Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Columbia University]On: 10 October 2014, At: 15:16Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Israel AffairsPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fisa20
Fundamentals of the Modern Muslim–Jewish PolemicLivnat Holtzman & Eliezer SchlossbergPublished online: 08 Aug 2006.
To cite this article: Livnat Holtzman & Eliezer Schlossberg (2006) Fundamentals of the Modern Muslim–Jewish Polemic, IsraelAffairs, 12:1, 13-28, DOI: 10.1080/13537120500381638
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13537120500381638
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Fundamentals of the ModernMuslim–Jewish Polemic
LIVNAT HOLTZMAN and ELIEZER SCHLOSSBERG
Abstract: Religious polemics between Jews and Muslims was a common event inmedieval times and revolved around The Bible, its authenticity, and the credibilityof its divine message. One of the noticeable characteristics of today’s polemic is theabsence of one of the debating parties from the debate–the Jews. The book,
_Haqa’iq Qur’aniyya
_Hawla al-Qa
_diyya al-Filas
_tiniyya (Qur’anic Facts Regarding
the Palestinian Issue) is a leading example of this. Written by the Islamist author,
_Sala
_h al-Khalidı, it is very popular in the Islamic world and it offers a unique
interpretation of several Qur’anic verses in order to prove that the Qur’an predictsthe total annihilation of the Jewish state by Muslim warriors, driven by genuineIslamic faith, who will fight the Jews in the name of Islam. Al-Khalidi’sinterpretation of these verses has an extremely remote connection to theinterpretation of classical scholars, such as Al-Tabari (d. 923), and medievalscholars, such as Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328). His exegesis can be considered even moreextreme than that of Al-Sayyid Qu
_tb, the leading writer and ideologue of the
contemporary fundamentalist movement in Egypt, who was executed in 1966.
In the Middle Ages, the polemic between the Jews and the Muslims wasbased in general on Scriptures and each party proffered quotations tojustify its faith and practice.1 The main arguments, made by Muslimsagainst the Jews, included:
. Islam abrogates the Torah.
. The Torah was forged in the course of its transmission.
. The Torah includes allusions to the advent of Muh˙ammad, which the
Jews partially deleted or ignored.2
The traditional method that the Jews employed to refute these claims wasprimarily the principle of Tawatur; namely that the Torah was transmittedby multitudes of people over ages. In other words, unlike the Muslimtradition of exclusive divine revelations to Muh
˙ammad, which were not
witnessed by anyone, the Torah was revealed to Moses at Mount Sinai inthe presence of the entire Jewish nation and, as such, is more reliable thanrevelations to Prophet Muh
˙ammad.3
Israel Affairs, Vol.12, No.1, January 2006, pp.13–28ISSN 1353-7121 print/ISSN 1743-9086 online
DOI: 10.1080/13537120500381638 q 2006 Taylor & Francis
Livnat Holtzman is an instructor and researcher at the Department of Arabic, Bar-Ilan University.Eliezer Schlossberg is an associate professor in the Department of Arabic at Bar-Ilan University.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
In modern times, these three previously stated Muslim claims continueand yet the modern polemic between Jews and Muslims has several noveland prominent features. First, the modern polemic does not usually takethe form of a public debate in a public forum that brings claims andcounterclaims to the foreground.4
The popular book_
Haqa’iq Qur’aniyya is an example of a one-sidedpolemic where the author presents his arguments with no consideration forany possible counter-arguments. Moreover, the chances of a seriousresponse to its claims and those of an ongoing debate are unlikely, given thedecline of the interfaith polemic in modern society.
Second, taking into consideration that the polemic against Jews in theMiddle Ages was a formal genre5 written in the form of chapters of booksagainst various religions,6 modern polemic, on the other hand, is found inthe popular print media such as newspapers and magazines and thusreaches wider audiences. Numerous media organs have regular featuresections dedicated to polemics against Jews and Christians.7 The H
˙amas
monthly Filast˙ın al-Muslima publishes some particularly vicious and
villainous articles against the Jews. These articles analyse Old Testamenttexts and caricaturize their content, denouncing the materialistic andterritorial aspirations of Jews. They also promulgate the forgery schemebehind the Biblical texts and confirm the irrefutable authenticity of theQur’an.
Third, whereas in the Middle Ages Muslim debaters were primarilymembers of the religious establishment (namely, traditionalist ‘ulama’ andtheologians), as well as philosophers and intellectuals, the modern debateis conducted by politicians, publicists, and representatives of Islamicmovements, who to a large degree dictate the cultural and intellectualagenda of the Arab world. In an attempt to add stature and credibility tothese claims, even academics have written polemical articles and books.
Moreover, whereas in the Middle Ages Muslims attacked, cited andquoted the Old Testament scriptures, modern debaters challenge, attack,cite and quote the Talmud.8 Ironically, since many contemporary Muslimsare unfamiliar with Talmudic texts, many authors’ biased introductorytexts have made the Talmud, especially passages referring to non-Jews,more accessible to Arab readers.9
The modern polemic is not exclusively religious, but includes anti-Semitic slurs that are reminiscent of past infamous blood libels. Forexample, Muh
˙ammad H
˙asan ‘Amr accused the Jews of slaughtering the
Arabs of Sabra and Shattila to use their blood for baking Passovermatzot.10 The Syrian defence minister, Mu
_s_tafa T
˙las, in his 1986 book,
Fat˙ır S
˙ahyun (The Matza of Zion), tried to correlate between the Damascus
blood libel of 1840 and the torture by the racist Zionist State of Israel of theArabs in the occupied territories. In an article about Purim, UmaymaAhmad al-Jalahima of the King Faisal University of Saudi Arabia explains
ISRAEL AFFAIRS14
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
how Jews use non-Jewish blood for preparing their holiday foods.11 InNovember 2002 during Ramadan, Egyptian government-sponsoredtelevision broadcast a serial, ‘The Headless Horseman’, based on theProtocols of the Elders of Zion.
