Dan in response to: "By your understanding, Jesus was not crucified by the Romans. Therefore is what Christians are about to memorialise in the coming week an apostasy?"

This is a letter to the Monks of St. Catherine Monastery from the Prophet

In 628 C.E. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) granted a Charter of Privileges to the monks of St. Catherine Monastery in Mt.Sinai. It consisted of several clauses covering all aspects of human rights including such
topics as the protection of Christians, freedom of worship and movement, freedom to appoint their own judges and to own and maintain their property, exemption from military service, and the right to protection in war. An English translation of that document is presented here:

“This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.

“Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.

No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.

No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet.

Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.

No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them.

If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.

Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.

No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).”

http://darvish.wordpress.com/2006/10/20/the-prophets-letters-to-christians/
Also see the Prophet's message to the Assyrian Christians at the above site.

grateful,
Thanks for the quote and link I did not know of.
If I may ask, what is your relation to sufism, in what sense do you see it as the essence of islam?
Are you a follower of Fethullah Gülen, or what is your opinion of him?

George,

You sound like someone looking for knowledge, so a sincere thank-you for you questions.

Sufism is a science of Islam, also known as Tassawuf. The deen (religion, but as a complete way of life) of Islam consists of Islam, Iman and Ihsan. These are explained in a key Hadith often referred to as the The Jibril Hadith (for a translation and interpretation see: http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=879&CATE=1).

So to put sufism in context it is best to begin with these three concepts

'Islam is that you witness that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and you establish the prayer, and you give the Zakat, and you fast Ramadan, and you perform the hajj of the House if you are able to take a way to it.'

Iman is 'That you affirm Allah, His angels, His books, His messengers, and the Last Day, and that you affirm the Decree, the good of it and the bad of it.'

And finally Ihsan:
'That you worship Allah as if you see Him, for if you don't see Him then truly He sees you.'

Ihsan is the realm of Tassawuf (Sufism).

If you have been patient enough to read thus far then perhaps you would be interested in the following introduction to Tassawuf by Shaykh Nuh Ha Min Keller in the form of lectures given to his students in Virgina in 1998 (http://www.shadhiliteachings.com/tariq/?act=file&id=3).

Otherwise, there is a brief introduction here: http://www.shadhiliteachings.com/tariq/?act=file&id=18

In fact there is something there for everybody.

For Dan there is something on Jihad, downloadable to your ipod :-) (http://www.shadhiliteachings.com/tariq/?act=file&id=3)

For athiests in general there are a number of lectures on scientism, atheism and so on (http://www.shadhiliteachings.com/tariq/?act=file&id=20)

..and here is a special something for Richard Dawkins: http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/evolve.htm

Shaykh Nuh is based in Jordan, although orignally from the U.S.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuh_Ha_Mim_Keller).

Happy listening/reading :-)

salaam

Pericles,
I’ve read the transcript.

You may want to interpret it differently to me, but it appears evident that Dawkins was saying more than reacting to the ideas of ‘niceness’ portrayed by Julia Bishop. He seemed to want to go higher in accusing the God of the New Testament for his method of bringing forgiveness and atonement. Dawkins appears to be saying (like our Muslim colleague, Grateful) that God could have or should have done it a different way.

I do not see any inconsistency within the New Testament. When you speak of barbarism within in the account of the death and resurrection of Jesus, you perhaps refer to the horrific method of execution enacted by the Romans. Crucifixion was a common form of execution at the time.

I don’t see how this reflects negatively on Jesus. This possibly makes the story of Jesus’ sacrifice more heroic and meritorious.

That Dawkins wants to make comment about the nature and character of God is his right or pleasure. I think it’s funny that it should bother him as an atheist to the degree that it does.

Grateful,
I asked your opinion of Daniel Scott. Since you’ve given it fairly forcefully, I’d like to say a few words in his defence.

In my experience of meeting him, Scott is scholarly (educated in Pakistan) and well understands the Koran and its supporting commentaries. He’s uncompromising; he calls things as he sees it. He’s gentle and hospitable in his attitude towards Muslims and would be as saddened as any by threats and violence. Though accused of religious vilification, the case was eventually settled by the parties, with an accompanying statement agreed by both sides towards the right to rigorous debate. This is a value that we all share here at OLO. The madness in the whole affair was the inadequacies evident within the Victorian government’s trendy new law, which threatened our right to speak openly.

Thanks for your detailed response.

Thank you Dan S,

Since you apparently know Daniel Scott quite well, would you be able provide examples of his scholarship, whereby he supports his assertions with serious scholarship and not unverifiable anecdotes.

Likewise, can you provide examples of such scholarship for anything that has been written or spoken under the banner of the Catch the Fire Ministries?

Grateful,
Thanks for the info and links. I should have mentioned that I do not understand Arabic, so some of the links were lost on me. So you approve of sufism, but did not answer my question about Fethullah Gülen.