Muslims through time have been accustomed to regarding themselves as constituting "a middle" or "moderate nation/community" (Ar. umma wasat) on the basis of Qur'an 2:143 which applies this designation to them. This designation has been enthusiastically adopted by Muslims as an indication of divinely-conferred distinction upon them and as a divine mandate to avoid extremes in one's beliefs and conduct. What is less well-known, however, is that this verse has its parallel in Qur'an 5:66 in which righteous Jews and Christians are also described as constituting a "balanced" or "moderate" community" (Ar. umma muqtasida). In these two verses taken together, the Qur'an thus suggests that it is subscription to a common standard of righteousness and upright conduct that determines the salvific nature of a religious community, and not the denominational label it chooses to wear. Such a view transcends sectarianism and offers the possibility of formulating universal principles of ethical and moral conduct which help contribute to the formation of a moderate and tolerant global community today. Several questions undergird this research. How have Muslims through time understood "moderation" and its implementation in communal lifem How did this self-understanding as a "middle/moderate community" shape individual and collective Muslim identity as well as relationships with non-Muslims Does the concept of moderation have a bearing on the concept of tolerance, particularly of religious "Others " What are the implications of this historical discourse for inter-faith relations today and for the retrieval of universal principles of just and humane conduct In the course of this paper, I attempt to answer these questions by looking primarily at a cross-section of Qur'anic exegeses from the earliest period (eighth century) to modern times, which discuss both Qur'an 2:143 and Qur'an 5:66. The exegetical works consulted include those by Mujahid b. Jabr (d. 104/722), Muqatil b. Sulayman (d. 150/767), al-Tabari (d. 310/923), al-Razi (d. 606/1210), and Muhammad Abduh (d. 1905). In this manner I will trace the diachronic understanding of "moderation" as expressed in the writings of some of the most prominent Muslim exegetes and thinkers, grounded in their specific socio-historical circumstances. As the topics of moderation and tolerance gain center stage in contemporary Muslim societies, particularly in the post-September 11 environment, a comprehensive interrogation of these issues as presented in authoritative texts is timely and relevant.

Intolerance is in the Eye of the Beholder: Revisiting the status of the Other in the Quran This paper seeks to reconcile the tension between the obvious meaning of Quranic text - with regards to the 'people of the book' - and the historical interpretation of the text as enshrined in Islamic orthodoxy. I seek to wade through the efforts by classical and contemporary Islamic interpreters and try to provide a contextual understanding of my finding that the Quran is more pluralistic, open and tolerant than its followers and especially its traditional interpreters. Consider the following two verses of the Quran: Those who believe, and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and do good deeds, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve (Quran 2:62 and 5:69). And if one seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted from him; and he is among the losers in the Hereafter (Quran 3:85). Today liberal and conservative Muslims are divided over which of the above two verses should determine Muslim relations with other faith communities. The first verse is inclusive and clearly indicates that those who are good people have nothing to worry. This status of fundamental moral equality of all people can become the basis for political equality in a multicultural, multi-religious society. But some Muslims who believe that only Islam has the Truth and only Muslims are good people, rely on 3:85 exclusively arguing that it is not only the ultimate source for defining Muslim-non-Muslim relations but also abrogates both 2:62 and 5:69. The most commonly used source for this argument is the exegesis of Al Tabari who on the authority of Ibn Abbas claims that after the advent from Prophet Muhammad no other religion except Islam will be accepted from anyone. I propose to systematically revisit the interpretation of this verse, examine the context of its revelation and cross examine it with other references in the Quran and classical interpretations. I shall also revisit the theory of abrogation. My goal is to show that pluralism in Muslim understanding has been limited by an exercise of interpretive preference and not by uncontestable evidence form the Quran.

