King Abd�ullah: Was this smart?
Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Islamic INTRAfaith Dialogue
Forum Description: Matters/topics, related to various sects, are discussed where only Muslims who may or may not belong to a sect take part.
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=10647
Printed Date: 24 November 2024 at 11:01pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: King Abd�ullah: Was this smart?
Posted By: Israfil
Subject: King Abd�ullah: Was this smart?
Date Posted: 08 November 2007 at 8:24am
|
http://news.yahoo.com/photo/071106/ids_photos_wl/r27615914.jpg">
I'm curious as to why this gentleman [King Abd'ullah] gave the Pope, a man who has made statements about Islam in the past, a golden sword? Already Islam is considered to be the most violent of all religions and of all things that are diplomatic, the.....King.......gives......the....pope....a.....sword? In this world some political figures are seen as greater physical representations of their country/religion. I hardly see this gesture as beneficial. See ref: http://news.yahoo.com/photo/071106/ids_photos_wl/r27615914.jpg - http://news.yahoo.com/photo/071106/ids_photos_wl/r27615914.j pg |
Replies:
Posted By: peacemaker
Date Posted: 08 November 2007 at 10:15am
|
This thread will be moved to intrafaith section. ------------- Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny? Qur'an 55:13 |
Posted By: peacemaker
Date Posted: 08 November 2007 at 10:59am
|
Assalamu Alaikum, Some might argue that this thread should be in current events. Perhaps that is also right. But, it is also sectarian in nature. King Abdullah�s actions don�t represent Islam as a whole. The title "King" or "monarchy" itself has no bearing in Islam that is prevalent in many so-called Muslim nations; it goes against the sacred institution of Islamic rule. A true Muslim always likes to see what Islam tells in any matter so that he or she could follow laws set therein. Anyway, I had to move it here primarily due to the sectarian nature of the thread. While we may not agree on some or many issues, it is very important that we discuss such matters with utmost care in order to maintain hospitable and learner-friendly environment here. Dawah should be an important objective in our lives, and many people see how we interact and exchange information whether or not they are active members. True, it is important what we say, and it is equally important how we deliver it. In no way do I mean that I am free from any flaw; we all may have our shortcomings. That is why we should interact to learn, to share, and to improve. Please feel free to discuss amicably that would help us avoid any misapprehension. May Allah guide us all. Peace ------------- Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny? Qur'an 55:13 |
Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 08 November 2007 at 11:46am
|
It is a great topic, giving of sword by a Muslim to a Catholic can mean many things in favor or against both religions. Christians have been for ages blaming the Muslims that Islam was spread by sword. So king Abdulla giving the sword to the Catholic king may mean " Sir, you can have the sword and do not blame us for anything about the sword any more." The pope will reply, "Dear friend, what use I have for any sword. Our religion is not in favor of any sword." The real purpose of giving the sword as a gift can only be explained by the king himself. There is a good hidden message in this good gift. But it is difficult to deocde. The kings always do the high grade things which have meanings. But who will explain the meaning now ?? I agree with Israfil that it was not a good gesture to offer the sword to the pope. But it could mean the end of enmity and the beginning of friendship. Let us wait and see what the angels say about it. ------------- If any one is bad some one must suffer |
Posted By: Israfil
Date Posted: 09 November 2007 at 8:07am
|
Peacemaker, So moving this thread here does what? Mixed messages? You guys do it all the time with advertising and such so the prevention of mixed messages are out the door, if that is what you are hinting at. Frankly, my question stems from whether this diplomatic figure did the smart thing. Some people say it is a nice gesture some may not. Personally, I find the sword [which some may assert as a symbolic gesture of war] to be the wrong message. I mean, For God sakes! Muslims are already seen as a war mongering people, so why further this stereotype by giving the pope...Come on the pope! A sword? That is like Fidel Castro giving Jesus Christ a butcher knife. I'm not infering that the pope is pure, but I'm merely referring to how the world sees the pope not just as the poplitical figure but also the religious figure. Yes we can talk all day about how Abd'ullah does not represent Islam but the world does not see it that way so we really need to get over ourselves in repeating ourselves about how such and such do not represent Islam. The world does not hear us. We need to focus on what symbols the world believes represents Islam and continually and outwardly change those symbols. The pope in that meeting stated "Abd'ullah comes from the heart of Islam" perhaps he meant he lives in Mecca or rules in the country where Islam begin. Who knows? All I know is the pope, like the world, made the association of a political/religious figure to Islam |
Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 10 November 2007 at 3:42am
|
It is a good point Israfil. The King is a representation in the eyes of the world of a Muslim nation. Whether anyone likes it or not, those leaders are the "public face." that the other 5.5 billion people may see. I am suer if they had thought about it more they could have found something else.. and really when you think about it, does the Pope need a sword?? ------------- When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi |
Posted By: Israfil
Date Posted: 10 November 2007 at 8:09am
|
Exactly. If the intention was truly peaceful, I would have given him a Qur'an and called it a day. |
Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 11 November 2007 at 1:00am
|
