Showing posts with label Islam and Jewry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Islam and Jewry. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 07, 2024


Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

Robert Werdine was my friend. He was also a Rhodes Scholar, historian, ardent defender of Israel, serious music lover, and a devout Muslim. Robert died too soon from complications of diabetes and was buried as a Catholic, his father’s faith, but he was undeniably Muslim. Through our three years’ worth of correspondence, Robert left me with a wealth of material on Islamic thought as it relates to Jews, Judaism, and Israel. These were subjects he cared about and wrote about, but never published.

More than once, Robert alluded to being in bad odor with certain family members over his stance on Israel. He detailed an incident in which his uncle, a member of Hamas, roughed him up when he found out that Robert was writing blogs at the Times of Israel, an Israeli publication. Which is actually how I met Robert. We were both blogging there in 2012, the year that TOI was launched.

Robert also mentioned that his mother was afraid for him to say in his blogs that he was a Muslim. She didn’t know what, if any repercussions there would be for him, and for the family as a whole. After some back and forth, Robert’s mom came to see it his way, and agreed that he should no longer hide his Muslim identity or his strong affection for Israel.

Since Robert died in 2017, I haven’t known what to do with the prodigious material he sent me—brilliant material, meticulously researched. These papers should be published. And I believe that is why he sent them to me. He knew he wasn’t going to live much longer. I think he hoped I would do something with his work after he died. Yet, all this time I haven’t been sure I should.

I’m still not certain it’s the right thing to do—publish Robert’s work without his permission. But I think he felt he could not publish them while he was alive, and trusted that I would make a decision about what to do with his work, and that it would be the right decision. All of this came to mind last week during an exchange yet another confrontational antisemite on Quora.

The exchange began, as usual, with a “question” I was asked to answer, that as per usual, was some gross, not-so-thinly-veiled anti-Israel propaganda: “Why does Israel have the right to occupy land where the Palestinian have lived?”

This was my answer:

“Israel builds in very few areas where Arabs once might have lived. In those areas, the Arabs either left of their own volition, at the behest of Arab leaders preparing to extinguish the fledgling Jewish State, or the land was retaken during the course of a defensive war, in which case, it is perfectly legal.

“The Jews expelled from Arab countries were absorbed by tiny Israel, while the 22 Arab states in the region, which cover an enormous breadth of territory, refuse to absorb the Arabs who fled Israel in 1948 (and their descendants).

“It is normal for a population exchange to occur as a result of war. The shameful aspect of what happened here is the Arab refusal to absorb and resettle their brethren.”

Naturally, there were confrontational comments. One particular commenter, Esmailjee Mohamed Ali, wrote: "How can there be Judhas or Jews in Palestine when they lived in Europe for 2000 years from the time they were created by the Romans in 69BC.

It was from EUROPE after the Second World War, 5MILLION Judhas or Jews migrated to America and another 6Million was brought landed and in PALESTINE by the British Empire and the League of Nations on creating the State of Israel in 1948CE."

“It was the British Empire that was upto [sic] all the mischief. Allah wiped out the British Empire because of all their cruel acts. Today, unfortunately the PALESTINIAN PEOPLE are suffering at the hands of the Poor downtrodden criminals who came from EUROPE because of the British Empire.”

Well, I couldn’t leave that alone, now could I? So I said, “Funny, because that’s not what the Quran says,” said I thinking of all the Quranic references to the Bani Isra'il.

To which Mr. Ali took umbrage, responding, “Do not misinterpret the QURAN.”

As I am so often wont to do in these situations, I went to my Robert Werdine gmail folder to see what my dear late friend had to say on the subject. I was looking for what he had said about Muslims living under non-Muslim rule. Because really—why did the Arabs have to kick up a fuss over the establishment of the Jewish State or be in denial about Jewish history, detailed in their own holy book? The Arabs didn’t have to leave, nor did they have to “suffer” at the hands of the Jews. They could have—and would have—been perfectly happy and prosperous under Jewish rule. Instead they were turned—by their own people—into perpetual refugees, filled with hate and blood lust. And their own people didn’t—and don’t—want them.

None of this had anything to do with the British Empire. Nor did it relate to “downtrodden criminals from Europe” supposedly brought to the region by the Brits.

It had to do with Muslims who are ignorant of what their own holy books and commentators have to say on the subject. They should have stayed. They would have been free to practice their religion under the Jews, and they would have led happy, content lives. And of course, the October 7th Massacre would never have happened. What happened on that Black Sabbath was in fact, proscribed by Islam. 

