For anyone who is interested in the topic, the muslim pilgrimage of Hajj has begun and I will be covering it again at my blog. You can see all my Hajj-related posts here and also there’s awesome coverage of Hajj at Talk Islam as well.
Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.
Support Dean’s World
{ 45 comments }
I hope that this is finally the year that it can pass without anyone getting trampled. I’m not being snarky; it bothers me every year that some sort of panic breaks out at some point and people die a senseless accidental death. I have the same sort of dread about the Black Friday sales coming up; if there’s not some story about someone getting killed in a stampede when I get up (probably around noon) then I’ll consider the day a win.
I dont think anyone has been trampled at Hajj for several years, and that was an isolated incident (albeit a bad one).
You’re right on the several years; Wikipedia says the last incident was 2006. But it certainly wasn’t isolated; there were also tramplings in 90, 94, 98, 01, 03, and 04 also.
I don’t think it has anything to do with Islam; it has to do with crowd control. Like I said, a shopping mall in America is just as bad once the density of people gets high enough. I read that the Saudis are trying to limit pilgrims to one trip during hajj, to try to reduce the size of the crowds; that is a family squabble that I have no interest in getting in the middle of.
oh i hadnt realized there were earlier tramplings. Were they of the same size? thats depressing.
agreed actually that theres a common human aspect to this, linking black friday too. Its just a kind of fervor and mob mentality. are we a pack or a herd?
The one in 90 was really bad, almost 1500 people dead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incidents_during_the_Hajj
It’s crowd density. It happens anytime too many people are in once place trying to the same destination. Shopping malls, concerts, whatever, that many people, and one person panicking can set everything off.
Looks like someone of note is on the hajj:
http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Religion/?id=3.0.4036802442
Obama’s “Christian” Grandmother is in Mecca? I forget, how many non-Muslims are allowed into Mecca each year? Oh, that’s right, zero, nil, zilch, nada; it’s a criminal offense (and a potential lynching offense) for a non-Muslim to even set foot in Mecca.
How’d she get in, being a Christian?
What do you think of the clock tower they are building next door?
LOL Mike, think about it for a sec. i assume you’re a little sleepy given you posted at 232am!
thanks for the lead though, i’ll post that at COB.
agmartin – i hate it. but my opinion is worth squat. here’s my general opinion of Meccan architectural projects by the Saudi regime:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/2008/12/un-making-mecca.html
I get it Aziz: She’s Muslim. Which is fine except why were we told that she was Christian? Why did the Obama campaign have to emphasize it so much? Middle America could care less what his ancestors’ religion was; just that he “accepted Christ”. Remember, individual spiritual decision trumps religious ancestry in American Christians’ minds.
But the other deeper question is: why are no non-Muslims allowed in Mecca (Hajj or not)? If you asked the Catholic Church if you could attend Easter Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica I’m sure they would be fine with it if you said you would be respectful; it’s happened in the past. Imagine the PR Islam could get from non-Muslims returning to their lands speaking about how the Muslims commitment to justice was so great that they stood fast (literally, in two senses) in front of Mt. Arafat.
She’s Muslim. Which is fine except why were we told that she was Christian?
rofl Mike, you need to get some more sleep! :) When you realize what obvious, trivial fact you’re missing you are gonna self-facepalm.
as far as non-muslims in mecca, the answer is simple – there is no room for disbelief at the literal center of faith. As the qur’an says, to you your faith and to me mine. The analogy to Mass at St Peters’ is false; a superior analogy is, am I welcome in your bedroom at midnight? Thats how private, personal, and intimate Mecca is for muslims. Its not just a ceremony. It’s something much more – and you can get a sense of what i mean by reading all my various posts on Hajj.
Islam is eternal and doesn’t need PR. and theres absolutely nothing “unjust” or unfair about non-muslims being excluded from Mecca. Its right as rain.
Well, St. Peter’s is the “Mother Church” in the “literal center of faith” (The Vatican) for Catholics, and Easter is the highest of the high holy days for Christians (and Easter is not just a “ceremony” it much, much more; the very center of faith in another sense: the resurrection of Jesus and the fulfillment of his promise). The analogy would be the Ka’bah during Hajj; so my analogy fits and is true. So why are Catholics open to having Muslims in the most intimate and personal place during their most holy experience but Muslims are not? Why do Muslims show such bigotry and xenophobia when they decry it when it applied to them?
