Copts are up in arms over a controversial book that they say may cause sectarian strife. Gihan Shahine listens to both sides While Egypt's estimated 10 million Copts were celebrating Christmas this week, Coptic lawyer Naguib Gabriel was busy preparing for a lawsuit he is filling against prominent Islamic scholar , for writing a new book that Gabriel said is likely to "incite sectarian rifts and jeopardise national stability." Fetnat El-Takfeer (The Sedition of Making Infidel), printed at the Ministry of Waqf (Religious Endowments) and under the auspices of Al-Azhar's Islamic Research Academy (IRA), was released last week. The book, which sold like hot cakes for a meagre LE1 a copy, was already sold out when Al-Ahram Weekly went to print. But according to Gabriel, the book includes a paragraph which "explicitly describes Christians as infidels, just like Magus and idol-worshippers, who are destined to eternal hellfire in the afterlife and whose property and lives can be lawfully seized during their lifetime." Emara, however, was quick to explain that the paragraph in question was no more than a quote from a century-old book by the grand Islamic Imam Mahmoud Hamed El-Ghazali defining faith and atheism. The quote said that an infidel disbelieves in any one of Prophet Mohammed's teachings, while faith means believing in the entire message of the Prophet. Emara told Al-Ahram Weekly that he was shocked to know that Copts were upset about the book, especially that it deals with rifts among different Islamic sects -- Shia, Sunni and Wahaabi -- and calls for their unity. "In that context, I just copied El-Ghazali's definition of what faith and infidels mean, out of trust of that great scholar," Emara explained. "But my own suggestion is that the Grand Imam probably meant those who go out and publicly declare their disbelief of Prophet Mohammed among Muslims, and not all those who disbelieve in Prophet Mohammed." He continued that non-Muslims have always had equal reverence, rights and duties as Muslims under Islamic Sharia (law), and hence "a great scholar like El-Ghazali would never make the mistake of sanctioning the taking of their lives and property." For his part, Emara regretted that he quoted the old text without "thinking". "There might have been a printing mistake in the old manuscript," he explained, "so I must apologise for having not thought about it before using the quote which unintentionally caused so much hurt to Christians." But Islamic scholar Youssef El-Badri said Emara should not have used the quote at all because it probably refers to "Christians and Jews who are at war with Muslims, not those living in peace in Muslim countries." But whatever El-Ghazali meant is not the issue for a despondent Gabriel, who immediately took the matter to the general prosecutor complaining that the book "defames Christian dogma, in contradiction with Article 98 of penal law dealing with derision of religion." He feels that the book is "all the more shocking" because it was published under the auspices of the government, at a time when Copts were celebrating Christmas and discussing citizenship rights as part of President Hosni Mubarak's initiative to amend the constitution. Meanwhile, Minister of Awqaf Mahmoud Hamdi Zaqzouq told the Oman-based daily Al-Watan that "there was nothing against Christians in Emara's book." Zaqzouq, who is known for his moderate views, was speaking earlier this week and before Emara's apology. The minister further called for renouncing all attempts to "blow matters out of proportion and escalate sectarian rifts," saying that the Waqf ministry has always worked to promote religious dialogue and social stability. Zaqzouq's adviser Mohamed Shama said the ministry usually revises all books printed in its publishing house, but not when it comes to veteran scholars like Emara. Initially, Shama said he did not read the book himself and that there must be a misunderstanding. A few days later, however, Shama told Al-Watan that "[Emara's] book does not mean to offend Christians, but some people are trying to create a crisis out of nothing." He added: "We, in the eyes of Christians, are also disbelievers and we see nothing wrong about that." Sameh Fawzi, the managing editor of the Christian Al-Watani newspaper, countered that "although those believing in one dogma are normally disbelievers in another, such theological differences should not be discussed in public in order not to incite sectarian hatred and discord." Fawzi continued that these differences could be taught in theology classes but not discussed in the media. At the same time, he is equally critical of Al-Hayah Christian satellite channel, which insists on airing programmes that are typically offensive to Islam. An angered Fawzi seemed hardly satisfied with Emara's apology, saying that this is not the first time Emara affronts Christian theology. Fawzi further accused the Islamic scholar of "using such theological debate, which usually looks down on other religions, to make a living and sell more books -- especially among the most conservative Islamist readership." The Christian journalist cited an article by Emara published in the national weekly Akhar Al-Youm , which sparked Christian uproar in 2004. In reaction to the public outcry, "Emara later retracted the offense saying he only meant Christians in the West," scoffed Fawzi. For him, Emara's discourse is likely to "ruin the theological debate between Muslims and Christians, and is a complete breach of a 2005 covenant for Islamic- Christian dialogue which was issued by the regional Arab Dialogue Panel based in Beirut." The panel, which includes prominent intellectuals like Mohamed Selim El-Awa, Tarek El-Bishri and Samir Morqos, agreed on the dangers of discussing faith issues in public. It concluded that such topics should be discussed among specialists and behind closed doors. Al-Azhar, which is the Sunni world's most prominent seat of learning, does not automatically censor books unless it receives a complaint from a government authority or an individual. The only exception is copies of the holy Quran, which are carefully revised before publication. Nonetheless, the religious institution has always come under fire for attempting to ban literary books with sacrilegious context, on the grounds that it curbs freedom of thought. This time, however, it is the Christian lawyer Gabriel who vowed to ban the book and takes its author to court, before the manuscript wreaks more havoc among the public.
