Given my long public record of correcting misperceptions about Islam and championing the rights of American Muslims, why was I consorting with the so-called “enemy”? If one considers Jews as eternal threats to Muslims, then discordant opposition may seem sensible and engagement foolhardy. However, I hold out hope, “that one day mankind will … be crowned triumphant over war and bloodshed, and nonviolent redemptive good will proclaim the rule of the land” (Martin Luther King, Jr.).

My journey, which was undertaken with 22 Muslim civic leaders, has unfortunately become a source of consternation in a small circle of influential activists. Particularly dismaying is a petition that casts aspersions on the program and its founder, Imam Abdullah Antepli.

While MLI has become the subject of attack, mostly by those with limited personal knowledge about its curriculum, overwhelming majority of MLI participants, both current and past, remain committed to engagement. Critics provide two arguments as central to their opposition. First, MLI violates the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which promotes boycott of Israel as a way to end its occupation of Palestine. And second, MLI “faith-washes” the occupation.

BDS as an idea may have some merits, but by pushing social and academic boycott, it fails to distinguish between the policies of the Israeli government and the activities of its civil society. Conflating the two, not only marginalizes Jews who are striving for solutions to this intractable conflict but also Arabs who live in Israel and are engaged in finding common ground with Jews. Secondly, a decade after its inception, support for BDS is far from universal even among those sympathetic to the plight of Palestinians. For example, Turkey has significantly increased its trade with Israel, while trade with Egypt remains robust, gaining strength even under the Muslim Brotherhood government. Meanwhile, mistreatment and suffering of the Palestinian people has increased.

Critics also attack MLI based on an inflammatory and misleading claim that it “faith-washes” the occupation. The MLI program did not frame the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a struggle between Judaism and Islam. It accepted the fact that the conflict is a top concern and the most incendiary flashpoint between Jews and Muslims, not just Arabs and Palestinians. In addition, MLI’s curriculum neither justifies the occupation nor dilutes the suffering of Palestinians.

Rather than succumb to the narrative of perpetual conflict, I chose the path of engagement because the struggle for peace and justice requires mainstream American Jewish and Muslim communities making common cause, which is only possible in an environment of mutual trust. Given that nearly 8 in 10 Jews in the U.S. are either very or somewhat emotionally attached to Israel, and thus Zionists, any engagement effort by American Muslims will have to find creative ways to meet and dialogue with Jews in Israel. And yet I am under no illusions that my actions, as a private citizen, would magically alter the brutal politics of the region.

Faced with vitriolic opposition, saying no to MLI would have been the popular choice, allowing me to comfortably stay within my bubble without risking to ask if there is another way forward. However, the words of Donniel Hartman, President of SHI, resonated with me, “As a Jew, I do not want to live in a zero-sum-game world with Islam. I yearn to live in a world where Jews, Christians and Muslims of good faith reach out to each other, live with each other, disagree respectfully with each other and most importantly, learn from each other. That will only happen when we have the courage to meet and hear each other.” Abdullah Antepli and Yossi Klein Halevi, a Senior Fellow at SHI, provided further assurance, “Our purpose in promoting dialogue isn’t to seek consensus but mutual understanding and respect. We will continue to disagree about many issues.”

As advertised, my teachers at SHI were just as eager to listen as they were to convey. For many of them, MLI offered a rare opportunity to have meaningful dialogue with Muslims. The seminars and conversations were intellectually stimulating and emotionally challenging. But I could not overlook the obvious. Israel prides itself in being a Jewish state, which implies a significant commitment to the values of Judaism. And yet nowhere is such commitment severely undermined than in Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. My surreal experience of walking to the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron is illustrative. What should have been a short trek took well over thirty minutes. Between check-points and settler intrusions the entry way to the mosque now meanders through a mostly empty marketplace. Between arbitrary shutting down of buildings, citing security concerns, and the paucity of Israeli action to rein-in settler misbehavior, life along the alleyway leading to the Ibrahimi mosque has become untenable. And yet the unremitting spirit of the Palestinian people shone through in the meetings we held with civil society leaders in Hebron.

