Chapter Eleven
The Problem of Dialogue with the Other
One day, a virtuous and zealous friend – who is a highly respectable scholar of Islam, whom I greatly esteem, and whose efforts and dedication in serving Islam and Muslims I highly appreciate – said to me, “I see you, brother Hamid, so interested and preoccupied with dialogue with Christians. So what is the fruit of your efforts and those of others like you in this regard?”
I said, “But what is expected in your opinion out of this dialogue, and what is its goal? I ask because defining the end and goal of a dialogue will certainly determine the kind of fruit you are asking about and how much of it is achieved.”
He replied, “The goal is clear and evident. Have you not read God’s words: ‘Say, “People of the Book, come to a word that equally applies to us and you; that we will only worship God, and worship nothing other than Him. We would not take each other to be lords, rather than God.” If they decline, say, “Be witnesses that we are Muslims”’ [Aal ‘Imran III: 64]?”
I told him, “Indeed I have, and I know it by heart the same way that you do. But we may differ in the method and the wise approach to arrive at its objectives.”
With some anger in his voice, he asked, “Do you have a better method and a wiser approach than what is introduced in the Glorious Qur'an?”
I said, “No, brother! Who among us can make such a claim, or even dare make it? Yet, it seems to me that you suffer from some ambiguity in regards to the wise approach.”
“What is the nature of the ambiguity you mean?” he asked.
I said:
With your profound learning and firm knowledge, it is no secret to you that there is a great difference between the attributes and traits of God, of the Blessed Names, and the attributes and traits of His servants. The same vocabulary may be used, but the denotation is really different. God, the Most Sublime, is the “Wise One,” and ultimate wisdom is His. Meanwhile, a human being may be “wise” and may acquire a measure of wisdom, but human wisdom can by no means rise up to the level of God’s wisdom, Most Sublime is He. There is nothing like Him, the Most Glorious. This is why the instruction of the Wise One is: “Call [people] to the path of your Lord through wisdom and benign preaching” [Al-Nahl XVI: 125]. On the same basis, the succinct instruction of the Prophet: “We are commanded to address people in a manner compatible with their minds.” This stresses that the wisdom of human beings is different from the wisdom of the Lord of human beings in dealing with human beings. Many standards control the wisdom of human beings, and these are discovered, appreciated, and used as a basis for any dealing by a person endowed with some wisdom. “He, who is granted wisdom, is granted a lot of benefit” [Al-Baqarah II: 269]. And due to that, we have that divine principle: “to get acquainted.” Acquaintance is an objective means to discover the other, know his qualities and characteristics, and learn the truth about his culture, beliefs, and desires, all this being required to determine the method of dealing with him and the nature of the wisdom to be used.”
Yes, dear brother, all of us strive for and aspire to have the fortune to answer this great and grave divine call. But how? What method is to be used? What are the appropriate time and conditions? What human vocabulary is available? All these things are, by God’s bounty and wisdom, left to his believing servants to choose what is proper for a particular time and a particular place, in light of the variety of cultures, beliefs, and desires. “Call [people] to the path of your Lord through wisdom and benign preaching. Your Lord knows best who strays from His path, and He knows best who are rightly guided.”
Persisting in his approach, the honored colleague said, “As for me, if I go to them, I will right away urge them to embrace Islam, so that I will leave them no excuse before God.”
I said, “Talking to them in this manner and following this hasty approach will end in few minutes.”
“Why?” he asked.
I said:
You will invite them to Islam before giving yourself the chance to introduce what you are inviting them to. Therefore, they will reject it. Then they will pay you back; they will invite you to embrace Christianity, and you will decline. Thus, the meeting will end in a quarrel and perhaps with enmity. Is that part of the wisdom and benign preaching that we are commanded by God, the Most Glorious, to employ?
This example of an attitude towards dialogue taken by Muslims is countered by similar examples on the other side, which includes Christians and followers of other religions. Some of them think, just like some of us do, that it is only a waste of time, a kind of misguided cultural luxury. They think the wide, open road to introduce the Christian truth to other people is direct preaching, with its effective, tried methods. Muslims, they believe, use the dialogue as a smart approach to introduce their religion, which they believe to be the true one and also believe that God will not accept from any human being a religion other than Islam. They say: Stop, Christians, this nonsense and hold to your method and missionary approach, which has accomplished its goals everywhere.”
Of course, there are on both sides many people who are convinced of the dialogue and see it as the only wise way of mutual acquaintance and understanding, and of cooperation to achieve the best for all.
