Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH)
December 6, 2005

The Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity (CGNews-PiH) is distributing the enclosed articles to build bridges of understanding between the West and the Arab World and countries with predominately Muslim populations. Unless otherwise noted, all copyright permissions have been obtained and the articles may be reproduced by any news outlet or publication free of charge. If publishing, please acknowledge both the original source and CGNews, and notify us at cgnewspih@sfcg.org.

**********

ARTICLES IN THIS EDITION:

1. “Speak and Act Before It Is Too Late: Let Go of CPT Peace Workers in Iraq!” by Mohammed Abu-Nimer
Associate Professor of International Peace and Conflict Resolution at American University’s School of International Service, Mohammed Abu-Nimer, points to the works of contemporary and historical Islamic scholars to denounce the “sacredness” of terrorist acts such as the recent kidnapping of Christian Peacemaking Team members in Iraq. He warns that “the massive and influential Muslim and Arab public voice is resounding in its silence” and it is clearly “the only force that can delegitimise such acts and marginalise the groups committing them.”
(Source: CGNews-PiH, December 6, 2005)

2. “Interfaith Dialogue: The Overlooked Objectives” by Mohamed Mosaad
Mohamed Mosaad, an Egyptian psychiatrist, anthropologist, and freelance writer, discusses the dissonance between liberal bourgeois interfaith dialogue and the “conflicting masses” who are either uninterested or not invited to the table. To overcome this gap, he urges scholars to “create and develop an authentic discourse of peace and understanding” and religious communities “to get directly involved in dialogue and peace-building.”
(Source: CGNews, December 3, 2005)

3. The globalisation of Islamic Relief
Ehsan Masood, project director of the Gateway Trust, looks at the growth and international impact of one of several non-government organisations with its origins in Islam. What is interesting, he points out, is “the “Muslim” in Muslim Aid is the same as the “Christian” in Christian Aid: the charity’s recipients do not have to be Muslim, or religious at all, to be eligible for assistance.” Although they will face challenges as a result of their modernisation and international expansion, they represent the potential for other organizations to start thinking “bigger” as well.
(Source: www.openDemocracy.net, November 29, 2005)

4. Who is the 'moderate Muslim'?
Abukar Arman, a freelance writer and a council member of the Interfaith Association of Central Ohio, considers the argument that "moderate Muslims” are the "only legitimate defense against Islamic extremism." Without disputing the need for a “moderate” voice, he uses controversial examples to demonstrate that America’s “moderate Muslim” may not be the Middle East’s “moderate Muslim”. Arman warns that “if the goal is to defeat extremism in the marketplace of ideas, both Muslims, whose religion has been eclipsed by terrorists, and the United States, whose foreign policy has been highjacked by ideologues, ought to find genuine Muslim moderates to support.”
(Source: International Herald Tribune, November 11, 2005)

5. “Faithful build bridges with books” by Jane Lampman
"In light of what's going on in the world, it just wasn't acceptable for me to be ignorant of Islam. It's not acceptable for Muslims to have little idea of what Jews are about. Or for Christians, either." Staff writer at the Christian Science Monitor, Jane Lampman, describes how an interfaith book club has strengthened the faith of its members, as well as the friendships they have developed with each other.
(Source: The Christian Science Monitor, November 30, 2005)

**********

ARTICLE 1
Speak and Act Before It Is Too Late: Let Go of CPT Peace Workers in Iraq!
Mohammed Abu-Nimer

Washington, DC - The November 27th kidnapping of four members of Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT)—Tom Fox (54), of the United States, Norman Kember (74) of Great Britain, and James Lonely (41) and Hameet Singh Sooden (32) of Canada—who were working in Iraq in solidarity with the Iraqi people is another sad reminder of the danger facing the Muslim and Arab world if we continue to tolerate those “elements” or forces of darkness who operate from within.

As a Muslim, scholar of Islam, and practitioner of conflict resolution and inter-cultural dialogue, I find one of the most appalling and frightening aspects of the recent kidnapping the fact that such acts have become an accepted operating principle for so-called “resistance groups” in Iraq and elsewhere in the Muslim and Arab world. Attacking and terrorizing civilians, human rights advocates, relief workers, and peace advocates has never been an Islamic way of resisting occupation or fighting oppression.

