Arab West Report Egyptian press summaries and media research for dialogue

Cornelis Hulsman kindly asked me to write a few lines on the tragic events that took place in Naj‘ Hammādī and how this could be best managed, punishing the responsible people and working towards reconciliation between Muslims and Christians in the region.

 

The New York Times came out on Friday, January 8, 2010 with the following report:

 

 Attack at a Church in Egypt kills 7 (Associated Press).

“Three men in a car sprayed automatic gun fire into a crowd of churchgoers on Wednesday in the southern Egyptian town of Naj‘ Hammādī as they left a midnight mass celebration of the Coptic Christmas.”

 

This is not the first time that Christians have been targeted in acts of terrorism[1], and yet a number of government officials including the Coptic Governor of the province, along with many news commentators, deny the sectarian basis of the crime. As a physician this form of denial—of the obvious - demands professional psychological help! It is also a negative response that carries serious dangers, similar to the fatal risks taken by a physician who is consulted to examine a patient with a ruptured appendix and tell him that it is only a stomach ache. This error may lead to death if not corrected in time!

 

The management of a situation, similar to the event of Naj‘ Hammādī, calls for recognition of the underlying cause of the tragic event that resulted in the slaughter of seven innocent people at Naj‘ Hammādī—six  Copts and one Muslim policeman. This again recalls the duty of a physician to initiate treatment only after the diagnosis has been established. This is simple and elemental logic!

 

I will not address the failure of the security apparatus that could have prevented the tragedy since I am not adequately informed on this subject. It is thus wiser to await the official and non-official investigations on the failure of our security agents. Nonetheless, people of minority creeds should not need the protection of police in order to be allowed to pray in a civilized community!!

 

This is why I was delighted when Cornelis Hulsman asked me to write a few lines on the underlying causes of the tragedy. Towards this end, he kindly suggested that I initiate my comments by paraphrasing Tarek Heggy’s masterly articles that start with If I were (a Copt or a Shiite, or another minority) and examine the tragic events of Upper Egypt as if I were a Christian or a Muslim Najc Hammādīan.

 

 

Before writing my comments I reviewed a July 2008 article that I saved in my select file. It was written by Dr. Mona Abu Senna[2] and carries the most appropriate title: ‘Terrorism and the fanatical mind’[3]. Professor Abu Senna reminded the readers of Voltaire’s definition of the fanatic as the person who is prepared to kill in the name of something higher and more powerful than him/her. She then added that the current religiously motivated terrorists believe that what they are doing is praiseworthy since they aim to save the entire world, based on their understanding that the world is divided into the abode of Islam and the abode of war; It is their duty to impose the Islamic law on a world that only knows the Jahilyya[4].

 

For Dr. Abu Senna, the antidote of this mentality is to follow Ibn Rushd [ 1126-1198], known as Averroes in the West, who went beyond the literal meaning of the sacred text in order to give it an interpretation that is harmonious with the entire text. Unfortunately, Ibn Rushd was exiled and his books were burned. The resistance to his views is as strong today as they were 800 years ago.[5]

 

Mona Abu Senna concluded her article by insisting that it is the responsibility of the educational system to transcend rote learning and literalism to teach rationally. By moving beyond an unquestioned dogmatism educators will provide a healthy organic entrance to knowledge in the minds of all students eager to acquire it. 

 

It may help to recognize the fact that killing in the name of God[6] is an old spiritual affliction that has twisted religious beliefs and has frequently resulted in atrocious acts of persecutions, torture, and killings throughout the ages. As an illustration of this phenomenon the name of Queen Isabella of Spain comes easily to mind. She was no doubt a great queen motivated by the purest religious zeal, but in giving her consent to the establishment of an Inquisition Tribunal in her dominions she became responsible for much killing and cruelty against suspected heretics, Jews and Muslims. She died in 1504, and it is possible that she died repenting since she is reported to have lamented her actions, uttering the following confession[7]:

“In the name of Christ and His Maid Mother, I have caused great misery; I have depopulated towns and districts, provinces and kingdoms”.[8]

 

