really think i live in a cave and only come out every 7 years?

and that i lay in wait in some animalistic dementia in sensory deprivation for the opportunity to come out and watch some savage slaughter for my own pleasure?

and that i and my crazed community are hiding out in a cave somewhere in america in apparent anonymity??

if youre going to include one graphic and inhuman item, id think you would have incorporated them all to create some scenario.

it is 1 of 2 possibilities

1) either, you really are so ,literalist is the only kind way i can put it-
and even though your language skiils (havent you been in australia over 20 years?) evidently are quite developed- they somehow failed you in this instance- to mistake a graphically freakish lampoon with an actual factual account-

2) or this is your way of you saving face and you'll sacrifice your english proficiency rather than admit it is possible you just didnt understand or were willing to accept the ridiculous too readily- which would indicate a lack of impartiality and a wound to your pride

if you really lack the subtlety and awareness to detect such an overt apparent and obvious parody-

what other REAL subtleties, distinctions, favorings and nuances have you missed or misinterpreted?

im just really flabbergasted that you thought that was a factual account

if its a language thing- i can understand that

and if that is the case- perhaps you have similarly missed or presumed other facts about me that you could revisit

i think youre basically a kind person, maybe a little too proud, and to me it is creepy when people try to get personal

if you have a genuine question- you really are welcome to ask

i would vastly prefer that ot being misrepresented

just as you like to perceive yourself as egalitarian and non-partisan

i am driven by a desire to not be misunderstood-
and when people tell me what i think- it makes me mental

also i was mad at you for inviting those ladies who have real issues with me and have attacked me - well- visciously-

terra on eboo patels bill clinton question
and insight all over the main board

she is actually marian, and then disappeared for a bit and came back as insight-

but even as insight she had some pretty disgusting accusations
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2007/09/the_gospel_according_to_bill/all_comments.html

so i felt it was pretty mean to invite those ladies in here because theyve both been really well- just unladylike

but im over it now i really dont know what to say about htis post

but it was interesting reading my own dramatic post as id forgotten all about it

to me, dragging personalities into something is questioning the logic and validity of a person and trying to throw distracting and assumptive motives where they may not exist

someone really has to slam me hard and alot before i have suspicion for bad in them
and i dont have suspicion for bad in you soja
ok peace
see you in the funny papers

Dear Victoria

Since you accuse me of "assassinating" your character by merely making a passing reference to a couple of details you mentioned about your personal life to elaborate a point I was making:

On October 16, 2007 2:16 PM you wrote, “youre a font of misinformation when it comes to me- even down to very basic details of having 2 or more children (where on EARTH did you come up with THAT ONE?)”

I based my information based on your post on the thread of Pamela K Taylor titled "The End is a-coming" (26 March 2007 7:40 AM).

On March 23, 2007 at 2:38 PM, in your post addressed to Concerned the Christian now Liberated, whom you addressed as "lib", you wrote,

"i WANT to be allowed to come out and see the sun- but the evil sunrays will kill me!!!

and my flabby gelatinous little daughters too!!

of course we mercilessly shove the boy babies out into the sun to get baked a nice raisin brown so their brains will only be fit for future brain washing-.."

My understanding of "daughters" ("my flabby gelatinous little daughters too") is that the word is used to refer to more than one. "Daughters" could mean two or more and my post made note of that distinction. Am I mistaken in interpreting that statement as meaning that you are referring to your daughters? If not, what were you referring to? Whose daughters? If not daughters, then what? Why should it amount to character assassination to refer to you as a mother when you mention "my flabby gelatinous daughters?"

If I was mistaken about you having two or more children based on your post, then I would appreciate you explaining the meaning of your post which I interpreted as I did. English is not my first language you know and I am willing to admit that I could miss the nuances in your writing.

If The Washington Post doesn't delete any of your posts on this forum, anyone can verify that you have posted a lot of personal details here (check out your posts on the threads of Pamela Taylor, Eboo Patel etc). I'm not inventing anything, and I have absolutely no reason to assassinate your character. I wonder about your motive for trying to paint me as one who hates Muslims and as one who is trying to assassinate your character.

Best wishes
Soja

PS: More later...maybe.

soja- what are you talking about?

i dont care if you agree with me.

you're still on about this not being an appropriate conversation?
and youre disappointed that the islamophobes on the other post didnt join here?
they werent discussing politics but personal character asassination, (mine)

dont worry about my choices in life, worry about your own soul.

whats with the bbc links?

yes, the non-muslims of the world watched the bosnian massacre

anyway- i have no idea what your point ever is.

youre always trying to force things into a personal disccusion about your beliefs-

if you dont have any coherent thoughts on ME politics, why do you keep posting here?

i just popped in to see if any of the islamophobes accepted your (kind of sneaky) invite to come in here and slam me-

your false assertion that al-qaeda is based on islamic principles is cleared up once and for all by the amman message of 2004-

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Frequently Asked Questions Tell a Friend

The Amman Message started as a detailed statement released the eve of the 27th of Ramadan 1425 AH / 9th November 2004 CE by H.M. King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein in Amman, Jordan. It sought to declare what Islam is and what it is not, and what actions represent it and what actions do not. Its goal was to clarify to the modern world the true nature of Islam and the nature of true Islam.

