Honig - From bakshish to Khaybar

Sarah Honig
Another Tack
22 September '11

http://sarahhonig.com/2011/09/22/another-tack-from-bakshish-to-khaybar/

In many ways Egypt-present isn’t like Egypt-past. In many ways nothing in Egypt has changed at all.

Herein prevails the paradox. Egypt is a bedeviling composite of the mutating and the immutable.

I described its immutability years ago, when recalling my first work assignment to Egypt. In those days peace with Israel hadn’t yet been thoroughly delegitimized among the broad lower strata of Egyptian society (as distinct from the razor-thin so-called intelligentsia).

Yet it was a frustrating (pre-Internet) time. The Jerusalem Post’s then-editors wouldn’t hear of footing the bill for long-distance telephone communications. Reporters from other Israeli papers weren’t likewise impeded. I had to travel by cab alone each night – over an hour each way – from our well-secured hotel to Cairo’s Reuters headquarters to file my copy by telex.

However, it soon transpired that the Cairo phones rarely worked. That being the woeful case, my alternative prearrangements made me a sudden star among my colleagues, who in no time appointed me their pool-writer. The upside was that I had company on those long, forbidding after-dark taxi adventures.

But a rude culture shock awaited us at the end of the ride. Reuters’ Egyptian teletype-operators were a nonchalant bunch. There was no hostility, just no rush. We explained that we were up against deadlines, to which the inevitable reply was a shrug and the word “ma’alesh.” We soon learned that it denoted something approximating “Who cares? What’s the big deal? So what? Don’t take it too seriously.”

After I detailed what must be done and by when, the man in charge, chewing on some late-night nourishment, nodded and uttered “inshallah” – God willing. His task, I thought, was straightforward enough to be attempted without divine intervention.

The Root of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: The Classic Islamic View of Jews

Hagai Mazuz
Hudson New York
28 July '10

From the day Israel was established, the Muslim world has been hostile towards the State of Israel. This has been increasing over the years, despite the efforts of so many to settle the conflict. Although Israel signed Peace Agreements with Egypt and Jordan, nevertheless, many leaders in the Arab world, including Egyptian and Jordanian officials, make anti-Zionist and even anti-Semitic statements, and oppose normalization with Israel. When asked why, they answer that this peace is between governments, and not between the people of their countries.

Trying to find solutions to the Arab-Israeli conflict, politicians and statesmen have spent endless hours with experts on Islam to understand the roots of the conflict. They have usually heard two answers: "The root of the problem is territorial," and "The root of the problem is religious; it stems from the classic Islamic view of Jews as evil."

Muslims often accuse Jews of harassing and plotting against Muhammad, Islam's founder and prophet, a charge abundantly clear since the start of classic Islamic writings, which are filled with anti-Jewish imagery.

In our "post-modern" age, most Western scholars, who are secular, find it difficult to accept the idea that medieval texts can dictate the lives of, or even inspire, people today. They criticize those who see the conflict as religious, arguing that scholars who see the conflict as religious, place too much emphasis on these ancient texts, as both the times and circumstances have changed. For them, these texts are outdated. In short, secular scholars find it difficult to believe that people even still regard religious ideas as relevant.

In talking with the common people in the Arab and Muslim world, however, it becomes clear that for them, these classical texts are as relevant today as when they were written. For the overwhelmingly majority of Muslims, these texts indicate that the conflict is indeed religious, not territorial.



As Muslims view the world, Muhammad was the ideal Muslim. How he acted is how all Muslims should act. So how Muhammad acted towards the Jews in Medina and Khaybar is how Muslims should act towards Jews.

How, then, did Muhammad act?

(Read full article)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

The Only Good Jew is a...Muslim

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
01 July '10


Muqtedar Khan is a professor at the University of Delaware who should be notorious for his refusal to sit on an academic panel with a researcher solely because the latter had served in the Israel Defense Forces.

And guess what happened? The University of Delaware didn't discipline Khan or invite someone else to participate insted of him, they uninvited the researcher and went ahead with the program. What more do you need to know about the state of American academia today? And there was no media shouts of outrage. What more do you need to know about the state of the American media today?

Khan has now written an item on an Internet site that is being sent around by people as an example of Muslim toleration and fairness toward Jews. The title is, "He was the Best of Jews said Muhammad." It is about the little-known story of a Jew named Mukhayriq who, according to some Islamic sources, actually fought for the Muslim side in Muhammad's battles.

So, contrary to the massacre of the Jews at Khaybar, is there a counter-case of a Muslim alliance with Jews, forged by that religion's creator and prophet no less? Well, not exactly.

(Read full post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.