I would like to concur with Brother Peacemaker's comment on the legitimacy of this Anglo-American neo colonial kingship in the holy lands. The standard and the mantle of the Prophet which is supposed to be in the possession of his vicegerent, they are in the Topkapi Museum. The Saudis have not dared to request them for an obvious reason i.e., their illegitimacy for joining the enemy of Islam! All the news pictorials I have viewed about king Abdullah's visit are quite poignant when you are able to study the king's body language though hidden under the cloak outfits while on his European whirlwind homage to the European powers. With W's application of Shock Doctrine in the land of Euphrates and Tigris which enriched his petro buddies in the kingdom to an unexpected levels (black gold going from $20 to 98 pb) at the expense of the rest of the world. this is not sitting well with Europeans. The poor countries in dire straights and can't do much but to suffer in silence. The powerful could expect some sharing of the loot in form of commercial contracts so the Brits and Germans got their shares. At Vatican the new Pope is first German in almost five centuries has a different agenda when it comes to Islam. Remember his pronunciations a while back about the Prophet(s) He has been told the plight of Filipino and other Catholic flock working in the kingdom about the restrictions in their prayer activities. The Saudi clan somehow is feeling the heat that the hostility in west is on the rise so this king has taken the ultimate step to visiting the most powerful Pope as an apologist and weakling with a peace offering, the gift of sword as misplaced beduin tradition of creating the friendship with a feisty Pope. If you pay closer attention to all the pictures of his visit and you will draw a conclusion from the Pope's body language that is saying hey you are bringing this sword to me; do I look like a camel jockey? I will take the gold any time! If you know he has projected himself as people's Pope by simplifying his dress dropping the papal tiara and including people in his inaugural mass whereas Abdullah represents diametrically opposite gluttonous Anglo American supported self styled royalty who is ready to help on each and every intrigue the vested powers hatch around in the world. It looks like as if the king being called on the carpet by the Pope to talk about the treatment to his Filipino flock, and Saudi king trying to deflect with a gift of sword. In return he got papal medallion. I think the Saudis have some ominous gut feeling that they are trying to make amends. But this whole theater was out of place and in bad taste! The news reports: A Vatican statement said "the presence and hard work of Christians (in Saudi Arabia) was discussed" -- seen as a clear reference to the Vatican's concern over the Christian minority. Vatican sources said before the meeting that they expected the Pope to raise his concern over the situation of Catholics and other Christians in Saudi Arabia. The Vatican wants greater rights for the 1 million Catholics who live in Saudi Arabia, most of them migrant workers who are not allowed to practice their religion in public. I would question the rationality of hiring so many Catholics in the first place if Saudis don't plan to facilitate the practice of their faith!!! They are only allowed to worship in private places, usually homes, and cannot wear signs of their faith in public. Muslims around the world protested last year after Benedict, speaking at a university in his native Germany, used a quote that associated Islam with violence. In that speech at a university in Regensburg in his native Germany, Benedict quoted the Byzantine emperor Manuel Paleologus as saying to a Muslim: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." The Pope later said he was misunderstood and has several times expressed esteem for Muslims. At the end of the meeting, the king gave the Pope a gold and silver sword studded with precious jewels, in keeping with a bedouin custom the Saudis also follow when foreign leaders visit their country. The king also presented Benedict with a small silver and gold statue depicting a palm tree and a man riding a camel. What is he trying to prove, as if the label of being a Camel jockey is appreciated in the west In an interview with Reuters on the eve of the meeting, the
bishop in charge of Catholics in Saudi Arabia called on the
country to guarantee more freedom and security for minority
Christians and allow more priests in to minister to the
faithful. ------------- Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction. |
Posted By: ZEA J
Date Posted: 11 November 2007 at 10:32pm
Says who? ------------- "You will never attain piety and righteousness,(and eventually paradise)until you spend of that which you love."(Al-Imran:92) |
peacemaker wrote:Posted By: Israfil
Date Posted: 12 November 2007 at 12:18am
|
Here are short clips of the meeting: http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=70288&feedType=VideoRSS&feedName=TopNews - http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=70288&feedType =VideoRSS&feedName=TopNews The problem with politics and political leaders is, despite the reality, there is always room to show off how much money you have. I'll admit, the sword looks nice and I'm sure its value could feed millions. I again echo my sentiments before: regardless whether this man performed his gestures out of sincerity, or to discuss the current filipino workers in Saudi Arabia this man's actions will seem to be a reflection of all Muslims. The world at this point does not care whether real Muslims exist. The world right now sees negative actions as an indicator of Islam as a religion. This man [King Abd'ullah] actions will not be considered a peaceful symbolic gesture. |
Posted By: peacemaker
Date Posted: 12 November 2007 at 4:14am
The title "King" or "monarchy" itself has no bearing in Islam that is prevalent in many so-called Muslim nations; it goes against the sacred institution of Islamic rule. A true Muslim always likes to see what Islam tells in any matter so that he or she could follow laws set therein. ------------- Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny? Qur'an 55:13 |
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 05 June 2008 at 12:47pm
|
I dont know whether it was smart or not . . . I simply think that we're thinking too deeply into the issue. The issue here is whether or not the King bieng a muslim head-of-state, hence kinda representing his fellow muslim countrymen should be entertaining a Pope who has such distorted views of Islam, or not. Pope Ratzinger was very vocal abt his negative opinions, which were factually/historically incorrect, and was propogating those beliefs. . .
