Background:

Christiaan van Nispen, S.J. (Father Dr.) talks about Shaykh Jād al-Ḥaq ‘Alī Jād al-Ḥaq, Grand Imam of Al-Azhar from 1982 to his death on March 15, 1996, and prominent Islamic cleric Muḥammad al-Ghazālī (September 22, 1917- March 9, 1996), and their influences on the Egyptian State and Islam, as well as how both Shaykhs view Coptic Christians.

Side A:

Van Nispen describes the late Grand Shaykh of al-Azhar, Jād al-Ḥaq ‘Alī Jād al-Ḥaq and the role and influence he had in Egyptian politics. He says that he offered advice on Egyptian policy, but could not make any binding decisions. He would, for example, voice his opinion regarding censorship, but he did not have the authority to ban specific  books himself. The President selects the Grand Imam. Van Nispen thinks it will stay this way. He says al-Ḥaq was quite conservative, and does not rule out the possible influences from Saudi-Arabia. Van Nispen explains the differences between Egyptian Islam and Saudi Islam as well as the terms ‘Islam’ and ‘Islamist,’ of which the latter one is more political

Van Nispen says that al-Ḥaq opposed violence in general and called acts of terrorism individual cases which have nothing to do with the religion of Islam. He does not think that al-Ḥaq referred to violence against Christians specifically. Van Nispen cannot confirm if al-Azhar supports Muslims who convert Christians financially. He says that the Grand Shaykh focuses more on missionary work. Saudi-Arabia is one of the countries that finances al-Azhar’s activities.     

Side B:

Van Nispen says that with the rise of al-Azhar, there is a danger that Muslim youth become estranged from Christians, and that they might start to think that Christians are a foreign, Western oriented people. Simply because they are not encountering any Christians in their environment

The second part of the tape is about ShaykhMuḥammad al-Ghazālī, who wrote a book: ‘From Here On We Know’ (Min Hina Naʿlam), in response to the book: ‘From Here On We Begin’ (Min Hina Nabdaʾ) by Khālid Muḥammad Khālid. Van Nispen sees al-Ghazālī as a missionary, and this was always kept in the background of his audience in mind. So when he spoke to Christians, he pointed out the similarities to Islam. At the same time, it was as al-Ghazālī who believed that the Western World conspired against Islam. This is one of the reasons why van Nispen does not think al-Ghazālī’s statements are to be described as moderate. However, van Nispen says he never attacked Egyptian Christianity. Van Nispen says it is more likely al-Ghazālī would say that Eastern Christianity is different from the Western one, as al-Ghazālī thought Western Christianity has aggressive intentions. Cornelis Hulsman asked what the Islamic World should do to become as economically successful as the West, and if this was a preoccupation of al-Ghazālī. Van Nispen says that al-Ghazālī would say that the Islamic World is behind the West in economic terms because they have become unfaithful to the real Islam, especially because they have forgotten how much true Islam calls people to take their responsibilities. When they do not take up these responsibilities, they are unfaithful to what God wants and the means that God provides to construct society. Though there would be a difference between science and its morality and values. Van Nispen then continues the discussion in Arabic for six and a half minutes.