Perhaps most illuminating was a visit with Palestinians living in Israel, who now number 1.6 million, approximating 21 percent of the Israel’s population. I was inspired meeting with Mohammad Darawshe from the Center for Shared Society whose mission, “is to build an inclusive, socially cohesive society in Israel by engaging divided communities … based on mutual responsibility, civic equality and a shared vision of the future.” Thanks in part to his efforts, Arab share of students at Technion (Israel’s MIT), stands at 21 percent up from just 11 percent about a decade or so ago, with the ratio of Arab men and women at nearly 50-50. This success has been greatly aided by Jewish philanthropists. Such small flowers of hope bear intoxicating fragrance of optimism.

Dialogue is an inclusive process that entails learning, not just talking. More often than not, dialogue leads to sustainable resolutions of conflicts, not just cessation of hostilities, because dialogue recognizes the humanity of “others.” MLI offers a modest pathway towards improving Jewish-Muslim relations by creating a safe-space for honest dialogue about each other’s narratives.

There are no guarantees for success and yet a program that allows the development of mutual trust seems a better way forward as it also offers an opportunity to mitigate the Islamophobia and anti-Semitism roiling our communities. I look forward to continuing my journey because I do not want my children and grandchildren to inherit a world where Jews and Muslims view each other as interminable enemies. Engagement is not appeasement. Dialogue is not capitulation.

This is first of a series from my visit to Israel and Palestine earlier this summer.

The lack of a just resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is often used as a pretext for anti-Jewish backlash. In the same vein, violence in the name of Islam is often used as a justification for the anti-Muslim backlash. Just as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is nuanced, with Jews expressing a variety opinions spanning from the far left to the far right, violence in the name of Islam is also caused by a multiplicity of factors; religion could be one of many but is certainly not an exclusive factor. A study by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point suggests that terrorism in the name of Islam kills more Muslims than non-Muslims. This alone ought to suggest that terrorism has little to do with Islam. The terrorist narrative that they are some vanguard protecting Muslims against Western aggression holds no credence. Victims of terrorism in the name of Islam are 38 times more likely to be non-Westerners and eight times more likely to be Muslims.

Often lost in all the attention-grabbing headlines about violence and hatred are the many quiet acts of heroism. One of the policemen killed during the attack on Charlie Hebdo was Muslim, Ahmed Merabet. The hashtag #JeSuisAhmed was trending on Twitter because Ahmed died defending the right of others to express their opinion, no matter how abhorrent those opinions were to him. Ahmed’s brother Malek spoke out, saying, “I address myself now to all the racists, Islamophobes and anti-Semites. One must not confuse extremists with Muslims. Mad people have neither color or religion. … [D]on’t tar everybody with the same brush, don’t burn mosques or synagogues. You are attacking people. It won’t bring our dead back and it won’t appease the families.” The hostage taking at the josher shop, which prompted the Grand Synagogue in Paris to close, also had a Muslim hero. Lassana Bathily, described in media reports as a practicing Muslim, was credited for saving the lives of seven Jewish shoppers by hiding them in a freezer, switching it off along with the lights, before risking his life by exiting the shop to alert policemen about the location of the hostages.

Ahmed Merabet and Lassana Bathily are not isolated names. Preceding them in France are other Muslim heroes who have also shown uncommon courage to reject the forces of evil. One name that comes to mind, now more than ever, is Noor-un-Nisa Inayat Khan. She was the daughter of an Indian Sufi master and his American wife. Noor was recruited by the British Special Operations Executive (SOE) in 1942 to serve as radio operator in France. She was the first female wireless operator sent to Nazi-occupied France during World War II. She resisted numerous opportunities to escape to safety and has been credited with saving numerous lives while bravely sacrificing her own. Just before being gunned down by a German firing squad, she cried out, “Liberté.” She acted out of her deep aversion to fascism and her deep attachment to her faith. Noor was posthumously awarded the George Cross in Britain and the Croix de Guerre in France. During troubled times like ours, we should remember Ahmed, Noor and Lassana. Their heroism should give us hope and inspire us to work towards overcoming hatred and bigotry.