Unlike in the past, modern religious polemics also generally servepolitical purposes. The exploitation of religion for political gain is not anew phenomenon in the Middle East. Modern polemicists, rather thanproving the superiority of the Islamic religion, use holy Muslim scripture tonegate the legitimate territorial sovereignty of the Jews and occasionallyeven their right to exist, as seen in Muh
˙ammad Barakat’s article ‘Is peace
with the Jews permitted by Islamic Law?’12 This article combines an overtpolemic against Jews with an ‘objective’ attempt to answer seriousreligious questions dealing with the contemporary peace process andArab–Israeli coexistence.
Despite these differences between ancient and modern polemics, thetraditional polemic form and main arguments have remained consistent.Even in more moderate countries such as Egypt and Jordan, oppositiongroups, in various publications, articles and books, cite these mainarguments. Obviously, these arguments are popular with radical groupssuch as H
˙amas, H
˙izbullah, and Islamic Jihad. Some of their publications
focus on the argument that Islam abrogates the Torah, others focus on theclaim that the Torah was forged during its transmission, still othersmaintain that the Torah includes allusions, which the Jews partially deletedor ignored, to the advent of Prophet Muh
˙ammad.
For example, in an article published in Al-Liwa’ Al-Islamı, Jews arereferred to as ‘The people who forged and changed the books of Allah,which call the people to Islam’.13 Another article in the newsletter of theAhmadiyya movement, published in Pakistan, raised serious doubts aboutthe authenticity of the Bible. The author concludes, ‘It is clear that thegeneral text of the Old Testament could [sic ] no longer be regarded as theWord of God preserved in its pristine purity’.14
This paper will present a few of the new and prominent features of themodern Muslim anti-Jewish polemics as presented in a book written bySalah ‘Abd al-Fatta
_h al-Khalidı, author of some of the most caustic
Muslim anti-Jewish polemical articles.15 The book, Haqa’iq Qur’aniyya
_Hawla al-Qa
_diyya al-Filast
˙iniyya (Qur’anic Facts16 regarding the Palesti-
nian Issue) was published in 1991, during the first intifa_da, in Arabic by the
_Hamas Publishing House Manshurat Filas
_tın al-Muslima (Publications of
Muslim Palestine). The book was republished in 1994, again in 1995 inLondon, and subsequently republished in 1997 by the Dar al-MustaqbalPublishing House located in the West Bank. The most recent publicationfrom the West Bank indicates the popularity and demand of this workamong local Palestinians. Its international Muslim popularity is seen by itstranslation into Urdu, Hindi, Turkish, Russian, and English.17
FUNDAMENTALS OF THE MODERN MUSLIM – JEWISH POLEMIC 15
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
The effectiveness of this work is due to its simple language and efforts tobase its ideas solely on the Qur’anic text. Many of these ideas have beenpreviously stated in the founding principles of H
˙amas (Mıthaq H
˙arakat al-
Muqawama al-Islamiyya) and in subsequent statements by its leaders. Yet,the book expands and expounds obscure points and emphasizes importantissues about modern Islamic attitudes towards the State of Israel, the Jews,and the possibility of reconciliation between Islam and the Jews. This bookis particularly significant in discussing the Muslim–Jewish polemicbecause it clearly demonstrates one of its main features – harnessingreligious polemics for political gain. The book is an attempt to prove thatall negotiations, and certainly any peace treaties, between Muslims andJews are forbidden in accordance with the Qur’an. The author’s conclusionis that since reconciliation is impossible, the only alternative is Jihad, a holywar for the sake of Allah.
For a better understanding of the Qur’anic verses cited in_
Haqa’iqQur’aniyya
_Hawla al-Qa
_diyya al-Filast
˙iniyya,18 and their manipulation by
the author, both early (such as Al-T˙abarı, d. 92319) and late (such as Al-
Jalalayn20) classical commentaries of these verses will be consulted.Furthermore, the explanations of Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328) on selectedverses, as depicted in his various works, will also be considered. IbnTaymiyya is of key importance because of his impact on the Islamicactivists’ school of al-Sayyid Qut
˙b,22 the leading writer and ideologue of the
Egyptian fundamentalist movement, executed by Gamal ‘Abdul Nas˙s˙er in
1966.21 Al-Khalidı, the author of the book under consideration, is anexpert in the works of Qut
˙b and, as such, his commentary on the cited
verses is compared with that of Al-Khalidı.Al-Khalidı identifies with
_Hamas, which he describes as an influential
minority fighting a holy war. This minority stands alone against the Jewishschemes and conspiracy to dominate the entire region. This militantminority, well aware of the dangers and risks posed by the Jewish enemy,draws its strength and conviction from its faith in Allah.
This faithful minority of holy warriors enters the war against the Jews,approaches the battlefield with full faith in Allah, confidence with Allah’svictory, content with the confrontation and satisfied with the fate chosenfor it by Allah, who chose it for this great mission. [This minority entersthe war] believing in the realization of Allah’s promise, desiring to pleaseAllah, equipped with weapon of ardent faith, awareness, insight,patience, steadfastness, Jihad, confrontation and provocation [of theenemy]. (p. 24)
Jihad23 is a major theme of this book. In his introduction to the book,Al-Khalidı explains that these are extraordinary times since the Jewssucceeded in establishing a state on the soil of Palestine as a trial posedby Allah to his faithful followers. In order to pass the trial, the followers
ISRAEL AFFAIRS16
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
are required to wage a Jihad until ‘the expulsion of the Jewish existencefrom the land of Palestine and until the release of entire Palestine, fromthe Sea to the River, from Rafah to Ras al-Naqura (pp. 17–18).
However, despite being frequently mentioned in this book Jihad is not amajor theme. The author’s main efforts are dedicated to prove that allevents that have taken place, and that will take place, in Palestine aredocumented in the Qur’an. The author advises his potential Palestinianreader to read the Qur’an alongside this book and not to despair, since it isevident from the Qur’anic text that the Jews are inevitably headed fordestruction. Compromise or negotiations with the Jews is unacceptable,and so is making peace with them (p. 17).
Thus, the book focuses on two major issues:
. Proving the Palestinian right to Palestine and dismissing the Jewish rightto the same territory.
. Providing a detailed description of the future of the Jews, who ‘arequickly marching towards their death, destruction, and slaughter’(p. 19).
