July 2(Thu)

  The first day of the workshop focused mainly on reports by Prof. Yakov Rabkin and Prof. Hashim Kamali. Both of these reports examined the relationships between Jews and Muslims as “others,” using legal stipulations as a starting point.

  First, we will look briefly at Prof. Rabkin’s report. According to Prof. Rabkin, past research on Judaism has focused on the perspective of how others have seen Jews, but in recent years, there has been an increase in research from the perspective of how Jews see others. Based on this view, the report examined how Jews’ views of others have been formed and transformed. In the past, Jewish identity took on the characteristics of remoteness and differentiation as a result of the Jewish law Halakha in particular, but in later generations, there were assertions, like those of Emmanuel Levinas, that identity is confirmed by how one responds to the calls of others. Regarding the relationship with Islam, many Jewish scholars see Islam as a strictly monotheistic religion, and point out, for example, that Islam is positioned only slightly differently from the “other” concept of “outsider,” which in practical terms refers to idol worship.

  Prof. Kamali’s report began by talking about Jews as referred to in the Quran as “people of the book.” In the Quran, Jews are referred to as “Yahud” or the grandchildren of Israel. The priority handling of Judaism compared to other religions is guaranteed in the revelations of the Medina period following Hegirae. To demonstrate this, Prof. Kamali gave the example of the Constitution of Medina, which guarantees freedom of religion for Jews in Muslim nations, and guarantees their social lifestyles in a variety of fields. Considering that after that, many Jews lived in Muslim societies, we can see that the Constitution of Medina held great importance in defining the relationship between Muslims and Jews in the context of social lifestyles. As indicated above, the report covered a wide range of topics including the Quran’s references to Judaism, the Torah, and the Bible, and the relationship between Muslims and Jews as seen in the era of the prophet Mohammed, for which the Constitution of Medina is a representative case.

  In response to the above two reports, the commentators Prof. Miura and Prof. Nigo presented comparative materials based on historical fact, for example on the problems of translating religious terminology from other religions in translations in modern Iran, and the effects that the medieval philosopher Al-Farabi had on Europe. Prof. Tanaka and Prof. Ichikawa talked about the need to take into consideration the fact that the prophet Mohammed said the Constitution of Medina was a special case; the fundamental relationship between the doctrines discussed in the reports and the radical ideas expressed by some modern Muslims; and realistic approaches to the relationship between Jews and the State of Israel, which is led by a secular government.

July 3(Fri)

  On the second day of the workshop, the first half focused on reports by Prof. Benbassa and Prof. Bakara, and in the second half, questions and issues were raised by Prof. Itagaki, Prof. Oka, and Prof. Ikeda.

  Looking first at Prof. Benbassa’s report, Prof. Benbassa explains the concept of “other” for Jews from a historical and linguistic perspective, making reference to the relationship between the Jews as seen in the bible (the people of Israel) and the Amalekites (see Exodus 17), a tribe that was seen as the enemies of the Jews, and to Hebrew and Yiddish words that refer to non-Jews (goy/goya, shekets, shikse). She also talked about Judaism and the Jewish perspective in Europe, which is the base of her own activities, using examples from France in particular, with a focus on the history of anti-Semitism as described in the writings of Jean-Paul Sartre. 

  Looking next at Prof. Bakara’s report, Prof. Bakara examined exclusiveness and inclusiveness as fundamental issues of religion, from the perspective of the potential for collective salvation in Islam. He defined “salvation” as being not of the next world by the world we live in now, in the form of “societal salvation,” and stated that salvation in this world is a deciding factor for salvation in the next world. He talked, from an Islamic perspective, about “Ummah” (“community”) based on the rule of Islamic law in this world, and how “others” should be included in that community, in terms of both current conditions and potential for the future.

  Among the comments to the above two reports, Prof. Usuki first explained an example of the Moroccan Jews and their move to Israel, and suggested that it was possible to view Prof. Benbassa’s report on European Jews in particular from a more global standpoint. Prof. Nouh then provided a further explanation of the problems of translation in the Islamic world, which were touched upon during Prof. Miura’s comments of the previous day, with a particular focus on the Arabic and Hebrew languages. He also referred to Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, who has been called the “father of modern Hebrew (Hebrew as an everyday language).

  During the third session, Prof. Itagaki, Prof. Oka, and Prof. Ikeda expressed a wide range of opinions regarding the problem of Palestinian refugees and the differences in the structure of religious views in Monotheism and polytheism, from the perspective of specialists on the modern Middle East. Prof. Oka and Prof. Nouh provided detailed facts regarding the problem of Palestinian refugees’ right to return to Palestine, and the response of surrounding nations to the reception of refugees. The discussions were very fruitful, covering contemporary issues as well. 

  This two-day workshop provided detailed explanations regarding the history of the relationship between Islam and Judaism, as seen in the reporters’ home countries and bases of activities. The dialog also included the reporters’ interpretations of the holy texts of both Islam and Judaism. With the contributions of the various commentators, who referred to modern issues as well, perspectives on the history of this relationship was complemented by a more global view, leading to active and rewarding discussions.