In the past decade, many books, articles, and studies have been published by Muslims and non-Muslims that systematically explain and document that foundational Islamic teachings have never prescribed such blind, shameful, and undignified ways of fighting injustice. Scholars have tried to remind Muslims and non-Muslims alike that the primary message, strategies, and values of Islam have been based on peace, achieving justice through nonviolent means, and the extremely limited use of force. Especially in the period of Islam’s early formation, Muslim religious thinkers –Faqih and Imams—spent centuries defining the strict conditions under which force can be used, hoping that their effort would restrict and reduce violence.

Recent Muslim scholars as well as peace and justice activists have sought to revive such work, including: Iqbal Ahmed, Abdul Ghaffar Khan, Jawdat Said, Sathan Anand, Khalis Jalabi, Abdul Aziz Said, Khalid Kishtainy, etc. These writings offer systematic interpretations based on authentic Quranic and Hadith sources, and the authors’ analysis and attention to textual nuance leaves no doubt that there is no religious justification within Islam for brutal and ruthless actions like beheading, randomly attacking Mosques, or terrorizing civilians of any nationality.

Offering cultural and religious bases for and interpretations of peace and nonviolent resistance, writing academic books, and conducting international conferences has proven to be a limited strategy in confronting this “evil force” in the Muslim and Arab world. These peaceful and academic gatherings are often aimed at the Western public and policy makers, to convince them that Islam is a religion of peace and is founded on the principles of pluralism and democracy.

Although this work is important and can possibly contribute to a reduction in prejudice and negative stereotypes directed at Muslims in Western public opinion, it seems to be based in the assumption that changing US and European foreign policy towards Muslim and Arab countries is the proper first step in confronting “evil” Muslim forces in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Indonesia, and Algeria. I think that this belief is an illusion, another way to cover our heads and escape the responsibility of looking inside the Muslim house. The real battle continues to remain in the Arab and Muslim homes and streets. A second tragedy highlighted by this kidnapping is that those Muslims and Arabs who are fighting the battle at home lack international and regional support and face constant oppression by internal political regimes and other parties in their societies.

Without the empowerment of such individuals and groups to organize, it is hard to realistically hope for success in blocking terrorism in the Muslim world.

What needs to be done?

The massive and influential Muslim and Arab public voice is resounding in its silence on these matters, even though it is the only force that can delegitimize such acts and marginalize the groups committing them. Despite all of its sophisticated weaponry, the American army cannot “flush” these elements out of society. They might be able to kill many of them and chase others away to underground caves and hideouts. However, they will eventually come back and renew their operations in different ways and under different covers. Unfortunately, many in the American public have not yet reached such a realization, and continue to ignore other alternatives of dealing with the problem.

Why doesn’t the Muslim and Arab public speak loudly against such terrorist actions?

First, terrorist groups adopting such methods have taken advantage of the public sentiment that the primary goals and practices of Western governments are aimed at exploiting Muslim and Arab national resources and at promoting Western hegemonic power over Muslim and Arab society and culture. Second, most Arab and Muslim regimes receive military and security support from the US and European countries despite oppressive internal policies that deprive opposition groups of meaningful political space. Such regimes constantly violate human rights and are mainly occupied with accumulating individual wealth or elite dominance. Third, many in the Arab and Muslim world live in fear because of state security apparatuses, which have been the main tool for governing throughout the post-colonial era rather than legislative bodies or publicly elected officials. Indeed, prisons are filled with thousands of political prisoners who dared to speak against the regimes. Fourth, economic underdevelopment and deprivation found within many Muslim and Arab societies has reached a level of desperation and hopelessness that it can be mobilized into support for acts providing temporary relief, venting of frustration, anger, or desire for revenge, especially those acts which are framed in terms of resistance to oppression. This process displaces blame and responsibility for the current crisis in Muslim and Arab societies onto colonial, foreign, and Western [Christian] powers, and becomes the easiest outlet for escaping individual and collective responsibility and best rationale for complacency.

We Arabs and Muslims who oppose these individuals and groups (al Qaeda, Zarqawi,etc.) can not rely on foreign forces and agents to clean our societies of terrorist forces for us. Arabs and Muslims must take to the streets and mobilize all of our social, cultural, and political institutions to fight these groups and their messages of hatred, exclusion, and blindness. When all those who oppose such actions and strategies- teachers, pharmacists, journalists, imams, housewives, and shopkeepers- claim the public space, the credibility and legitimacy of such ideology and terrorism will become a religious, cultural, and political taboo.