THE CONCEPT OF ‘THE HOLY LAND’ IN THE QUR’AN
In the second chapter of his book, the author tries to prove that ‘the blessedland’ (al-ar
_d al-mubaraka) or ‘the holy land’ (al-‘ar
_d al-muqaddasa) cited
in the Qur’an is ‘Palestine’. He reminds the reader that in ancient times thepeople who inhabited the holy and blessed land were ‘The Children ofIsrael’ (Banu Isra’ıl), who must not be identified as ‘the Jews’. Those‘people of faith’ established on this land a blessed Islamic dominion. Yet,due to their heresy and injustice, Allah expelled and scattered the progenyof these generations of faithful believers all over the world. This hereticalprogeny known as ‘the Jews’ were not assigned the ‘holy and blessed land’by Allah.
Allah assigned the holy land to the holiest and purest of nations, thenation of Mu
_hammad who represents Islam to the world. Therefore, Allah
obliged the nation of Muh˙ammad to confront the evil greediness of the
impure Jews in ‘the holy and blessed land’ by Jihad and thus cleanse theland from their impurity (p. 48).
The Qur’an relates the story of the Children of Israel leaving theirbondage in Egypt and their 40-year sojourn in the desert. According to theQur’an, when the Children of Israel were ordered by Allah to enterPalestine, they refused to fight for the land. Allah then commanded them toremain in the desert for 40 years until ‘a new generation ready for Jihadwould rise’ (pp. 44–45).24 Al-Khalidı uses the following verse, ‘O mypeople, enter the Holy Land which God has prescribed for you, and turnnot back in your traces, to turn about losers’ (Sura (Chapter) 5, Ayya
FUNDAMENTALS OF THE MODERN MUSLIM – JEWISH POLEMIC 17
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
(Verse 21) to prove that ‘the Holy Land’ mentioned in this verse isundoubtedly Palestine which was their ultimate destination (p. 45).
In contrast to this unequivocal identification of the ‘Holy Land’ asPalestine, traditionalist commentators suggest alternative interpretations.For example, Al-Tabarı quotes various traditions that identify ‘the HolyLand’ as Mount Sinai and its periphery, Al-Sham (Syria, Israel and Jordan),and even Jericho and its periphery.25 Ibn Kathır (d. 1373) cites othertraditions which ascribe the ‘Holy Land’ to al-T
˙ur (East Jerusalem)26 and its
periphery, or even Jericho.27 Al-Bayd˙awı (d. 1286) ascribes the ‘Holy Land’
to Jerusalem, Al-Tur and its periphery, or even Damascus, parts of Jordanor al-Sham.28
The unequivocal identification of the ‘Holy Land’ as Palestine byAl-Khalidı, without any consideration of the former traditions, stems fromhis polemical intentions and his interest in exerting Muslim rights overPalestine which would justify using all means to regain Muslim sovereigntyover this land.
The aforementioned Qur’anic verse also serves the author’s interest indelegitimizing the rights of the progeny of the Children of Israel, the Jews,to the Land of Israel. Any claim that the Jews have rights to the Land ofIsrael, as progeny of the Children of Israel who conquered the Land at thetime of Joshua Bin Nun, is groundless. The Land of Israel was givenexclusively to the Children of Israel who after their Egyptian bondageconquered it. Their progeny by their misdeeds for which they were expelledlost all claims to the land (p. 45). Attributing the loss of land rights to themisdeeds of the Children of Israel revokes any Old Testament claims to theLand of Israel.
The author links the holiness of the Land and the Divine commandmentof Jihad. He emphasizes that Palestine is ‘the Holy Land’ because ‘Allahwas the one who sanctified and purified the Land by transforming it into aland of Divine Unity and Faith. Allah commanded the Muslims to purifythe Land from the impurities of heresy and the filth of polytheism’ (p. 46).Thus, true believers are obligated to restore holiness to the Land. Theauthor asserts that restoring holiness does not refer to the physical aspectsof holiness such as removing blood and bodily excretions,29 but rather tospiritually sanctify the Land from the false beliefs of the heretics, as statedin the Qur’an, ‘the idolaters are indeed unclean; so let them not come nearthe holy Mosque after this year of theirs’ (9:28). Certainly, Jihad is the onlyway to purify the Land from the moral and spiritual impurities imposed bythe impure Jews. (p. 47)
When comparing the exegesis of Sayyid Qu_tb with that of Al-Khalidı on
the verse, ‘Enter the Holy Land’ the latter’s commentary is considerablymore radical. Qutb does not try to identify the physical location of theHoly Land, but rather exploits the verse to describe the cowardice of theJews who refused to enter the Land for fear of the resident giants.
ISRAEL AFFAIRS18
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
According to Qu_tb, the verse conveys Jewish cowardice as an overt and
hereditary trait ‘without the thinnest of veils’.30
Al-Khalidı’s polemical intentions, and the circumstances under whichthis book was written, might explain his radical exegesis to the Qur’anicverses cited above.
PALESTINE IS MUSLIM
The author challenges the widespread claim that the Land of Israel hadbelonged to the Jews since the days of the patriarch Abraham until theJewish exile after the destruction of the Second Temple. Al-Khalidı assertsthat the Qur‘an demands that Muslims refute those false claims andconfront the heretics, specifically the Jews, by presenting the facts as foundin the Qur’an. They must initiate the Jihad, which should be ‘internationaland comprehensive, in the media, in science, culture, and politics, as Allahsaid, “So obey not the unbelievers, but struggle a great war31 with themthereby [by the Qur’an] (25:52)”’ (p. 52).
Al-Khalidı goes to great lengths to refute claims that the Jews are thespiritual heirs of Abraham.32 In his opinion, since the Qur’an denies thereligious ties between Abraham and the Jews, it also rejects the notion thatreligion and belief are hereditary. Moreover, the Qur’an also rejects thepossibility that Abraham was a Jew or a Christian. ‘No; Abraham in truthwas not a Jew, neither a Christian; but he was a Muslim and one of the purefaith; certainly he was never of the idolaters’ (3:67) (p. 52).