It is unjust and hypocritical.
And, yes, she was “sold” as a Christian.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-03-05-obama-kin_N.htm
And BTW, I have had a stranger in my room in the middle of the night while I slept, she was a researcher. She approached me (or really, sent out an ad) and once I knew she was “on the level” and would be respectful i allowed her to observe me (and collect data) for her research. Why would it be wrong to allow a non-muslim researcher who is researching religion to observe the Hajj first hand?
It’s unfortunate that the first thing I thought when I saw that drawing was “Barad-dûr and the eye of Sauron.”
ugh squared. its like the Saudis want to deliberately draw your eye away from Kaaba as you circle around towards their own monument instead of Allah’s.
thats not to say that there isnt a desperate need for housing and hotel space to accomodate pilgrims in Hajj, but this is just over the top.
whats next? concrete apartment high rises in Mina?
MikeLyons: How many grandmothers (living or passed on) do you have? I happen to have 2…
and no, easter mass at St Peters is nowhere near a good enough analogy. its only remotely analogous for some Christians. And even for them, its not the unique center of faith on a daily, even hourly basis, all year long. you could argue that Karbala is more analogous to Mass at St Peters’ however, and it shoudl be noted that there are no restrictions on nonmuslims going there.
How many grandmothers (living or passed on) do you have? I happen to have 2…
OK, so you think my analogy is shallow and trivial. But then why do you make trivial points in that effort?
and no, easter mass at St Peters is nowhere near a good enough analogy. its only remotely analogous for some Christians
Didn’t say “Christians”, said “Catholics” (with Catholics being a subset of the set Christian). But that doesn’t answer my question. You can meet with the Pope (well, if he personally allows it. Being a religious leader does not necessarily mean he gives up his personal preferences on who he meets with), you can go to the Vatican (again, theoretically; there is no religious law against you going there), you can attend Mass, watch as Communion, Baptism, Last Rites, etc are performed (no laws against a non-believer doing so. No taint or “filthiness” you carry which would invalidate the rite). Why can I not stand respectfully in Mecca and observe the Hajj? Why can I not (while observing Islamic norms of dress, grooming, interaction) walk your holy city and learn about the history, people, architecture that make up this most important (to you) city? Why the exclusion?
I’ll spell it out for you Mike. Obama’s grandma at Hajj is his father’s mother – a muslim. The grandma you refer to as being “sold as a Christian” is his mother’s mother.
good grief!
you are trying to make an analogy for Catholics as equivalent to all of Islam? theres your problem right there. i guess oif you’re catholic the analogy seems reasonable.
and its not a matter of “taint”. Its just simple: you arent a believer. Its not for you. Going thru the motions of hajj even in perfect fidelity to tradition and dress is just nonsensical. Its not just a ritual to us. it has MEANING. its sacred and you cant participate unless you mean it.
“Good Grief” right back at ya, pally. You obviously didn’t read that article from USA Today I linked and were asleep during the campaign. It and they are referring to Obama’s Paternal Grandmother; the one who lives in Africa.
And I didn’t say “go through the motions”; I said “respect”. And I didn’t say participate; I said observe. If you were allowed, in my analogy, to attend St. Peter’s Basilica on Easter Mass you certainly wouldn’t be allowed to be given the Communion; but you could observe the sacrament without invalidating it .
Its not just a ritual to us. it has MEANING. its sacred and you cant participate unless you mean it.
Yeah, that’s right, all non-Muslim religious observances are just mindless ritual not filled with sacred meaning, right?
and its not a matter of “taint”.
So I guess you gotta stop using that Muslim word for non-Muslim meaning “taint” or “filth”(i.e. “Kaffr”)
I’m sorry Aziz, but as an observer with no skin in this fight (deist) your arguments are entirely uncompelling. Your argument essentially boils down to, “my religion is holy and yours isn’t.” By saying that the Islamic traditions cannot be observed because they are sacred implies that any tradition that may be observed isn’t sacred. I don’t buy that.