In order to give this statement more religious authority, H.M. King Abdullah II then sent the following three questions to 24 of the most senior religious scholars from all around the world representing all the branches and schools of Islam: (1) Who is a Muslim?
(2) Is it permissible to declare someone an apostate (takfir)?
(3) Who has the right to undertake issuing fatwas (legal rulings)?

Based on the fatwas provided by these great scholars (who included the Shaykh Al-Azhar; Ayatollah Sistani and Sheikh Qaradawi), in July 2005 CE, H.M. King Abdullah II convened an international Islamic conference of 200 of the world's leading Islamic scholars 'Ulama) from 50 countries. In Amman, the scholars unanimously issued a ruling on three fundamental issues (which became known as the 'Three Points of the Amman Message'):

They specifically recognized the validity of all 8 Mathhabs (legal schools) of Sunni, Shi'a and Ibadhi Islam; of traditional Islamic Theology (Ash'arism); of Islamic Mysticism (Sufism), and of true Salafi thought, and came to a precise definition of who is a Muslim.

Based upon this definition they FORBADE takfir (DECLARATIONS OF APOSTASY) between Muslims.
Based upon the Mathahib they set forth the subjective and objective preconditions for the issuing of fatwas, thereby exposing ignorant and illegitimate edicts in the name of Islam.

These Three Points were then unanimously adopted by the Islamic World's political and temporal leaderships at the Organization of the Islamic Conference summit at Mecca in December 2005. And over a period of one year from July 2005 to July 2006, the Three Points were also unanimously adopted by six other international Islamic scholarly assemblies, culminating with the International Islamic Fiqh Academy of Jeddah, in July 2006. In total, over 500 leading Muslim scholars worldwide—as can be seen on this website [click here to see the entire list]—unanimously endorsed the Amman Message and its Three Points.

This amounts to a historical, universal and unanimous religious and political consensus (ijma') of the Ummah (nation) of Islam in our day, and a consolidation of traditional, orthodox Islam. The significance of this is:
(1) that it is the first time in over a thousand years that the Ummah has formally and specifically come to such a pluralistic mutual inter-recognition; and
(2) that such a recognition is religiously legally binding on Muslims since the Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him) said: My Ummah will not agree upon an error (Ibn Majah, Sunan, Kitab al-Fitan, Hadith no.4085).

This is good news not only for Muslims, for whom it provides a basis for unity and a solution to infighting, but also for non-Muslims. For the safeguarding of the legal methodologies of Islam (the Mathahib) necessarily means inherently preserving traditional Islam's internal 'checks and balances'. It thus assures balanced Islamic solutions for essential issues like
1)human rights;
2)women's rights;
3)freedom of religion;
4)legitimate jihad;
5)good citizenship of Muslims in non-Muslim countries, and just and democratic government.

It also exposes the ILLEGITAMATE OPINIONS of RADICAL FUNDAMENTALISTS and TERRORISTS from the point of view of true Islam. As George Yeo, the Foreign Minister of Singapore, declared in the 60th Session of the U.N. General Assembly (about the Amman Message): "Without this clarification, the war against terrorism would be much harder to fight."

Finally, whilst this by the Grace of God is a historical achievement, it will clearly remain only principial unless it is put into practice everywhere. For this reason, H.M. King Abdullah II is now seeking to implement it, God willing, through various pragmatic measures, including
(1) inter-Islamic treaties;
(2) national and international legislation using the Three Points of the Amman Message to define Islam and forbid takfir;
(3) the use of publishing and the multi-media in all their aspects to spread the Amman Message; (4) instituting the teaching of the Amman Message in school curricula and university courses worldwide; and
(5) making it part of the training of mosque Imams and making it included in their sermons.

God says in the Holy Qur'an says:

"There is no good in much of their secret conferences save (in) whosoever enjoineth charity and fairness and peace-making among the people and whoso doeth that, seeking the good pleasure of God, We shall bestow on him a vast reward." (Al-Nisa, 4:114).

there you have it-

October 20, 2007 2:46 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Posted on October 20, 2007 14:46

VICTORIA:
heres your coordinated fatwa against terrorism

its long, but i didnt know what i should leave out
ill cap the relevant parts
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The declaration is of the utmost importance to the future of Iraq and to the war on terrorism for the following reasons:

(1) The war on TERRORISM cannot be won by military and intelligence means alone. The only way to win the war on terrorism is to win the hearts and minds of Muslims, and thus to dry up the pool of potential recruits to extremism. This cannot be achieved by western-style television or radio stations, which appeal to and influence only tiny secular, urban, westernized minorities. It can only be done through the authority and legitimacy of Islam itself. Unlike other religions, Islam has not been held together over hundreds of years by religious or temporal institutes, or by a clerical caste—rather, it has been held together by the Holy Qur’an and other texts which in effect interpret it. Thus religious authority lies in written texts and their interpretations. What the extremists did, before they ever took a single violent action, was to REJECT the traditional internal checks and balances on the interpretation of these texts. Indeed, to this day, before and behind every single terrorist act there is a PSEUDO-FATWA permitting or commending it. What the conference achieved is to put those traditional checks and balances (in theory at least) back on the interpretation of these texts.