In general, Muslims today have, in regards to the question of dialogue, two attitudes, one that supports dialogue with the other and stresses its legitimacy and importance, and another that refuses it and suspects its ends. The rejecters regard such dialogue as a trick that leads Muslims on so that they may abandon Islam and accept another creed: one of the distorted religions or arbitrary human-conceived doctrines. They support this attitude of theirs with God’s statement that “Religion, for God, is Islam” (Aal ‘Imran III: 19), and also with His declaration that “If a person desires a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter, he will be among the losers.” (Aal ‘Imran III: 85). They also base their attitude of suspicion towards the dialogue on the assumption that it bypasses and ignores the enmity of the People of the Book and others, which is explained and confirmed by God, the Most Sublime, when he says, “Neither Jews nor Christians will be satisfied with you until you follow their creed” (Al-Baqarah II: 120). According to them, it also bypasses and ignores the confirmed enmity towards Muslims and their religion, and lying in waiting for them, as indicated by God’s words: “They will keep fighting you until they force you to renounce your religion if they can” (Al-Baqarah II: 217). To these people, the dialogue is a type of positive response and submission to intrigue by the other, who is, through the dialogue, waging a new type of Crusade and using new tools.
Other rejecters of the dialogue have other reasons. One of these is the lack of equality among participants and the lack of recognition of Islam and Muslims on the part of the other. In the absence of these two elements, the dialogue will serve the other’s interests and will be, at best, a “dialogue of the deaf.” In order not to be to the advantage of the other alone and not to be a dialogue of the deaf, they insist on two conditions:
First, the other must recognize our master, Muhammad, as a Prophet and Messenger, and Islam as God’s religion.
Second, the assets of Muslims must be equal to those of other participants in the dialogue.
Unless these two conditions are met, there can be no dialogue with the other, because the other participants are followers of falsehood and deviation, while we are followers of true guidance and of the obvious, divine truth. Truth does not conduct a dialogue with falsehood.
Those are the justifications of rejecters in general. On the other hand, those who take a supportive attitude base their position on evidence from the Glorious Qur'an. They maintain that while the Qur'an does declare that
§ religion, for God, is Islam;
§ when a person desires a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted of him;
§ Jews and Christians will by no means be satisfied with Islam and Muslims; and
§ a Muslim must be cautious of their attempts to lead him away from Islam and its guidance—
The Qur'an itself decides for us and commands us to observe:
§ The dialogue principle with those it has described in the aforementioned manner and defined very clearly and specifically as People of the Book and others. This is clear and manifest in God’s words in the following:
Reason with the People of the Book only in a graceful manner, except the unjust among them, and say, “We believe in what is revealed to us and revealed to you. Our God and yours is one, and we submit to Him” (Al-'Ankaboot XXIX: 46).
Say, “People of the Book, come to a word that equally applies to us and you; that we will only worship God, and worship nothing other than Him. We would not take each other to be lords, rather than God.” If they decline, say, “Be witnesses that we are Muslims” (Aal ‘Imran III: 64).
§ The principle of the mutual acquaintance of people.
“People, We have created you from a male and a female and made you into nations and tribes in order to know each other. The noblest among you in God’s consideration are those who fear Him the most” (Al-Hujuraat XLIX: 13).
§ Dialogue ethics, as definitely confirmed in God’s commands:
Reason with the People of the Book only in a graceful manner.…
“Speak kindly to people” (Al-Baqarah II: 83).
§ Competition for more refined discourse, by using the finest level of speech and the kindest phrases when engaging in a dialogue with non-Muslims, as directed by God, the Most Sublime, when he says:
Call [people] to the path of your Lord through wisdom and benign preaching, and reason with them in a graceful manner (Al-Nahl XVI: 125).
§ The principle of equal footing with the other in the search for the truth. God instructs His noble Messenger to be kind to others and to say,
“… and we and you are either well-guided or clearly astray.” (Sabaa XXXIV: 24).
This means, “Come, let us search together, objectively and with meditation and insight away from passions and rigidity, to arrive at the truth and the true path, and nothing but the truth.”
The Qur'an moves then to another lofty level in dealing equitably with the other. God asks His greatest prophet and messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, to say:
“You are not accountable for the crimes we have committed, nor we for your actions.” (Sabaa XXXIV: 24-27).
He makes kind speech to all people a principle that has to be followed in compliance with the divine, merciful instruction:
“Speak kindly to people” (Al-Baqarah II: 83).