I found what I needed in my “Robert Werdine” email treasure chest, and it was so perfect I quoted it word for word. I knew Robert would forgive me. And I never heard a peep back from Mr. Ali:

The Shafi’i jurist, Imam Abu Zakariyya Muhyi ’l-Din al-Nawawi (1233–1277) [stated]: 

If a Muslim is able to declare his Islam openly and living therein (in a land dominated by non-Muslims), it is better for him to do so […] because by this it becomes Dar al-Islam […] (Al-Nawawi, rawda al-talibin, (Beirut: Dar ibn Hazm, 2002), p. 1819)

Al Nawawi also stated: 

Where a Muslim is able to protect and isolate himself, even if he is not able to proselytize and engage in combat, in such case it would be incumbent upon him to remain in this place and not emigrate. For such a place, by the fact that he is able to isolate himself, has become a dar Islam

The opinions of al-Ramli, al-Mawardi, and al-Nawawi are all consistent with prophetic practice in the authentic Sunnah. Two Hadiths, one from Sahih Bukhari and one from Sahih Muslim attest that the prophet would refuse to attack any non-Muslim entity that allowed for the practice of the Muslim religion by Muslims living there. Here is the Sahih Bukhari (Vol. 4, Book 52, #193):  

Narrated Anas: Whenever Allah's Apostle attacked some people, he would never attack them till it was dawn. If he heard the Adhan (i.e. call for prayer) he would delay the fight, and if he did not hear the Adhan, he would attack them immediately after dawn.

Nawawi interprets the Hadiths as follows: 

In this narration is evidence that verily the call to prayer forbids invading (yamna‘) a people of that area, and this is an evidence of their Islam.

This is only one tiny fragment of the material I have from Robert. Some of what he wrote was conversational. I’d ask him questions, and he’d answer. Once, for example, I asked him how he felt about the word “Palestinian.” What did he, Robert, call the Arabs who call themselves “Palestinians?”

He wrote (May 20 2015), I'm not sure what to call the you-know-who. I call them the Nowhere People; they came out of nowhere and they're going nowhere, fast. I generally call them Palestinian, but I don't remember my grandfather using that term. He just called them Arabs and refugees. Probably "Arabs" is the best word to use, or Palestinian Arabs, either word refers to the customarily delusional, intransigent, and recklessly self-destructive people whose leaders will continue the long, hard slog of hatred, violence, and deligitimization of a people who have shown them more humanity and compassion than their own Arab brethren ever will.”

Robert knew more than Islam. He ate, drank, and slept history and was always happy to share with me what he learned—especially if there were a reference to Jews. On May 27, 2015, he wrote: “I’m reading Robert Markus’ biography of Pope Gregory the Great. What a phenomenal figure. He was almost an exact contemporary of Muhammad. Gregory was a great reformer. He also wrote a six-volume commentary on the Book of Job. He was a font of wisdom, integrity and able statesmanship. The chants that bear his name are the earliest music that is written on record, and still haunts the monasteries of Italy, France, and Germany. 

“He was also a great protector of the Jews. He forbade compulsory conversions that so many popes of the past had winked at, and he gave them full rights of equal citizenship—a true rarity in that day and age.  When he learned that the bishops in Palermo had appropriated the local synagogues, he ordered that they make full restitution. Here is what he wrote to the Bishop of Naples: 

“‘Do not allow the Jews to be molested in the performance of their services. Let them have full liberty to observe and keep all of their festivals and holydays, as both they and their fathers have done for so long.’’’ 

Sometimes I wonder what Robert would have said about October 7. I know that he was sickened by Arab terror against the Jews of Israel. On September 23, 2015, he wrote, “My mother and I were talking the other day about what it would be like for us to know that there were people living in the next county who would be only too happy to murder us and all our love ones, and celebrate the deed afterward. How could we help from hating such people filled to the brim with such murderous hatred for us, and who demonstrate such hatred in deeds of unmentionable horror day after day? It's a sobering thought to ponder.”

By ironic coincidence, on October 7 (!), 2015, he wrote to me in regard to the murder of Eitam and Na’ama Henkin in front of their four young children, one of them a four-month-old infant, only one week earlier:

“Your feelings after that savage murder of the Henkin couple are completely natural and understandable. How would any person of conscience react to an act of such naked savagery?  In their evil they could not be more evil. The hysterical glee that they show whenever Jewish blood is shed is like something out of a nightmare. The one, true accomplishment of the Palestinians is their societal normalizing of savagery as a virtue to be emulated: murders celebrated like weddings, streets and village squares named after suicide bombers. These people are sick. I mean: SICK.” 

People don’t believe me when I tell them about Robert. They think he was pulling the wool over my eyes. That he was deceiving me the Sunni Muslim way with taqiyya. But I know that he was good. And that the scholarly works he sent me should be read by more than one person (me). Robert did not agree with the idea of “Islamic reform.” He believed that the violent, Jew-hating form of Islam all too unfortunately practiced by too many Muslims the world over, was due to ignorance of what Islam actually preached.