(2) From the beginning in Iraq, the Takfiri foreign militants have targeted the Shi‘a in order to create a civil war and widen the conflict, thereby entangling the coalition forces in a never-ending conflict of which their countries will eventually weary. By achieving a consensus that all Sunni and Shi‘as are Muslims and that all have basic common beliefs and practices, the conference has taken the theological and religious basis out of this sectarian conflict, and exposed for what it really is: SEDITION and MASS MURDER. Without a religious solution in Iraq there can be no political solution, and hence no end to the conflict. The conference is thus providing “the religious solution”.

(3) Through the explicit recognition of the “Eight Schools of Jurisprudence” of Islam and their methodology, it implied the recognition of seven issues which are vital for Muslims and non- Muslims to live together harmoniously in this world: (i) THE protection of human rights, individual rights and freedoms and social justice under Islamic law; (ii) THE protection of women’s rights, children’s rights and ethnic minorities rights under Islamic law; (iii) The ABSOLUTE PREVENTION OF INDIVIDUAL VIOLENCE, AGGRESSION AND TERRORISM under ISLAMIC LAW; (iv) The prevention of the POLITICIZATION of religion and of offensive “JIHAD” by Muslims in the modern age; (v) The GUARANTEE of respect and tolerance for other religions under Islamic law; (vi) The injunction according to Islamic law for Muslims to be loyal and good citizens in non- Muslim countries in which they are not oppressed and enjoy full freedom of religion (as is the case precisely in the U.S. and the U.K.), even if those countries are in conflict with Islamic-majority countries; (vii) The permissibility according to Islamic law for Muslims to chose their own form of temporal government for themselves (within the parameters of the maqasid or “goals” of the Shari‘a) including modern DEMOCRACY.

King Abdullah II’s historic conference was made possible at this period of history due to a number of historical factors and recent political developments, specifically: the galvanization of world opinion against terrorism following the events of 9/11; Western pressure on the financial resources of the terrorists; Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia’s courageous moves in his own country to recognize and honour the Shi‘a and Sufi minorities despite the vehemence of the Wahabi opposition to this; the co-operation of the traditional religious leadership in Egypt (especially that of al- Azhar); the recent coalescing of the Shi‘a religious leadership in Iraq, around the supreme authority of Grand Ayatollah Al-Sistani. This conference was attended by over 175 leading religious figures from over 40 countries and marks one of the most important efforts to combat the problem of extremism and violence in the modern world.

ARE YOU STARTING TO UNDERSTAND NOW?

Dear Victoria

You wrote, "You have an almost cartoonlike superficial awareness of ME issues..."(posted October 16 2007 5:17 PM) Hence in response to your questions, I have provided BBC links to the topics you touched on. Reading up in detail on these issues to go into a lengthy discussion with you lies outside my area of particular interest. I must repeat too that I am here on an On Faith forum, not a political one.

I will touch briefly on the issue of Turkey since you mentioned it. I understand however that your views are coloured by the fact that your husband is a Turkish Muslim. (I know nothing about your personal life other than what you have written on this forum. I don't go back to reread your posts, but I can't help it that I have a fairly good memory.)

Seventeen years ago a Kurdish woman from Turkey told me about the plight of her community in Turkey. According to her the Kurds feel marginalised and persecuted by the larger Turkish community. The world read about the gassing of Iraqi Kurds by Saddam Hussein and also about the recent terrorist attacks on their community in Iraq. Being a small ethnic group in Turkey with Turkish Muslims on one side and Iraqi Shia and Sunni within the Iraqi side of Iraqi Kurds, they feel isolated and in need of self-protection. Who could blame them for that? The fact that the Kurdish territory within Iraq has oil and the fact that the Iraqi Kurds feel a sense of kinship with their community in Turkey, makes it politically interesting and volatile territory.

Do you have reports of the minority ethnic Kurds in Turkey attacking the majority Turkish civilians? If so please feel free to share the information here with details of the source.

Turkey and its history of Christianity we already discussed in one of Eboo Patel's thread. I pointed out that I belong to an Eastern Church which had nothing to do with the Roman Catholic church in Rome until 400 years ago. Even now the Syro-Malabar Catholic church in Kerala enjoys autonomy within the Catholic church. Only Syro-Malabar Catholics who live outside Kerala come directly under the RC church in Rome.