It is fair to speculate that the Spanish queen must have been tortured by immense guilt, if only because she must have invented excuses to ignore the Biblical example of Christ who, upon Peter’s violent attempt to resist the arrest of his Master, ordered him to “put his sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword” ( Matt. 26;52). She also disobeyed the command to love and forgive her enemies (Luke 7: 47; 10:25-37; John 13:34-35, Matt. 22:37; Matt. 6:14-15; Matt. 5:44-45). She also ignored her Master’s example, hanging in agony on the cross, yet forgiving His enemies because they knew not what they were doing (Luke 23:34). And yet most of Isabella’s victims were not even her enemies, they only had different beliefs! In her delusion that she was obeying the Master, she sinned against Love and disobeyed Him who is Love.

 

Centuries passed by after the death of the queen, but the memories of her persecutions and injustices did not! Yet at long last the church has recognized its guilt and asked for forgiveness. Unfortunately, this awareness took almost 400 years to be expressed. The clearest public regret took place in the 20^th century, as we are all familiar with Pope John Paul II asking for forgiveness for the shortcomings of the church throughout the ages. He was also known to have proclaimed his respect for Muslims[9]. What we are less familiar with was that this pope, who publically admitted the culpability of the church 94 times in offenses ranging from the Inquisition to violence to the treatment of women, was preceded by many popes who prepared the way for this great pope’s powerful call for universal love and acceptance of the other. Looking back at his pontificate, there is no doubt that John Paul II prepared the Catholic faith to become the chief catalyst for reconciliation and peace.[10] What should also be remembered is that this wonderful pope declared in the presence of 8000 pilgrims that it is a special duty [of all Christians] to acknowledge our frailties and the times when we have not been completely faithful to the love of God.[11] These instructions are supposed to be understood as binding to the faithful. This is vital because the recognition of one’s sins is the spiritual equivalent of diagnosing a disease and is the sine qua non of initiating healing and reconciliation.

 

With this rather long introduction, it is now possible to answer the question proposed by Cornelis Hulsman: What if I were a Naj‘ Hammādī Copt? How would I react to the open persecution of my brothers and sisters in Christ? Would I be able to follow the example of the Lord on the cross? Would it be possible to follow the Gospel admonition and the pope’s call to love, peace, and forgiveness? Writing this on my lap-top in the comfort of my apartment, having lost neither relatives or friends nor seen my property gutted, my forgiveness is complete and I pray for the pardon of the killers because “they knew not what they were doing” (Luke 23:34). Yet if I were in Naj‘ Hammādī such forgiveness would demand heroism that I don’t think I have. This is why my faith would have to be reinforced by reason.

 

Reason tells me that that returning violence for violence will only beget more violence. This led me to recall that the great Mahatma Gandhi obtained freedom for his country from the British by the use of non-violence, known in Hindi as Ahimsa[12]. The Mahatma chose to obey the Ahimsa principles and paralleled in many ways Christ’s call for love and forgiveness when he wittingly commented that “an eye for an eye and the entire world will soon be blind.” Thus when a massacre of innocent Hindus was perpetrated by the British army under the command of General Dryer killing 379 people, the immediate reaction of the Indian people was vengeance (Himsa) which was actuated on British men and women. The greatness of Gandhi, however, was that he is reported to have declared that if the independence of India was to be built with the blood of his enemies, then he does not want such independence. He then submitted himself to a dangerous fast.

 

It is to the great credit of the Indian people that Ahimsa defeated Himsa in love and reverence of their great Mahatma! Violence soon stopped and India was soon to get its independence from Britain and became the largest democracy on Earth!!

 

The Copts have never desired independence; what would it mean to be independent from brothers and sisters who have a different creed? It is simply absurd!! What the Copts really need is to establish stronger loving bonds with their Muslim brothers and sisters, not separation from them!!

 

There is a well known story that Gandhi told Saad Pasha Zaghloul how impressed he was that all the Copts joined him and were prepared to die for him and offer their fortune to his cause which was intimately fused with theirs! Conversely, the Muslim Indian minority abandoned him! (The Indian Muslims eventually formed their own nation which they called Pakistan). This major difference is not surprising because, unlike the Indian Muslims, the Copts always regarded themselves as an integral part of a national fabric in which their strands are interwoven with the more numerous strands of their Muslim brothers and sisters. This, however, was apparently not the way the majority of Muslim Indians looked at “Mother India”!      

