2 in 24

In Cairo taxi drivers often neither speak English (not much a problem, unless they cannot find the place) nor have any idea where to go (not much of a problem, unless they don’t speak any English or cannot understand your Arabic). So far I have been fortunate to experience only one of these two conditions at a time. And even if they speak English I refuse to speak anything but Arabic – probably irritating for them, but darn good practice for me.

Anyway, this morning my driver and I were chatting on the way to St. Andrews and he asked me if I was a Christian. An interesting and unexpected question. However, this was after mentioning that his brother lived in Ohio*. I asked if he had ever visited the States – a feeble attempt to change the subject to something lighter. He retorted that as a Copt (Egyptian Christian) he could not travel because of the “Muslim problem”.

A “Muslim problem”? What exactly does that mean? The relationship between Copts and Muslims in Egypt is strained at best, and while the international community faces serious issues (macro and micro) involving degrees of tension, this blanket statement references a sad reality. At least a reality for many. Moreover, his comment is certainly not an isolated event in Egypt – these voices are unfortunately omnipresent in too many societies. Thankfully groups such as the Interfaith Youth Core, Tony Blair Faith Foundation, Religions for Peace, CRES, and the Pluralism Project at Harvard all seek to slowly rehabilitate the scarred landscape of multi-religious relations.

Another observation regarding perceptions of the Muslim-Christian relationship emerged from Arabic class last night. Our professor was quizzing us on the names of capitals and their countries (in Arabic) and included an association that seemed quite natural in his mind.

“Filastiin – al-Quds”. Palestine – Jerusalem.

While I will reserve commentary on the core issue, I would like to point out a few political realities. Currently, Palestine is not a country – it is a geographic location, a territory, and an ever-shrinking refuge. And Jerusalem, despite its Muslim population and presence (the largest quarter in the city belongs to the Muslims), is not the capital of Palestine. And although eastern Jerusalem is considered to be the “potential” capital of the Palestinian state, that reality has yet to reach fruition. Furthermore, the city is devoid of embassies and lacks international recognition as Israel’s capital.

Our professor at al-Diwan holds obvious sympathies with the Palestinians, as was expressed in this subtle, perhaps unconscious denial of the Israeli state, affirmation of the Palestinian state, and the implicit ownership of Jerusalem (Islam’s third holiest city, trailing Mecca and Medina). I wonder if his interpretation of the “situation” is intentionally tainted or is simply a product of his environment. Perhaps both. And what does this say about conflict resolution? If neither group (whether Palestinian, Israeli, or outsider) recognizes the problems, no matter how concrete, abstract, or manifested, then any genuine progress seems unpromising.

In the course of 24 hours I experienced two very different voices, each within the broader context of religion, politics, and land, each expressing fallacious assumptions about their Abrahamic brothers. And some people think religion is irrelevant. Time to rethink.


Jonathan


* Many shop owners on the street will brashly approach foreigners (it is really quite hard to blend in) and offer assistance. This inevitably leads to them saying that their “insert family member” lives in “large American city” – a ploy to continue conversation. Naturally, this is a hook to lure the bait into a highly overpriced shop …

** Both pictures were taken when I was in Jerusalem last month. The top shot is the view from a church looking out on the Old City. The second shot is in an alleyway in the Muslim quarter.