You’re right Mike that US News article seems to insist his paternal grandmother is Christian. Thats odd. I had only heard reference to his maternal grandmother during the campaign, though. And trust me, I was paying attention. The US News link is the only time I’ve ever seen the assertion that his paernal grandmother was Christian. Strange. I’l look into that.
Yeah, that’s right, all non-Muslim religious observances are just mindless ritual not filled with sacred meaning, right?
of GMAFB. You cant understand our rituals. Not even if you observed wiht maximum respect, you would still be an outsider. This has nothing to do with your beliefs so stop playing teh victim card.
Phelps, you too are trying to turn this aroudn but youre just wrong. My refusal to share something intimate with you doesnt mean you dont have something equally intimate.
That said, if you’re a member of a religion and you DONT think other religions are, essentially, false ones – then youre not doing religion correctly. No Christian – not one who respects his own faith – thinks that MY religion is just as holy as theirs. They would be STUPID to grant Islam equal status with Christianity if they adhere to Christianity.
you can claim that my argument boils down to the TAUTOLOGY that “my religion is holy and yours isnt” but thats pretty much a tangent. a true tangent, but a tangent nonetheless.
Maybe I shoudl do a pos on this at COB. I jad no idea that there were non muslims who really even gave a damn about going to Mecca. Frankly I figured only journlaists would be even sightly interested. Do you realize how HARD Hajj is? Why youd want to do it oif you didnt find anyt meaning in it, and werent thus obligated to, is utterly baffling to me.
but fine, if it is ever up to me, everyone on DW can have a Visit Mecca pass. Except Kevin. :)
(j/k man :)
You cant understand our rituals. Not even if you observed wiht maximum respect, you would still be an outsider. This has nothing to do with your beliefs so stop playing teh victim card.
this reminds me of the old joke about the American businessman trying to get a room in a Japanese hotel. In short, the hotel manager says “you don’t speak japanese” the businessman says “but I’m fluent in japanese” it goes on and on like that with the hotel manager raising objections to the businessman won’t like the communal baths, the food, the tight quarters. It ends with an exasperated businessman finally having thought he got through all the objections and the hotel manager says “Ah, but you don’t speak Japanese”
In short, the joke is about mindless, stubborn bigotry on the part of the hotel manager. he doesn’t want the Gaijin in his hotel but raises silly, nonsensical and offensive objections just to deny him. Which is analogous to you bringing up “you can’t understand our rituals”
Can you understand them? Then I can. I can read, I am highly intelligent, well-read, highly educated. I can master quantum mechanics, advanced calculus, metaphysical philosophy, computer science, biochemistry, japanese language; I believe I can master a 7th-century religion. Many, millions, before me who were a lot less intelligent have understood your rituals.
Or is it I can understand it intellectually yet do not convert that you say I “can’t understand it”? If so, see japanese hotel manager above.
And finally, if being part of a religion is a firm requirement to understanding that religion’s rituals doesn’t that undermine your whole religion? Mohammed created Islam out of criticisms of Judaism and Christianity. What was he doing giving such criticisms when he could not understand these religions since he was not a believer in them?
as we are talking past each other – you’re insistent on playing the victim card here when its really not about you – Im going to focus on the part of your last comment that is truly thought provoking:
And finally, if being part of a religion is a firm requirement to understanding that religion’s rituals doesn’t that undermine your whole religion?
Actually Mohammed SAW did not “create” Islam out of a critique of the previous faiths but rather brought an updated religion which explicitly claimed those faiths as its ancestors. In fact muslims consider themselves technically also Jews and Christians too, since we revere Jesus and Moses as prophets of god and honor Jews and Christians as People of the Book (see the Constitution of Medina).
From a Christian perspective Mohammed invented a new religion, but from the muslim perspective he updated a very old one. Plus, all prophets of God are a category unto themselves as bearers of a divine message, so if you believe Mohammed was such a prophet then theres no reason to suppose he had a limited understandin of Christianity at all.