I think giving a sword as a gift has something to do with Saudi or Arabic traditions. Swords have great cultural symbolism there, hence gifting one was probably a cultural thing. Whn a ruler gifts someone a sword, it probably expresses the peaceful/friendly intentions of the country. Thats all.
|
Posted By: mariyah
Date Posted: 06 June 2008 at 9:22am
Well, does anyone remember what the medievel Catholics did to the remnant Moriscos in post islamic spain, and who was welding the sword that destroyed the tolerant, most enlightened civilization of the times? It wasn' t the Muslims that destroyed a culture that was thriving with Muslims, christians and Jew living in harmony!
If It looks like as if the king being called on the carpet by the Pope to talk A Vatican statement said "the presence and hard work of Christians (in Saudi Arabia) was discussed" -- seen as a clear reference to the Vatican's concern over the Christian minority. Vatican sources said before the meeting that they expected the Pope to raise his concern over the situation of Catholics and other Christians in Saudi Arabia. The Vatican wants greater rights for the 1 million Catholics who live in Saudi Arabia, most of them migrant workers who are not allowed to practice their religion in public. Well they dont let schoolgirls wear hijab at school either In France! [/QUOTE] ------------- "Every good deed is charity whether you come to your brother's assistance or just greet him with a smile. |
Posted By: Hamzah
Date Posted: 06 June 2008 at 4:15pm
|
I remember one Student of Islam was asked
Why can't you build or have churches in Saudi Arabia? he answered: can you have Mosques built in the Vatican? no was the answer, so he replyed: Saudi Arabia is like the Vatican but it's just a little bit bigger!  ------------- "Whosoever fears Allah, he will appoint for him a way out, and provide for him from where he does not expect" |
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 07 June 2008 at 3:13am
 ------------- "O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young." |
Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 07 June 2008 at 9:32pm
Comparing Saudi Arabia with Vatican is like comparing apple with orange! Who would need a mosque in Pope's offices which is Vatican with hardly any Muslim employed there? The mosque should be center of the community of believers and not a shell for show! Essentially all dignitaries, priests, nuns, guards, and the approximately 3,000 lay workers live outside the Vatican! The place is smaller than our shopping mall covering less than 3/4 of a sq. mile! Only commonality might be their establishment time frame of mid twenties of last century when Vatican got the independence from Italy and Saudi Arabia a payoff in helping the destruction of Caliphate! The question for the Saudi Arabians is that why do you hire people of Christen / Catholic or Hindu religions if don't plan to let them fulfill the demands of their faiths? If they were few in numbers is one thing but with million plus presence the pretense doesn't make sense! Unless of course if the contract states upfront that they forgo the part but you know these Filipinos are hard core Catholics! Don't forget the neo colonials won't let you learn or practice the true Islamic faith in your land after they demolished the Khilafah and Saudi Arabia was set up! So what gives? ------------- Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction. |
Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 08 June 2008 at 1:05am
|
"The king also presented Benedict with a small silver and gold statue depicting a palm tree and a man riding a camel." Frankly I find this more unIslamic than presenting a sword. The Saudi monarchy does not represent Islam for me. As a Muslim I find that any "Muslim" head of state who demands sujjud from his subjects is verging on shirk. Not to mention the hand kissing....------------- �No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.� Eleanor Roosevelt |
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 08 June 2008 at 6:10am
Although I find nothing unislamic with presenting a sword . . . or the camel/tree thing . . .
The latter part I agree with a 100%.
|
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 08 June 2008 at 6:35am
I would like to clarify in the beginning by saying that I do not agree with the policies of the Saudi Monarchy . . . niether do I believe they are the representatives of Islam.
I may personally agree/disagree with the church decision, heres how banning religous places of worship can be justified:
1. You said the mosque should be a centre for the community, not a shell for show. . . agreed a 100%. Nobody here said otherwise.
2. Just because a place is small, doesnt justify it having places of worship. UNLESS there r other reasons. So by saying that the Vatican is small, you cannot justify it not having other places of worship whilst blaming the Saudis.
3. You ask why the Saudi's hire non-muslims from othert countries as foriegn workers if they are not willing to provide them churches . . . . . One may put the same question to the Foriegn Workers. They GO there for materialistic reasons i.e Jobs. Nobody forces them. They go there with prior knowledge that Arabia will not have places of worship . . . They can always CHOOSE not to go, and instead the religous workers can opt for the other large number of countries that demand them.
If they have a problem with a lack of churches . . . They shouldnt go. So you cannot say they r being suppressed bcz Saudi doesnt hav churches. Its a public fact. (The treatment, cruelty etc is another issue altogether which no one condones)
4. I dont understand what u mean by referring to the neo-colonial, secular example.
5. ONE of the major reasons why I believe the Saudi's do not allow any missionary work or other places of worship is because Mecca & Medina are the hub of Muslim pilgrims from all over the world. This includes many unaware, illetrate muslims with little knowledge of Islam as well as new converts . . . . Allowing the preaching of other religions causes possibilities of these Muslims being influenced. Also, since Mecca and Medina is where muslims from all over the world congregate . . . Any knowledge, innovations that may be spreading among them NEEDS to monitored by the Saudis. So that innovations in Islam are prevented.