Each and every Muslim and Arab is responsible for the kidnapping of the four peace workers who came to express their solidarity with and help the Iraqi people. Regardless of the reasons for silence for Muslims and Arabs around the world to not massively move and speak out against these actions should be considered a silent crime against our own future generations; it is internally destructive. Such groups or individuals, motivated by hate and intolerance, do not stop with kidnapping foreigners; on the contrary, they are capable of attacking their own people in mosques, restaurants, weddings, and schools. There is no “Haram” or sacredness in their view of the world, and their level of “ignorance” will not stop them from harming anyone in their society who thinks or feels differently from them.

To delegitimize such horrendous actions, we all have to talk, stand, and act to our full capacity and using all available social and cultural space. The Jordanian public reaction to the terrorist bombings was a promising glimpse of what can be done, as was the Lebanese response to the assassination of Hariri. Thousands of people went to the streets and many nongovernmental groups and associations spoke against the crime committed.

Speak and act now before it is too late!

###
*Mohammed Abu-Nimer is an Associate Professor of International Peace and Conflict Resolution at American University’s School of International Service in Washington, DC, and is the Director of the Peacebuilding and Development Institute
Source: CGNews-PiH, December 6, 2005
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 2
Interfaith Dialogue: The Overlooked Objectives
Mohamed Mosaad

Cairo - Dialogue is the first step to peacefully end conflicts; interfaith dialogue is its religious version with one of its objectives being to end religiously motivated conflicts. This promising approach is anything but unusual. Many regional and global interfaith meetings are held, and attended by high-ranking religious scholars. To counter the vehement exchange of theological arguments among the masses, these scholars have issued statement after statement emphasizing the message of love and peace which naturally exists in all religions of the world. These statements, however, never materialize into palpable change in the reality around. The dissonant picture we have now is one of a liberal bourgeois enclave of interfaith dialogue surrounded by a vast terrain of conflicting masses who are either uninterested in, or not invited to, that enclave.

To repair this picture let us consider two objectives, which are unfortunately frequently overlooked. First, scholars should apply their knowledge to seriously counter the conflict discourse. In its Islamic variant this discourse evolves around a number of essential concepts such as Jihad, Martyrdom, The Jews, Holy Land, Islamic Caliphate and the Prophecy of the end of world. Here Jihad is used to mean an eternal war against non Muslims; Martyrdom is used to legitimize suicide operations against civilians; The Jews are a people destined to eternal hostility against Muslims; and the Holy Land has a special sacred nature which imposes specific political regulations. The Islamic Caliphate, which was a specific historical formation, now becomes a substantial part of the practice of Islam; Muslims believe if it does not exist then they cannot really be Muslims. All these concepts, and their discourse, are led by a prophecy, a vision of the future, whose main feature is a fierce war between Muslims and Jews that will mark the end of the world. The creation of these religio-historical concepts and their weaving together is a recipe for eternal violence that nice rhetorical preaching of peace or promising economic incentives cannot neutralize.

To call this discourse fundamentalist and attribute it to some fringe extremists, who “do not represent the real Islam”, has always proved to be a failing and, in fact, a hypocritical strategy. The overwhelming Muslim majority believes Jihad, Martyrdom, the Holy Land, and the Islamic Caliphate are essential parts of its religion. They continuously listen to Friday preachers quoting Quranic texts, which plainly condemn the Jews for their hatred of Muslims; and were they to put these quotations aside, how would they ever escape a prophecy they consider an essential part of their creed? On the other hand, a common prescription to shift from a wrong literal reading to a correct interpretative one has fallen on deaf ears. Both the absolutely literal reading that never attends to the sociocultural context and the absolutely interpretative reading that renders the text almost irrelevant have not found their way into mainstream Islam. It has always been something in between, a negotiated reading that dynamically correlates the text and the context. Moreover, it was ironically an interpretative reading which legitimized suicide operations and a literal reading which strictly prohibited them.

Scholars, therefore, must quit composing peace statements, a task many people can do, and commit themselves to the task only they can promote. They should create, develop and further an Islamically authentic discourse of peace. Such a discourse must be tradition-friendly; one that pays serious attention to the holy text and builds on, not ignores, the Muslims’ historical experience and socio-cultural forms . Only a discourse like this can serve as a legitimate outlet for the majority of religious Muslims, who long for peace but cannot neglect their faith. Such a discourse is not impossible, given the richness and diversity of a multi-layered tradition that has been carved out and produced through a plethora of times and locales.