You are also missing the point about what “understanding the religion” means in teh context of Mecca. I am quite sure actually that you could understand Islam quite well, and better than many muslims, if you applied yourself to study of it. I mean, its not THAT complicated – its a religion after all. But the key reason you cant set foot in Mecca is not your understanding but your lack of belief. If you do not agree that it is sacred then you may not enter. This is to preserve the dignity of the sacred itself. If you really fail (or refuse) to see why that would be so by your disbelief, then you and I have really takem this convo about as far as we can, and I have to regretfully withdraw.
Anything with over a million people in one place is not intimate. There has to be at least one person there who is just going through the rituals. There has to be at least one apostate just doing it to keep up appearances. That’s the human condition.
The simple fact is that the exclusionary rules are simple bigotry. You may believe that they are justified, but let’s not dress it up like it is anything else. If it is justified, then justify it, but don’t avoid that by calling it something else.
So if I believe that I am also a prophet while still revering all the previous Middle Eastern prophets, I’m technically also Muslim and welcome at the Hajj?
So if I believe that I am also a prophet while still revering all the previous Middle Eastern prophets, I’m technically also Muslim and welcome at the Hajj?
Well, Muhammad SAW said he was the “seal of the Prophets” and that after delivering teh Quran Allah had “perfected [your] religion for you” so you cant claim an add-on anymore and still be muslim :) There are actuually people who have claimed exactly that and they are usually deemed heretics.
That was what I guessed. (Note that Christians, even though their religion evolved directly from the Judaism of its time, don’t claim to also be Jews, except for a few small Messianic Jewish denominations.)
Speaking as a former Protestant-turned-atheist-turned-Catholic and all-around studier of religion, a few comments:
1) If exclusionary rules are bigotry, then, the Catholic Church is clearly “bigoted” because while you certainly may attend mass (“services”) at St. Peter’s or most other ceremonies, you certainly are NOT allowed to take communion if you are not Catholic (or, in some cases, Orthodox). I’ve seen more than one non-Catholic whine and claim victim status on this, or to claim it’s bigotry, or “anti-Biblical” or whatever. Or, in some cases, just snort derisively: “what’s the big deal, it’s just some bread and wine, right?”
But this is extremely intimate–actually, the most important rite and the center of worship–for the Church. Not just at St. Peter’s, but any time and anywhere. Now, it’s not normally the case that someone’s sitting there at the door checking your membership card, but if you take communion and aren’t a part of the Church–especially if you know you’re not supposed to, and it’s known that you’re not Catholic–then you’ll have done something outright blasphemous.
You may if you wish call this bigotry. In fact, I’d say that if I accepted Mike’s logic, it clearly is. For us, though, you’re not supposed to be even touching the substance of God’s flesh and blood unless you’re in a state of grace, which you probably can’t be if you aren’t Catholic and haven’t done a few other things on top of that (well, it’s a wee bit more complicated than that, but the rule is pretty firm that most non-Catholics are seriously not supposed to even touch, let alone take part in the rite).
2) St. Peter’s is not “the holiest site in Catholicism.” Not by a long shot.The closest we have to that is the (very large) Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem, which most of the world’s Christians (including Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Armenian Apostolic, Coptic Orthodox, and Syriac Orthodox) believe covers the area where the crucifixion, entombment, and resurrection of Christ took place. With the notable exception of many Protestants (who are all over the map on the question depending on sect), the vast majority of Christians worldwide would agree this is our holiest site.
Because the site is so large and has such an ancient and complex history, there are many interesting (and sometimes embarrassing) stories about it regarding who controls the entrance, who controls or is even allowed into what areas, when and how renovations are allowed to take place, etc.
2) The way the Sauds run Mecca is a subject of ongoing controversy amongst Muslims. I suspect the more onerous punishments are more a matter of draconian Saudi law than any firm Muslim commandment. It’s not always easy to separate the two but it’s worth the effort.
I, personally, have no problem at all with a “you’re not Muslim, you’re not part of this, you aren’t welcome here at this time” mentality. I do have a problem with the more draconian rules about it set up by the Saudi Kingdom.
There’s a big difference between ‘not allowed to take part’, and ‘not able to even witness it, and, you know what, just get the fuck out of the entire town.’ I’m not a fan of the LDS runs its temple, either, but they don’t ban non-Mormons from being in Salt Lake City at all.