6. You may not know . . .but the Government ALSO keeps a strict check on any pamphlets, books that MUSLIMS bring there as well. There are many so called sects being formed, and this is to prevent them preaching thier twisted knowledge there. Muslims are not allowed to take personal prayer books there either. And the Security also keeps a strict check on ppl performing innovations there . . .Some ppl go overboard when they see the Kabaah for the first time and start clinging to it, or taking pieces of the cloth away . . .THAT is also banned. . . because this is on the verge of Shirk (idolatorous behaviour) and thus is banned. Why u may ask? So OTHER muslims there dont mistake it as the 'correct' behaviour and go back with unislamic knowledge bcz they say this happening in Mecca. Islam is very strict about spreading innovations in the religion.
SO, EVEN the MUSLIMS religous activities are monitored. NOT only the nonmuslims.
7. The case of Mecca & Medina HOWEVER cannot be applied to Muslim countries all over the world. . . .because Islam respects the right to build places of worship, and allowing them to practise thier religion. In Islam . . .the demolition of places of worship is strictly prohibited. . . whether they be churches, temples or synagogues. The prohibition of non-muslim places of worship is ONLY applicable to the Haram Sharif which is in Saudi Arabia.
|
Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 10 June 2008 at 12:32am
|
Chrysalis is in black me in brown 2. Just because a place is small, doesnt justify it having
places of worship. UNLESS there r other reasons. So by saying that the 3. You ask why the Saudi's hire non-muslims from othert
countries as foriegn workers if they are not willing to provide them churches .
. . . . One may put the same question to the Foriegn Workers. They GO there for materialistic reasons i.e Jobs. Nobody forces
them. They go there with prior knowledge that If they have a problem with a lack of churches . . . They shouldnt go. So you cannot say they r being suppressed bcz Saudi doesnt hav churches. Its a public fact. (The treatment, cruelty etc is another issue altogether which no one condones) Pope has tabled the issue only
the time will tell and the king is not going to consult any of us! ----Saudis top
the world in materialistic practices, what European/ American Judeo Christian run/ owned franchise is not
facing the Haram sharif ? As Americans souls are in the hands of Jews the Saudi's souls are withe the Americans! Have you seen what goes on the inside of the gated communities in Saudi? The American Embassy is crawling with Jews and they have no control over it! I have been told by the Saudis beg to be invited to their parties so they can get some booze! The Saudis are in love with Jews more so than the Saudis themselves! 4. I dont understand what u mean by referring to the neo-colonial, secular example. What I mean by the neo colonials controls
means which Muslim country is free to function as a law and order model? Won�t
you agree 5. You don�t need to elaborate; have
been there and I know all about that police state! It is the Saud that is forcing
the an innovation to begin with ��Duh��.Everybody knows that non Muslims are not
to be allowed in the Haram�s precinct who is debating that? 6. You may not know . . .but the Government ALSO keeps a
strict check on any pamphlets, books that MUSLIMS bring there as well. There
are many so called sects being formed, and this is to prevent them preaching
thier twisted knowledge there. Muslims are not allowed to take personal prayer
books there either. And the Security also keeps a strict check on ppl
performing innovations there . . .Some ppl go overboard when they see the
Kabaah for the first time and start clinging to it, or taking pieces of the
cloth away . . .THAT is also banned. . . because this is on the verge of Shirk
(idolatorous behaviour) and thus is banned. Why u may ask? So OTHER muslims
there dont mistake it as the 'correct' behaviour and go back with unislamic
knowledge bcz they say this happening in SO, EVEN the MUSLIMS religous activities are monitored. NOT only the nonmuslims. You must be kidding; There is no way some one can cling to
the granite walls of Kabbah! may get run over! Have you tried it yourself? The amount of corruption amongst
Saudis is beyond the pale of the Mutawas my dear! I know how religious were Saudi I
had tons of them as school mates who practically lived at the bars as if they
had found paradise ! I am glad they are cooped up there after 9/11 Do you know Saudis
yourself? As a matter of fact they have destroyed
the Islamic heritage in their pursuit of commercialism! ------------- Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction. |
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 10 June 2008 at 1:24am
I really don't care if/why Abdullah went to the Pope's office. Probably lobbying, political relations, trying to improve saudi-christian ties . . . irrelevant. So who's saying the Saudi govt doesnt have its interests to look after? Like I said. . .I'm not defending the saudis. Those were simply my views as to why lack of churches in Saudi could be justified.
Nothing wrong with being materialistic. When I said the Foriegn Workers go there for materialistic reasons, I meant that there priority at that time is work/jobs. . . not following religion. Which is why they are willing to fore-go thier rights to go to church for that time period. Hence its there personal choice. Like I said, no body is forcing them to work in Saudi. They have a huge job-market in other countries as well, where churches are present. They can opt to work there. The reason they go to Saudi is because they get paid well.
And I think there is nothing islamically wrong with non-muslim owned franchises, as long as they do not violate islamic principles otherwise (halal/haram etc) Its similar to trading. . . And again . . .Islam is not against materialism, it is against other vices associated with the material world. I could not agree more that Saudia Arabia is materialistic. . .so are other countries, and they need to be to survive. Agreed?
However, commercialization of religous places is something that can be termed wrong or unislamic. . . And whoever does that, Incl Saudi Arabia. . . Im against that.
Depends on what your interpretation of 'better law and order' is. Was there peace? No. Were ppl satisfied/happy? No. Perhaps for a few yrs in the middle of colonization there may hav been a feeling of resignation. But history books will show u random spurts of unrest throughout. Again, was there equal treatment of races? No. There was elitism, suppression whatnot. The Law was for the weak. No 'Natives Title' etc etc. Would I say that Pakistan has better law today? In all honesty no. . . but just bcz things r not well now doesnt mean Colonization was 'better'. Both are ragged in thier own ways. Very detailed. . .