The second ignored objective is the engagement of religious communities in interfaith activities. Interfaith dialogue has to move from the five stars hotels to the neighborhood mosques, churches and synagogues. Religious people of different religious backgrounds have to meet frequently, listen to each other, communicate humanely and share what they value the most: their individual religious and spiritual experiences. That should be allowed and nourished in a safe space devoid of political representations and full of personal and intimate relations.

In conclusion, scholars have to create and develop an authentic discourse of peace and understanding. The religious communities, on the other hand, need neither preaching nor clerical leadership. Motivated by an authentic discourse, they have to get directly involved in dialogue and peace-building. The activist scholar/theologian laity situation we are locked in has to be urgently reversed.

###
* Mohamed Mosaad, an Egyptian psychiatrist, anthropologist, and freelance writer. He is an interfaith dialogue activist and serves currently as the Middle East and North Africa Coordinator of the United Religions Initiative (URI). This article is published in partnership with the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).
Source: CGNews, December 3, 2005
Visit the website at www.commongroundnews.org
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 3
The globalisation of Islamic Relief
Ehsan Masood

London - The experience of one Islamic charity with modest English origins is symbol and portent of changes in the landscape of NGOs worldwide, says Ehsan Masood. In August 2002, a young executive dressed in a suit and tie approached me with his business card. I was in the press-conference hall of the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, a gathering of the great and the good to mark the tenth anniversary of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. A planned briefing from yet another honourable minister for the environment had been delayed, so I had loitered towards an exhibition of NGOs in search of more stimulating company.

The business card said “Islamic Relief Worldwide”. Somewhat nervously, I asked if this was the same “worldwide” organisation that once had its headquarters in a small office in Birmingham, England. He replied that it did, that the United Kingdom head office now had more than 100 staff, and that there were field offices in other countries. Islamic Relief, he told me, was at the Johannesburg summit to observe the negotiations, lobby policymakers, and network with other NGOs.

This story came back to me as images from the Kashmir earthquake cascaded through the television screen in October 2005. There was Islamic Relief once more, this time next to Oxfam, the United Nations children’s fund (Unicef) and other international organisations responding to calls for aid in the aftermath of a tragedy that has taken more than 79,000 lives. The charity had announced an immediate donation of £1 million. This has since been more than doubled. It all seemed a world away from 1984 when Islamic Relief opened for business with a donation of…20 pence.

Why should this be surprising?

At one level it shouldn’t. Islamic Relief today operates as would any large international charity based in Britain: it sources its income from a mix of individual donations, business, and government. It has a network of worldwide field offices. Its senior officials – not just its founder, Hany El Banna – have access to heads of state, ministers, top-level civil servants and the media in the countries it works in. And it has its teeth sunk firmly in the international aid policy agenda.

Yet, while none of this is innovative for an international non-profit in the modern age, it does represent a milestone of sorts. What we are witnessing is possibly the world’s first international NGO with origins in Islam. Add to this the fact that this particular NGO is headquartered not in Riyadh or Cairo but in London, and its story becomes even more interesting. Islamic Relief may be the largest of its kind, but it is not alone: other British Muslim aspirants for international NGO-dom are the charities Muslim Aid and Muslim Hands. The message is clear: watch this space.

A new horizon

It has been a long journey that reveals a mix of continuity and change. Like other, older British charities, Islamic Relief, Muslim Aid (1985) and Muslim Hands (1993) began life as small organisations, deeply serious about the practice of religion and focused on helping people of the same faith. Today, they are big, still serious about the practice of faith, but no longer consumed by a desire to help people of their own faith alone.

What has happened is that they have grown up and they have modernised. The “Islamic” in Islamic Relief today refers to the act of giving. The “Muslim” in Muslim Aid is the same as the “Christian” in Christian Aid: the charity’s recipients do not have to be Muslim, or religious at all, to be eligible for assistance. True, the majority of the staff of Britain’s Muslim charities are still Muslim, but it is only a matter of time before this next milestone is crossed.