The Christian role of Turkey you mentioned was over three centuries before the birth of Islam. The powerful Turkish Ottoman Empire was not Christian, but Muslim. European countries at the time considered themselves Christian.

Turkey is for sure a bridge between the East and West. Geographically only a very small portion of it lies within Europe, the vast bulk of it is in the East (Turkey cannot be referred to as ME for that reason). Turkey applied for full membership in EEC (now EC) on 14 April 1987 (twenty years ago). The delay for acceptance into the EU is because it has not yet met all the political criteria for EU membership. Turkey is still in the process of working towards fulfilling all the criteria.

Why did I write about my faith journey on this thread? Why should description of one's faith journey be out of place in a forum that is discussing religions? Besides, the "On Faith" forum would like to hear about personal faith journeys. There is even a separate section with invitation to share the journey. I did not share my personal faith journey there, because I feel that I am currently in a phase that is difficult to put in words.

Mentioning your motherhood was only to highlight the pain of mothers in Iraq, now suffering because of the Shia-Sunni conflict. If your sympathies are with the occupied, then it should matter to you even when Iraqis are killing each other on the basis of their ethnic differences.

You should be asking yourself with what motive you share your personal details on this forum. Being annoyed with me for remembering them is pointless. Your status as an ex-Francisan novitiate (novice) of many years is an essential part of your faith journey. As a Catholic who has been exposed to and has engaged with other religions (and have known many others who have done the same without giving up their Christian faith), when you present your Islamic views to me I cannot help but calling to mind (and maybe gently reminding you) you were once a Catholic nun in training. I respect your freedom to choose any path that appeals to you, but that doesn't oblige me to agree with your views. I take no offence when you disagree with my views.

Best wishes
Soja

Dear Victoria

You ask quite indignantly why the world allows wrong things to happen and where the humanitarian responses to Darfur and now Myanmar (Burma)etc are. (Re post Oct 6, 2007 5:51 PM)

May I ask what exactly you are doing? What exactly the 1 billion + Muslims are doing about the issues you have mentioned? Are you indignant about human nature in general or about some human beings in particular? Do you notice that some human beings do go out of their way to do good things while the vast majority don't? In what way do you differentiate between the humanitarian tendencies of Muslims and non-Muslims, if you differentiate between them at all.

Below from the BBC a couple of links for a quick review on what is going on and what other people around the world are thinking about the issue.

Burma/Myanmar:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7035943.stm

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=3610&edition=2&ttl=20071021122450

To Victoria:

DARFUR(from BBC):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5316306.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7023413.stm

A delegation of influential elder statesmen led by Archbishop Desmond Tutu has been visiting Darfur to try to find solutions to the conflict.
The "Elders" have been talking to local community leaders and to displaced people living in camps.

The visit comes three days after an attack on the African Union base in southern Darfur left 10 soldiers dead...

To Victoria:

Kosovo contd...

Operation Allied Force by NATO against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia lasted from 24 March to 10 June 1999. Ten member countries of NATO which participated in the military action to protect Muslims in Kosovo after diplomatic efforts failed - Belgium, Germany, France, Great Britain, Italy, Canada, The Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and the USA.

http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/1999/p99-040e.htm

The German Green Party's first ever foreign minister and deputy chancellor, Joschka Fischer, is the man who faced down pacifists in his own party (then in power along with SPD as coalition partner) to send German airmen to Kosovo [the Greens split into two factions as a result - the “Realos” (who believe in just war to stop oppressors) and “Fundies” (total pacifists)]. For the German Air Force (Luftwaffe) it was the first time it had participated in a conflict since World War II.

Slobodan Milosevic on Trial:

“The trial of Slobodan Milosevic was organised through a specially-created UN tribunal, located in The Hague, Holland, as an effort to show that it was possible to hold a powerful man accountable for what were considered to be his crimes during the Balkan Wars of the 1990s.” (BBC)

http://www.un.org/icty/indictment/english/mil-ii990524e.htm

To Victoria:

KOSOVO (from BBC):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/country_profiles/3550401.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/country_profiles/3524092.stm

"The 1974 Yugoslav constitution laid down Kosovo's status as an autonomous province, and pressure for independence mounted in the 1980s after the death of Yugoslav President Tito.
But resentment over Kosovan influence within the Yugoslav federation was harnessed by the future leader, Slobodan Milosevic. On becoming president in 1989 he proceeded to strip Kosovo of its autonomy.

A passive resistance movement in the 1990s failed to secure independence or to restore autonomy, although ethnic Albanian leaders declared unilateral independence in 1991.
In the mid-1990s an ethnic Albanian guerrilla movement, the Kosovo Liberation Army, stepped up its attacks on Serb targets. The attacks precipitated a major, and brutal, Yugoslav military crackdown.