What it really comes down to, from what I have seen, is the belief that non-Muslims are unclean. That is flat out bigotry, and dressing it up in religion does not excuse it. It is no more excusable to me than the belief that black people are unclean through the Curse of Ham myth of the bible.
In the root Greek and Hebew, the word “unclean” would be the same word to explain why you’re not allowed to take communion, actually. It has to do with ritual and spiritual issues, not anything personal. It is similarly related to the ancient Christian term “infidel” (which is straight out of the King James Bible, as it happens). It has more to do with spiritual fitness in a context like this, and not some generalized judgment of a person’s character.
A woman on her period is deemed “unclean” in the Bible, by the way. If you insist on reading that as a condemnation of menstruating women, you can I suppose, but most biblical scholars (Jewish and Christian alike) would call that a terrible misreading.
*Sigh* I repeat, again, why aren’t non-Muslims allowed to witness Hajj (watch respectfully but not participate)? I never brought up participating in the rite; in fact I specifically stated that the observers would not be allowed to participate.
And you compare the Catholic Church’s ban on Menstruating women to Islam’s complete ban on non-believers? Let me ask you: would the Catholic Church allow them in if they weren’t Menstruating?
Yes. So while it is a bit of a silly anachronism (which other non-Catholic religions also have) it does not exclude them because they are women. Islam excludes people even from being in the same city because they are non-believers. It is part of Islamic Theology that non-belief (or really, different belief) confers a status of “filth” or (in many Muslim’s eyes) “sub-human” on you.
Phelps is correct, this really is situation of covering up bigotry with religion. Bigotry we would not tolerate for an instant from most other groups but since it is dressed up in their religious belief we have to be tolerant of their intolerance.
I’m sorry, I might be going out on a limb here (I certainly don’t think so) but this (the treatment of non-Muslims in the Muslim world) is a major Civil/Human rights issue for Islam; one that the Muslim world is failing horribly.
Mike: So it’s bigotry if you can’t be there, but not bigotry if you’re not allowed to participate? You’re drawing a rather arbitrary line there. Especially in something like the Hajj, where your very presence would seem to indicate some degree of participation.
Also, do you even understand traditional Christianity? The Catholic Church has no “ban” on menstruating women, and I didn’t say it did. If anything I said the opposite. Do you not understand the difference between ritual cleanliness and literal?
As for the fact that many Muslims and some Muslim-dominated regions have backwards human rights beliefs and practices: that they do. The example you’re giving isn’t very strong though. Ritual purity doesn’t have anything to do with this.
The differences between spiritual and temporal filth is a difference without a difference, because my point is that it is all a pretense in the first place. You are in the same position as someone arguing the theology of the curse of Ham myth rather than the underlying bigotry.
phelps,
Some people don’t get invited to weddings and you are worrying about entire religions leaving you excluded.
get a life.
Riiiiight. And I guess you believe that Martin Luther King Jr. was just being uppity, too, right?
How MLK Jr showed up… I don’t know… but no not him.
On the other hand, Minister Louis Farrakhan —
Oh. Nevermind.
Bigotry is bigotry. Dressing it up in religion does not excuse it.
You keep changing the subject.
Other than that Hajj ya doing ?
Some people don’t get invited to weddings and you are worrying about entire religions leaving you excluded.
That really is a piss-poor analogy, I could spend an entire long-winded post showing how that is a piss-poor analogy. Instead, I’ll give a counter-analogy to illustrate Phelps’ an my point.
Suppose the Prince of Wales, second in line of succession of the British crown, were to be married. Of course it would be a State and a Church of England event. Now suppose that in announcing this event the crown stated “Muslims will not be allowed at this ceremony and if they try to attend the ceremony at Westminster Abbey (whether invited or not) or try to attend any of the functions including the reception parade for the people they will be removed from scene, arrested and prosecuted simply for being Muslims” do you think people will just shrug and say “Well, it’s not for THEM”?
No, the Muslims would be in a justified uproar, Dean would be frothing at the mouth screaming “Islamophobe!”, Aziz would be penning long posts at his home blog explaining how this is just like Jim Crow, Obama would make a excessively long-winded speech, etc.