In America we have a strong tradition of interfaith dialogue that helps us transcend our religious differences when radicals threaten to drive a wedge between faith groups to usher in their messianic vision of apocalyptic end of times. And yet it is not easy, because the propensity to stereotype is ingrained in our human character. It takes courage to understand and dialogue with those we view as the “other.” Through dialogue and discussions, Germany overcame its anti-Semitism. It can do the same with its Islamophobia. France’s prime minister rightfully feels that a flight of Jews will be a great loss to the French Republic. To translate this concern into action, France must reengineer social policies that will help address the rising anti-Semitism, particularly among its poorer immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa. Muslim leaders and imams, while speaking out loudly against Islamophobia, must also unequivocally denounce anti-Semitism. “Je suis humain” should be the battle cry against those who want to divide us on the basis of our nationality, race or religion.

Islam is more legalistic than Christianity but less so than Judaism. In many instances, Islam straddles the middle ground between Christianity and Judaism. Thus Islam is both like and unlike Christianity and Judaism. Islam has common elements to both Christianity and Judaism and yet there remain subtle and sometimes not-so subtle distinctions.

One saying of Prophet Muhammad is very similar to Christ’s teaching. Muhammad said, “Whoever wants to be drawn away from the Fire and admitted to Paradise, let him die while believing in God and the Last Day (of Judgment), and do for the people what he likes them to do for him.”

Other quotes from Prophet Muhammad that express similar sentiments are:

“No man is a true believer unless he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself.”

“You will not enter paradise until you have faith. And you will not complete your faith until you love one another.”

“Verily, God is compassionate and is fond of compassion, and He gives to the compassionate what He does not give to the harsh.”

“The best richness is the richness of the soul.”

The sacred texts of Islam, Christianity and Judaism do not explicitly prohibit polygamy or polygyny (a man married to more than one woman at a time).

Biblical prophets, like Muhammad, practiced polygyny. In the Biblical scriptures, Abraham had three wives (Genesis 16:1, 16:3, 25:1). Moses had two wives (Exodus 2:21, 18:1-6; Numbers 12:1). Jacob had four wives (Genesis 29:23, 29:28, 30:4, 30:9). David had at least 18 wives (1 Samuel 18:27, 25:39-44; 2 Samuel 3:3, 3:4-5, 5:13, 12:7-8, 12:24, 16:21-23) and Solomon had 700 wives (1 Kings 11:3).

Polygamy was allowed in both Jewish and Christian practices. Judaism expressly prohibited polygamy in the beginning of the eleventh century. Its prevalence in Christian practices is mixed. Mormons allow it to this date while other sects allowed it till as late as the sixteenth or seventeenth century.

Islamic sacred texts allow polygamy but do not require it.

The Quranic verses related to polygamy were revealed after the battle of Uhud, which left behind many widows and orphans who needed protection. In tribal societies marriage was one of the foundational institutions that ensured protection of women and children.

“If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then (marry) only one.” (Quran 4:3).

Polygamy is allowed but discouraged.

“And it will not be within your power to treat your wives with equal fairness, however much you may desire it; and so, do not allow yourselves to incline towards one to the exclusion of the other, leaving her in a state, as it were, of having and not having a husband. But if you put things to rights and are conscious of Him – behold, God is indeed much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace.” (Quran 4:129)

These verses show that a man marrying multiple women is not a fulfillment of his sensual desires. Islamic law allows a woman to seek divorce if her husband fails to support her adequately. The sacred texts of Islam when compared to the sacred texts of other religions actually limit the practice of polygamy by placing stringent conditions, which are very difficult if not impossible to fulfill. Polygamy is viewed as lesser evil than the harm caused to children orphaned and women left without protection as a result of war. Thus if a society evolves to provide adequate protection to women and children then the institution of polygamy becomes irrelevant.