Al-Khalidı also refutes the claim of contemporary Jews that the State ofIsrael is an extension of the rule of Kings David and Solomon. According tothe Qur’an, the Jewish prophets were, in fact, Muslims. Thus, Kings Davidand Solomon reigned over Muslim lands as Muslims. Therefore, the Landof Israel belongs exclusively to the Muslims and not to the Jews, who arenot the spiritual heirs of Kings David and Solomon.
THE ATTITUDE OF THE QUR’AN TOWARDS THE CHILDREN OF
ISRAEL AND THE JEWS
In a chapter entitled, ‘Our Attitude towards the History of the Children ofIsrael’, Al-Khalidı presents a complex Qur’an-based position. Hedisqualifies the position he attributes to ‘contemporary Arabs’, whobecause of their anti-Jewish attitude reject anything Jewish or associatedwith the Children of Israel. On the other hand, he also disqualifies the‘Jewish’ position that posits that every Jewish descendant of the patriarchJacob deserves respect, regardless of his moral attitude and behaviour(p. 79).
The proper attitude, according to Al-Khalidı, is obviously based on theQur’an. The Qur’an judges the Jewish people by their moral behaviour, as
FUNDAMENTALS OF THE MODERN MUSLIM – JEWISH POLEMIC 19
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
individuals, and does not regard them as a historical entity: ‘He who is abeliever is entitled to honour; he who is a heretic is impure and cursed’(p. 80). In effect, the Qur’an teaches that the majority of the Children ofIsrael belong to latter category.
And We gave to Moses the Book, and after him sent succeedingMessengers; and We gave Jesus son of Mary the clear signs, andconfirmed him with the Holy Spirit; and whensoever there came to you aMessenger with that your souls had not desire for, did you becomearrogant, and some cry lies to, and some slay? And they say, ‘Our heartsare uncircumcised’. Nay, but God has cursed them for their unbelief;little will they believe. (2:87–88)33
To justify his position, Al-Khalidı addresses Jewish history, but transformsthe Jewish prophets into faithful Muslims. ‘Contemporary Jews have norights to the glorious history of their predecessors . . . since it is the historyof Islam and faith. The history of Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Saul,Solomon, and David is our history, not theirs’ (p. 85). Therefore, whenconfronting heresy, the believers should learn from the deeds of those‘Muslim’ prophets.
What is then the true history of the Jews? According to Al-Khalidı, it is‘a black sinister history’. ‘The Jews fought against the truth, they callprophets liars, and deny their covenants with God. Therefore, we hate thishistory and its people’ (p. 86). The author opposes the ‘Jewish use’ of thename ‘Israel’ for their country since it creates a false historical link betweenthem and the historical ‘Children of Israel’. Adding the name ‘Israel’ togovernment institutions such as ‘The Bank of Israel’, ‘The Voice of Israel’,and ‘The Israel Defence Forces’, intentionally gives religious significanceand attracts financial and moral support for their heretical state. Theattitude of the Qur’an towards the Jews is explicit. The name of theheretical and cursed people who conquered and plundered Palestine is‘Jews’. They do not follow any religion nor do they follow Allah, andtherefore their prophets, including ‘Israel’ their beloved and blessedprophet, deny any affiliation with them (p. 98).
THE FATE OF THE JEWS ACCORDING TO THE QUR’AN
In the last three chapters of the book, Al-Khalidı expounds his views on howto fight the Jews. In contrast to the previous chapters, this section providespractical applications to the theories about how to confront the Jewishenemy. He begins his diatribe by citing the ‘slogan’ used by the Israelis that‘the State of Israel was established to remain forever’ (p. 117). This ‘slogan’,used to calm the Jews, contradicts the writings of the Qur’an:
ISRAEL AFFAIRS20
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
[Muslims proficient in the Qur’an] certainly know that Jewish existence onthe soil of Palestine is only temporary, their Jewish presence there has nofuture, but it is condemned to extinction and defeat. They [the Muslimsproficient in the Qur’an] contemplate the events by this truth [of the Qur’an];they envisage the future according to it, and it moulds their perspective.
The counter-slogan based on the Qur’an which he suggests, and which shouldbe adopted by Muslims, is that the ‘State of Israel was established to perish’.
The Qur’an, especially in the chapters Aal ‘Imran (the House of Imran),Al-A‘raf (the Battlements), and Al-Isra’ (the Night Journey), include‘prophecies’ about the fate of the Jews. The author’s interpretation of thesechapters is not traditional and shows originality. He insists uponinterpreting these verses with implications for the future. Thisinterpretation, reminiscent of Friday sermons given in mosques, with itspolitically accepted ideas, is intended to incite the masses.