And which innovation are you talking about? Btw, there are 2 kinds of innovation in islam . . .the good and the bad. Clearly, any innovation that prevents bad-innovations - is a good innovation.
During the less-populous or should I say off-seasons my friend, one can get closer to the Kaabah and other places than usual. It is less croweded then. And ppl sometimes react a bit too emotinally or hysterically at this wondrous moment. 'Shurta's can be seen hurrying them along . . . or correcting them.
The Saudi's like any other nation have thier share of the good and the bad. Shockingly, yes. . .even Saudis can be corrupt. So whats the big deal? And why is it so out of the ordinary or surprising that it is worth mentioning again and again? Isnt it understood? You will find corruption wherever u find humans.
Who is debating/discussing piety? Why do you expect Saudis to have anymore piety or spirituality than you or I? They are humans, and not infallible due to thier 'arab' descendance. Yes, so some Saudi's may be correct/non-religous. Big whoop! I dont find that out of the ordinary, since they are humans after all and so are bound to have thier own mischief-makers.
Even if I do. . .the list will probably not be as long as yours, considering you have met/known intimatley 'tons' of Saudis. Despite that my friend, you have the narrow-sight to brand an entire nation based on your own experiences? If like you say you have known so many Saudi's, you must have come across many good examples. Bcz even though I knw a few, I knw they have thier share of good ppl. Perhaps, your experience is scarce after all . . .since you have only met a certain 'type' of Saudis . . . perhaps you should widen your circle. . . or make friends frm a better crowd, so you may have a glance at the 'better side' as well.
Last time I checked, my driver who has 10 kids to support, and works on a minimum wage, was able to go perform Hajj-e-badal for the 2nd time Alhamdulilah. I believe there are numerous packages according to affordability. However, I may be wrong . . .and if the Saudi's are using Hajj as a commercial tool, they are going against the essence of Islam and noone is supporting thme in that here. But I DO knw that the Saudi Monarchy despite being wrong in many things DOES take care of the Haajis quite a lot, at thier own expense. From food, water, essenials to transport. . . whn we see the bad in ppl, we should also have the guts to admit thier good as well.
Shirk is bad. Again, nobody is supporting them in that. No disagreement there at all. ------------- "O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young." |
Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 10 June 2008 at 6:54pm
|
"Won�t you agree Better law and order for whom? The ruling colonials or the enslaved Pakistanis?
I do have to agree with Sign Reader about the cost of Hajj. From the U.S., even if you go with a group package, sharing your room, etc, it is still over $6000.00 and that doesn't include everything. To many Muslims in this country that is alot of money.
But I have known alot of Saudis and most of them are very warm, sweet, and extermely hospitable. They cannot help being born in Saudi anymore than I could help being born in the U.S. and they certainly aren't responsible for what the monarchy does.
When people agree to go work in Saudi, I have a friend teaching there right now, they know that there are no churches, etc... This is not kept secret. They also know that they have to follow a dress code and a code of conduct which means no drinking, no pork, etc... They choose to go there because they get paid huge amounts of money and lots of fringe benefits that they would never get anywhere else. If you know you are going to work in a country that has such restrictions, and choose to go anyway, then you shouldn't complain when you get there or if you personally find it that bad, leave.
I have to say, are people getting dumber, or what? Some of the arguments on here are just monumentally ignorant. People go to Saudi to work then get upset because there are no churches, so this sovereign country which has every right not to have churches, comes under fire. If you want to work some place with easy access to YOUR own house of worship if it is other than Islam, don't go work in Saudi Arabia. Is that SO hard to grasp?
------------- �No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.� Eleanor Roosevelt |
Posted By: Hamzah
Date Posted: 11 June 2008 at 5:44am
|
Assalam Alaikum
The costs of preforming Hajj have little to do with the Saudi Government, it depends on the grp you travel with, here in Saudi Arabia you can preform Hajj from as low as 200 USD up to 4000 USD the Hajj visa is free, a plane ticket to Saudi Arabia will coust something in the region of 1000-1500 USD, the problem with living in places like the states is that you don't have so many options of Hajj groups, so the price tends to be high due to the fact that these Hajj group orginisers have not so much competition while in countries such as egypt if you take away the price of the plane tickets, the price would be 10 times less. ------------- "Whosoever fears Allah, he will appoint for him a way out, and provide for him from where he does not expect" |
Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 12 June 2008 at 2:19am
|
Even if the plane ticket cost is $1500.00 U.S., that's still $4500.00 plus for accomodations, which are sometimes a tent. That's just crazy.
Groups are already starting to advertise: $4800.00 per person and you have to share your room and/or tent with three other people. This is the cheapest deal I have been able to find, and you have to book now online, and it doesn't include the airfare to New York, the hajj fees, any taxes, fuel surcharges, any food, or the Qurbani. And the fuel surcharge can be what ever amount they choose to add.
So, for any muslim in the U.S. to perform Hajj this year, even purchasing the cheapest group ticket and sharing with three strangers, will cost at least $7000.00.