In modern day Muslim majority societies the practice of polygamy is rare (1-3% by some accounts). In many Muslim majority countries (Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Tunisia and Turkey) polygamy is not legal. Muslims living as minorities in the West are not clamoring to be granted exceptions to practice polygamy. Much like the Mormons in the U.S., American Muslims do not practice polygamy.

A note about marriage in Islam: Marriage is solemn contract between a man and woman.

The Quran says, “Your wives are a garment for you, and you are a garment for them.” (Quran 2:187). “Garments” offer both protection and beautification.

“It is He who created you from a single soul, And made its mate of like nature in order that you might dwell with her in love….”(Quran 7:189).

One of the great Muslim poets Rumi wrote:

May your vows and this marriage be blessed.

May it be sweet milk,

this marriage, sweet drink and halvah.

May this marriage offer fruit and shade

like the date palm.

May this marriage be full of laughter,

your every day a day in paradise.

May this marriage be a sign of compassion,

a seal of happiness here and hereafter.

May this marriage have a fair face and a good name, an omen as welcome as the moon in a clear evening sky….

May spirit enter and mingle in this marriage.

Arabic speaking world

People who speak Arabic as their primary language make up fewer than 20% of the Muslim population worldwide. The adjacent map shows, in green, places around the world where Arabic is spoken as the primary language. A person is regarded as an Arab if they meet one of the following three criteria:

1. Someone who can trace their ancestry to the tribes of Arabia (the Arabian Peninsula).
2. Someone who speaks Arabic as their primary language.
3. Any person who is a citizen of a country where Arabic is the national language.

Although the words Arab and Muslim are often used interchangeably they do not mean the same thing. Many Arabs are not Muslims and most Muslims are not Arabs.

Given that Islam originated in Arabia at a time when history was being meticulously recorded allowed Arabic to be infused into many of the ritual practices of Islam. The fact that the Quran was revealed in Arabic and it has been preserved till date in the language of its revelation affords the language of Arabic a special role in Muslim communities.

Certain religious rituals, such as prayers, require some of the utterances be made in Arabic. This is no different than the practices in many Christian denominations which require prayers to be in Latin. Judaism also requires ritual prayers in Hebrew. Similarly, Eastern religions such as Hinduism also require certain religious rituals to be conducted in Sanskrit.

Many non-Arab Muslims make extreme effort to learn Arabic as this enhances their ability to access sacred texts without the need for any translations. Understanding Arabic allows Muslims to better appreciate the linguistic majesty of the Quran, which they view to be the final revelation from God.

Judaism, Christianity and Islam claim a common father figure – Abraham. I am attaching file that shows the lineage of Moses, Jesus and Muhammad and how they all trace to a common father – Abraham. Muslims sees Judaism and Christianity as earlier versions of Islam. Muslims view Islam as the final revelation of the Abrahamic traditions.

The Islamic tradition recognizes many of the Jewish and Christian prophets, including Abraham, Moses, and Jesus (although he is not considered to be the son of God). For Muslims, the Quran has the same reverence as Jesus does to Christians. Muhammad himself is not divine, but a prophet chosen by God to deliver his message and an example of good character to emulate.

Jews and Christians are specifically mentioned in the Quran as “People of the Book,” reinforcing their spiritual connection to Islam. The Islamic legal tradition has upheld the rights of Jews and Christians to maintain their beliefs and practices within their communities in Islamic lands, and this policy of tolerance has generally been upheld.

CLICK HERE to see a brief table that compares side-by-side some of the issues of belief and practices among the Abrahamic faiths.

CLICK HERE to see a chart showing lineage of major prophets and messengers.