The ‘Aal ‘Imran’ Chapter
You were34 the best nation ever brought forth to men, bidding to honour,and forbidding dishonour, and believing in God. Had the People of theBook believed, it was better for them;35 some of them are believers, butthe most of them are ungodly. They will not harm you, except a littlehurt; and if they fight with you, they will turn on you their backs; thenthey will not be helped . . . Abasement shall be pitched on them,wherever they are come upon, except they be in a bond of God, and abond of the people; they will be laden with the burden of God’s anger,and poverty shall be pitched on them; that, because they disbelieved inGod’s signs, and slew the Prophets without right; that, for that theyacted rebelliously and were transgressors. (3:110–112)
Traditional commentators such as Al-Tabarı and Al-Jalalayn relate theseverses to the obligation of non-Muslims living in Muslim countries to paythe Jizya tax. This tax, although it grants non-Muslims physical securityand religious freedom, assumes subservience and even humiliation.36 Thefirst verse raises several exegetic problems. For example, according to Al-Tabarı, commentators differ about the identity of ‘the best nation everbrought forth to men’. Some contend that this term refers to ‘friends ofMuh
˙ammad’ who migrated with him from Mecca to al-Madına; others
contend that the term refers to all Muslims, if they fulfil the requirement of‘bidding to honour and forbidding dishonour’.37
Another problem raised by the text is to identify the potential‘harm’ afflicted upon ‘believers’ by the ‘People of the Book’. According toAl-Tabarı, the potential harm might be caused by the ‘People of the Book’calling Muh
˙ammad a liar or by their slanderous comments about Jesus and
his mother, or Ezra, the Scribe. According to al-Bayd˙awı and al-Jalalayn,
the potential harm might be caused by insulting and threatening the
FUNDAMENTALS OF THE MODERN MUSLIM – JEWISH POLEMIC 21
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
Muslim people. Yet the most difficult exegetic problem presented by thispassage is the interpretation of the phrase, ‘a bond of God and a bond ofthe people’. According to Al-Tabarı, this phrase specifically refers to theJews whom ‘Allah humiliated and they have no power’. The ‘bond’ is themeans by which the Jews ‘receive security for their lives, property, andprogeny from the believers’.38 According to Ibn Taymiyya, a bond of Godand a bond of the people’ refers to the Jizya tax.39
Al-Khalidı’s contemporary interpretation is entirely different than thatof the traditional commentators, which reflected their own reality. In theMiddle Ages, Jews were forced to pay the Jizya tax and were subjected tofurther humiliation by the sovereign Muslim majority. Al-Khalidı lives inan entirely different socio-political reality where Jews are the sovereignmajority over Muslim and Palestinian soil. Thus, his interpretation reflectshis world. In the introduction to his interpretation to this particular phrase,Al-Khalidı quotes other Qur’anic verses relevant to his reality: ‘Many ofthe People of the Book wish they might restore you as unbelievers, after youhave believed, in the jealousy of their souls, after the truth has become clearto them’ (2:109); or ‘They will not cease to fight with you, till they turn youfrom your religion, if they are able’ (2:217).
According to Al-Khalidı, these verses describe the never-ending Jewish–Arab wars. The Jews will not cease fighting the Muslims until the Muslimsbecome heretics. The Quranic promise, ‘they will not harm you, except alittle hurt’ definitely indicates that the Jews, ‘will never succeed in harmingyou, they will not succeed to empty you from Palestine, and Palestine willnever be theirs’ (pp. 118–119). As proof of the Quranic promise, Al-Khalidı cites the fact that the Jews established their State, but neversucceeded in extinguishing the Muslim identity of its Arab inhabitants.Moreover, the Islamic movement flourishes in the Galilee, the ArabTriangle, and the Negev. Even the conquest of the West Bank has notsuppressed the Muslim identity, as proved by the Intifad
˙a (p. 120).
Al-Khalidı does not ignore that, even according to the Qur’anic verse, ‘alittle hurt’ will be inflicted. This ‘hurt’ will only be external and superficial; itwill only affect individuals and small groups. In other words, the Jews haveaspired to penetrate and dominate Muslim souls, but of course they havefailed. Even more so, ‘our Jihad fighting nation’ continues its struggle againstthe Jews. ‘The more the Jews increase their violent attacks against the will ofthis nation, the more it will add its tenacity [to continue] Jihad’ (p. 121).
To settle the apparent contradiction between the Qur’anic promise,‘they will not harm you . . . and if they fight with you they will turn on youtheir backs’ and the reality of successive Arab military defeats, Al-Khalidıemphasizes that the conditions for this promise have not yet been fulfilled.To date, the Jews have not yet confronted true Muslim warriors; ratherwarriors who believe in various ideologies such as nationalism, socialism,some of which are foreign to Islam. Therefore, the latter part of the
ISRAEL AFFAIRS22
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
verse, ‘abasement shall be pitched on them’, will also be fulfilled becauseabasement is an integral part of the fate of the Jews throughout history.
The originality of the Al-Khalidı interpretation can be seen in hisexplanation of the two ‘bonds’ given to the Jews; one of God and one of thepeople. Al-Khalidı decontextualizes the verse from its ‘traditional’context – the Jizya – tax and interprets it with reference to the modernhistory of the Jews in the State of Israel. The bond of God indicates that fora short time Allah has removed the humiliation, an integral part of theJewish fate, from the Jews. Yet, this ‘bond’ is meaningless since itrepresents such a short interval in the history of the Jews (pp. 125–126).
In the Al-Khalidı interpretation, the word ‘bond’ (in the phrase ‘bond ofthe people’) refers to a covenantor an agreement, and as such closely relates toits traditional interpretation. According to Al-Khalidı, when the Jewsestablished their State, they were dependent on several ‘bonds’ sent from allover the world: the European bond (which includes the French and Britishbranches), the American bond, the Russian bond, andeven theArab bond. Al-Khalidı reminds the reader that bonds eventually wear thin and break apart(pp. 127–129).
A possible source of inspiration for Al-Khalidı’s interpretation of thebonds might be Sayyid Qu
_tb’s interpretation of the same verses. Although
Qut˙b’s Qut
˙b also draws parallels between the bonds and the protection of
‘the People of the Book’ (Dhimma), he also relates the verse to contemporarypolitical reality.40 Al-Khalidı’s interpretation is more extreme. Whereas Qut
˙b
considers the protection given to the Jews an integral element of the socialconvention, Al-Khalidı considers it an element of a distorted politicalconvention, which enables the development of the Jewish State.