Even in dealing with those who are tyrannical and haughty on earth, who control people, take advantage of their weakness, and enslave them to serve the interest of the enslaver, the great divine approach does not, in its wisdom, exclude them, nor does it treat them in a manner similar to theirs. It rather calls them and, very kindly and gently, gives them opportunities for their hearts to soften and their visions to get clear, thus paving the road for their renunciation of the deprivation and obsession they have been afflicted with. This is evident when God, the Most Sublime, says:
“Go to Pharaoh, he has gone too far. ◘ Speak to him gently; he may pay attention or feel apprehensive” (Taha XX: 43-44).
The refined and wise approach of the Qur'an goes further; it prohibits Muslims to abuse the creeds of others or revile what they call for and believe in. God, of the Lofty Attributes and Sacred Names, makes this clear when He says:
Do not revile what they invoke instead of God, lest they should revile God spitefully out of ignorance. Thus have We made the actions of every community seem goodly to them. Then to their Lord shall they all return, and He will explain to them all that they have been doing (Al-An' am VI: 106-08).
The Islamic approach takes another turn into a noble and lofty rank of manners and behavior and promotes a gracious quality of objectivity and appreciation of the other and his achievements, as well as his private concerns. It even considers the violation of this behavioral code a kind of mischief and corruption on earth. This is clear when God says:
Do not deprive people of what is rightfully theirs, and do not cause mischief on earth, spreading corruption (Hood XI: 85).
God’s Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, conducted a dialogue with the Christians of Najran, received them in his mosque, and was hospitable to them. He used to go out and visit tribes, converse with them, introduce Islam to them, and invite them to embrace it. He conducted a dialogue with Quraish, arguing with them over the message which he was entrusted with and which he brought them from his Lord.
The Qur'an provides us with many models of dialogue, argument, and debate between prophets and messengers, on the one hand, and their respective people, on the other, through the ages and the succession of divine missions. This only emphasizes the importance of the dialogue methodology and the respect of the brain, which is made by God the site of religious obligations and the portal of the reassurance derived from faith.
“‘Yes, but I only wish to be reassured at heart’” (Al-Baqarah II: 260).
From this it is clear that to reject dialogue is to reject and cancel the methodology of the Glorious Qur'an; abandon the approach of God’s Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him; and suspend the jihad of speech and rhetoric, which is affirmed in God’s order:
Do not obey unbelievers, and strive most vigorously against them with it [i.e. with the Qur'an] (Al-Furqaan XXV: 52).
Rejection of the dialogue is a flaw resulting from forming a wrong interpretation of certain passages in the Qur'an, without taking into consideration other, relevant passages. As it is known, the Qur'an passages related to our proper attitude towards the People of the Book are closely connected to and complemented by other passages related to the method of dealing with them and addressing them. The attitude towards them, then, should be formed on the basis that all these passages complement each other. This gives the attitude that supports dialogue a greater weight, being the attitude compatible with the complementarity of the passages and their unified subject, and with the complementarity of the Qur'an methodology:
Call [people] to the path of your Lord through wisdom and benign preaching (Al-Nahl XVI: 125).
It is also the attitude more suitable to establish the winning argument and proof against the other that he may turn back to the truth:
Thus We make plain Our revelations so that they may return (Al-A'raaf VII: 174).
As for the claim that Islam is the true religion and that the truth does not enter in a dialogue with falsehood, I am convinced that this is an interpretation that does not stand to reason, nor conform to Islamic Law. If the truth does not enter in a dialogue with falsehood, what then is the function of the truth? And what is going to crush and eradicate falsehood, I wonder. How does this strange and hard-to-accept interpretation get along with the statement of God, the Most Sublime, “Nay, but We hurl the truth against falsehood, and it crushes the latter, and it withers away” (Al-Anbiya XXI: 18), unless the hurling of truth against falsehood can only be, in the opinion of those rejecters, with the sword and rocket launchers, without any dialogue or explanation. If that is what they mean, then they are taking the side of the great lie promoted by orientalists and repeated by enemies of Islam, saying that Islam was spread by the sword. Usually we call this a lie and say, at the top of our voices, “No, a thousand no! Islam was not spread by the sword, but rather by kind speech and good example.” If what we say is true and we believe in it, is the dialogue then not the means to deliver kind speech and offer a good example? If we say no to the sword and no to the dialogue, then how did Islam spread? And how do we present it to others?