Are you honestly saying that government has no control over costs in Saudi Arabia. Especially for those performing Hajj? I didn't realize Saudi was a free market enterprise. ------------- �No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.� Eleanor Roosevelt |
Posted By: Hamzah
Date Posted: 12 June 2008 at 5:13am
|
The tents are those in Arafa Muzdalifa and Mina, these tents are fire proof properly ventilated and the best option for such places, once you have gone to hajj and may Allah realise this soon for you, you will understand what i mean, the government does not charge individuals but they charge groups Hajj companies for it, it is left for these companies to name their price to the individuals who chose to travel with them, i am staying in Bahrain currently, if i chose to make hajj it would cost me arround 1000 USD with a 4 star company not including plane tickets, while it would cost you almost 5000 USD not including the plane ticket, why? do you think the government will chrage Muslims from the States more than those from Bahrain? and if so it can never be such a big diffirence more than 4000 USD per individual? i think packages from the states tend to spend longer time 3 weeks in total to visit both Makka and Madina, an average hotel in Bahrain would cost you 125 USD per night, thats arround 3000 USD for 23 days and this does not include any meals apart from breakfast while hajj groups will provide dinner plus breakfast so that will push the total to 3000 USD, then you have transportation provided for the 23-25 day package.
What the Government charges per individual for these companies is small money and is nothing to what it puts back to run and maintain the holly places, once you are there sister you will know what i mean. i want you to look at the following package sister which i happend to find on the net: Round trip Air-Fare from/to New York Transportation by air-conditioned fleet Oriental Buffet meals (Breakfast and Dinner) Visit to Historical Holy sites in Madinah Munawarah Accommodations in a four star hotel walking distance to Masjid-al-Haram Makkah Accommodations in a five star hotel walking distance to Masjid-an-Nabawi Madinah Accommodations in Mina by Jamarat During 8th - 13th Zil-Hajj (Hajj days) while in Mina tents, no hotel accommodations will be available in Makkah for all above packages (no exceptions). this is the time in which the pilgrims go the the places i mentioned above Group accompanied by an experienced Mu'allim or Guide such packeges cost arround 5000-7000 USD, once you break it up it will be obvious that what the Saudi Government charges these Hajj companies per individual is peanuts. Barak Allahu Feek and may Allah grant you what your heart wishes. ------------- "Whosoever fears Allah, he will appoint for him a way out, and provide for him from where he does not expect" |
Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 12 June 2008 at 12:30pm
|
Yes, and I can take a 14 day all-inclusive vacation with my own room to a tropical island for $3400.00. It shouldn't cost me more to do Hajj. I know you are trying to blame it on the groups, but it is actually much cheaper to go in a group than to do Hajj alone. If this is the case, it cannot be the group you are traveling with.
Perhaps to someone in Saudi or Bahrain $7000 + doesn't seem like a lot of money. To most muslims in the U.S. and other poorer countries it is a lot. Soon perhaps only Saudis and wealthy muslims will be able to do Hajj and then that will sort of defeat the whole purpose...
------------- �No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.� Eleanor Roosevelt |
Posted By: Hamzah
Date Posted: 12 June 2008 at 4:54pm
|
Sister Shasta'sAunt
Barakallahu feek If Hajj would cost 7000 USD very few people from Saudi and even less from Bahrain could afford to perform Hajj, 7000 USD is a monthly salary for very very few people in Saudi Arabia (Medical consultants and Company executives maybe), we are not as wealthy as you think, I could make much more money doing what I do for a living in the states than in Saudi Arabia. Saud Arabia charges Hajj groups something from 200-300 USD per individual, I agree the government should keep an eye on the hotel companies in the holly places and also the groups and make sure they charge fair amount of money to perform Hajj, in this sense I think the government is not doing it's best, but the government looses far more money than what it makes in Hajj, Allah has given it the privilege of serving the pilgrims so they have to accept that it's a non profitable thing for them but rather an obligation, examples of that is people who take Hajj duties, a few years back I was doing my Hajj duty as a medical doctor and working 12 hours a day with no days off, the ministry of health paid me 50% of what I earn in my full time job with them, we look upon it as a privilege unfortunately Hajj groups, Hotel and transportation companies don't. ------------- "Whosoever fears Allah, he will appoint for him a way out, and provide for him from where he does not expect" |
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 13 June 2008 at 10:18pm
Very True. The private enterprises that control hotels, accomodations and resturaunts etc are the ones that end up hoarding profits during the Hajj. The Govt tries to subsidise it. Bcz they do try to provide facilities like free food, transport etc. My mom told me that alhamduliah if a person wishes, they need not spend on food etc at all during hajj bcz there is so much free food being distributed there, both by govt as well as private parties (e.g the bin laden group. they do a lot of good work there) Mineral water, food-boxes, dates etc etc. There is also Free Iftar I believe, during ramadhan.
For e.g prices of normal products are TRIPLED if not quadripled by businessmen and store-owners in Mecca/Medina during Hajj. They are the ones that make Hajj expensive. Unfortunatley they dont care for the well-being of the average Haaji.