The question of how Islam views the "Other," while one that has long been discussed in classical theological treatises, has become more and more poignant in our times in light of modern political events. The claim is being made that any religion which views itself as exclusively possessing Divine Truths will inevitably treat others with contempt, and perhaps even consider their lives and property as insignificant. The rhetoric of some militant groups such as al-Qaeda lends some credence to this claim. If non-Muslims are eternally cursed and doomed to Hell, and if God Himself is angry with them, then why should His Believers treat them nicelyc On the other hand, others, such as Fazlur Rahman, Khaled Abou Fadl, and Abdul Aziz Sachedina, have claimed that the true Quranic message is one that includes Jews and Christians within its fold of salvation. But does this pluralist approach to make good with"Others" go too far Can it be shown to remain faithful to Islam's sacred textsc This paper will look at various intellectual traditions within Islam, in particular, the theological works of the Hanbalites, Ash'arites, Maturidites, Mu'tazilites, and Shi'ites, and also examine exegetical literature of these traditions, to determine if there is any broad-based consensus on the issue, or whether an argument can be made from within the classical traditions for religious pluralism. It will also examine how specific verses that have been used to both justify pluralistic understandings (for example, 2:62), and negate them (for example, 3:85) have been understood. Finally, it will explore the various historical alternatives to modern pluralism and their global implications.

Embracing Relational Hybridity and Theological Tensions: Muslima Theology, Religious Diversity, and Fate Emerging in response to a theological and practical gridlock in contemporary Islamic writings on religious diversity, Muslima theology of religious pluralism draws insights from three distinct approaches: contemporary Muslim women's reinterpretation of the Qur'an, Jeannine Hill Fletcher's Christian feminist approach to religious pluralism, and Toshihiko Izutsu's semantic analysis of the Qur'an. Focusing primarily on the Qur'anic text as a unified whole, Muslima theology of religious pluralism seeks to 'map' relational hybridity in religious identity. As such, it raises important questions about common exclusivist, inclusivist and pluralist approaches to worldly religious diversity and the fate of various religious groups, approaches that do not provide a holistic vision of religious diversity and do not integrate and embrace complexities and ambiguities. If religious groups in this world are not isolated, discretely bounded or static entities, what are the implications in relation to fate? In order to answer this question, this paper begins with a brief overview of the theoretical and methodological foundations of Muslima theology and its critique of contemporary Islamic approaches. Stressing the intimate relationship between notions of fate and worldly (inter)actions, this paper then argues that a vital first step in discussions of the fate of religious others ought to be comprehensive 'mapping' of the Qur'anic Weltanschauung on religious diversity. Through specific examples, such mapping reveals an interlocking 'web' of complex and dynamic relationships. This challenges prevalent static conceptions of religious diversity premised upon homogenizing sameness or incommensurable difference, as well as the resultant reductive or mechanical ascription of particular fates. It is then noted that similar complexity is observable in prominent theological tensions - such as those that exist between Divine guidance and Divine freedom, justice and mercy, and faith and works. This paper concludes by arguing that both relational hybridity and theological tensions are simultaneously irreducible and practically and theologically productive.

Acts of Salvation: Agency, Others and Prayer beyond the Grave in Islam This paper will explore the theme of salvation and the fate of "Others" through considering classical and contemporary discussions surrounding the question of whether Muslims can pray for deceased non-Muslim "Others". Answers to this question derived from the four schools of law usually cite the Qur'anic verse (9:113), holding that it explicitly closes the door on praying for non-Muslims who have died. "It is not fitting for the Prophet and the believers to pray for the forgiveness of the polytheists (mushrikin), even though they may be near kin (to them) after it has become clear to them that they are the people of Hell." Discussion on online forums suggest that this position is especially troubling to Muslims living in contemporary and pluralistic contexts, for example, converts to Islam or those aware of the good actions and exemplary lives of individual non-Muslims. The paper will therefore take into account: 1) Islamic understandings of prayers for the deceased, funerary or otherwise, whether Muslim or non-Muslim--for example, the diverse Muslim theological positions on intercession, vicarious blessings, and so oni 2) Various positions articulated in the Islamic tradition about this issue, derived from classical tafsirs through to certain contemporary Muslim discussions. 3) Whether diverse Muslim understandings of the afterlife allow reinterpretations or reframings of this discussion, in particular in light of a movement from fiqh to theologyi Could a historical/critical approach to the cause for the revelation of 9:113 in terms of terminology, such as the use of "mushrikun", or in the light of contravening evidence from the Sunna (the case of the Negus of Ethiopia) open a possibility for reconsidering the classical rulingse