The principal tension for charities such as Islamic Relief is to maintain the support of their traditional donor base as they expand, while at the same time knowing how to handle the many overtures from governments that inevitably come their way – especially when a charity based in the United Kingdom becomes large and influential in parts of the world where the British government is not very popular. Islamic Relief’s close links to the British government will not be lost on those of its donors who are angry with Tony Blair’s support for and participation in the invasion of Iraq.

A secondary tension is that most ordinary Muslims in Britain are not at all used to the modern, professional charity run by people who carry laptop computers and write their emails on a Blackberry. The idea that hard-earned donations from the people on low incomes in Britain could be used to recruit lobbyists, campaigners, researchers and press officers (as opposed to directly helping the poor in other countries) will for many not be altogether welcome.

Modernisation and international expansion have inevitably brought new tensions. But these trends also offer something different and potentially very exciting: the prospect of real change within the world of international NGOs, still dominated by wealthy and powerful organisations based in the rich countries of the global north.

For if a relatively small twenty-year-old British community charity called Islamic Relief has the ability to go global in a relatively short space of time, the potential for much larger organisations elsewhere to think bigger than they do at present is there for the taking.

###
* Ehsan Masood is project director of the Gateway Trust.
Source: www.openDemocracy.net, November 29, 2005
Visit the website at www.opendemocracy.net
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 4
Who is the 'moderate Muslim'?
Abukar Arman

Hilliard, Ohio - Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and the disastrous war in Iraq, the argument that "moderate Muslims" - the so-called MM Factor - are the "only legitimate defense against Islamic extremism" has found its way onto center stage and has found acceptance in certain circles.

But, who are these "moderate Muslims"? What is the ideological engine driving them? What indicators are there to authenticate them? And, more important, who should interpret the readings of such indicators?

Before an objective debate on these questions could get under way, neocon activists like Daniel Pipes have been spinning the whole MM Factor in order to push a handpicked list of what he describes as "anti-Islamist Muslims." Not surprisingly, the list includes controversial figures like Khalid Duran, a notorious Islam-basher and a friend of Pipes; Irshad Manji, who hosted "Queer Television" on Toronto's City TV; and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a self-declared atheist who collaborated with the murdered film-maker Theo Van Gogh on a film offensive to many Muslims.

Granted, these are individuals who are exercising their freedom of expression and who may want to "shock the system" from the periphery. But this tack will not moderate the current trend of extremism. Bringing Islam back to its original nature of being a middle-ground faith, as taught by the Prophet Muhammad, would require a moderate tone and judicious dialogue. Lending support and a platforms to individuals considered pariahs could simply undermine the whole MM-Factor.

Credibility and sincerity is the name of the game.

For anyone to be accepted as a moderate voice and for his or her message to resonate with the broader Muslim population in the United States and around the world, one must demonstrate, among other things, the following three characteristics:

First, that he or she is a devout Muslim with a track record of community service - an individual without any apparent ulterior motive. Second, he or she is an independent person with an independent mind, an individual not predictably on the same side of any issue all the time, since neither truth nor justice is predictably on the same side. Third, he or she is a sensitive bridge-builder willing to cultivate a peaceful, tolerant community that respects the rule of law, who supports his or her position through Islam's main authority - the Koran and the Sunnah (the legacy of Prophet Muhammad).

Unfortunately, there seems to be a competing standard for moderation based on one's position on the Israel-Palestine issue - not on the moot question of whether Israel has the right to exist, but whether the Palestinian people have the right to self-determination and to resist oppression and occupation. This is what the overwhelming majority of Muslims in America have gradually come to understand as the real litmus test.

Muslim thinkers and activists who are apathetic or oblivious, or are supportive of the status quo are readily embraced as "moderates" while others, regardless of how moderate or liberal they might be, are declared radicals or terrorist sympathizers.

A case in point is the routine harassment of prominent Muslim activists like Yusuf Islam - formerly known as Cat Stevens - who is famous for his peace songs and indeed activism; of widely respected moderate Muslim scholars like Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who made a career campaigning against extremism and radical literalism; and of "liberal" thinkers like Tariq Ramadan, who is known for being a pioneer in bridging Islamic values and Western culture. All three were, in one way or another, denied entry to the United States for "national security reasons."

Recently the U.S. Embassy in Cairo denied Sheikh Abdul Hamid al-Atrash, the head of Al Azhar Fatwa Committee, an entry visa give to lectures and sermons at a number of American Islamic centers during Ramadan. Ironically, in addition to being the oldest and most prestigious Islamic university, Al Azhar is considered the most moderate Islamic educational institution.