The ‘Al-’Isra’’ Chapter
And We decreed for the Children of Israel in the Book: ‘You shall docorruption in the earth twice, and you shall ascend exceeding high.’ So,when the promise of the first of these came to pass, We send against youservants of Ours, men of great might, and they went through thehabitations, and it was a promise performed. Then We gave back to youthe turn to prevail over them, and We succoured you with wealth andchildren, and We made you a greater host. ‘If you do good, it is your ownsouls you do good to, and if you do evil it is to them likewise.’ Then,when the promise of the second came to pass, We sent against you Ourservants to discountenance you, and to enter the Temple, as they enteredthe first time, and to destroy utterly that which they ascend to. Perchanceyour Lord will have mercy upon you; but if you return, We shall return;and We have made Gehenna a prison for the unbelievers. (4–9)
The Qur’anic commentators present two basic approaches in reference tothe two evil deeds perpetrated by the Jews and the identity of the
FUNDAMENTALS OF THE MODERN MUSLIM – JEWISH POLEMIC 23
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
messengers sent to punish them. According to Al-Tabarı41 and Al-Jalalayn,the two evil deeds specifically refer to the murder of the prophet Zechariahand his son. The messenger of retribution was the Babylonian King, whokilled many Jews and destroyed their Temple. According to Ibn Kathır,since there are numerous traditions concerning these deeds andmessengers, some of which were even transmitted by Jewish heretics,their exact identification becomes irrelevant.42 Even Ibn Taymiyya, whopreceded Ibn Kathır,43 only comments that the Jews sinned twice and weretwice punished, subsequently their sovereignty over Palestine ended, and‘they were cut into nations in the earth’ (p. 153).44
Al-Khalidı rejects both approaches. According to Al-Khalidı, thesecommentators lived in times with Islamic sovereignty when the Jews were intheir natural status, weak and humiliated. None of the commentators evenconsidered a possible situation where the Jews would defeat the Muslimsand take Palestine from them. Therefore, they interpreted the two evil deedsas historical events from the distant past. The responsibility of the moderncommentator is to give Qur’anic verses an up-to-date interpretation thatwould apply to the current gloomy state of Palestinian affairs.
In spite of this approach, Al-Khalidı identifies the first Jewish evil deedas their opposition to Muh
˙ammad in the beginning of Islam, much like the
opposition of the tribes of Nadır, Qaynuqa’, and Qurayza.45 However, thesecond evil deed is contemporary, as expressed by Jewish sovereignty overPalestine. This sovereignty is made possible by the financial and humanassistance given to the Jews from two sources. The first is the financialsource, as expressed by tens of billions of dollars annually granted by theUnited States, Germany, France, etc. The second source is Jewishimmigrants coming to Palestine from all over the world, from placessuch as Ethiopia, Russia, Eastern and Western Europe. The seeming successof this Jewish immigration is Allah’s will as a preparation for the futuredecisive battle against the Jews.
This decisive battle, the outcome of which is obvious, will have twostages.
1. The first stage of the battle against the sovereign Jewish State will be inPalestine. The result of which will be regained Muslim sovereignty andthe Jews will again be humiliated and dispersed all over the world.
2. The second stage of the battle will be global and result in the totalannihilation of the Jewish people. This stage will occur in the lastmoments of the world when the Dajjal [the anti-Christ] will appear, andrule until Jesus kills him. Jesus will then ensure eternal peace over theworld. (pp. 185–88)46
Al-Khalidı’s ideas on this reflect the influence of Sayyid Qut˙b’s
interpretation of the Qur’an.47 Whereas Qut˙b’s interpretation combines
ISRAEL AFFAIRS24
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
both a theological discussion about predestination and free will with adiscussion of contemporary issues, Al-Khalidı primarily deals with thelatter. Qut
˙b describes Jewish history as a continuous process of corruption
and punishment and also reminds his readers that the Qur’an promises afuture total annihilation of the Jews.
Although Al-Khalidı does not explicitly mention Qut˙b’s interpretation,
Al-Khalidı’s reading can be considered as its extension. In contrast to Qut˙b,
Al-Khalidı gives many historical examples, and tries to find Qur’anicreferences for future events. Thus, the reader gets the impression that theQur’an not only deals with historical events, but also makes promises overthe future battle for Palestine and the end of Jewry.
CONCLUSION
The religious polemic between Jews and Muslims was a common event inmedieval times. The axis around which the debates rotated was the Bible,its authenticity and the credibility of its divine message. A frequentargument made by Muslim debaters was that Jews unsuccessfully forgedthe Bible to conceal valuable evidence regarding Muh
˙ammad’s prophecy.
This part of the Islamic battery of arguments against Judaism is still incontemporary use.
One of the noticeable characteristics of today’s polemic is the absence ofone of the debating parties, as evidenced in the book,
_Haqa’iq Qur’aniyya
_Hawla al-Qa
_diyya al-Filast
˙iniyya by the Islamist author, Salah Al-Khalidı.
This popular book, which is well known throughout the Islamic world, is aprominent example of this phenomenon. It pleads lengthy Islamicarguments based on the Qur’an, and gives no room for any Jewishresponses, as hypothetical as they might be.
The author, Al-Khalidı, gives his unique interpretation to severalQur’anic verses, to prove that the Qur’an predicts the total annihilation ofthe Jewish State. Muslim warriors, driven by genuine Islamic faith, willfight the Jews in the name of Islam. Al-Khalidı‘s interpretation of theseverses is only remotely connected to the interpretation of classic scholars,such as Al-Tabarı, and medieval scholars, such as Ibn Taymiyya. Hisexegesis can be considered more extreme than that of Al-Sayyid Qut
˙b, the
leading writer and ideologue of the Egyptian fundamentalist movement.His interpretation of particular Qur’anic verses makes a powerful andradical contemporary political statement. Thus his book, first published in1991 and subsequently translated into several languages, attempts toincrease Islamic animosity to the State of Israel and the Jews. The book alsoreassures Muslims, that Palestine, promised to them in the Qur’an, will berestored to them soon.
FUNDAMENTALS OF THE MODERN MUSLIM – JEWISH POLEMIC 25
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
NOTES
1. For the importance of Scripture in this genre of polemics see, for example, E. Schlossberg, ‘TheCentrality of Scriptures in Jewish Polemic of the Middle Ages – A Study of Polemics in theWritings of R. Saadia Gaon’, in Uri Dasberg and Shraga Fisherman (eds.), Talellei Orot,(The Yearbook of Orot College), Vol. 5 (1994), pp. 52–70 (Hebrew).
2. For a summary of the Muslim allegations against the Jews, see Martin Schreiner, ‘ZurGeschichte der Polemik zwischen Juden und Muhammedanern’, Zeitschrift der DeutscheMorgenlandische Gesellschaft (ZDMG), Vol. 42 (1888), p. 529; E. Strauss, ‘The MuslimPolemic’, Memorial Volume of the Vienna Rabbinical Seminary, Jerusalem, 1946, pp. 182–197(Hebrew); Moshe Perlmann, ‘The Medieval Polemics between Islam and Judaism’, inS.D. Goitein (ed.), Religion in a Religious Age, Cambridge, MA, 1974, pp. 103–138; HavaLazarus-Yafeh, Intertwined Worlds – Medieval Islam and Bible Criticism, Princeton, NJ, 1992,pp. 19–49.