 

Thus if I was a Copt from Naj‘ Hammādī I would have found it my duty to insist that justice should triumph and that peace must become the prevailing climate that invites brotherly love, progress, and prosperity and in such a way help prevent similar tragedies without the need of security forces.

 

 Towards such a sublime end:

 

I would have worked tirelessly to inform and be informed of all the in’s and out’s of the tragedy.

I would have used reason rather than anger in all my deliberations.

I would have tried very hard to replace any call to vengeance by an inner call to forgive.

 

With such peaceful resolutions:

 

I would have found myself knocking at the doors of legal authorities and those responsible to insure peace and security.

I would have contacted high local officials and used restraint and wisdom in order to develop sympathetic ears among people who could otherwise become hostile players.

I would have contacted my representative in Parliament and remind him of his/her duty to represent all residents of his/her district irrespective of social status or creed.

I would have reminded all government officials to work tirelessly to prevent the recurrence of such tragedies.

I would have asked for actions, not platitudes or false reconciliations.

I would have contacted the elders of Nag Hamadi in order to reason with them.

I would have asked for an impartial committee to investigate the matter.

I would have listened patiently to the local religious leaders, and expected the same from them.

I would have tried very hard to approach the highest Muslim authorities in order to help prevent similar tragedies.

I would have sought moral support and spiritual strength from the church, its sacraments, and its priests, in order to reject vengeance and violence.

I would have found myself praying for faith, fortitude, and patience. 

And, most importantly,

I would have done all this with a forgiving heart that blesses its enemies and a rational mind that seeks lasting solutions, appreciating the fact that aggressors are the greater victims since their evil deeds damage their own moral fiber and endanger their spiritual health. These as such need my compassion. 

 

But: what if I was a Muslim in Naj‘ Hammādī?

 

In order to answer this, I would have needed to be in Naj‘ Hammādī, and to live with its people for a long time, perhaps with one, two, or three of their families.

 

Short of this I find myself a prisoner of my books, my indexes, and my conclusions. I also realize that it is difficult to understand a mind shaped by religious traditions that are not my own.[13]

 

This is why I find myself unable to develop a theme on the title of: “If I were a Muslim in Naj‘ Hammādī”, because the Muslims with whom I lived and grew up with are the product of a liberal era that has been erased by an exclusive Islamist culture. I suspect that it is possible that the Muslims I know would also like to spend some time with their Naj‘ Hammādī brethren in order to understand them better!

 

I know many Muslims, and those are the ones who called me to express their sympathy and their regret at the slaughter.

 

They are the Muslims in a restaurant who overheard one of my cousins bewailing the Coptic victims of the tragedy and left their table to console him. They expressed their pain and regret that fellow Muslims could be so cruel in the name of Islam, demonstrating their twisted personal faith by an act of wanton violence that our restaurant friends were unable to understand.

 

They are the Muslim thinkers like Tarek Heggy who picked up their pen to publicly express their disgust at what was done in the name of their religion.

 

They are the columnists of the major newspapers, including the largest, Al-Ahrām, who like their syndicate leader Makram Mohamed Ahmed used their space in defense of the Copts and in blaming the radical Islamists.

 

They are the Muslim commentators like Saad Hagrass, who chose to appear on the TV screen to expose the injustices suffered by the Copts, including their marginalization and humiliation crowned by the killing and maiming of innocent Christians joyfully leaving their church after the Christmas celebration of 7-1-10.

 

In fact, one thing that filled me with pride when I returned from America was the courageous Muslims who never feared to criticize those of their own faith when it was misused. They did this when, at the same time, some Copts in high position preferred to downplay, ignore, or deny any form of Coptic marginalization, discrimination, or persecution! The ascent to power is easier when it is done over the backs of one’s own! 

