The PLO and Islamic policy for Jerusalem.

• Author: Talhami, Ghada H.
• Position: Palestine Liberation Organization

JERUSALEM OCCUPIES A UNIQUE POSITION in the world of Islam, not only as the third holiest city after Mecca and Medina, but also as the first direction of the qiblah. The presence of the Dome of the Rock, the Aqsa Mosque, and the Buraq Wall (Wailing Wall), established Jerusalem eternally in the Muslim mind as a sacred waqf (religious trust). This status was also confirmed by its historical fame as the final repose of companions of the Prophet Muhammad, learned Sheikhs, Sufi masters and others (Talhami 2000). The memory of Jerusalem as the first direction of the qiblah, before that honor devolved on Mecca in 622 CE is still preserved in Masjid al-Qiblatayn, in the Banu Salma Quarter in Medina. There, a miharab (niche) is set to the north, pointing towards Jerusalem. The significance of Jerusalem to Muslim worship, in addition to the story of the nocturnal journey in the Quran, which took place in 619 CE, has been enshrined in a Hadith, reported by the famous Damascene jurist and scholar, Ibn Taymiyyah. According to him, the Prophet said: "Do not set out on a journey except to one of the three mosques: the Holy Mosque (in Mecca), the Aqsa Mosque (in Jerusalem), or my Mosque (in Medina)" (Raymond 2005).

RELIGIOUS HIGHLIGHTS

It is commonly acknowledged by Muslims that the religious choice of Jerusalem as the site from which Muhammad rose to heaven was not solely due to the need to establish the new faith as a full-fledged member of the monotheistic family of religions. Jerusalem was chosen in order to affirm Islam's connection to Abraham as the purest founder of the monotheistic tradition. Muhammad rose to heaven from Mount Moriah because of its association with Abraham's attempt to sacrifice his son Isaac as a burnt offering to the Lord (Genesis 22:2). The Jewish association with Mount Moriah as the site of Solomon's Temple was later recorded in 2 Chronicles 3:1 (Chapman 2004). Yet, despite all of this religious lore, the Ummayyids who ruled Jerusalem from Damascus never entertained the idea of converting it into the administrative capital of Palestine. This was due in large measure to the need to spare the holy city the role of sustainer of the troops. Jerusalem was ruled by a governor and enjoyed its own judge as recognition of its elevated spiritual status, but the administrative capital was placed in Ramleh (Duff 1990). It is interesting to note here that some Israelis view their connection to Jerusalem in more than just religious terms. Modern Israeli officials refer to the manner in which the Temple was built and its location as proof of ancient and uninterrupted physical ownership. According to the author of Kings, a prophet named Gad ordered David while in the midst of a severe plague to "build an alter to the Lord on the threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite". Araunah welcomed David and offered to provide the necessary wood and the sacrificial animals, but David insisted on compensating the Jebusite for the threshing-floor and everything else. After the Israeli capture of Jerusalem in June of 1967, the Israeli Minister of Religious Affairs, Zarach Warhaflig, referred to this Biblical story as proof of Israel's ancient and continuous title to what he referred to as "Temple Mount". When an interviewer asked him "Are you saying that the Temple Mount ... is Jewish property even today?" he answered "Yes, (it was) acquired in more than one sense. Generations have shed blood in order to make the Land of Israel ours; and the full price was paid (by David) in money as well" (Elon 1995).

Despite these competing claims for Jerusalem, the history of the city is living proof that the upholders of these religious ties were the faithful people of this city. For much of its history, Jerusalem was inhabited by a majority of Arabs, at least for thirteen centuries, until the arrival of European Jewish settlers during the last quarter of the nineteenth century. The Arab population of the city upheld its position as the custodian not only of the Muslim, but of all the holy sites. In his 1971 Easter message and four years after losing East Jerusalem to the Israeli state, King Hussein of Jordan gave expression to the classic Arab and Islamic position regarding Jerusalem's holy sites in more secular terms:

At this time of the year the thoughts of all Christians turn to Jerusalem where nearly 2,000 years ago the central event of their faith took place; so it is appropriate to think about what is happening in Jerusalem today.... The Arabs have for centuries been worthy custodians of the Holy City. It was they who built and preserved the monuments for which it is famous, such as the Holy Sepulchre and the Mosque of Omar. It was the Arab way of life and the Arab people, Moslems and Christians alike, who preserved the traditional life of the city and gave it that unique sense of being a living piece of the ancient world which all pilgrims to its walls have felt so strongly. There is a good reason for this. To the Moslems, the Christians and Jews are People of the Book.... Therefore, the Holy places of Judaism and Christianity are ours too. It is thanks to us, for example, that the Wailing Wall of the Jews was preserved throughout the centuries of Moslem rule. He then explained:

For centuries our custodianship has been accepted by the Christian churches. It was to the Arab families of Jerusalem, for example, that the keys of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre were and are still entrusted (King Hussein 1971).