Believe me, I am no apologist for Islam. But I also know that it doesn’t need to be practiced in the violent way it is currently practiced by way too many ignorant, blood-crazed cretins. I would like others to at least see and wrestle with Robert Werdine’s writings.

So now I would like to ask a question of regular readers of this column: would you like to read these works sitting and doing nothing in a Gmail folder? Shall I post them here in weeks to come? Or should I keep them hidden, buried away where no one will ever see them?

I honestly seek your opinions. And I’m guessing that Robert, were he able to weigh in, would hope that you’d view the idea with favor. He wished with all his heart that more people were open to the Islam that he saw and believed—an Islam that respects the rights of people of all faiths to follow their beliefs in peace.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, February 24, 2023




The Muslim paranoia about something that doesn't exist remains high.


The new "Abrahamic religion"... a threat whose goal is to destroy Islam 
 Ali Demir23/02/2023

Intellectuals, preachers, and academics are raising their voices to warn of the danger of the new so-called “Abrahamic religion,” pointing out that its goal is to destroy the Islamic religion with attempts that will end in failure.

According to observers, the sources of the promotion of this religion are huge and mysterious research centers that have recently spread around the world and called themselves "centers of spiritual diplomacy", funded by the largest and most important international bodies such as the European Union, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the United States of America.

Observers warned that “the apparent vision and message of these research centers depends on the assertion that religions are the main and fundamental reason for igniting the most violent conflicts throughout the ages, and the reason for not accepting the other is because of the lack of understanding of the texts of their religion.”

And the “spiritual diplomacy centers” that work within the framework of spreading love and tolerance have taken upon themselves the task of inviting the senior clerics of the three Abrahamic religions, in order to find general common values ​​between religions such as “love, tolerance, equality, coexistence and acceptance of the other” and other good values, and then proceed to broadcast it, especially among the new generations, in order to instill a hidden hatred for the religions they follow and create a tendency towards embracing the new Abrahamic religion. And the “spiritual diplomacy centers” have already begun to implement their plans on a large scale, according to observers.

Warnings were raised that “what is taking place is a process of brainwashing with the aim of preparing generations to accept the adoption of the new Abrahamic religion when it is presented in the near future as the global public religion, and then the research centers will turn into sacred places and shrines that will replace the temple, church and mosque.

The preacher and researcher, Mustafa Ibrahim, criticized the advocates of the so-called Abrahamic religion, stressing that “Abraham was Muslim according to what was confirmed by the Holy Qur’an."

Ibrahim added that “all the messengers sent by God Almighty were Muslims and called to Islam, and this matter is mentioned and confirmed in many verses in the Holy Qur’an, including the words of God Almighty on the tongue of Jacob, peace be upon him.

And he continued, “The advocates of the Abrahamic religion want to dilute Islam and mix the three heavenly laws of Islam, Judaism and Christianity into one religion in order to open the door to normalization with the Israeli occupation, and to end the cause of Palestine and honorable Jerusalem."

For his part, the doctor in comparative jurisprudence, Muhammad Musa al-Dali, said in a post on his Facebook account, “The people of falsehood claimed that there is a religion that includes Islam, adding to it what they call Judaism and Christianity, and that this religion is the Abrahamic religion in relation to the true Muslim, the Prophet of God Almighty, Abraham, upon him....This is a false claim, and a pure slander, because the Prophet of God, Abraham, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, is a Muslim according to the text of the Qur’an, God Almighty denied that he was a Jew or a Christian."
Sounds like a Jewish plot!





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Sunday, August 30, 2020

Matthias Küntzel in the Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs:

A thirty-one-page booklet in Arabic entitled Islam and Jewry, published in Cairo on August 18, 1937, served as an effective propaganda tool. 11 As far as we know, this publication is the first written evidence of Islamic antisemitism. In 1938, the Berlin-based publishing house Junker und Dünnhaupt released it under the title Islam–Judaism: Call of the Grand Mufti to the Islamic World in 1937, explicitly attributing that screed to al-Husseini for the first time. 12 In subsequent editions released by the Nazis during World War II, the Mufti continued to be named as the author. Whether al-Husseini was in fact the sole initiator and author of this pamphlet remains an open question.