It goes without saying that any such subjective alienation and deliberate silencing of those widely recognized as genuine moderates will only fuel more cynicism, anti-Americanism and extremism. If the goal is to defeat extremism in the marketplace of ideas, both Muslims, whose religion has been eclipsed by terrorists, and the United States, whose foreign policy has been highjacked by ideologues, ought to find genuine Muslim moderates to support.

And until a bona fide definition crystallizes, there will always be the risk of blindly embarking on yet another quixotic foreign-policy endeavor.

###
* Abukar Arman is a freelance writer and a council member of the Interfaith Association of Central Ohio.
Source: International Herald Tribune, November 11, 2005
Visit the website at www.iht.com
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity.
Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.

**********

ARTICLE 5
Faithful build bridges with books
Jane Lampman

Cambridge, Mass. - Laughter rings out in the salmon-colored living room of the parsonage at First Church in Cambridge, Mass. More than a dozen women - Christian, Jewish, and Muslim - are sharing insights garnered from "Gilead," a 2004 novel about the faith and struggles of a Christian minister in Iowa.

The easy camaraderie as they discuss their distinctive approaches to prayer reflects three years of monthly meetings of the Daughters of Abraham, as they call themselves. The book club has explored the realms of the three monotheistic faiths - and blossomed into comfortable relationships that reach into each other's daily lives.

"My hope was we'd come to know and respect the other two faiths while deepening our commitment to our own," says the Rev. Anne Minton, a retired college teacher and Episcopal priest. "What I didn't anticipate was the deepening of relationships in the group."

In fact, 10 of the 18 members traveled together to Spain last January, where they explored sites of the medieval golden age of Muslim-Christian-Jewish coexistence, which spawned an intellectual flowering. They are planning a trip to Jerusalem next May.

The club's origin, however, lies in the immediate anguish of Sept. 11, 2001. That night, an interfaith service hastily called by the minister at First Church (United Church of Christ) packed the sanctuary.

"The service was powerful and people were crying; there were women in head scarves sitting next to me," recalls club founder Edie Howe. "I had this strong thought of how we were all the children of Abraham, and how unnecessary and tragic it was. I thought, 'What can I do about this?'"

Her answer was to start the women's book club as a first step toward improving understanding. To ensure a joint commitment, she sought out Jews and Muslims who might share her interest and held planning discussions. A group of 18 met for the first time in September 2002 and has been meeting ever since. Though expectations vary, all share an interest in how other faiths are expressed in individual lives.

"I wanted the benefit of how to guide my reading on this," says Rona Fischman, a real estate agent active in a local synagogue. "In light of what's going on in the world, it just wasn't acceptable for me to be ignorant of Islam. It's not acceptable for Muslims to have little idea of what Jews are about. Or for Christians, either."

Keeping a booklist, they vote on priorities and read a book a month, alternating among the three religions. Tastes range across novels, history, poetry, memoirs, and religious philosophy. During their summer hiatus in 2004 - after the group had developed a level of trust - they read books on the history and politics of the Middle East.

"The Crusades Through Arab Eyes," was particularly informative, says Ms. Fischman, because of its non-Western vantage point.

"One book that really struck me was 'The Rock,' a historical novel by Iraqi author Kanan Makiya about the building of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem," says Ms. Minton. "The book quotes extensively from Jewish, Christian, and Muslim sacred texts but doesn't give you the footnote on the page. The quotes are so similar you can't tell where they come from without looking them up in the back."

From Islamic poetry, to a mystery involving the ritual baths of Jewish tradition, to C.S. Lewis's exploration of good and evil in "The Screwtape Letters," the varied choices spur conversation on the commonalities and differences in beliefs and practices. And sometimes they reveal surprising similarities.

Sepi Gilani, a Muslim physician and mother who is a member of one of two spinoff book clubs (a third is planned for next year), says that "Lying Awake," a novel about an American nun in Los Angeles, resonated for her. The nun's devotional experiences reminded her of her grandmother in Iran, who after her husband's death, spent her time focused on prayer, reading, and worship. But it also rang a bell with her own life in the United States.