War

Slobodan Milosevic's rejection of an internationally-brokered deal to end the crisis, and the persecution of Kosovo Albanians, led to the start of Nato air strikes against targets in Kosovo and Serbia in March 1999.

Meanwhile, a campaign of ethnic cleansing against Kosovo Albanians was initiated by Serbian forces. Hundreds of thousands of refugees fled to Albania, Macedonia and Montenegro. Thousands of people died in the conflict.

Serbian forces were driven out in the summer of 1999 and the UN took over the administration of the province.

Contd...

Dear Victoria

I notice that nobody has responded to my invitation on the main thread to join this discussion and contribute to the political issues you have referred to. I was hoping that someone who was politically savvy would save me the trouble of responding with little knowledge. I would have been happy for you to get involved in a lively and interesting debate (which I cannot provide due to my lack of interest in such a debate which does not deal with the question on this forum in the first place). It would definitely have gone a long way in proving my point that you are mired in a very prejudiced mind-set when it comes to assessing any issue concerning Muslims anywhere in the world.

To answer your question (October 16, 2007 2:16 PM): "Where do you get the idea that non-Muslims helped the Kosovos or any of the Balkan Muslims?" repeated once again at the end of your post, "and what gives you the idea that non-Muslims helped the Balkans?"

BOSNIA:

For a quick overview, please read the Balkan timeline on BBC for information on the role of NATO, UN (peacekeeping force and International court of Justice in the Hague), UK, US and EU (Eufor)in the Bosnian conflict.

Please read up about the Dayton Peace accord and the trial in the Hague as well.

Here a couple of BBC links to get started:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/country_profiles/1066981.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/14/newsid_2559000/2559699.stm

sorry- i realized there is a base of information necessary for the connection to be clear-

due to the recent resolution passed by congress declaring turks the perpertratotors of a genocide on the armneian people 92 years ago-

and the US denying turks access to THEIR OWN BORDER to chase the PKK- the kursdish terrorist gorup that have so far killed 30,000 turks- (using m-16s by the way. a strictly MADE IN AMERICA weapon)
the turks have told the US their bases in incirlik- (through which 70% of US supplies travel through into iraq) may be closed.

also- i notice putin is meeting with ahmadenijad today, where he stated that all of the caspian sea neighbors are under the protection of russia, which is certainly an allusion to azerbaijan, as america casts about looking for a new base of strategic value.

the world market reacted to this news by raising the cost of a barrel of oil to 87. dollars- as of 7:00pm EST (up from the 80 posted earlier
because they are afraid that the oil lines and supplies will be negatively impacted if the turks cut off access to their base.

the interesting thing about turkey is it depends where you are approaching it from-

its the site of the first congregations of christianity- also the catholic church was codified in turkey- if you approach it from eastern europe- its a european country-
if you appoach it from the ME, its a middle eastern country-
smack dab in the middle

also the issue of the armenian so called genocide is not an established fact

the armenians calim 1 1/2 armenians were killled by the turks

the turks contend that the armenians made a treasonous alliance with russia (no one denies this) and there were 2 1/2 million turks killed also (again no one denies or questions this)

alos the turks opened their archives 10 years ago and invited historians to study them
today, the armnenians still will not open up their archives to outsdiers

also, an autobiography written by the first armenian president belies the facts proposed by the armenians
this book is bannned in the US

the only reason this went through to congress was the powerful armenian lobby whose base is in s. calif and whose rep they pushed to put forth the resolution

so you see its not a cut and dried issue at all

for america to make such an allegation without studying any facts is really irresponsible
not to mention it happened 100 years ago and theres an ominous silence on darfur- china- even cambodia-etc-etc....

so your statement-
"Darfur, Burma, Bosnia, Turkey (working towards becoming a member of EU) are not countries of ME either (since you mention you were mentioning only issues that concern ME in accordance with the question on this thread.) "

as im watching the news- i see that the current confliuct between the united states, IRAQ and turkey have manifested in the world by PUSH9ING OLI BARREL PRICES TO AN ALL TIME HIGH OF 80 DOLLARS A BARREL- WTH PROJECTION GOING TO 100

so you have a problem that im looking at underlying events in advance and foreseeiing their impact?

turkeys been applying for EU admission for over 40 years

go do a google and see how many turks CARE ABOUT THIS today

you have an almost cartoonlike superficial awareness of ME issues, and you are complaining that i comment on it?

soja- what are you talking about?

im talking politics here, and you keep going on about all this uneccesary personal stuff-

i didnt decide to post on postglobal now- IVE BEEN posting on it since it started-

and WHERE do you get the idea that i have 2 or more children???

this isnt a froum about why people come to these boards- we all have our reasons-

why do you comment on personal issues?

theres plenty of on topic subjects there

why do you care what subject i post about?

do you have some strict rules in your head that you feel are being encroached upon?

where do you get the idea that non-muslims helped the kosovos, or any of the balkan muslims?

even my own government doesnt have the audacity to make such a claim- as a matter of fact- the aide to ronald reagan- richard holbrooke-
a SUPER CONSERVATIVE HAWK- stated that the west non-reaction to the genoicde of the muslims in the balkans was OUR GREATEST FAILURE!

so what makes you think this?

youre a font of misinformation when it comes to me- even down to very basic details of having 2 or more children (where on EARTH did you come up with THAT ONE?)

in the future, why not just discuss the issues presented reasonably, and stay away from personal comments

for instance the several unanswered and direct questions

would you support an american (and possibly australian alliance) of an incursion into iran?

and what gives you the idea that non-muslims helped the balkans?