 

Those are the Muslims I know, the others-including the cowardly Copts- I try to forgive, but I cannot forget when the slaughter of innocents takes place.

 

Yet with good will I may try to identify with the unknown Muslim brothers and sisters of Naj‘ Hammādī by exploring their beliefs.

 

In order to start to understand the other Muslims I needed to find out a little bit about a popular understanding of Islam that served to guide the Naj‘ Hammādī aggressors and their sympathizers. Taking a crash course on Islam would simply not do.

 

So I started by consulting booklets published by Islamic societies and by the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs. In one of them[14], Dr. Zaqzouq offered a good summary of the rejection of terrorism and fanaticism in Islam. He offered the beautiful verses that shun fanaticism such as the one proclaimed by the Prophet to the disbelieving pagans of Makka: “To you your faith and to me my faith” (16:125). I am also familiar with the verse that reads: “Let there be no compulsion in Religion” (2:256). Dr. Zaqzouq also quoted Qur’anic passages that call for forgiveness. But what he failed to quote are verses that the great teacher and defender of Islam, Mohammed Arkoun[15], found necessary to include in his book, in order to try and understand, in a historical or theological context, the quasi-martial verses found in the Maida Sura which have apparently been used to justify acts of terror[16] by radical Muslims and which became a source of anxiety to non-Muslims. Moreover, in another booklet offered to me by the same Muslim gentleman who gave me Dr. Zaqzouq’s booklet, the Christians are clearly accused of following a false religion[17].

 

By reading all this, it became obvious that many Muslims like to defend and live their religion and to do so interpret some passages in such a way that the martial[18] teachings acquire a symbolic or historic meaning. On the other hand, a more literal interpretation may call for a zealous attempt to defend the creed, even if this leads to violence. Muslims also reject the Christian principle of offering the other cheek as yielding to evil and injustice. So, for them, if they feel that their faith is being criticized it may call for a violent response. Again, it is the first variety of Muslims, those who follow Ibn Rushd or Arkoun in their understanding of the sacred texts, with whom I have lived, studied, and worked, and with whom I have shared joys and sufferings. The others, I may encounter them in the streets, the clubs, or their offices, but I really do not know them. This is a great pity since knowledge of the others eventually means loving them. I did know a Muslim Brother when I was studying medicine; he spent a long time in prison and shared with me his sufferings and his mistreatment when I met him after his release. I felt sorry for him and respected his silence about his beliefs, but never tried to understand him better. This is also a great pity since I could have learned more if I knew how to probe a soul!    

 

Yet I still have to be informed. I know from reading the translated Qur’an and talking to Muslims in times of vulnerability–such as caused by serious illness-is that God in the Muslim understanding is Most Merciful, Most Gracious and Most Beneficent. In addition, I know the Holy Islamic texts call for peace. This peace, however, seems to be understood to come with the imposition of the Shari’a and benefits primarily the Muslim believers. Thus Haykal Pasha[19] noted that all “believers are bound to one another to the exclusion of other men”. Hussayn Haykal Pasha also explained that Pax Islamica calls for total adherence of all Muslims to fight in the cause of God. This precludes a separate peace and calls“for avenging the blood of one another.” Peace seems to be seen as that which is imposed from a position of superiority. Indeed, Muslims have been known to be magnanimous in victory. Nevertheless, the same Holy text which calls for peace and forgiveness also contains verses that justify, in the understanding of radical Islamists, a duty to fight the unbelievers wherever they are found (4:89-91).

 

What I also know is that the climate of radical Islamism and fanaticism is new. So who are we to blame today?

 

Commenting on the events of Naj‘ Hammādī, Amr Adib, the famous talk show host and respected commentator, blamed the media, the education system, and a number of Muslim sheikhs[20] for the rise of violence against the Copts of Egypt. Dr. Mona Abu Senna blamed the educational system for much of the violence that has been perpetrated during the past decades, as well as for the many woes that are facing Egypt.

 

Another factor that may be cited as a facilitator of violence is the presence of article two of the constitution, since this article reinforces the belief that Muslim Egyptians[21] enjoy more rights than those who follow a minority religion like the Copts[22].