As for advocating the condition of mutual recognition to establish the legitimacy of the dialogue, this leads to a very serious pitfall related to faith. Do the advocates of mutual recognition want us to recognize that “God is Christ, son of Mary” so that the other may recognize that “Muhammad is God’s Messenger”? Do they want us to replace our belief with faithlessness? If, however, they mean by recognition that the others recognize that Muhammad is God’s Prophet and Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, in return for the recognition by Muslims that Christ, peace be upon him, is also God’s Prophet and Messenger, the advocates of this level of mutual recognition should realize that a recognition by Muslims that Christ is a prophet sent with a message, that he is God’s servant and a ‘word” from Him, would not satisfy Christians or make them happy. Such recognition, according to their belief and understanding, would undermine the position of Christ and underrate his place in their hearts. For them, he is God and God’s son. To recognize him in accordance with the way he is described in the Glorious Qur'an would strip him of the Godhood they claim for him and believe in. Therefore, they would consider a call for such a level of recognition a religious insult for them and for what they believe in.
On the other hand, let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that they do accept such recognition. Is there any justification for a dialogue with them? Does not such recognition turn them into brothers of us in faith? Is the dialogue anything but a means to reach this and similar desired, noble goals?
As for the call of equality as a necessary condition for the legitimacy of a dialogue, I consider this a kind of overbidding the approach of God’s Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, who conducted a dialogue with the polytheists and unbelievers of Quraish and other Arab tribes while he was himself in an extreme condition of human weakness. He himself, peace be upon him, described his condition on his way back after a dialogue with the people of Taif; he said, “Lord, to You I complain of my enfeebled strength, poor stratagem, and humiliation among people.” The call for equality is also contrary to the magnificent model of the dialogue between Ja'far Ibn Abu Talib, may God be pleased with him, on the one hand, and the Negus of Abyssinia and his bishops on the other. Ja'far was a fugitive, being chased by his own people and seeking refuge and security with another people in a country other than his homeland. Yet, this disadvantage and human, material, and political weakness did not reduce his determination or make him hesitate, if only for a minute, to meet the head of state in the host country. With great daring and confidence, he conversed with the Negus and argued what he believed in, defending his religion and arguing his case in front of the unjust delegation representing his tribe, whose mission was to set the Negus against Ja'far and his comrades. With the sincerity of his belief and his eloquence, and with his powerful argument and his skill, Ja'far impressed the Negus and the rest of the audience so much that they cried and were convinced that the immigrants to their country had a just claim and deserved support and protection. That dialogue, on that day, was a critical weapon in repelling the Quraish intrigue, plotted by the tribe’s leaders and powerful men and aimed at getting the Negus to drive back Ja'far Ibn Abu Taliban and the other Companions who had immigrated with him to Abyssinia, may God be pleased with him and them all.
Other examples are too many for this book to include. All of them, however, prove the invalidity of the demand for equality of potential as a necessary condition for a dialogue with the other, unless equality refers to learning and morale. Such equality is something I confirm and stress. In fact I call for supremacy in this, rather than mere equality. A Muslim engaged in a dialogue should excel in knowing his religion, in knowing the other and his culture, and also in his general knowledge. He should excel in his debate, argument, eloquence, wisdom, ethics, experience, skill, dress, and appearance. A Muslim should be, as urged by God’s Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, when he says, “Let the one of you be an outstanding mark,” outstanding in his belief, knowledge, competence, skills, ethics and behavior, and appearance and dress.
This unfortunate controversy among Muslims about the legitimacy and importance of dialogue is unjustified. In my conviction, it is due to the lack of understanding that is based on the complementarity of Qur'an passages within the framework of the unity of objectives of the general Qur'an discourse. From the above, it is clear that the dialogue approach is adopted in God’s Book and the Sunna of His Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him. It is called for by the task of serving as witnesses of civilization, is made obligatory by the trust of spreading the divine guidance, and is demanded by the responsibilities of vicegerency on earth, the enforcement of justice, and the attainment of the common interests of human beings.
It should be stressed, however, that a Muslim participant in a dialogue should be equipped with adequate learning, skill, power of argument based on knowledge of Islamic Law, experience, and awareness. Another thing to be stressed is the Qur'an rule:
Beware of them lest they beguile you away from a part of what God has sent down to you (Al-Maidah V: 49).
In summary, on the basis of the final attitude arrived at by the scholars participating in the Second Islamic Dialogue Symposium held in Cairo to set foundations for the concepts, controls and mechanism of dialogue, based on the above explanation and evidence, the International Islamic
Islamic Forum for Dialogue stresses that dialogue is
1. a religious duty,
2. a civilized approach, and
3. A moral course.
From His Book (Partners ... not Guardians) Part Four / Chapter Eleven
|
To the Nation’s leaders - To the Nation’s scholars and intellectuals - To leaders of the world |
All Rights Reserved For The Author Prof. Dr. Hamid Al-Rifaie