Dear Victoria

It is interesting: your opinion that expressing one's opinion and differing with yours constitutes ad hominem attack and passive agressive insult. As far as I can recall the forum has been deluged with posts from many Muslim bashers, who have not had one good word to say about Islam, and yet you did not dish out the kind of remarks that you have been generous with in your posts addressed to me. All my posts are on this forum, everything I have said about Islam too. I see no reason to list them all here in order to defend myself against your false allegations.

On the one hand you claim that you have not read all my posts and on the hand you allege that my posts always end with critique of Muslims. ???

I have written my impressions based on the posts I read stemming from you. If not for the difficulty of navigating through literally thousands of posts, I would have reposted your comments based on which I hold the opinion that you did not have much good to say about Christianity. I recall particularly our exchange in Eboo Patel's thread where you expressed your opinion that no spiritual experience involving celibacy is complete; on a separate thread more recently how the Torah and the Bible does not give instructions about doing good as the Quran does etc. Your time as Franciscan novitiate (novice)for many years you mentioned on several ocassions.

On this thread you mentioned Vietnamese killing Vietnamese, Koreans killing Koreans, Columbians, blacks and Hispanics killing each other. None of them killed in the name of their religion. They are not issues dealing with the ME.

Darfur, Burma, Bosnia, Turkey (working towards becoming a member of EU) are not countries of ME either (since you mention you were mentioning only issues that concern ME in accordance with the question on this thread.) Aside, Kosovo Muslims were helped by non-Muslim nations. Milosevic was brought to trial by people who were not Muslims.

The Washington Post (like the New York Times) is an international newspaper, so setting up a mainstream forum discussing religions to facilitate dialogue between religions, and assessing the impact of religion on politics and vice versa is nothing less than pure genius on the part of Sally Quinn and Jon Meacham. What happens in Washington has an impact on the rest of the world. Sally and Jon through The Washington Post has taken on the role of making Washington the Athens of religious-political dialogue, where new ideas can be thrashed out and tested; its international readership ensures that the ideas generated here will spread like a ripple, if they are worth spreading.

I mentioned that I am apolitical and yet I got interested in the Iraq issue. I listed my sources of information only to clarify that I took pains to inform myself extensively before setting out to voice my protest in some small way. I do not read all the news sources I have listed on a regular basis to keep myself politically informed. I would do that if my interest in politics was that great. In fact I read far too little. My knowledge on political matters is accordingly meagre. I'm even less interested in sports. But I manage to survive without feeling overly ashamed of myself. However I would not pretend to political knowledge I do not have (at least I hope so!).

Australia is not about to expel all its Muslims. It would be good if you could cite your source of such false information.

We are dealing only with opinions on this forum or any other forum. Your opinion, my opinion, the opinion of x, y, z. The difference in opinions are however based on the information that the person has accessed, the quality of the information they base their opinions on, their personal interpretation based on their own ability to interpret the information, their conditioning and their personal values etc. We do live in a very subjective world because people look at it through their subjective eyes. None of us can help it. Sharing on (reading) these forums helps us to get different subjective takes on a given issue, that is all.

Why do I post on the On Faith forum? Faith is an issue I could discuss from a personal perspective (because of my interest and personal experience) in a way that I could not discuss politics. I was raised in a very traditional and pious Syro-Malabar Catholic family. I attended a Syro-Malabar Catholic Carmelite convent school for two years (age 8-10) where we were taught Carmelite spirituality appropriate to our age. I started to read the Bible for myself when I was about ten years old. My interest in spiritual matters has been lifelong (although I have had only secular education except for those two years in an SMC Carmelite school and have never spent time living in a convent even as a lay person), although in my childhood years I did nothing more than participate in the family prayers and church attendance and rituals like every SM Catholic child. For eight years in India, I attended a school which inculcated the idea of national unity (including acceptance of religious plurality) very consciously. For nine years (1984-1993) I knew Dom Bede Griffiths, a Benedictine monk whose great contribution was to work towards religious unity and inter-religious dialogue.

I must admit that I turned lukewarm about spiritual matters about 15 years ago. Participating in this forum is gradually beginning to revive my interest in spiritual matters again. So I'm deeply grateful to Jon and Sally.