Look, signs like “Whites Only” or “Muslims only” went out with Jim Crow; were the predominant enfranchised group felt it “right as rain” to harshly discriminate against the powerless, disenfranchised group. And Muslim talk of religious commitment to “justice” combined with their vocal advocacy of civil rights for Muslims in non-Muslim lands should make this an easy test issue for them to get behind.
Oh, and Dean, I misread your comment. I only brought up the Catholic thing because I thought you had mentioned it. Soryy.
But, Phelps is correct. Trying to differentiate and justify ritual uncleanliness and real uncleanliness is simply to cover up religious bigortry.
Let’s see. Prince Charles marries Camilla in a civil ceremony at Windsor Guildhall and his parents never showed up And Charles gets to be the new King when mom dies. And you’re worried if muslims can come to his wedding. And btw, they never did have a religious wedding. But there was a nice showpiece wherein they went to Westminster Abbey for a blessing and not a marriage.
Wow McKiernan,
Here’s the point I was trying to make by means of an analogy (look it up maybe you’ll understand better), and here’s the point that you just made 50 billion lightyears apart.
I’m not worried that “muslims can come to his wedding”; I’m emphasizing the point that to specifically deny entrance to a group (or in this case the complement group to muslims) is bigotry and would not be tolerated even under the excuse (that the Church of England could theoretically give) that this is a religious ceremony and that it would be “meaningless” to non-Anglicans (or non-Christians, or non-Protestants, or just “the darkies from the South and East of the Mediterranean”).
No, in England Muslim heads of State (and probably local Muslim clerics) would be allowed.
It is simply a dangerous form of bigotry to have exclusionary and discriminatory policies enforced by the state and to dress it up as “it’s our religion”. Maybe MY religion is one that says that people who follow a religious code that inseparably binds a religion with state functions should not be allowed in this country that has Secular government and separation of Church and State and that under my “religious belief” people like Aziz (and many Jews and Protestants, BTW) they should be excluded*.
*Not my belief, BTW, and I’d defend Aziz’s inalienable right to worship Allah in the U.S. with just as much ferocity that I am defending the right of non-Muslims in Muslim lands here.
Finally, to make a point possibly to clarify the issue to Aziz and Dean who seem to think that it is OK for Muslims to exclude non-Muslims from Mecca because they are “ritually unclean” and would violate Islamic religious dictates. What would you say if a Jewish person justified expelling all non-Jews from Israel on the basis that it was “holy territory” and non-Jews were “ritually unclean”? I only bring this up as a hypothetical because, even though I remember reading that some extremist jews have made this argument, I was unable to find a link.
Answer: you’d label it for what it is: simple bigotry, thinly disguised as religion.
i dunnno where you get the non-muslims are “unclea” and “filthy” stuff from, but i suspect youve been reading too much Ba(shit) Yeor. And extrapolating that to violence and Israel is the same tired tactic wherein everything muslims do is somehow tied to that miserable topic.
“…I’m emphasizing the point that to specifically deny entrance to a group (or in this case the complement group to muslims) is bigotry”.
Precisely, Mike. that’s where I call it bogus and willful misunderstanding of the distinctions between bigotry and discrimination, or as in this case of exclusionary protocols.
Pray tell, what is this definition of bigotry that you have that doesn’t include excluding others from an entire city, by law, based on nothing more than their creed?
Just to address this:
1. The royal family wasn’t under threat of arrest if they did show up, or in fact, even set foot in Berkshire.
2. The odds of Charles being the next king (which includes being the head of the CoE) are very, very low.
What, you had insider info on Prince Charles and didn’t tell us. That’s not fair.
On the other hand, you aren’t invited to Mecca, until King Saud says so.
Hint: Just don’t try it.
Just wondering if there has been any media coverage of the torrential rains that have been falling in Saudi Arabia since the Hajj began.
Any mention of the scores of deaths as a result of corruption, bad management and flooding in Jeddah? Or the outraged Saudi citizens who have been screaming about this on facebook?
Why do Muslims put up with Wahhabi corruption, mismanagement and destruction of their holy sites?
Because they control the holy sites, and that makes the best hostage they could have. If they push too hard, the Saudis say “NO HAJJ FOR YOU!” and few are willing to take that chance.
Comments on this entry are closed.