So are hotel costs. There are ppl proffiting off the Haajis. For e.g a hotel NEARER to the haram will cost more than an average one. During off-season the same hotels have low-prices. Etc Etc.
perhaps the Govt should keep a check on these private-business men and introduce price-roofs and keep limits to how much they charge. They shud also keep a check on the airlines etc as well. . . ------------- "O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young." |
Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 15 June 2008 at 12:18am
|
I have read with interest the posts of friends. I do not agree with Shaista'aunt and ith Chris. But Sign_Reader is right. Makkah is no more what it should be. It is a blessed place by the sacred house of Allah (Baitu Allah ) is there. And some other many blessed places there. But the guidance has vanished. There is no guidance in Makkah now. No liberty, no leadership, no spiritual leadership is there any more. There is all politics and the wealth of oil. The rulers are also not pious (muttaquee). Even though wine is forbidden but hardly any Saudi will be found who does not drink. Muslims all over the world go to Makkah to perform Hajj because it is a duty to be perfomed once in life time. They suffer many hardships. Does it serve the purpose? Do the Muslims have any Imam today ho should guide them. If there is no Imam then there is no Salaat. Salaat is the primary obligation (prayer). If there is no Salaat then there is no Zakat or Hajj. (Continued....) ------------- If any one is bad some one must suffer |
Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 15 June 2008 at 12:34am
|
It is a general decline of the Muslims all over the world due to their negligence. Sign-Reader is right when he says that in British India, laws were much better for the Muslims than they are now. But it is all justified. The Muslims of British India deserved some relief from their misled religious leaders and kings. So they got that relief. The present day Muslims of after partition Pakistan deserve what they are getting because of their arrogance and denial of truth and justice and their denial of the bounty of Allah that granted them freedom. They abused that bounty and so they are suffering under inhuman laws. In order to get justice, the pakistanis have to do justice to themselves and to all other classes of people. But they are being misled continously for many years now. So the suffering will continue. I have seen Arabs (not necessarily Saudis) drinking heavily in London, Paris, even going after women. But the white women have decided unanimously not to go with any Arab. So the Arabs enjoy themselves and remain contented with Algerian and other North African ladies. The Muslims all over the world have not learnt a sensible lesson from the rest of the world about some simple matters. They have the Quran but they do not understand it. They do not have any teacher to tell them even the basics. At the most they teach the lessons of Killing. But Islam means complete peace. ------------- If any one is bad some one must suffer |
Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 15 June 2008 at 12:50am
|
Since Hajj is being discussed, May I ask whether Hajj is only for the Muslims. Or is it for all makind (Al-Naas) whoever can afford and make his way to makkah. Of course no pagan rites / customs can be performed during visit to Makkah but is it forbidden to all non-Muslims to go to Makkah?
Al-Imran 97,
There are clear signs i.e. about the right status (standing) of Ibraheem. And whoever entered it became safe. And it is binding upon the people as a right of Allah whoever can make his way to it to make Hajj of the House. And whoever denied (or opposed) it then Allah has no no need of any one. ------------- If any one is bad some one must suffer |
Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 15 June 2008 at 2:44pm
|
Minuteman: you don't agree that hajj is expensive? Do you have a special price plan that you can share with the rest of us? ------------- �No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.� Eleanor Roosevelt |
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 16 June 2008 at 7:32am
Hi there MM,
You shall not be questioned on the day-of-judgement for the actions of the rulers, niether does thier piousness in anyway effect your actions. So if they drink wine, Allah will deal with them accordingly - no fear. No need to always dwell on that issue and harbor antagonism. Having a God-Fearing ruler is a blessing and an added bonus, but muslims cannot expect to always have perfect rulers.
Plus, in order to change the rulers/government - the people need to change first. They have the power to over-turn bad rulers/governments. It has been done and is possible. So rather than rave about the 'bad conditions' perhaps one should focus on changing themsleves and thier families. . . thats the 1st step.
So are you suggesting that just due to the absence of a capable imam, all other aspects of Islam have been rendered useless? Allah asks you to obey Him, one should do just that. Focus on individual Imaan and individual actions. The Imam can be ANYONE. It can be the head of a household, society, nation . . . absence of an islamic imam does not nullify all other actions that Allah requires of us.
------------- "O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young." |
Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 17 June 2008 at 3:12am
|
Chrys Your first part reply is quite in good order. Agreed. But I would not agree to the second part about the Imam. Perhaps you will please reconsider the matter and feel the need for an Imam (A real good spiritual head). ------------- If any one is bad some one must suffer |
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 17 June 2008 at 3:22am
Oh, dont get me wrong . . . I do think there is a dire need for good muslim leaders today. . . I just think we as muslims should not blame all our problems soley on the lack of good leaders and should accept some of the blame.
------------- "O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young." |
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 17 June 2008 at 3:39am
[
Thats not true at all! Pl refer back to history to read abt how racist the Brits were in the subcontinent. And muslims were on the bottom rung. Also, had they been satisfied or in relief they would NEVER have rebelled for independence. And these rebellions were there throught the reign. The British Raj was purely for greed, and British supremacy . . .dont fool yourself into thinking they ever had the local's interests at heart.
EXCUSE ME? You seem to have a personal/political grudge against Pakistan. What arrogance? What denial? How could you possibly justify ANY wrong done to the Pakistanis? Who are you to sit there and pass judgements about what the Pakistani public deserves or does not deserve, or what they should or should not do? Justice to other classes of ppl?