One of the main reasons I felt inspired to participate in this forum was because I have known Dom Bede Griffiths personally for nearly 9 years and I wanted to direct as many people as possible to his work and mission. In the last letter he wrote to me (Jan 1993) before his death (May 1993), he said that I have work to do for God. I didn't give that any thought. When I discovered this forum, I was reminded of what Fr Bede wrote to me. Since I am unfit to dicuss his books because I lack the theoritical knowledge I felt the next best thing I could do was to direct others to read his books. I went to his Ashram merely to spend time in prayer and not to become a religious scholar. Although in that context I spent a lot of time talking and discussing with him and many spiritual seekers, in different stages of their spiritual journey, from around the world, it is not sufficient to take on the task of carrying out any mission on behalf of Fr Bede. I am hoping though that many people who read the blogs on this forum will get to read Fr Bede's books for themselves. All who knew Fr Bede considered him a holy man and a visionary. His message is way ahead of his times and therefore I felt taht The Washington Post On Faith forum was a very good place to introduce Fr Bede.

I read your posts on religious matters as the opinions of a white American woman, now married and mother of two or more children, who was raised by atheist/agnostic parents, spent time in a Franciscan convent as noviciate (novice) for many years, practised Buddism, Hinduism, paganism etc, and arrived at Islam nine years ago. You prayed at every stage of your spiritual journey and your prayer took you from one religion to the other before arriving at Islam nine years ago.

I am glad that you have decided to post on PostGlobal now. May you have your fill of discussing politics with the politically savvy crowd there!

Best wishes
Soja

Middle East Politics

BBC

MUSLIM SCHOLARS REACH OUT TO POPE

More than 130 Muslim scholars have written to Pope Benedict XVI and other Christian leaders urging GREATER UNDERSTANDING between the two faiths.
The letter says that WORLD PEACE could depend on improved relations between Muslims and Christians.

It identifies the principles of accepting only one god and living in PEACE with one's neighbours as common ground between the two religions.

It also insists that Christians and Muslims worship the same god.

The letter coincides with the Eid al-Fitr celebrations to mark the end of Ramadan.

Koran and Bible

It was also sent to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the heads of the Lutheran, Methodist and Baptist churches, the Orthodox Church's Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I and other Orthodox Patriarchs.

The letter, entitled A COMMON WORD BETWEEN US AND YOU, compares passages in the Koran and the Bible, concluding that both emphasise "the primacy of total LOVE and devotion to God", and the love of the neighbour.

With Muslims and Christians making up more than half the world's population, the letter goes on, the relationship between the two religious communities is "the most important factor in contributing to meaningful PEACE around the world".

"As Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against them and that Islam is not against them - so long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion, oppress them and drive them out of their homes," the letter says.

Emerging voice of Islam

It adds: "To those who nevertheless relish conflict and destruction for their own sake or reckon that ultimately they stand to gain through them, we say our very eternal souls are all also at stake if we fail to sincerely make every effort to make PEACE and come together in harmony."

One of the signatories, Dr Aref Ali Nayed, a senior adviser at the Cambridge Inter-faith Programme at Cambridge University, told the BBC that the document should be seen as a landmark.

"There are Sunnis, Shias, Ibadis and even the... Ismailian and Jaafari schools, so it's a CONSENSUS," he said.

Professor David Ford, director of the programme, said the letter was UNPRECEDENTED.

"If sufficient people and groups HEED THIS STATEMENT and act on it then the atmosphere will be changed into one in which violent extremists cannot flourish," he said in a statement.

The letter was signed by prominent Muslim leaders, politicians and academics, including the Grand Muftis of Bosnia and Hercegovina, Russia, Croatia, Kosovo and Syria, the Secretary-General of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, the former Grand Mufti of Egypt and the founder of the Ulema Organisation in Iraq.

soja- i invite you to the postglobal blog where i have been posting for some time.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2007/10/is_condemning_the_armenian_gen/comments.html

however, its a much more savvy crowd there-

and one has to be more consistent in providing substantaition for any claims made- and opinions are- well, just that.

so basically - the turkish government 10 YEARS AGO- invited scholars from all over the world to investigate and they opened up all of their archives to any interested.

10 YEARS AGO!!

and NOW- NOW?