 

With such a complexity of factors I find it still harder to develop the second part of the theme suggested by Cornelis Hulsman, namely that which is titled “What if I was a Muslim”? This is why, as noted earlier, one may learn much more from an answer to this question from liberal Muslims offering to answer this hypothetical what if question. Such a “liberal” candidate may find it easier to think like his fellow Muslims of Naj‘ Hammādī. The response of such a candidate may include a re-reading of the sacred texts as suggested by Mohammed Arkoun[23]. This kind of mindset, however, demands the insight of Muslims who have read and memorized the Qur’an and the teachings of Islam for as long as he/she can remember. It is only the one who read that can re-read. On the other hand, it may be difficult to teach such subtleties to people who have found comfort in the literal understanding of the text, reinforced by a religious establishment that frowns upon what is perceived as manipulation of the sacred text. Yet without proper enlightened guidance more violence may be expected. Moreover, another problem may obstruct the call to the re-reading of texts, and this has to do with the question of authority. In Sunni Islam, as in Protestantism, authority stems from personal understanding of the sacred writ and the rejection of any central authority, such as the pope in Catholicism and the ayatollahs in Shiism.

 

This is why another route may be needed.

 

It seems in fact, based on my readings, that observant Muslims might be able to get nearer to Christianity and utilize a mental –“what if”- journey if they rendered themselves cognizant of Sufis’ beliefs and practice. This mental journey might, indeed, insert much love and mysticism in their practice of Islam. This is important because for non-Christians, the cross is frequently a cause of offense[24]. This could explain the violent objections of some radical Muslims to any visible cross, which is sometimes seen as an affront to their sacred beliefs. The influence of Sufism may moderate such radical zeal because of their understanding of suffering for the love of others.[25]

 

As an illustration of what Sufism may achieve it may help to quote Ibn Arabi who declared: “No religion is more sublime than a religion of Love and longing for God. Love is the essence of all creeds; the true mystic welcomes it whatever guise it may assume. My heart has become capable of every form: it is a pasture for gazelles and a convent for Christian monks. And a temple for idols, and the pilgrims’ Ka’ba, and the tables of the Torah, and the book of the Koran”.[26] Much of these mystical utterances may shock Orthodox Muslims, but they may still soften the dictates of rigid Sunni dogmas.

 

One may add at this point as a model to a more peaceful life: Muslims may be asked to recall that there was a time when the Muslim ummah showed more tolerance than Christendom in their treatment of the Jews.[27] This was clearly observed in the Middle Ages.[28] Sadly this form of civilized acceptance of the “other” was weakened by the appearance of radical movements such as those of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Wahhābīs. Will it be possible for Egyptian Muslims to revive a renaissance that was in the making, but then melted away with the demise of Ibn Rushd, and yet returned vivified in the early 20^th century under the leadership of Saad Pasha Zaghloul, Nahas Pasha, Taha Pasha Hussein, Sheikh Aly Adel Razik, and Lotfy Pasha al-Sayed? Currently, this can only be the subject of prayers and supplications to the Almighty!

 

Finally, it is important to realize that the religious chasm between the two major creeds of the Egyptian people is too wide to cross. Therefore that which unites people of different creeds cannot be their religions. Only a belief in their common humanity, strengthened by their common Egyptian identity, can reunite them in a common purpose to build a modern, peaceful, and prosperous society. 

 

In conclusion, I am not sure how much history and Muslim mysticism may percolate into the everyday Islam of a Naj‘ Hammādīan. I am not even sure that the understanding of a common humanity will have many followers. Nor does it seem plausible that the majority of fanaticized radicals will re-read their sacred texts or re-examine history in an unbiased manner. What I am sure of is that the educational system, the various media, and the local and highly placed religious leaders have a serious task to undertake if they believe, as they should, that ideas have legs and that, depending on the idea, these legs may be used to carry either armed extremists or else brothers lovingly searching for each other irrespective of their beliefs. This is why the media, the government, the religious leaders, and all teachers carry a grave responsibility and will have to answer to their Maker if they neglect their sacred duty to heal all wounds and replace hatred by love!

---