Response to The Washington Post
This is a letter that Dr. Idris sent to The Washington Post in response to the Article "Spreading Saudi Fundamentalism," where Dr. Idris' name was mentioned.. The letter was delivered to the Post by hand and via e-mail. The Washington Post did not publish his response.
Susan Schmidt’s report, (Spreading Saudi Fundamentalism), Thursday, October 4, 2003, is an example of writings about Islam that Muslims find very disturbing. They wonder what good does it serve the national interest of the United States to distort the facts about Muslim individuals, organizations, beliefs and positions, to see organizational links where none in fact exist, and to present all their honest activities as a threat to America?
The writer calls me an Imam, which I am not; I am a professor of philosophy. She groups me with what she calls salafi and ****** groups (her definition of which is ridiculous) while I consider myself to be an independent scholar who is not a member of any group or party or a blind follower of any leader; my only ultimate leader is Prophet Muhammad. I am certainly not a ******, and do not know of any scholar even in Saudi Arabia who calls himself a ******. There is no sect in Islam called ******sm. I did read some of Ibn Abdel Wahab’s works and I did write about him, but I never invited people to follow him, or any particular scholar or leader. I have great respect for him as one of our outstanding scholars, and the leader of a major revivalist movement. But still we do not accept every thing he says.
One might wonder why have the teachings of this man suddenly, and after more than two hundred years, become a threat to America? The answer is that what is now perceived by some to be a danger is not what is called ******sm. The epithet ‘******’ is now being exploited by many in America to describe any Muslim who takes his religion seriously. If you are a serious adherent to Islam, you are ******; if you are ****** you must be a terrorist; and if you are a terrorist you are a legitimate target. The message to practicing Muslims seems to be that if you are not like us you will not be tolerated by us. This is in essence is what the Senator, whom the reporter quotes, is saying. ******sm is a danger, we are told because it is “antithetical to the values of tolerance, individualism and freedom as we conceive these things.” Must everyone in the world conceive these things the way the Senator and his likes conceive them? If so then the problem is not confined to what is called ******sm. It is bound to include other Muslims, as well as all people who belong to other cultures; it is in fact bound to include many in the West since there is no consensus among them on the way these things are to be conceived. If your tolerance applies only to those who share your values and , further, conceive them the way you do, you will be making mockery of tolerance, which is by definition readiness to coexist peacefully with those who do not share your values. Thus in Islam a distinction is made between beliefs and believers. As far as beliefs are concerned there is absolutely no compromise: any belief that contradicts Islam is false, and must be criticized. But those who adhere to such false beliefs are to be tolerated, nicely treated and invited to the truth in the best of ways. It is because of this that Jews and Christians found their safest haven in the Muslim world long before the West started to talk about human rights and freedom of religion. “Jews familiar with history might note that from Spain to Baghdad, it was the Islamic world that offered the Jews of the Middle Ages a fair degree of toleration -- not the Christian West’, so tells us Richard Cohen in an article in the Post.; non-Muslims continue to live peacefully among Muslims. Islamic teachings, corroborated by our historical experience, teach us that the best atmosphere for the spread of Islam is the peaceful atmosphere. It is because of this that people like myself have been staunch advocates of peaceful coexistence and peaceful ways of inviting others to Islam long before September/11. And that is why we have been condemning acts of violence as ways of furthering the cause of Islam; we believe that they do just the opposite. But this has been of no avail to us; if you are an advocate of Islam, even by merely distributing copies of the Qur’an, you are bound to be viewed with suspicion. The same does not apply to organizations that put a copy of the Bible in every room of almost any hotel, not only in America, but in many other parts of the world.
We are determined however to stay this course. We know that being firm in our adherence to Islam has been one of the main reasons for its fast spreading.
Why is Islam expanding so spectacularly? … … … To any Christian familiar with the Bible, the answer is obvious: because God keeps His promises and blesses those who obey His Laws and fear Him, and punishes those who do not. … … Compare the amounts of abortion adultery, fornication and sodomy among Muslims and among Christians. Then compare the amounts of prayer. [Ecumenical Jihad, 1994, p.38]
These are the words of a Catholic professor of philosophy, Peter Kreeft. Could he perhaps be a Catholic ******?
Dr. Jaafar Idris
Washington Post article:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Spreading+Saudi+Fundamentalism
لعربي: ـ المقالات مقالات جريدة الميثاق . معالم لنهضتنا . الكتب والبحوث . الندوات والمحاضرات العامة . اللقاءات الصحفية . تعريف بالشيخ