You seem to suggesting that Pakistan is an evil country that has brought upon calamaties on itself? Newsflash: Pakistan is one of the FEW countries, founded in the name of Islam, where muslims could have the freedom to practise thier own religion. They are also perhaps the ONLY country whose sentiments lie with ANY AND EVERY muslim nation around the world. They jump up whenever a wrong is committed around the world while others sit silently. Pakistan was willing to accept sanctions JUST SO they could help thier fellow Afghanis and Iranians, Kashmiris. The same Afghanistan and Iran that now backstab it. Pakistani Mujahideen are willing to help any muslim country under war and go to help them. .
You seem to have opinions on how to improve things all over the world by blaming others, whether they be Saudis, the Monarchy, the Pakistanis, Lack of leaders, wine-drinking whatnot. I suggest you look at the man in the mirror and help him improve, and ask yourself what is it that you have done to improve the state of muslims today - apart from flinging blames and opinions - becuase that does not count. . .
------------- "O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young." |
Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 17 June 2008 at 10:27am
|
All people who colonise other nations do so under the guise of bringing enlightenment and civilization. However rarely do they bring such to the indigenous population and rarely does the indigenous population desire to be "enlightened". Usually the land and resources are plundered , the natives become virtual slaves with little or no rights, and the enlightened colonists become dictators and tyrants.
Most people, if given a choice, would rather have a tyrant of their own making than one forced upon them by someone else. I am sure the Pakistanis are no different. ------------- �No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.� Eleanor Roosevelt |
Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 18 June 2008 at 3:26am
|
Chris What you have written is right. I agree that British had not come to help the Indians. They came and captured whole of India just with a bullet and due to the bad behaviour (Munafiqat) of some muslims. Who was responsible for that?? You know the survival of the fittest? Then why to cry and blame the british when the locals were at fault.
But do not forget that it was the inner major weakness of the muslim Ummah which brought down the Muslim government in Spain and in India. I hope you will not deny the faults of the muslim leaders who have been bickkering all the time. Even now, while India is advancing in all fields, the Pakistnis are engaged in internal fighting. Every body seems to crying for water and electricity. The most horrible condition. I believe that you always close your eyes to such things. Will you blame others? ------------- If any one is bad some one must suffer |
Posted By: minuteman
Date Posted: 18 June 2008 at 3:33am
|
The Muslims of 100 years ago were so weak spiritually that they lost everything. They even lost the name sake khilafat of Turkey and the name sake worldly kingdom in India which has no real value. That is a clear proof of their spiritual downfall. They are absolutely zero even though loving Allah and the Prophet and praying and spending and performing Hajj etc.
In the Hajj about 2 million Hajis cry and pray to Allah and seek forgiveness. But it appears that Allah is not listening to them any more. Why?? Because they are not walking and working in the way of Allah. I have no grudge against any one. But at least i realise that there is a severe problem at hand. That is not a crime. ------------- If any one is bad some one must suffer |
Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 18 June 2008 at 10:24pm
OH pleeease quote me correctly; what I said was The laws were not better for Muslims i would say but were those folks knew what Islam was? And that was irrefutable the day Brits left and it is today things have gone down hill- 60 years and counting! I can relate some stories that I remember if you like! Today the country is lead by two families of thugs and a musketeer on US payroll! And you think the colonials are gone!! Simple question of cleanliness(wudu) for Muslims to pray is paramount! Have you paid attention to the open areas in the city wherever you live in?--- the piles of garbage, lack of potable water and staple foods for the common man but availability of drugs being no problem! What gives? i think I should stop here.................. ------------- Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction. |
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 19 June 2008 at 4:00am
Kindly edit your above post, to say 'Quote MinuteMan' rather than Chrysalis. Bcz I didnt say that. . .MM did.
Dear Sign-Reader, the conditions you have described are not exclusive to Pakistan or to Muslim nations. They are a common problem shared with numerous muslim/nonmuslim nations all over the world. Asia, Europe, Africa, Americas. . . . and the general ignorance of people (not only muslims) is to blame, including the govts - but then again, they are a reflection of the ppl, out which they are elected.
So what exactly are you trying to prove? ------------- "O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young." |
Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 19 June 2008 at 4:15am
Like you said. 'Name-Sake'. And Brother, fluctuations in Imaan (Faith) as a nation, ummah or individual is a reality of this world. Which is what our struggle in this world is all about. . . Struggle for better Imaan. Not-having Khilafat to me, and many other muslims, is the same as having a corrupt Khilafat. I'd rather NOT have Khilafat than have a corrupt Khalifa misrepresenting Islam.
Wow, brother. . . you actually are suggesting that it 'appears' Allah is not listening any more? I realise you have various theories on the impending doom of muslims/this earth . . .but how can you possibly assume whether or not Allah is listening?
And Brother, do not 'imply' things or coat your views, especially since you already have vocalized your strong grudges in previous posts. You apparently DO have a huge grudge against certain ppl and nationalities. . . so stick to your stance. Unless you didnt mean to say such things, the correct response to which is owning up, retracting ones words or apologizing. . . .not simply switching directions in future posts.
Realizing the problem at hand now, is not as big a feat as you seem to think. This stage has already passed, and everyone from Doctors to Plumbers know that we have problems at hand. The local butcher will also tell you that today's ummah is facing problems. What the next step is , to do something about it. Anything. Starting with educating oneself. And stop blaming 'others'. . .especially when you yourself have a responsibilty to improve things. ------------- "O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young." |