"The nun leaves a devout group and goes out into the secular world where many don't believe, and God is the last thing on their minds," she recalls. "When you are constantly thinking of God and the mechanisms of the universe, sometimes it seems the rest of the world is very aloof. Yet when you meet someone who is religious in their own way, whatever their faith, there can be more of a connection with that person than with someone who claims to be of your faith."

She found similar pleasure in the discussion on "Holy Days," about the life of the Hasidic Jewish community in Brooklyn.

Muslims in the US are not as regularly active in the book clubs as Christians and Jews. That's largely because the younger generation is working and raising children, Ms. Gilani believes, while the older generations of immigrants are less sure of their English. Some also travel - two members are now in Egypt and Pakistan.

Most club members are heartened by the way it has spilled into their lives.

"People meet for lunch, help out when members are not well, suggest a good movie - like Jewish or Iranian film festivals - and [have] dinner ahead of time," says Ms. Howe. "And they attend weddings, bar mitzvahs, celebrations at the end of Ramadan."

For Fischman, it was meaningful when some came to the shiva after her father died. They had learned about Jewish mourning during club discussions. "We can talk about the symbolism of our faiths' rituals, but it won't click unless we happen to attend and see what it means in a family's life," she says. "It's about what's in the head and in the heart."

Wherever the book club discussions roam, they clearly have come to be meaningful for those participating. It's still going strong, Minton says, because of the quality of the relationships, the fun and laughter, and the intellectual stimulation.

"We discuss a book, and people think, 'well after that we could read these five others!' " she adds. "We always come out of the meeting feeling better than when we went in."

###
* Jane Lampman is a staff writer of the Christian Science Monitor.
Source: The Christian Science Monitor, November 30, 2005
Visit the website at www.csmonitor.com
Distributed by the Common Ground News Service – Partners in Humanity.
For copyright permission, please contact lawrenced@csps.com

**********

The Common Ground News Service - Partners in Humanity, brought to you by Search for Common Ground, seeks to build bridges of understanding between the West and the Arab World and countries with predominately Muslim populations. This service is one outcome of a set of working meetings held in partnership with His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal in June 2003.

Every week, CGNews-PiH will distribute 5 news articles, op-eds, features, and analyses that aid in developing and analyzing the current and future relationship of the West and Arab/Muslim world. Articles will be chosen based on accuracy, balance, and their ability to improve understanding and communication across borders and regions. They will also reflect the need for constructive dialogue around issues of global importance. Selections will be authored by local and international experts and leaders who will analyze and discuss a broad range of relevant issues. We invite you to submit any articles you feel are compatible with the goals of this news service.

Partners in Humanity also regularly publishes the work of student leaders and journalists whose articles strengthen intercultural understanding and promote constructive perspectives and dialogue in their own communities through its Youth Views column. Student journalists and writers under the age of 27 are encouraged to write cbinkley@sfcg.org for more information on contributing.

We look forward to hearing from you, and welcome any questions, concerns, or comments you may have about this service. Please forward this message to colleagues and friends who may also wish to subscribe to the service. To subscribe, send an email to subscribe-cgnewspih@sfcg.org with subscribe in the subject line.

If you are a member of the media, please join us in promoting constructive dialogue to improve understanding and perceptions. Unless otherwise noted, all copyright permissions have been obtained and the articles may be reproduced by any news outlet or publication free of charge. If you choose to republish any of the articles, please acknowledge both the original source and CGNews, and notify us at cgnewspih@sfcg.org

The views expressed in these articles are those of the authors, not of CGNews or its affiliates.

Common Ground News Service
1601 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Suite #200
Washington, DC 20009 USA
Ph: +1(202) 777-2207
Fax: +1(202) 232-6718

Rue Belliard 205 bte 13
B-1040 Brussels, Belgium
Ph: +32 (02) 736-7262
Fax: +32(02) 732-3033
E-mail: cgnewspih@sfcg.org
Website: http://www.commongroundnews.org

Editors:
Emad Khalil
Amman Editor

Juliette Schmidt
Beirut Editor

Elyte Baykun & Leena El-Ali
Washington Editors

Chris Binkley
Youth Views Editor

**********

This is a not-for-profit list serve.

Please feel free to forward this message to anyone you think would like to see these articles.

To subscribe, send an email to subscribe-cgnewspih@sfcg.org with subscribe in the subject line.

Posted by Evelin at December 7, 2005 12:57 AM