3. On the principle of Tawatur in Jewish polemic of the Middle Ages see Hava Lazarus-Yafeh,Intertwined Worlds, pp. 53–58. For a detailed analysis of the Jewish claims against theMuslim argument see, for example, E. Schlossberg, ‘R. Saadia Gaon’s Attitude TowardsIslam’, Daat: Periodical of Jewish Philosophy and Kabala, Vol. 25 (1990), pp. 21–51(Hebrew); idem, ‘The Attitude of Maimonides towards Islam’, Pe’amim, Vol. 42 (1990),pp. 38–60 (Hebrew); idem, ‘The Attitude of R. Maimon, the Father of Maimonides, to Islamand Muslim Persecutions’, Sefunot, Vol. 5, No. 20 (1991), pp. 95–107 (Hebrew); idem, ‘ThePolemic Against Islam in the Midrash “Nur al-Zalam”’, Tema – Journal of Judeo-YemeniteStudies, Vol. 3 (1993), pp. 57–66 (Hebrew).
4. It should be noted that even in the Middle Ages the Jewish–Muslim polemic was mainlywritten and not oral. Public debates between Jewish and Muslim representatives were not ascommon as those between Jewish (such as Nachmanedes and R. David Kimchi) and Christiansrepresentatives.
5. For example, Samaw’al al-Maghribı, Ifh˙am al-Yahu (Silencing the Jews with Argument),
Cairo, 1969; Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, Hidayat al-H˙
ayara fi Ajwibat al-Yahud wa’l-Nasara(Guiding the Perplexed regarding Proper Arguments against Jews and Christians), Riyadh,1987.
6. Such as the chapters concerning the Jews in the books of Abu Bakr al-Baqilanı, KitabAl-Tamhıd (The Book of Paving), in R.J. McCarthy (ed.), Beirut, 1957; and Muh
˙ammad
Zahid Hasan Al-Kawtharı (ed), Kitab al-In_saf, Cairo, 1963.
7. For example, Ghazi Al-Sa’di, ‘Jewish Racism is Based on the Ideology of the Theory,Implementation, and the Menorah’, Al-Ra’y, 26 November 1996; and Hasan Zaza,‘The Successors of Moses lost his Torah’, al-Fay
_sal, No. 240 (October–November 1996),
pp. 19–23.8. On the polemic against the Talmud in the Middle Ages see I. Goldziher, ‘Proben
muhammedanischer Polemik gegen den Talmud’, Jeschurun (Berlin), Vol. 8 (1872–73),pp. 76–104; and Vol. 9 (1873), pp. 18–47.
9. For example, Zafar al-Islam Khan, Al-Talmud – Ta’rıkhuhu wa-Ta’alımuhu (The Talmud: ItsHistory and Teaching), Beirut, 1971; Salah Mahmud Salih, Al-Insaniyya w’al-S
˙ahyuniyya
wal-Talmud (Humanity, Zionism and Talmud), Beirut, 1982.10. Al-Nur, April 1986.11. al-Riyya
_d, 10 and 12 March 2000.
12. al-Wa_tan al-‘Arabı, 29 November 1996.
13. Al-Liwa’ al-Islamı, 3 August 198414. Zikrullah T. Ayyuba, ‘Authenticity of Bible and Quran Examined’, The Review of Religions,
Vol. 9 (September 1988), pp. 12–18.15. See, for example, the articles published in the newsletter of H
˙amas, Filas
˙tın Al-Muslima,
London, October 1995; and September–October–November 1996. For other expressions byAl-Khalidı against the Jews see http://axt.org.uk, and also Meir Litvak, ‘The Islamization ofPalestinian Identity: The Case of Hamas’, at http://www.dayan.org/d&a-hamas-litvak.htm#_edn52.
16. The word Haqa’iq also means ‘truths’.17. See also http://www.alsahal.com; http://www.assabeel.com ; http://www.aljwaher.com; http://
www.al-atheer.com and http://www.athagafy.com
ISRAEL AFFAIRS26
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
18. The quotations from the Qur’an are taken from Arthur J. Arberry, The Quran Interpreted,London, 1964.
19. Abu Ja’far Muh˙ammad b. Jarır Al-Tabarı, Jami’ al-Bayan fı Tafsır Al-Qur’an (An Extensive
and Broad Commentary of the Qur’an), Beirut, n.d.20. Jalal Al-Din Al-Mahallı (d. 1459) and Jalal Al-Dın al-Suyutı (d. 1505), Tafsır Al-Imamayn Al-
Jalalayn (The Commentary of the Qur’an by the Two Imams Al-Jalalayn), Beirut, 1983.21. See, for example, Henri Laoust, Essai sur les doctrines sociales et politiques de Taki-d-Din
Ahmad b. Taimiya, Cairo, 1939, pp. 506–576, and Immanuel Sivan, Radical Islam: MedievalTheology and Modern Politics, Tel-Aviv, 1986, pp. 103–114 (Hebrew).
22. Al-Khalidı edited two books of Qut˙b’s articles: Amrıka mina al-Dakhil bi-Minz
˙ar Sayyid
Qut˙b (America from within the Eyes of Sayyid Qutb), Jedda, 1986; and Na
_zariyyat al-Ta
_swır
Al-Fannı ‘inda Sayyid Qu_tb (Sayyid Qu
_tb’s Literary Analysis of the Quran and its Language),
Jedda, 1989. Al-Khalidı also wrote two supplements to Al-Qutb’s interpretation on theQur’an and composed a biography of Qu
_tb, Sayyid Qu
_tb: Mina al-Mılad ila al-Istishhad
(Sayyid Qut˙b: From Birth to Martyr Death), Damascus, 1991.
23. For detailed analysis of the concept of Jihad in Islam, see Rudolph Peters, Jihad in Mediaevaland Modern Islam, Leiden, 1977; idem, Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam, Princeton, NJ,1996.
