Al-Qaeda doesn’t at all like the idea of inter-religious dialogue, according to the AFP article. In a new video communiqué, Abu Yahya al-Libi condemned the call for such a dialogue made by Saudi King Abdullah and tried to stoke fears that it would lead to ‘churches in Arabia’. That would hardly be the end of the world, though it might be a step toward the end of Al-Qaeda’s fanciful world.
Qaeda slams Saudi calls for religion rapprochment
A senior Al Qaeda operative in Afghanistan, Abu Yahya al-Libi, yesterday slammed calls for closer ties between religions made by the Saudi monarch, warning in a video statement that it would bring churches to the heart of Islam.
Without naming King Abdullah, Libi warned: “If you don’t face up today like heroes to this mischievous tyrant, and let deviant ulemas (Muslim scholars) justify his stupidity, soon would be the day when you see church bells ringing in the heart of the Arabian Peninsula.” The term is usually used by militants to refer to Saudi Arabia.
Apparently referring to a proposal made by King Abdullah last month to hold inter-faith talks between Muslims, Christians and Jews – in a first for the ultra-conservative Muslim kingdom – Libi charged: “The guardian of monotheism, as claimed by the sycophantic ulemas, raises the banner of fraternity between religions, and talks at random about what he does not know.”
…
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
May:23:2008 - 12:17
Libi said, “The guardian of monotheism”
I didn’t know that ISLAM as a belief and religion has or needs a guardian.
Hasbee Allah wa whoanamah wakil. MEANS
Allah is sufficient for us and in him alone do we put our trust!
May:25:2008 - 05:20
Maybe he is referring to the title “custodian of the two holy mosques…”
But I’ve heard SOME, not all, Saudis say that there is a religious dynamic where they need to guard Islam from attack by aggressive means. As in the response to the Danish cartoons, etc.
Maybe this falls in the same line…
Would an Ulema care to weigh in on this one?
May:25:2008 - 07:23
We could say the Pope for example is a guardian of Christianity in a sense or the public face of Catholicism if you will. I didn’t believe Islam had one. I don’t think and to appoint one person to carry such a heavy title is quite inappropriate in my opinion.
Custodian of the two holy mosques is quite different than the guardian of monotheism. Allah says in the Quran that he is the Protector of Monotheism not any man….
May:25:2008 - 09:44
Having a unitary leader (as well as not having one) has its good points and bad points.
The problem many see in Islam is that with no single voice to speak, there’s no way to tell who is speaking authoritatively and doctrinally. Everyone appears to be legally competent to issue fatawas, provide ‘guidance’, interpret complicated situations, make judicial rulings like ‘Qatif Girl’, etc.
This leads to out-and-out contradictory rulings being handed down, all with equal ‘authority’. And that leads to confusion for both Muslims and those trying to understand them.
Better than ten million speakers would be either one or none, i.e., everyone was left to do his best, but with no ‘authorities’ at all.
May:25:2008 - 13:48
John,
I agree that we need a set of religious scholars that are authoritative in interpreting the religion. I think Saudi is trying to do that with the Council of Senior Islamic Scholars. However, that effort has not gained complete acceptance for multiple reasons:
- There is no structure that forces the members to follow the final rulings. So although there is a set group membership each of the members can speak independently.
- The group has the most conservative elements. This does not give them complete legitimacy even within the borders of Saudi never mind outside the country.
- There is no oath of poverty or anything close to that in Islam. I know many scholars are honest in their believes, but the fact that some of them accumulate huge wealth in a profession which should not produce such gains, leaves doubts in people’s mind. Radicals use this as a weapon to show that the religious establishment is corrupt.
I think countries like Saudi can eliminate the bad aspect of fatwas by developing a comprehensive set of laws and a process for change this set. Fatwas will continue to come from all directions as it is the nature of ijtihad in Islam. The issue is there is no process to vet such fatwas.