Jerusalem is sacred space to Muslims not only because of Muhammad's ascension to heaven but because they truly regard it as the place where the Day of Judgment will take place. It is reported that after the Prophet died at Medina, his Companions argued over the best place for His final repose. Three factions emerged and debated this issue, one of which favored burial in Mecca, His birthplace and the land of His people. Another faction favored burial in Medina, the house of the Hijra and the home of His supporters. But a third faction favored transporting Him for burial to Jerusalem, the place where the Prophets were buried and from where He ascended to heaven. After much debate, it was agreed that He should be buried at Medina since He said in a Hadith "Prophets should be buried where they die" (Mahmoud 1989). According to al-Muqqadasi, a native Jerusalemite and a historian of the city, a tradition developed in later centuries claiming that the city will be the "plain of marshalling on the Day of Judgment where Muslims would gather and both Mecca and Medina will come to Jerusalem and the excellence of them all will be united there" (Peters 1985).

WHO DEFENDS JERUSALEM?

Despite Jerusalem's centrality to the Muslim faith and the history of its prophets, the city was never fully defended by its various recent overlords. Instead, the city is fast becoming a Jewish center with a dwindling Muslim and Christian population. In recent years, states, regimes and national movements have failed Arab Jerusalem. The struggle to maintain the Islamic and Christian character of the city is being increasingly borne by its own unarmed and civilian population. This trend goes back to the nineteenth century when the city's leading families acquired something of a corporate standing and began to speak with one voice. During the ten-year period of Egyptian rule, 1830-1840, Ibrahim Pasha allowed the creation of a council to advise him on the city's day-to-day affairs. The advisory nature of this body did not prevent it from opposing some policies deemed to be out of step with the city's history. Such was the case of a request by a Jewish group to purchase the Buraq Wall, which the city council quickly rejected. It also took the occasion to instruct the Egyptian ruler in the illegality of such a move since the Wall was waqf property. The council added that a waqf cannot be ceded even to a Muslim. In 1887, Muslim and Christian families resisted attempts by wealthy Jews to purchase rights to the Wall one more time. Later on, memories of these efforts led the newly appointed Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin Husseini, to affirm Islamic ownership of the Wall as soon as he assumed office in 1922 (Talhami 1988). In 1863, Jerusalem was accorded a municipal council (majlis baladi) by a special Ottoman firman, the first in the entire empire after Constantinople to enjoy such a privilege. The council consisted of ten members, six of whom were Muslims, two Christians, and two Jews. Every male citizen of twenty-five years or older and who paid fifty Turkish pounds or more in annual taxes was eligible to participate in municipal elections. A police force was created in 1886 and a municipal physician was appointed, followed by the construction of a municipal hospital in 1891. The council was entrusted with issuing municipal building permits. In addition, an administrative council was created around the same period and included beside the Governor, the Chief Judge and the Mufti of the city, representatives of the various religious communities such as the Greek Orthodox, the Latin, the Armenian and the Jewish. Benefiting from the liberalization policies known as Tanzimat, these councils began to assume a representational role vis-a-vis the Ottoman Government when their city was threatened by a rising flood of Jewish immigration and settlement. Leading members of these councils who also represented the city's oldest families sent a resolution to the Ottoman Grand Vizier in 1891, protesting the flow of East European Jewish immigration to the city and its attendant jump in land purchases. This resolution numbered 500 signatures by the city's leading citizens. Those elected from the Jerusalem sanjak (administrative division) to the Ottoman parliament which the Young Turks convened in 1911, also raised the issue of increasing Zionist threat to Palestine through increased Jewish immigration (Scholch 1990). Tax revolts by the city's native population were a frequent...