3 short months ago turkey voted in their PM who is an observant muslim- also their president is an observant muslim-

the people by voting in a democratic system- (who are 99% muslim) decided the want muslim leadership-

erdogan has turnewd turkey around, as far as religious freedom, intellectual and press freedom, economic expansion- in other words-
running a successful democracy that just happened to be full of muslims.

so the US- which has been stating that islam is inconsistent with democracy-
has decided that ALTHOUGH WE ARE IN A WAR ON "TERROR"- the turks CANNOT PURSUE TERRORISTS!!

on their own border!!!

turkey has been cooperative and acquiescent in allowing us troops to use their land-
turkey has been a good friend to america in their war in terror-

its extraordinarily and transparently anti-muslim and hypocrisy of the US to do this.
most of the world feels this way
go to some international blogs-

BBC has alot of stories on it- and BBC is in no way muslim friendly.

well, Eid is here this morning -

in an hour or so ill probably run into people from all sorts of middle eastern lands- as well as many indians and pakistanis-

i guess we can discuss religion and its impact on politics in the middle east-

its always interesting and informative to hear from a wide spectrum of nationalities

so what do you think about your own countries overtly islamophobic agenda?
you think they should expel all muslims?

again soja- the question posted by onfaith bloggers sally quinn and jon meachem is-

"To what extent are problems in the Middle East about religion and to what extent are they about politics? Does it matter?"

your response-

"Chewing cud over the Middle East political issues that has already been discussed at length On Faith forum doesn't seem like a very wise investment of time"

is a hoot-

THEN WHY ARE YOU CHEWING SO MUCH CUD ON THIS QUESTON?

no one forces you to post here-
basically you are saying that you are wasting your own time?

so go post on postglobal then!

no ones is telling you to post here- or make long and time consuming responses

why do you make such passive agressive insults?

im not insulting you or telling you what to do- if you dont think this is an appropriate forum- why did you post in the first place?

besides- as stated- my government is rattliing the sabres here over iran-

it scares and outrages me.

why do you care so much what i post or where?

you havent answered one question ive asked- yet ive answered your specific questions at length-

its respect soja-

heres an exercise for you of the spiritual bent-

all of the unasked for observations and thinly veiled insults and unecessary remarks of a personal nature you have made in regard to me-
(although its a mystery to me why you take so much energy to do so)

consider the possibilty that you may be projecting something you see in me that you dont like about yourself.

do what you want soja- i dont care
i havent even thought about what youre doing- i was thinking of the issues presented

for instance- turkey has been told by the united states that it CANNOT CROSS ITS OWN BORDER INTO NORTHERN IRAQ TO PURSUE KURDISH TERORISTS IN THE PKK WHO HAVE JUST KILLED 15 SOLDIERS!

AND THEN! the US has just passed a bill declaring that the contested behavior of the turks in 1915-
1915!!!!
was genocide!
if that isnt inflammatory intervention i dont know what is!
also david horowitz- a known muslim basher has just proposed a seminar (not debate) linking similiarities to this incident 92 years ago to the holocaust of the jews by the nazis!!!

i could go on-

even YOUR OWN COUNTRY has declared that they want to EXPEL ALL MUSLIMS!

if you dont find these things important or pertinent-
thats on you-
but i do- and ill continue to speak to these issues where and when i deem appropriate.

its just not up to you to decide for me whats appropriate soja
i will decide for me, thank you!

Dear Victoria

You prove my point. You interpret my communication in accordance with your notion that you read the intention of others infallibly.

I was only pointing out to the fact that Washington Post has set up a separate forum to discuss politics (PostGlobal), and that this forum focusses on faith matters. The UN is NOT dealing with Iran and its nuclear weapons program (or what is believed to be the nuclear weapons program, since Iran claims it intends to use nuclear technology only for peaceful purposes) as a religious issue. It is a political issue as far as the world is concerned. There are thousands of great humanist atheists in the US and elsewhere working towards peace, justice and nuclear disarmament, without treating it like a religious issue. It can be done you know. One doesn't have to be a Muslim to be interested in peace and justice in the world and work towards the common good of all. Even for believers of other religions who work towards peace and justice at a political level, the good work remains a fruit of their religious beliefs, not an integral part of their religion. Islam as you are aware (as is the rest of the world), unlike any other religion, has a political element ingrained in it. That is the point I was trying to make. It is laudable when one uses political Islam to do good - the Quran repeatedly reminds its believers to do have faith in God and do good works.

Chewing cud over the Middle East political issues that has already been discussed at length On Faith forum doesn't seem like a very wise investment of time. Just my humble opinion.

So you think I'm trying to censor what you are doing in the US from Australia? I just hope that it is your idea of a joke, because if it is not, then your interpretation of what I'm doing is just plain ridiculous.

Best wishes
Soja

To what extent are problems in the Middle East about religion and to what extent are they about politics? Does it matter?

The problems in the ME are mostly political.

and as it affects the srest of the world, it matters very much.
it matters to me, and if it doesnt to you- i dont care.

this is a specifically relevant question to my posts. and ill post where i want.

trying to censor what im doing from australia is an absurdly futile enterprise soja.

Dear Victoria

We are both agreed that this forum is not about you or me. Our impressions of each other are so irrelevant to this discussion, so investing extra time to identify all your posts (which probably run in the thousands) and analyse your input serves no purpose. Luckily all our exchanges have been made only on this public forum and if not deleted by The Post, are still posted on this forum. Among others, I remember some of your posts from the threads of Eboo Patel, Pamela Taylor, and one from Cal Thomas.