Outrageous =(

[Alpha]

A long drawn out fierce debate is what we need here.

Why "fierce"? 

Anyway, that was for Borakk. We'd plan to have a nice debate, some time.

[astarmathsandphysics]

I was thinking in the sense of ridiculous posers squaring up not wanting to let a hair fall out of place.

[$tyli$h Executive]

Why "fierce"? 

Anyway, that was for Borakk. We'd plan to have a nice debate, some time.

 Debate, by nature has to be fierce.

An ideal pilgrimage would allow you to go thru all the experiences that all the early Muslims and our beloved Prophet (pbuh) had gone thru. At least for the Muslims, Hajj is a type of Jihaad where you are supposed to leave behind all the luxuries and just engage yourself in worship...and having booked an air conditioned hotel room where I'd be served all the dishes I'd ever want to taste in my life would indeed encourage my 'nafs' even more and that would take over the real objective of Hajj.

Yes I do agree that things should be made easy for the pilgrims, but come on, when I go on a holiday to a certain place, don't I try to actually adapt to what is locally done and accepted? We all want to seek peace of mind which is far more important and essential than peace of your body. When you leave your home and come Mecca, and perform Hajj, adapting with the food and the slightest struggle you do in the path of Allah is also a part of your worship, definitely benefiting you spiritually more than you can think. I believe God has it upon Himself the responsibility of Mecca-Medina and I'm sure no human power, no matter how strong, can do anything that much to it. .
The reason why really opened up this topic is cos I wanted us to reflect upon the way we're literally endangering our own religious values and morals. And before we know it, we'll see we've demolished our own selves. May Allah Protect us. Ameen. Peace..

Leaving out the rest of your post, are you aware of the fact that your Holy Kaaba was utterly destroyed several times in history?

[astarmathsandphysics]

Maybe all ancient monuments/works of art maybe end up like the ship cutty sark, which has been rebuilt and repaired so many times that very little besides the nameplate remains of the original ship.

[$tyli$h Executive]

Maybe all ancient monuments/works of art maybe end up like the ship cutty sark, which has been rebuilt and repaired so many times that very little besides the nameplate remains of the original ship.

Astar, wearing down of ancient monuments is okay... But the Kaaba is different. It did not wear down. It was actually deliberately destroyed by Islamic kings such as Yazid Ibn Muawiyah, Abdullah ibn Zubayr, AbdulMalik Ibn Marwan etc who were muslims themselves!

The Islamic history is soaked with blood. Thinking that somehow God/Allah will protect the Kaaba is utterly delusional considering how many times in the past the "holy" Kaaba and the "sacred" black stone were leveled to the ground and stolen.

[astarmathsandphysics]

All history is soaked with blood. People will find whatever they need to fight over to have a war.
As for books, they are interpreted into different languages as time goes along. Once so many interpretations have been done, it might be said that very little remains of the original text just as for the Cutty Sark.

[Alpha]

If in the past people couldn't save it, doesn't mean in the future they can't.

Kaaba is what KSA is known for. It could build a 1000 more monuments, but rarity has value. And uniqueness is indefinitely valuable.

[Saladin]

I fear if I reply, this will turn into a long long debate. Later, we will fight.

That is a problem with most debates. They tend to lose focus, and simply becomes a battle of what people say, or personally believe. Often its pro-choice vs pro-life or rather pro-idealism vs neo-liberalism.

Truth be told, debates do not come to a compromise, so often its just two sides fighting for the heck of it.

[Ukhti-R]

That is a problem with most debates. They tend to lose focus, and simply becomes a battle of what people say, or personally believe. Often its pro-choice vs pro-life or rather pro-idealism vs neo-liberalism.

Truth be told, debates do not come to a compromise, so often its just two sides fighting for the heck of it.

wow. I remember you

[Alpha]

That is a problem with most debates. They tend to lose focus, and simply becomes a battle of what people say, or personally believe. Often its pro-choice vs pro-life or rather pro-idealism vs neo-liberalism.

Truth be told, debates do not come to a compromise, so often its just two sides fighting for the heck of it.

Yes, that is true.

wow. I remember you

And I remember you.

[$tyli$h Executive]

All history is soaked with blood. People will find whatever they need to fight over to have a war.
As for books, they are interpreted into different languages as time goes along. Once so many interpretations have been done, it might be said that very little remains of the original text just as for the Cutty Sark.

I agree. Too often such interpretations are not backed by physical evidence. Such as how most Muslims believe that Mecca and/or Kaaba is divinely protected and is indestructible. And any attempt to destroy them would lead to mythical birds descending from the sky and stoning the aggressor, which can't even be backed by the quran to be honest.

A little critical mindset would lead to questioning such beliefs. And some questioning and research into history would reveal the the Kaaba and Mecca was invaded and deliberately destroyed several times in history by Islamic kings themselves.

If in the past people couldn't save it, doesn't mean in the future they can't.

Kaaba is what KSA is known for. It could build a 1000 more monuments, but rarity has value. And uniqueness is indefinitely valuable.

I was merely contesting the belief put forth that Kaaba and/or Mecca is indestructible.

That is a problem with most debates. They tend to lose focus, and simply becomes a battle of what people say, or personally believe. Often its pro-choice vs pro-life or rather pro-idealism vs neo-liberalism.

Truth be told, debates do not come to a compromise, so often its just two sides fighting for the heck of it.

However, debates lead to valuable exchange of information and thus, critical thinking.

[astarmathsandphysics]

How can Mecca be divinely protected if the streets need to be swept and the toilets need to be cleaned by actual people?

[Saladin]

However, debates lead to valuable exchange of information and thus, critical thinking.

Truth is, all that is really happening in a debate, is the opinion is simply the formation of your inner views, whether your pro-life, pro-culture or whatever, and all these disciplines have their reasons and whatnot. So in the end, if you really want to boil it down to the bare facts, then you will see that one side values one aspect of the problem than the other. So, most debates are not debates, but simply a battle of wills.

In this case, its the debate between the pro-choice and pro-sanctity. One side believes that Mecca should develop with disregard to the values that encircle it, the people have no responsibility in maintaining an image (and that can be justified under pretenses) against another side that believes that duty and obligation to a message and way of life are more important.

If you want to dive even deeper, one side wants happiness one way, and the other side wants happiness another way. It really comes down to a personal choice, does more money and choice make you happy (as it does for many) or does a more spiritual presence give you happiness? All a matter of views. Nothing more.

[Saladin]

How can Mecca be divinely protected if the streets need to be swept and the toilets need to be cleaned by actual people?

Because divine protection merely means that it won't even be destroyed. Muslims believe that it will exist till the world falls apart. Thats pretty much what divine protection means.

[astarmathsandphysics]

Thought it would mean stain and blemish free