24. See also the tradition cited by Ibn Kathır in his interpretation on Qur’an 5:21, according towhich the Children of Israel refused to obey Moses’ commandment to declare Jihad andconquer Jerusalem, and therefore were punished by remaining in the desert for 40 years. IbnKathir, Tafsır Al-Qur’an Al-’Azım (The Great Qur’an Commentary), Beirut, 1950, Vol. 2,p. 37. Compare also Ibn KhaldUn’s theory about the remaining of the Children of Israel in thedessert for 40 years, Muqaddimat Ta’rıkh Ibn Khaldun (Ibn Khaldun’s Introduction toHistory), Beirut, 1988, p. 177.
25. Vol. 6, p. 110.26. For the identification of Al-Tur see also Yaqut, Mu’jam Al-Buldan (The Dictionary of
Countries), Beirut, 1957, Vol. 4, p. 47.27. Tafsır Al-Qur’an, vol. 2, p. 37.28. Nasir al-Dın al-Bayd
˙awı, Anwar al-Tanzıl wa-Asrar Al-Ta’wıl (Baydawi’s Allegoric
Commentary of the Qur’an),Vol. 1, p. 253, Beirut.29. Bernard Lewis, The Jews of Islam, Jerusalem, 1996, pp. 37–38 (Hebrew).30. Sayyid Qut
˙b, Fı Zilal Al-Qur’an (Under the Shade of Qu’ran), Beirut, 1971, Vol. 2, p. 695.
31. The original verse in Arabic reads: ‘Jahidhum bihi jihadan kabıran’. Arberry translated: ‘butstruggle with them mightily’, but we prefer to use the words ‘a great war’ for a more accuratetranslation into English of the words ‘jihadan kabıran’.
32. It should be noted that Abraham and the sacrifice of Isaac were an important issue in theJewish–Muslim polemic of the Middle Ages. See, for example, Amer Yunis, ‘The Sacrifice ofAbraham in Islam’, in Frederic Manns (ed.), The Sacrifice of Isaac in The Three MonotheisticReligions, Jerusalem, 1995, pp. 147–153, and the response of Halim Noujaim (ibid.,pp. 159–161); J. Doukhan, ‘The Akedah at the “Crossroad”: Its Significance in the Jewish–Christian–Muslim Dialogue’, in Manns (ed.), The Sacrifice of Isaac in The ThreeMonotheistic Religions, pp. 165–176; and E. Schlossberg, ‘The Binding of Isaac inR. Sa’adia Gaon’s Polemic against Islam’, in M. Hallamish, H. Kasher and Y. Silman (eds.),The Faith of Abraham in the Light of Interpretation throughout the Ages, Ramat Gan, 2002,pp. 115–129 (Hebrew).
33. Compare also: ‘Some of them are a just nation; but many of them – evil are the things they do’(5:66).
34. Arberry translated ‘You are’, but the Arabic original word ‘kuntum’ forces us to translate inthe past tense.
35. According to Al-Jalalayn the meaning of the verse is: ‘Had they believed, the belief would havebeen a good thing for them’.
36. See Lewis, The Jews of Islam, pp. 20–22.37. Vol. 4, pp. 30–31, and compare Ibn Kathır, Tafsır, Vol. 1, p. 39138. Vol. 4, p. 32, and see also similar interpretations by Al-Jalalayn, Ibn Kathır Vol. 1, p. 396, and
Al-Bayd˙awı, Vol. 1, p. 171.
39. Al-Jawab al-S˙ah˙ı_h fı Dın Al-Masıh (The Proper Argument regarding Christianity), ed. ‘Ali
hasan Nasir et al., Riyad, 1993, Vol. 2, p. 201 and 212; Vol. 3, p. 89; and Vol. 6, p. 74. See also
FUNDAMENTALS OF THE MODERN MUSLIM – JEWISH POLEMIC 27
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
the discussion in this issue by Ibn Taymiyya’s disciple, Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziya, Ah˙kam ‘Ahl
Al-Dhimma (The Laws of Dhimmis) Beirut, 1997, Vol. 1, p. 484.40. Sayyid Qut
˙b, Fı Zilal Al-Qur’an, Vol. 2, p. 37.
41. Al-Tabarı’s, Jami’ al-Bayan fı Tafsır Al-Qur’an, Vol. 6, pp. 17–24.42. Ibn Kathır’s Tafsır Al-Qur’an Al-’Azım, Cairo 1950, Vol. 3, p. 25.43. On the influence Ibn Taymiyya had on Ibn Kathır see H. Laoust, ‘Ibn Kathır’, EI2, Vol. 3,
p. 817.44. Al-Jawab Al-S
˙ah˙ı_h, Vol. 5, p. 224.
45. For detailed analyses of the relations between Muh˙ammad and these three Jewish tribes see
Michael Lecker, Muslims, Jews and Pagans, Leiden, 1995; Michael Lecker, ‘Waqidı’s Accounton the Status of the Jews of Medina: A Study of a Combined Report’, Journal of Near EasternStudies, Vol. 54 (1995), pp. 15–32; and Michael Lecker, ‘Did Muhammad Conclude Treatieswith the Jewish Tribes Nadır, Qurayza and Qaynuqa’, in Uri Rubin and David Wasserstein(eds.), Dhimmis and Others: Jews and Christians and the World of Classical Islam, WinonaLake, IN, 1997, pp. 29–36.
46. On the role of Jesus in Islam and in the forthcoming redemption see: M. Hayek, ‘L’origine desTermes ‘Isa al-Masih (Jesus Christ) dans le Coran’, Orient Syrien, Vol. 7 (1962), pp. 365–382;Hava Lazarus-Yafeh, ‘Is There A Concept of Redemption in Islam?’, in R.J.Z. Werblowskyand C.J. Bleeker (eds.), Types of Redemption, Leiden, 1970, pp. 168–180.
47. Sayyid Qut˙b, Fı Z
˙ilal Al-Qur’an, Vol. 5, p. 306.
ISRAEL AFFAIRS28
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Col
umbi
a U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
16 1
0 O
ctob
er 2
014
