Yes, an ironic twist here...

Submitted by J.S. (Canada), Jun 6, 2006 at 17:30

Bernard Lewis notes in one of his texts on the Middle East that Jerusalem was not considered a sacred city by early Muslims. This was one of Islam's earliest traditions/beliefs (ie., Jerusalem should not be sacred to Muslims; it was a city sacred only to Jews). But then, politics intervened and Islamic authorities decided that Jerusalem was, after all, "sacred."

I suppose this puts the lie to the belief that every older tradition is necessarily truer or more authentic...If so, we could hope that Islam would revert back to its original (more authentic?) beliefs regarding Jerusalem. (I've also noted the lack of Israeli outrage regarding Olmert's planned division of Jerusalem...I suppose it's yet another "red-line" drawn in shifting sands...)

So now, for Israelis, Jerusalem is de-sacralized (just as with early Islam), and politically "sacred" for Muslims...(about as "sacred" and "cherished" as human life is for the fanatic Muslim zealots...that is, not worth two cents.) What a sad comment on the state of the world (maybe have to hit rock bottom, descend to the depths, before rising..)

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".