While classical Islamic literature treats Muhammad’s struggle with the Jews as a minor episode in the life of the Prophet, now “Muhammad’s conflict with the Jews [was being] portrayed as a central theme in his career and their enmity to him given a cosmic significance.” 13 The anti-Jewish verses of the Qur’an were generalized and considered valid for the twentieth century. Finally, for the first time, religious tropes were combined with elements of conspiracy theory. Since Muhammad’s days, according to Islam and Jewry, the Jews have constantly been trying to “destroy Muslims.” The brochure concludes:

[T]he verses from the Qur’an and hadith prove to you that the Jews have been the bitterest enemies of Islam and continue to try to destroy it. Do not believe them, they only know hypocrisy and cunning. Hold together, fight for the Islamic thought, fight for your religion and your existence! Do not rest until your land is free of the Jews. 14

Here, the Muslims are presented as eternal victims in order to legitimize new forms of aggression more reminiscent of the policies of the Nazis than the attitudes of the Prophet. In September 1937, days after its publication, the booklet reached a wide audience through its distribution at the National Arab Congress in Bludan, a health resort in Syria, fifty kilometers northwest of Damascus.

The Spread of Islamic Antisemitism

This first pan-Arab congress, held from September 8–10, 1937, was organized by al-Husseini. He also “provided the funds to rent the two largest hotels in Damascus and Bludan and grant a large number of penniless participants rooms without charge.” 15 No wonder, then, that the congress attracted 411 attendees, although only 250 were allowed into the hall of the Grand Hotel of Bludan, where the congress took place. The Mufti could not attend because he was in hiding in Jerusalem after a failed July 1937 attempt by the British authorities in Palestine to arrest him. 16 In October 1937, he fled to French-controlled Beirut. Nevertheless, the delegates named him honorary president of the assembly.

The congress was not a public event; even newspaper reporters were not allowed inside. However, Colonel Gilbert MacKereth, the British consul in Damascus at the time, arranged for a person in his confidence to attend. Based on the reports of the spy, MacKereth described the event as “a manifestation of Judeophobia.” He referred to “a startlingly inflammatory pamphlet entitled ‘The Jews and Islam,’ which was handed to each member of the congress on his arrival. It had been printed in Egypt.” Annex V of MacKereth’s memorandum, written by his confidante, bears the title “Description of a violently anti-Jewish Pamphlet printed in Cairo for the Palestine Defense Committee there, which was given to each of the persons attending the Bludan congress.” The summary of the pamphlet’s contents presented in an annex to the report leaves us with no doubt that he was referring to the Cairo publication of August 1937. 17

The Nazis viewed Islam and Jewry as an especially valuable tool. During the war, Berlin printed and disseminated this text nearly unchanged in several languages and editions. For example, there is proof that in 1942, the Spanish authorities confiscated some 1,500 copies of “a German propaganda pamphlet in the Arabic language called ‘Islam and the Jews’” that had been sent to the German consulate in Tangiers. According to the German Foreign Ministry, these brochures were to have been distributed “unobtrusively” in Spanish Morocco. “Unobtrusive” is the key word here. The Muslims would have laughed at an SS officer openly distributing an Arabic text pretending to speak in the name of Islam. But this was indeed what was happening. The Nazis disguised themselves as Muslims and falsified Islamic scripture so as to lend credibility to their murderous hatred of Jews.

The Spanish authorities responsible for Tangiers, however, frustrated this plan. They were of the opinion that “the distribution of such propaganda directed against the Jewish elements in Spanish Morocco could not be permitted” and had all copies confiscated and destroyed. 18 In 1943, another 10,000 copies of the same pamphlet were printed in Zagreb, capital of Germany’s Croatian satellite, this time in Serbo-Croatian (Islam I Zidovstvo), and distributed in Bosnia and Croatia. 19

Though the precise details of the pamphlet’s dissemination are unknown, Islam and Jewry might well be regarded as the forerunner to Sayyid Qutb’s notorious text Our Struggle with the Jews of the 1950s. David Motadel regards Islam and Jewry as “one of the most significant examples of this kind of religiously charged anti-Jewish propaganda dispersed among Muslims,” 20 while historian Jeffrey Herf deems it “one of the founding texts of the Islamist tradition, one that defined the religion of Islam as a source of hatred of the Jews.” 21

The timing of the publication of Islam and Jewry, in August 1937, is also revealing. It proves that Islamic antisemitism took hold when the flight and expulsion of the Palestinian Arabs (1948) and Israeli rule over Gaza and the West Bank (1967) were still in the distant future. This fact alone contradicts the widespread assumption that Islamic antisemitism developed as a response to alleged Israeli misdeeds. It was not the behavior of the Zionists that prompted the publication of this hostile text, but rather the fact that a first attempt had been made in the summer of 1937 to agree on a two-state plan. Islam and Jewry accordingly culminates in the following call: “Do not tolerate the Partition Plan, for Palestine has been an Arab country for centuries and shall remain Arabic forever.” This pamphlet was intended to theologize the territorial conflict between Jews and Arabs in order to destroy the first important attempt at a compromise—which had initially been met with a degree of approval from some moderate Arabs.

The antisemitic Mufti of Jerusalem is, of course, an icon for Palestinians today. His influence remains.

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive