Talk:Hajj/Archive 1

Archive 1

Islamic law

Islamic law di lifes of muslimschajj can effecttates that only Muslims may enter the city of Mecca, and the penalty for a non-Muslim entering the limits of the city is death. This penalty would presumably not be enforced in modern times. Comment would be superfluous. Wetman 10:03, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

How much of that is Saudi law and how much is Islamic law (meaning cite)? This is relevant because the main page is fairly ambiguous on this issue.

Al-Hajj should not redirect here, but rather be about sura 22. (at least that is how the links on sura are placed) dab (ᛏ) 22:28, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Agreed, I planned on doing it if I ever got around to making a page about

the sura.

Vandalism

Some ***** with the IP address 69.3.119.201 keeps vandalizing the text. Maybe we can get this article protected or semi-protected, or just get him banned?--Temoshi 04:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Merge

Some of this article needs to be merged with Mecca: I am thinking of the section 'millions of people' or suchlike under this article, and its overlap with disasterous incidents paragraphy on 'Mecca'. 81.153.177.193 22:32, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Disaster

Hello all, I added in the hotel collapse in mecca under disaster, PLEASE fix it up, I was very tired when I did this, (and still am) so fix it as you please.--Maliki 786 14:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Gender neutrality

An anon editor worked over one section, on the spiritual aspects of the Hajj, to make it gender-neutral. That was a good idea. However, the copyeditor in me winced in pain at the use of "their" for "his or her". I ended up rewriting the section, which was (IMHO) somewhat bloated and discursive. I hope that Muslims will agree with what's left. Zora 21:28, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

A Question from a non-Muslim

Greetings. I have a question regarding the tradition of the Hajj, if you do not mind an outsider's curiousity. What happens if a Muslim does not have access to Mecca, and thus cannot make the traditional pilgrimage? Are there any precedents or interpretations in Islamic law regarding such a situation? If so, what is to be done? Thank you very much for your time. Brasswatchman July 31, 2005. 11:07 AM EST.

I also am a non-Muslim, so take my answer with a grain of salt. I don't know if this is the case any longer, but it used to be the custom that someone who had the money to do the Hajj, but was too ill to travel, could pay for someone else to do the Hajj and get credit for the pilgrimage by proxy. I know this was done by Indian Muslims. Whether this is still a custom, I dunno. Zora 21:01, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, that's a start, I suppose. Thank you very much for your time. I've asked something a little more specific on the Talk:Mecca thread, if you're interested. Thank you again. - --Brasswatchman 05:53, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

I have a question why seven times during a tawaf? Is there any significance?

[annie}

In some sunni school the pilgrimage could be replaced if someone was die. I think that's would be better way to do, who know our own life and future? If someone could not perform this why should be enforced to do? Sure there is no answer about thawaf excep that the prophet do so!Aditthegrat 10:16, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

ANSWER. from Adil Sidqi,

Proxy Hajj. Proxy Haj is a Mullah ( Clerics) Invention and not an order of the Quran, which is the only guide. Quran clearly says"" On the day of judgement day, each one will get what he earned. "". And its against logic that a bad person can be rescued by others( relatives or freinds etc) thru proxy hajj or donations or any other act. This way, the whole order of judgement day will be nullified. Thanks.

Answer: About Non Muslims to enter Mecca.

“God invites all mankind”, period. But our clergy loves dissension of thought and action. Verses 9:18, 9:28, 3:97, 22:25-28 directly answer question.

9:18 & 9:28 mention administration of Masjids and the other verses cited here invite all humanity to Hajj. hence all present restricions are unislamic, Non-quranic, discouaging and stopping islam. ( AdilSidqi) —Preceding unsigned comment added by AdilSidqi (talk • contribs) 22:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

revert

My edits got reverted. Care to share the motivation?--Striver 20:43, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Striver, I just cleaned up the article by making sections. Aside from that, you didn't explain the reasons for why you removed the procedure for performing the Hajj. I think it should be left in because it explains the entire Hajj on one page, and I will also make sections (e.g Umrah) in order to organize it. Hope that helps. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 21:07, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Okay striver, I have created the sections that show the Hajj step-by-step. I have also linked the Umrah article to it and even created an "In between" section like you wanted. Hope that satisfies you. :) --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 21:16, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Great, that was exactly what i was going to propose! A pleasure co-operating with you! thx :) --Striver 21:25, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 21:27, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Masjid al-Nabawi

I feel a little bit uncomfortable about one thing, but dont want to make any change on my own: It says that Muhammad (pbuh) lies with Umar and Abu Bakr in Masjid al-Nabawi. That sound a little bit (not much) as sunni triumphalist... Maybe add that he does NOT lie with Uthman? No, of course not... Just telling how i feel :) Ma salam. --Striver 01:18, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Incidents during Hajj

I've copied the section, 'Incidents in Mecca' from the Mecca page and pasted it here under a new section heading (the section is still present in the Mecca article). I assume that all the incidents contained in the section refer to incidents during the Hajj - therefore it should be in this article. If not all the incidents mentioned in the section occurred during the Hajj, then at least the section title in the Mecca page should be changed to something more specific (maybe, Incidents during Pilgrimage), as it seems to refer to at least the Hajj (and possibly the Umra). ---Mpatel (talk) 11:35, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

Just confirmed all but one (1987) of the incidents as occurring during Hajj. The section in the Mecca article has been updated (see the 3 new links in this article), deleted from there and placed here. ---Mpatel (talk) 11:54, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

1987 incident confirmed, but (oops) not sure about the 1979 incident - during the Hajj ? ---Mpatel (talk) 12:02, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

1979 confimed., I've added a bunch of links for support. ---Mpatel (talk) 13:38, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

Mut'ah of Hajj

When I deleted that, I didn't know that it was something Striver had added. It just seemed completely unnecessary. I haven't seen the term in any of the Muslim websites re the Hajj that I've browsed. I also tweaked some of AE's edits. Emphasis on the "appeal" of the Hajj is misplaced, IMHO. It might "appeal" to a Muslim, but to those of us who aren't, the appeal is just about nil. I've read Burton and portions of Burkhardt, it's very clear to me that the appeal was the mystery and the prohibition, not the Hajj. Zora 00:15, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok then, no problem, no bad feelings. Hajj at tamatum (Mut'ah of hajj) is hardly mentioned in most places by name. Can you guess why`? --Striver 01:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Man you removed it AGAIN?! Then we do have a problem. Try to read some more if you cant find it, but dont remove things only because you didnt know it exists. --Striver 01:14, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I re-edited the article so that the link to Mut'ah makes sense, but now I'm going to have to rewrite your article so that it isn't POV. Striver, there's got to be something more to Shi'a Islam than hatred of Umar and Abu Bakr. A religion based on hatred is no religion at all. I don't think you're making the best impression on the rest of us with your version of Shi'a Islam. Zora 04:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Of course there is more to it, but you keep deleting every positiv thing i add about Ali and Ahl al-Bayt also, so i stoped with that part and content with opposing Umar, its simply more fun :P

Zora, what are you doing? Mut'ah of Hajj being a contetios issue between Shia and Sunnis? Says how? Its not more contetious than Tayammum, its really simple: Umar issued a stupid fatwa and people dont care. However regarding Mut'ah of Hajj, it took Sunnis a little while to stop caring, a little bit longer than for Tayammum. Thats all!

--Striver 10:07, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Is the historical dispute the only basis for Shi'a Islam? There is no caliph and most Shi'a believe that there is no imam on earth. In terms of present-day practice of religion, the only differences between Sunni and Shi'a seem to be some legal issues and some holidays. Those seem to me to be utterly trivial matters. What about the cultivation of character? What about love, justice, truth, self-discipline? Do Shi'a believe in those? If so, do your actions demonstrate them? Zora 20:24, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I gues that means you have no counterargument againg what i wrote, so im going to revert the non correct statement you added.

Regarding what you answered, since when does "love, justice, truth, self-discipline" dictate that one should settle with the ommision of facts that speak in the favor of your histrica view? Do the same things dictate one to behave sa you do, that is, removing everything i do on some unknown basis? You seem to be under the impresion that facts may be presented only as long as they do not put Sunnis or Salafis on a weaker stand, way else would you oppose me to write about Ibn baz on his own biography? It contains hardly anything as it is now, yet still you are trying to barge his fatwas from it an keep them on other articlse. That is a violation of WP rulse, POV does not constitute removing embarasing statements, as you very well know: you didnt object to having the rape incident on Khalifa, but you refuse to let me have Bin Baz belifs on his own artilce! On the other hand, you hade nothing against it when the Abu Bakr article claimed that the prayer incident was factual, even though i did told you that Shia oppose that as being factual. Does that behavior originate from the virtues you mentioned? Does second guesing that there is a dispute regardin Mut'ah of Hajj between Shias and Sunni, only on the basis that Umar gave a stupid fatwa on the issue originate from the virtues you mentioned? Does removing hadith that suport the shia beilfe, caling them as fables, and later removing the claiming that they are presented as facts, when they where presented as tradition originate from those virtues? GET OF MY BACK! stop harrasing me, stop stalking me!

--Striver 12:18, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Picture of tawaaf

Malik (did I remember your name right?) -- I'm not sure how I feel about the picture you posted. I think it could be much prettier than it is. Also, I'm not sure that all Muslims would agree that this is the proper method of tawaaf. I'm not a Muslim, and I could be wrong but ... I think Shi'a Muslims venerate a particular corner of the Kaaba that they associate with the birth of Ali, so would do tawaaf differently.

I moved the picture to the left and made it even smaller. It shouldn't dominate the article.

Let's talk about this. There could be other ways of conveying the same information ... Zora 06:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, first off, THANKS FOR CONTACTING ME FOR THE PIC!!!!!!!!!!!! {:~p Very few people talk about the thing's I put up, they just delete it, and second, thank's for fixing the screw up I did, I also screwed up the top by posting that sky veiw of the kaaba. Well, regarding the tawaaf, sunni, shia, heck, even sufi do it all the same way, going out, then slowly in, then heading back out, well, the only difference is the the shia 'grasp' the corner they assume Ali was born in. So basically, it's mostly the same, but change any thing you feel fit.(P.s. I'm only 15, so you probably know more, and being a muslim,sunni, I think you did an excellent job!!) --Maliki 786 06:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I've removed this image as an apparent copyright violation. If someone could draw their own image and put it under a free license, that would be great. Also, Image:Hajj.JPG has no source and it's been removed as well unless it is shown that it is free use.--Pharos 09:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Links

I pruned the links. I removed personal essays, commercial sites, and links with reflections on the meaning of the Hajj. The reason for that last is that if we let a Sunni site (Islamonline) link, then we have to let all the other Islamic groups give THEIR perspective on the Hajj. What I left was useful info (that might otherwise be hard to find) about vaccinations, finding one's way in the air terminal, and finding the special pillars in the Prophet's Mosque. Zora 12:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization?

Is Hajj always capitalized or not? This article appears (to an ignoramus like me) to be inconsistent. --Bletch 22:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it's inconsistent. I'm not sure myself whether hajj/Hajj should be capitalized or not. Pious Muslims capitalize everything in sight. Secular editors would presumably regard hajj as just a translation of pilgrimage and decide that capitalizing the Pilgrimage was POV. What do you think? Zora 22:17, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I think it probably should written as "hajj". I looked it up in an Oxford desk dictionary and that is how it is written there. Pepsidrinka 22:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, its interesting to know if it translate as a specific pilgramge (i.e. the pilgrimage to Mecca) or to just pilgrimage. Maybe someone with a Hans-Wehr dictionary can look it up. Pepsidrinka 22:50, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm just inclined to pull out a dictionary and go with that. If the Oxford dictionary uses "hajj", I'm game. --Bletch 02:19, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

The reason I make the point over the defintion is if it is a specific pilgrimage, it would be a proper noun wouldn't it? And if it were just a pilgramage in general that happens to the majority of the time refers to the Mecca pilgrimage, then it would not be. Pepsidrinka 02:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree, just like "treaty" is not capitalized, but "Treaty of Ghent" is. --Bletch 04:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Question about the Islamic Calendar

I wonder if you could answer my question? I saw you edited recently. Khoda Hafez -- Tompsci 00:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I posted a response to your question on the Islamic calendar talk page as well as on your talk page. joturner 01:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Cam. Is it better to use 'pillar' (jamaraat) or 'wall', as this year the pillars have been replaced by walls ? Maybe this could be clarified. MP (talk) 15:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I changed it here as well as at Stoning of the Devil. --Cam 16:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

This page was linked on Yahoo! News

Under the main Link "religion full coverage" page. The headline dealt with Saudi Arabia's effort to make the Hajj safer (the exact time corresponds with my signature stamp). This page was listed as a secondary article, "Hajj Overview at Wikipedia". I noticed Wikipedia sometimes pats itself on the back when that happens, so I thought I'd mention it here since I don't know the code for marking the article as such in the discussion section Bobak 22:14, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

'Omra'

Geo Swan has added a link to Omra, but I think this has been confused with Umrah. There is also a very dubious external link on that page. I've put the article up for deletion, as firstly, I think it's superfluous and secondly, I am unsure regarding Geo Swan's intentions about inserting that external link. MP (talk) 09:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I created an article entitled "Omra" because I encountered this term in the testimony of one of the Guantanamo detainees during his Combatant Status Review Tribunal. The Tribunal's translator offered a brief and only partially correct explanation of the term. Wikipedia didn't have an article for "Omra". I thought it was important. I don't think I have anything to apologize for for creating this stub.

Following MPatel's heads up I redirected "Omra" to "Umrah". I disagree with them that it is "superfluous" and should be deleted. So long as the official DoD translators use unexpected transliterations we will need to have entries that redirect those transliterations to the regular articles.

The external link that roused MPatel's suspicion directed readers to page 15 of the unclassified dossier from Abd Al Aziz Sayer Uwain Al Shammeri's Combatant Status Review Tribunal. The translator's brief, and partially incorrect, explanation of "Omra" started on page 15. I don't think I have anything to apologize for for including that link. I am going to encourage MPatel to assume good faith. -- Geo Swan 16:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Types of Hajj and views of Islamic scholars

This article needs a little section containing information on the 3 types of Hajj that the Islamic scholars (by that I mean the Hanbali, Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki and Imamiyyah scholars) distinguish between. There is an external link in the Umrah and tawaf articles that I've added. I think it's written by a Shia, but contains some great details on the Sunni and Shia positions regarding details of the rituals. MP (talk) 10:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Keep close eye on article

The vandal 82.5.76.64 removed most of the 'Types of Hajj' section on July 11th 2006 (at 06.04) and nobody (including me) seemed to notice. I created that section and will put in a reference soon (can't remember if it's in external links). MP (talk) 11:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

Someone had added some extraneous, sixth-grade level prose to the intro. The external links were all of them proselytizing links. There were two obscure sections, lists of items in Arabic, that seemed to repeat the gist of the article in forms accepted by a particular branch of Islam. There was a space-hogging template that was completely unnecessary. Zora 05:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Mecca vs Makkah

This article should stay consistent with whether it calls it Mecca or Makkah. Mecca is the more Americanized version, while Makkah is usually what Muslims call it. Which is more appropriate? I believe we should stick with Makkah. 165.82.96.115 18:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

This has been discussed many times. WP uses the transliterations most common in English. In this case, that's Mecca. An accepted metric is google hits (ghits). Makkah gets 1,880,000 ghits and Mecca gets 11,600,000. Six times as many. It's clear that Mecca is the preferred term. Zora 19:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

BTW, thanks for pointing out that it had been changed to Makkah in a few places. I changed it back. Zora 19:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with this, as this is an english encylopiedia, we should use the english translation of the name Superbun (talk) 16:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Hajj countrywise figures and groups allowed

I saw a show on TV that said the smallest national Haj contingent consisting of something like 2 pilgrims was from North Korea. I know that the Saudi government imposes restrictions on the number of people who can attend Haj from a single country (I think its something like 1000 pilgrims for every million Muslims in that country, not sure though) Does anyone have information about this, like a countrywise breakup of the number of people permitted to attend Haj from each country? Also I read somewhere that Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan who are allowed to send around 25,000 and 5,000 pilgrims from their country's by the Saudi government have restricted this to only 5000 and 188 (in Turkmenistan's case it only allowed 1 flight carrying pilgrims).

Finally, what is the status of Ahmadiyas, Ismailis,Nation of Islam members and a number of other groups that identify as Muslim but are not considered Muslim by the Saudi government/ larger Islamic community? Are they allowed on the Haj? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.199.177.246 (talk) 14:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

Latest revert

I've just spotted and reverted to the last clean version of the article. Ashamedly, the last clean version was a Feb. 15 version. This highlights the fact that we need to keep a close eye on vandalism (many of which were spotted and reverted) and good edits being lost in reverts. MP (talk) 19:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Section "Effects of the Hajj" POV dispute

A lot of the article just represents a muslim's view on the matter. It is noted by it saying "muslims see it as..." "muslims view...", etc. Since this section is about the effects of the Hadj on a muslim, I believe that those opinions noted with words that say that it is the muslim view should stay.

However, this one part is what I think people would see as POV:

The Hajj rituals have a deep psychological significance for Muslims. The pilgrimage is usually a very profound experience for those who participate. When life is lived according to the precepts of the religion and the mind is in a suitable condition, the pilgrimage can spiritually transform the individual.

The bolded part is probably where the dispute lies.

I say that this can be easily solved if it is put in: "muslims believe" or something along those lines so that it isn't presented as a fact but as a belief.

Armyrifle 23:47, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Can Israeli Muslims go on the Hajj?

Can Israeli Muslims go on the Hajj? since Saudi Arabia denies entry to people with Israeli passports --131.215.159.11 08:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

They can probably attain visas through Jordan, who has relations with both Israel and Saudi Arabia.Vice regent 19:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Thousands of Israeli Muslims go every year. They can't enter Saudi Arabia with Israeli passports, of course. Instead they go through Jordan where they are issued temporary Jordanian passports. WLior (talk) 21:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggested format

I suggest the following format to this article:Vice regent 19:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Header (not actually a section)
• Significance
• History
  • Incidents during the Hajj
• Preparation for Hajj
• Format
  • Umra
  • Mina
  • Arafat
  • Eid al-Adha
  • Ramy
  • Tawaf al-Ifada
• Non-Muslims at Hajj
• See also
• References
• External links
  • Arabic pronunciation

Hajji

[quote] Upon arrival in Mecca, the pilgrim (now known as a Hajji) [/quote] Is this correct or is the word Hajji only used for people who have completed the whole Hajj? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Holscher (talk • contribs) 20:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you're correct. It has always been my understanding that the honorific title of Hajji is only bestowed upon completion of the Hajj. I'll double check my primary sources carefully; but I believe you're correct. Oasisbob (talk) 19:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Eid Al-Adha

Eid Al-Adha is 4 days long not 3. Intro seems to be locked. Can someone correct this as soon as possible?OpTioNiGhT (talk) 03:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

According to the sources on the article, it's a 3-day festival. Do you have a source that says it's 4? --Elonka 04:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

"a four-day public holiday in Muslim countries" http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/holydays/eiduladha.shtml

"‘Udhiyah refers to the animal (camel, cattle or sheep) that is sacrificed as an act of worship to Allah ... during the period from after the `Eid prayer on the Day of Nahr (`Eid Al-Adha) until the last of the Days of Tashreeq (the 13th day of Dhul-Hijjah)" http://www.islamonline.net/english/hajj/2002/01/ayadna/Rulings/article6.shtml

I will also verify the Karen Armstrong source. OpTioNiGhT (talk) 05:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

BBC works for me.  :) I've noticed that Armstrong got a couple other minor things wrong, and everything else I've checked confirms that it's four days. Though I could see that if something said "the festival ran from the 10th to the 13th", that some people might have gotten legitimately confused. But I've tweaked the lead accordingly, thanks for the refs! --Elonka 18:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

ANSWER: From AdilSidqi

There is no such thing as "festival of Eidul Adha".

First of all, you will not find the terms EID-UL-FITR or EID-UL-ADHHA in the Qur'an.. Except Festival of the Revelation of the Qur'an in Ramadhan.

The performance of Hajj (Root Meaning: Annual Gathering for Interaction of people) is Quranic as per chapter" Al-IMran 3:97. and carried out by Prophet Mohammad(S).

The practice of slaughtering goats and sheep and cows during the Hajj season, in Makkah and around the world, is absolutely non-Qur'anic. Its not holy or any thing. Its just food arrangement for people at this period, when so many are pesent. If you study the ahadith and history about slaughtering animals on the 10th of ZilHajjah, you will find the reports full of contradiction and concluding that SAHABA KARAM did not indulge in this wasteful non-Qur'anic practice.

(ADILSIDQI) —Preceding unsigned comment added by AdilSidqi (talk • contribs) 22:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

You may be right Adil و الله اعلم (God knows more). But Wikipedia is not a forum for correcting religious practices based on original thought. OpTioNiGhT (talk) 03:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

History in Intro

The third paragraph beings with sentences about history (the pilgrimage existed in the pre-islamic arabian peninsula), up to "Pilgrims would perform a series of rituals". Could someone clarify that the rest of the paragraph really describes the pre-islamic ritual and not the current practice? WLior (talk) 21:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

is 'in popular culture' section needed?

I would say no unless the section is expanded, because a section with only about 1 sentence in it, is a bit pointless, so my suggestion is, either to expand the section, or delete it and incorporate that info in another section-perhaps the into? Superbun (talk) 14:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

addded sectstup headder, as shown here:

Superbun (talk) 18:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Removed Unsourced, Biased Non-neutral Point Of View

"Yet no Muslim has protested or has tried to reverse the shameful apartheid practiced in Mecca and Medina. No one is suggesting that a church or a synagogue or temple be built inside th kabbah. But Mecca and Medina are big cities and there is enough space for building churches. Also why are Muslims not protesting against the apartheid by boycotting the hajj. Any decent Muslim would publicly boycott the hajj by publicly condemning and refusing to do the hajj."

Someone had inserted this text in the article, which I had removed as biased POV. It is also unsourced. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 14:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I have removed this as well: "Unfortunately, the hajj also represents the shameful apartheid that is an integral part of Islam , also known as Muhammadanism." 'Shameful' is a POV word, and also I have found no proof (from a reliable source) that this 'apartheid' is called "Muhammadanism". --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 14:58, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

"Thus parts of Dearborn in Michigan are claimed as Muslim lands by Muslims. Muhammad very efficiently ethnically cleansed Arabia of all Jews.

Today in Arabia, aka Saudi Arabia, non-Muslims may not:

1) Practice their faith in public 2)build a place of worship 3) enter Mecca or Medina. The kabbah is located in Mecca. 4) May not try to propagate their faith to Muslims 5) even wear symbols such as the Cross

On the other hand Muslims demand freedom of worship in non-Muslims countries and get it. They have even built mosques in Rome which has the same significance for Christians as Mecca has for Muslims."

I have left a note on the WP Islam discussion page and these statements were also determined to be POV, so I am removing them for now. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 16:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Non-Muslim "visitors"

The section on people sneaking in mentions "risking their life" but nowhere in the article does it indicate why this might be a fatal attempt. Could not see an easy way to correct this in light of the fact that someone at some point removed the sentence that mentioned the possible penalty for entrance. Can anyone explain why this was removed, or figure out a way to fix the problem in my first sentence? Thanks. Turnstep 03:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't think that non-Muslims would be killed for entering Mecca in these times. They would have been in the past. I've been reading explorers' accounts of journeys in Arabia in the 19th century. Yes, non-Muslims were hated and were often in danger of their lives. In the accounts I read, the danger came from rioting townspeople and it was the authorities who had to act quickly to remove the visitors before there was a death and an international incident.

Actually capital punishment is still in effect in Mecca for non muslims who enter, among other things (importing of alcohol/pork products/drugs) Pzycoman 20:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

BTW, all this fussing over the article has made it somewhat incoherent and repetitive. I don't have time or energy to work on it now, but something needs to be done. Zora 07:57, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Dr. Naik said it best, "To travel to the United States, you have to get a visa and agree to follow all of United States laws. The same way, to travel to Makkah (Mecca), the requirement is a Hajj visa and the agreement to follow all Islamic laws (including accepting Allah as the one and only worthy of worship, and Prophet Muhammad as his messenger." --Zybez (talk) 14:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

No crushing

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's Ministry of Hajj has a website, with the message, "Be peaceful, orderly and kind. No crushing"

Should that really be quoted in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hsinava (talk • contribs) 12:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

perhapse a in-line link to the website would be apropiate-or put it in the 'in popular culture section, as that section needs more content Superbun (talk) 16:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Given the fact that a fair few people have been crushed on the last day of Hajj over the past few years, I think the Ministry's message warrants inclusion somewhere. It at least shows that they are taking their resposibility seriously. In the same area (and a popular culture section may be best) it might be worthwhile to mention that after the fires in the camps in teh late 1990's, the Saudi government bought fire proof tents. I'm sure I read it in the Gulf Daily News at the time, but unfortunately no exact reference... Special:Contributions/ ([[User talk:|talk]]) 20:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Health issues

I am well aware that for my patients planning to undertake the Hajj, that meningitis immunisation with the 4 strains of ACW135Y is now a Saudi Arabia visa requirement for taking part in the Hajj (see ref at Meningitis#Immunization) - should some mention be made of this as the certificate must be issued at least 10 days, but not more than 3 years before arrival ? Not uncommonly some patients may struggle to get Nurse appointments for this to be administered in sufficient time. Clearly this is not a religious issue of Ihram#Behavior_and_hygiene, but a public health issue of the geographical location and the large congregation of people at the Hajj. Can't see where this would easily fit in an article which is essentially religious & cultural, and it is not wikipedia's role to instruct readers. David Ruben ^Talk 17:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Women in menstruation - how do they perform Hajj?

How do women in menstruation perform Hajj? As we know, people book their Hajj trips even a year or so ahead, and menstruation can be difficult to predict exactly. What happens if a women is to get her period half way through Hajj? --Zybez (talk) 14:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

According to al-Marghinani's al-Hidayah (A compendum of Hanafi law): If a woman enters her period while on Hajj, she will bathe, re-enter the state of ihram, and will continue to carry out the rest of the rites EXCEPT Tawaf. God knows best M2k41 (talk) 18:35, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I presume there is no contraindication to the woman using progestogen hormonal tablets (such as norethisterone which is typically given for at least 10 days) to postpose her menstruation ? David Ruben ^Talk 17:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I believe that scholars of the modern era have stated that it is permissible for women to use contraceptive medication to delay their menstrual cycle. As the Tawaf al-Ziyarah and Tawaf al-Wida'a must be performed as part of the Hajj rituals before the female pilgrim leaves Mecca.81.154.204.51 (talk) 23:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Umrah

As far as my sources go, the Umrah is in fact not part of the Hajj, and while the article makes that a point, it is rather subtle and easy to skip over. I was wondering if the Umrah could be separated from the rest of the 'rites' section. Please correct me if I made a mistake.

Presentiment (talk) 23:07, 4 January 2009 (UTC)Presentiment

muslim

my names is fadumo heybe

          hi  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.220.15 (talk) 18:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC) 

Practicalities?

It'd be swell to see some more information in the article about the economics of the Hajj. Which home countries provide subsidies? How much subsidizing is there in Saudi Arabia? How are visitors accommodated - I see in the article mention of tents, but is there anything else? How realistic is it for poor people to do it? Who is actually allowed in the country for the pilgrimage? In other words I'd like to see more on the practical undertaking, which seems enormous and complicated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.232.47.18 (talk) 17:33, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Length of the calendar or of the year?

The article says "Because the Islamic calendar is a lunar calendar, eleven days shorter than the Gregorian calendar used in the Western world, the Gregorian date of the Hajj changes from year to year." I think it would be more precise to say that the respective years and not the calendars have different lengths. Since my previous edit in this direction was reverted, I'm putting this up for discussion. What about: "Because the years of the Islamic calendar are eleven days shorter than those of the Gregorian calendar, the Gregorian date of the Hajj changes from year to year."? WLior (talk) 01:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Obligation

I took the liberty of changing "an obligation" in the second paragraph to "a moral obligation", since there is actually nothing forcing Muslims to do it, except their belief. Junhalestone (talk) 13:54, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Well I don't know what the source actually says, but in terms of wording "personal obligation" seems more neutral. Peter Deer (talk) 22:54, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I changed it to religious duty and added a link to the article Fard. OpTioNiGhT (talk) 01:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Length of Eid al-Adha?

in the current revision there is contradictory information about the length of Eid al-Adha. In the second paragraph we have "The pilgrims then shave their heads, perform a ritual of animal sacrifice, and celebrate the three day global festival of Eid al-Adha" and in the section Eid al-Adha we have"At the same time as the sacrifices occur at Mecca, Muslims worldwide perform similar sacrifices, in a four-day global festival called Eid al-Adha". The article on Eid al-Adha is not too helpful in solving this. I'm not going to pretend I know anything about holidays in Islam so could someone who is more versed than I in this matter clarify the contradiction? Thanks, Valley2city^‽ 00:44, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I fixed this page (again). Please see the discussion archive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hajj/Archive_1#63327583931 OpTioNiGhT (talk) 03:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

largest annual pilgrimage in the world ?

This article claims it is the largest annual pilgrimage in the world with about 3 million pilgrims participants. The Sabarimala page says its the second annual pilgrimage in the world with about 40 to 50 million pilgrims participants. also see bbc[1] and thaindian[2]. This incongruity has to be solved. Thanks .Arjun (talk) 11:27, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Prophet's Tomb story?

This story is unreasonable , according to the Popular Mechanics this story happened in Mecca (we can see the Ka'ba in the picture),however the prophet's tomb is located in Madina which is more than 400 Km away from Meca. In my opinion , this story is false and does not worth to be posted and has nothing to do with Hajj. Please post facts that are related to the topic. I erased this story due to the previously stated reasons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jum943 (talk • contribs) 05:33, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

It got posted up, but this story is false. Someone keep it down. Plus, if this was ever done, only the Khawarij(a deviant sect concidered by most to have left Islam) would have done something on that scale because it is prohibited in mainstream Islam to inflict harm on yourself or to kill yourself. This practice hasn't been ever done, I am going to delete the story. BTW If the popular mechanics article was really published, it was due to a lack of understanding of islam. 173.69.212.161 (talk) 01:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Picture of pilgrim

I have removed the picture prominently showing a smiling pilgrim with a small Ka'bah in the background. This is entirely inappropriate for an encyclopedia as the focus is clearly upon the person and not the subject of the article. DO NOT replace this picture with out at least discussing the issues I have raised—Wikipedia is not a depository for tourist pictures. Xargon666x6 (talk) 22:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Misname? Hajra/Hagar

I'm not familiar with this topic area, so I won't make this edit myself. In the History section, it says "Prophet Ibrahim was ordered by God (Allah) to leave his wife Hajra and his infant son Ismael alone". I think the reference to Hajra isn't the right one - it should be to Hagar. Also, while I'm here, some other clarification maybe someone can verify: Although Abraham and Hagar were parents to Ishmael, I don't believe that Hagar was considered Abraham's wife. Also, maybe for consistency, it should be spelled "Ishmael", not "Ismael"? FrancisC (talk) 21:19, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Hajar(or Hagar in English) is concidered Prophet Ibrahim's wife. Let me tell you the story:

Prophet Ibrahim went with his wife Sarah to a place near modern-day egypt, where a king lived who would take every women who entered by force. When Prophet Ibrahim and Sarah entered his kingdom, he ordered Sarah to come to his palace. On their way though, they were informed that the king would kill the husband of any women he took but honor the family. Upon hearing this, Prophet Ibrahim told Sarah to tell them that she was his sister(which is a half-truth, because in Islam, you concider other Muslims to be your brothers and sisters in Islam) so that they would be spared. Before she went into his palace, she made ablution and prayed that she would be saved from him. When she was pulled into the room by the king, the king became paralyzed, so he told Sarah to pray to Allah to cure him. After she had done that, he tryed to take her again, but he was then paralyzed. He again asked Sarah to pray to Allah to cure him. After she had prayed, he told his guards "You have not brought me a woman, rather you have brought me a devil!". He then gave them some gifts and Hajar as a maid. When they left, Sarah suggested that Prophet Ibrahim marry Hajar so he could have children, as Sarah hadn't been able to give birth to any child yet. However, afterwards, Sarah became jealous of Hajar, so much that Hajar had to wear some tools in order to erase her footprints from Sarah. Eventually, Allah told Prophet Ibrahim to send Hajar to what is now Mecca, and I think I can stop here. Hope that helps 173.69.212.161 (talk) 01:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay, so, yes, "Hajra" should be changed to "Hajar" or "Hagar"? FrancisC (talk) 11:46, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

English, please

I came to look for a short description of the custom of throwing stones at the devil, and was confronted with a teble of contents in transliterated Arabic. Why shouldn't an English term like "stoning" appear in the contents?Broad Wall (talk) 01:37, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Hajj1.gif Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Hajj1.gif, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:53, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Better name

I would suggest renaming the article Pilgrimage to Mecca, as very few readers would be familiar with the Arabic term حج‎ Ḥaǧǧ. English-speaking readers would be more likely to read it if there were fewer foreign words as obstacles. --Uncle Ed (talk) 18:38, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

The NY Times doesn't seem to think so. Neither, apparently, does the BBC, Guardian, Chicago Tribune. Same with any number of online dictionaries. The word Hajj is commonly used in English as the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca. nableezy - 20:41, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I won't go against consensus, but I think you're wrong, and here's someone else who disagrees with you:

• I think most people would make a distinction between words that have been adopted into mainstream English usage, and foreign language words that we use because there isn't an English word. Hajj isn't a generic word that can be used for any other purpose. It has a specific meaning, and it is inappropriate - even offensive - to use it in any other context. I would never "go on a hajj to Bletchley Park", for instance, but I would "go on a pilgrimage" to it. So while technically it is "a word that is used in the English language", it's very much a borderline case. Although it's legal in Scrabble, so maybe I'm wrong. [3]

I dont believe I said that Hajj is a generic word that can be used for any other purpose, what I wrote was The word Hajj is commonly used in English as the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca. Because it is the word most commonly used for the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca, the article on the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca should be titled Hajj. nableezy - 01:23, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

But it's not: Pilgrimage is the most commonly used word for this. You're assuming that because you can find newspaper articles or dictionary entries that use this loanword that it's in common use; this assumption is in error, but I won't edit war over it. --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:39, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Huh, funny, I have an Uncle Ed...

Anyway, that's not entirely true. Hajj does have common English usage, and people who are unfamiliar with the term are generally also unfamiliar with the concept. Finding newspaper articles and dictionary entries is actually one of the means that Wikipedia suggests for determining whether the word has common English usage.

The word actually has such common English usage that its derivative title, Hajji, has even become a common racial pejorative for persons of Middle Eastern descent. Renaming it would frankly be like suggesting that Kaaba be named Cube (Islam). Peter Deer (talk) 20:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

• I agree with Nableezy here; there's no reason to create what is essentially a disambiguating title where there is no ambiguity. As well, the argument that we should cater to the lowest common denominator, because some people don't know what a hajj is even though it's overwhelmingly used by high-quality sources, is a weak one. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:33, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

  Well, if you're going to bring in concepts like the Lowest common denominator, what can I say? I'm a part time math tutor. We also don't want to be catering to the vulgar. (Although I did briefly consider renaming the Cube. --Uncle Ed (talk) 04:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Request for comment

		Proposal for removing prefixes "Islamic views on xyz"
		I have started a request move to remove the prefixes Attached with the Prophets in Islam to there Names as in Islam. Like Islamic views on Abraham → Ibrahim as it becomes difficult to search the topic. Please participate in the discussion at Talk:Page Thanks. --Ibrahim ebi (talk) 19:25, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Eid Al-Adha

Eid Al-Adha is 4 days long not 3. Intro seems to be locked. Can someone correct this as soon as possible?OpTioNiGhT (talk) 03:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

According to the sources on the article, it's a 3-day festival. Do you have a source that says it's 4? --Elonka 04:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

"a four-day public holiday in Muslim countries" http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/holydays/eiduladha.shtml

"‘Udhiyah refers to the animal (camel, cattle or sheep) that is sacrificed as an act of worship to Allah ... during the period from after the `Eid prayer on the Day of Nahr (`Eid Al-Adha) until the last of the Days of Tashreeq (the 13th day of Dhul-Hijjah)" http://www.islamonline.net/english/hajj/2002/01/ayadna/Rulings/article6.shtml

I will also verify the Karen Armstrong source. OpTioNiGhT (talk) 05:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

BBC works for me.  :) I've noticed that Armstrong got a couple other minor things wrong, and everything else I've checked confirms that it's four days. Though I could see that if something said "the festival ran from the 10th to the 13th", that some people might have gotten legitimately confused. But I've tweaked the lead accordingly, thanks for the refs! --Elonka 18:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• The Eid Al-Adha is a 3 day religious festival from 10th to 12th Dhul-Hijjah and the holiday is also of 3 days. On account of 4 days holiday it is because there is a holiday for Hajj that is on 9th Dhul-Hijjah. So precisely its 3 days plus an addition holiday for Hajj.

Supporting references

Book here

Web here here Thanks --Ibrahim ebi (talk) 08:09, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

ANSWER: From AdilSidqi

There is no such thing as "festival of Eidul Adha".

First of all, you will not find the terms EID-UL-FITR or EID-UL-ADHHA in the Qur'an.. Except Festival of the Revelation of the Qur'an in Ramadhan.

The performance of Hajj (Root Meaning: Annual Gathering for Interaction of people) is Quranic as per chapter" Al-IMran 3:97. and carried out by Prophet Mohammad(S).

The practice of slaughtering goats and sheep and cows during the Hajj season, in Makkah and around the world, is absolutely non-Qur'anic. Its not holy or any thing. Its just food arrangement for people at this period, when so many are pesent. If you study the ahadith and history about slaughtering animals on the 10th of ZilHajjah, you will find the reports full of contradiction and concluding that SAHABA KARAM did not indulge in this wasteful non-Qur'anic practice.

(ADILSIDQI) —Preceding unsigned comment added by AdilSidqi (talk • contribs) 22:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

You may be right Adil و الله اعلم (God knows more). But Wikipedia is not a forum for correcting religious practices based on original thought. OpTioNiGhT (talk) 03:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Pilgrim Numbers

The citations at the bottom appear to cite that more pilgrims went on Hajj than the numbers listed in the main body of the article. Is there some reason why? Captain Gamma (talk) 03:21, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your notice! They are also not updated and show numbers only till 2011. Thanks Faizan (talk) 14:39, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I am also developing a full correct table for it! Faizan (talk) 16:03, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

2013 Hajj number is decreasing because of MARS Virus? What is the citation of this? As far as i know, the primary factor is Saudi Arabia cuts down Hajj Quota because of ongoing construction in Mecca, simple googling 2013 hajj quota shows many news about this. Ali Akbar (talk) 03:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Social effect

Given a recent report citing ongoing concerns about this, I have added a reference to this at the end of the section.Cpsoper (talk) 05:10, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

The reference to Salafi attacks on American Shi'a pilgrims (foot note 27) appears to be more rumor than fact. The source is a Washington Tiimes Community blog, which provides nothing definitive to suggest the event occurred, or that it unfolded in the manner described. Considering the provocative nature of such an account, it should be removed until it can be appropriately corroborated. Ludwigson (talk) 14:24, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I have added another source, which also cites the US State Department's response to receiving these reports.Cpsoper (talk) 12:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Discuss Disputed material before Edit warring here also

There are several editors here, i am sure we can start a discussion and involve more editors in regard to the content you are adding here. A discussion started on Ramadan already covers two position held by two editors. More views can be added before consensus says the section meets the criteria for inclusion, esp as a sep section. --Inayity (talk) 20:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

What criteria fro inclusion you mean apart from the fact that it is reliably sourced? See the discussion there that 1. you don't understand WP:WEIGHT 2. you simply dont like what it says. Debresser (talk) 20:31, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Relevant and sourced: Let me just discuss that. DId I revert it? What is the next step? Per wikipedia policy. YOu think it is okay, I disagree. You seem to always need to have your way. We discuss disputed edits, gather agreement WP:NORUSH, but you pushing an agenda hard and strong. You said I do not understand weight. This is not what Wikipedia said, this is your words. You do not understanding editing policy. So do me a favor and stop telling other people what you think they understand and do not understand and make proper mature arguments for inclusion and refutation based on proper debate process.--Inayity (talk) 20:34, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

And the proof of a problem is in this remark which shows the intent to WP:WAR and get your way by pushing 3rr, disturbing childish tactics.--Inayity (talk) 20:38, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

I am giving you a kind reminder, and you use it against me. Not nice. Debresser (talk) 20:40, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeah so you can have your way, Nice move But I can count. Worry about your warring. I will worry about mine. --Inayity (talk) 20:44, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Proposed merger from Istita'ah

Proposing this for IP user 90.218.98.130. "The topic is simply never going to expand beyond two lines, and hasn't done for seven years now. What it relates to is whether a Muslim can or cannot perform the Hajj pilgrimage. This can easily be covered by transferring the two lines of text to the lead section of the Hajj article." ♥ Solarra ♥ ^{♪ Talk ♪} ߷ _{♀ Contribs ♀} 10:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

• Support, as per nomination. The article should be merged. Faizan 07:35, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
• Comment: Maybe a new article like "Conditions for Hajj" can be created, and it will not be too short. --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 09:58, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Should Istita'ah be linked to Hajj?

I do not agree that Istita'ah should be merged. This is an totally another debate and it is quite obvious that if you have the financial stablity to go and perform Hajj, you should because its obligatory.

One should also save and prefer hajj more over umrah if he/she have not done so as yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtahaalam (talk • contribs) 08:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Newly added content in Ihram section

There is a factual inaccuracy in this edit. It is totally wrong to say During the Hajj, women must have their faces uncovered... It will be During ihram... The sources cited in first paragraph clearly state this. Even the source provided the contributor (http://islamqa.info/en/woman/36619) of this new content says 8 – It is haraam for the muhrimah to wear the burqa’ or niqaab…. and muhrimah is a women in ihram, mentioned two lines above. Again, nowhere in the source is written Prophet Muhammad strictly forbade women from covering their faces during the Hajj as claimed in the content. -AsceticRosé 04:46, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for this explanation. Now I understand why you removed this paragraph. Debresser (talk) 19:14, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Use of the word "prophet"

WP:SAWW is pretty clear about the fact Muhammad is be referred to as simply Muhammad and not as prophet. In spite of this, AsceticRose keeps reverting the term into the article for reasons that seem less than convincing to me. I see no need to restate Muhammad's importance within Islam, which is already explained in the lead, despite AR's protestations to the contrary and fail to see how the use of the term impacts on the mention of Abraham later in the sentence. Dolescum (talk) 05:14, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

The article already says "Islamic prophet Muhammad" in the lede, and that should be enough. Further mention of "prophet" is a violation of WP:HONORIFICS and more specifically WP:SAWW. Debresser (talk) 14:36, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hajj/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

hey guys. I have some pictures for the Hajj site but i dont know how to put them on the site. feel free to contact me surfersteve_69.

Last edited at 08:57, 19 June 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:54, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Muzdalifah Image

AsceticRose, you restored an image. I think that the image is too vague and of low quality to address the subject. --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 08:48, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Something is better than nothing. If a better image of Muzdalifah can be provided, we can replace the present one. Also, the removal was unexplained. -AsceticRosé 15:34, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

No, AsceticRose, this picture is not better than nothing. This picture looks like a typical Middle eastern roadside, and has no distinguishing marks. Not to mention the angle of the picture. Debresser (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

If this is the case, then it is okay to remove it. However, removal of an item on account of low quality should also be accompanied by an effort to substitute it with a better one so as not to leave the readers in want of it. -AsceticRosé 15:50, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Tiimoora's edits

So. --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 09:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Rightly so. Debresser (talk) 11:26, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I shall restore the images, since you seem to have no objection. --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 15:38, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

You misunderstand my intentions. I do object. I think the text accompanying the images should use some normal English, and that otherwise they should not be posted. Feel free to change the text though and post them afterwards. I can't do that, since I don't understand what these captions say. Which is precisely the reason I removed them from what still is the English Wikipedia. 17:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)Debresser (talk)

I did change the captions and re inserted the images, anyway, will do that. ––Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 00:57, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Please, Fauzan, read the following caption: "This diagram depicts the path of Tawaf around the Kaaba and Sayee between Safa and Marwa during Hajj or Umrah". I see 5 non-English words in this one sentence, out of only 20. That is 25%. Can you please use some English here? I won't revert, because I appreciate your efforts and the fact that you are actively involved in the discussion here, but please understand that this is the English Wikipedia. Debresser (talk) 16:02, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but there are actually no English equivalents for these words, and all these are regularly used in the mainstream media.

• Hajj and Umrah might do with "pilgrimage", if there is some consensus for doing so.
• For "Tawaf" and "Sayee", I don't think any alternative exist in the English language. (Circumambulation is not an adequate description for Tawaf.)
• "Kaaba", "Safa" and "Marwa" are proper nouns.

I hope this clears it up a bit! --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 12:41, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

I know only Hajj and Kaaba. But thanks for your explanation, your edits and for being on this talkpage. Debresser (talk) 17:25, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hajj/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Shii (talk · contribs) 07:38, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Before I do copyediting and image checks, I would like to see a huge cleanup in the sources used. Nothing published by "PositivePsyche.Biz Corp" will ever be a WP:RS. Islamic sources are good if they are published by reputable imams or Muslim academics, but "Islam For Dummies" is quite weak as a source and hajjumrahguide.com, published by two random people, is completely unacceptable as a source for Muslim practice. Also the citation style is messy in the first place. Shii (tock) 07:38, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Shii, thanks for undertaking the review task. I'm working on providing reliable sources. However, will you please explain what you meant by "citation style is messy" so that it can be corrected. The citations I added earlier were arranged as per citation template. -AsceticRosé 03:39, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your effort. I was referring to the stray references like "Peters, F. E., p. 71" and "Hamza Yusuf, Pilgrims with a Purpose" that lack necessary information to identify what is being cited. Hamza Yusuf is an example of a source that would be excellent to use if we could supply his citation with a page number and ISBN. I'll keep an eye on this page if you have any further questions. Shii (tock) 03:52, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Actually I used "Peters, F. E., p. 71"-like references because a full citation has already been provided above about Peters (here currently the citation no. 16 in this article), but I'm not sure if I should use the full citation every time about the same reference. If the latter is the case, I will change them. (This issue was confusing me for a long time).

Another inquiry is will the website islamqa.info and iqrasense be regarded as RS? However, I'm trying to find better sources. Thanks -AsceticRosé 04:39, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, I see. You are mixing two different styles of citation. You can see when citations can be shortened here: I Ching <-- In this article, the number of books being cited has been cut down to the bare essentials and there are no extra webpages in the footnotes. You can also see that there is a link taking you to the full name of each specific book, which makes things easier for people seeking out sources.

IslamQA looks like a popular website, but who is it operating under? How can a non-Muslim reader know that they are representative of mainstream Muslim practice? IqraSense looks worse than that, I have doubts that it is an RS. You should be thinking about how general readers often want to verify the information in the article, and how we can direct them to quality sources. Websites are convenient but might not be the best option. Shii (tock) 04:52, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Shii, I have cleaned up the reference section as far as possible. Will you please have a look? -AsceticRosé 09:39, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Shii, are you currently active on Wikipedia? -AsceticRosé 14:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about that! I got distracted halfway through checking your sources.

Although a FA might require more rigorous sources than this, it seems that you have found reliable sources for everything and there are no longer any dubious statements in the article. I checked the use of images and everything looks good there too. The article's general layout and prose is admirable and close to FA quality. I don't see any other problems for GA. Shii (tock) 15:42, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

This isn't intended as a proper GA review, but just reading through this I had a bunch of questions:

• Tawaf: reading this section I didn't understand what this word meant. The article doesn't wikilink it. There's a truly mystifying sentence that introduces the section: "The pilgrims perform an arrival tawaf either as part of Umrah or as an welcome tawaf." The article then explains things done during tawaf without saying whether they define or make up the entirety of tawaf.
• Al-Safa and Al-Marwah: the article does a poor job of conveying where these hills are located and doesn't include images of the gallery between them that I see in the linked article.
• Costs: the article talks about programs by other governments to help with costs, and mentions a sacrifice voucher program, but doesn't detail what the costs are. It should start with a general figure of how much the pilgrims are told they should budget, then break it down more specifically.
• Quotas: how does the Saudi government decide how to set the national quotas (is there a formula, or is it a matter of foreign relations?) and from within each national quota, who to allow to enter for hajj and who to exclude each year?
• Mount Arafat: Neither this article nor that one explains who is allowed to preach from the mountain or how they are chosen.

Wnt (talk) 18:09, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Although the article has already become a good one months ago, still I've addressed some of the issues raised above. The issues of Tawaf and Al-Safa and Al-Marwah have been addressed as further improvement. Thanks for pointing out those shortcomings. --AsceticRosé 15:27, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

When does this occur in the year ?

January, August, December, approximately ? This should be easy to find out in an encyclopedia article without reading the whole thing. If it progressively changes, it should at least state : "the date for 2014 was/will be ....". I couldn't find it. Rcbutcher (talk) 02:29, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I've created a separate section on the timing of Hajj to address this problem. -AsceticRosé 15:31, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that. So I would assume that approximately every 34 years Hajj would occur twice in one western/Gregorian year, correct ? The Western dating system would have great difficulty handling such a concept I assume, as this implies that a Hajj year can only be correctly stated according to the Islamic calendar, yes ? If so, I feel the article should discuss this and state the relevant Islamic years together with the Gregorian years in the section "Timing of Hajj". Rcbutcher (talk) 02:03, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

The last time when the Hajj occurred twice in the same Gregorian year was in 2006 (AH 1426 & 1427) -- the next time will be in 2039 (AH 1460 & 1461). Tables with the dates (according to the Umm al-Qura calendar of Saudi Arabia) for the Hajj for past and future years can be obtained from here. AstroLynx (talk) 09:40, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Hajj date is determined by Islamic calendar or not

I'm not sure why this edit was necessitated. What is the merit of deleting this line The date of Hajj is determined by Islamic calendar (known as Hijri calendar or AH) which is a lunar year which gives information to those not adequately familiar with how dates of Islamic events are determined/chosen. Moreover, these information are supported by provided sources. For example, the Harrison source clearly says The date is determined by the Hijri calender which itself relates to a journey, the migration of the Prophet.... Again, Marshall's Islam-Beliefs, practices, culture says The timing of Hajj, like that of Ramadan, is based o lunar calender (see). I see no problem in saying that The date of Hajj is determined by Islamic calendar or the like.

Another problem of the edit that it has attributed the above sources to a new sentence Every year, the events of Hajj take place in a... which they do not correspond to. -AsceticRosé 05:17, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps we should simply return that first sentence. In addition, the sentence "Every year, the events of Hajj take place in a five-day period, starting on 8 and ending on 12 Dhul-Hijjah, the twelfth and last month of Islamic calendar." is now sourced to the same sources that the old sentence was sourced to, which seems a mistake. So that sentence should be restored to its previous location. Debresser (talk) 07:29, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I've resorted to original wording. Thanks Fauzan for adding Day of Arafah in the section. -AsceticRosé 16:41, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Why not add the dates for the next few years (per Umm al-Qura calendar)? AstroLynx (talk) 17:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I could not access the source, so my mistake there in carelessly changing the attributed sentence. Regarding "determined", I think it is might not be strange for a Western viewpoint to use such a wording; but, see, we never say "The date of the Indepence Day of the Unted States is determined by the Gregorian calendar." Any thoughts? --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 13:45, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Years wrong in "Number of pilgrims per year" section

Hajj occurred twice in Gregorian year 2006 : 1426 and 1427. Table years appear to go wrong from 2006 onward. Rcbutcher (talk) 08:51, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Fixed the table. However, the data for 1426 AH (and also most of 1429 AH) is still missing. AstroLynx (talk) 12:20, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

One could copy those from the Arabic WP which should be reliable enough. AstroLynx (talk) 12:31, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

I've addressed the issue a couple of days ago. -AsceticRosé 15:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Numbers for 2008/1429 are still incomplete. AstroLynx (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

I will try to collect data on it some time later, being busy now. However, others can contribute also. -AsceticRosé 15:48, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Recent spree of reverts

Recently, there has been an unnecessary spree of reverts over a single reference, the last one being this. I think the issue doesn't deserve it. What do you think, Shii and Debresser? -AsceticRosé 15:41, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Routine cleanup, I think the issue is taken care of now Shii (tock) 17:02, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

I am shocked at what was been fought over, But I do not understand Debressers passion for keeping the dubious reference, what possible political, social, ideological, religious profit could the user gain from it?--Inayity (talk) 18:03, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Inavity, why would you be shocked? I am shocked by your assumption that my edit is motivated by "political, social, ideological, religious profit". I find that offensive, actually. Debresser (talk) 19:50, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes shock and being offended are part of some people's identities. Let me give clarity, people disagree over things of value (however you define that value --maybe you like the book, maybe you feel it gave balance), your recent edit war (from as far as I can see) had in ZERO value. --Inayity (talk) 20:22, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Inayity, more tolerance is needed when commenting on other users. Focus should be given on objective discussion, not on subjective one.

Shii, would you please share with us what is particularly wrong with this book? -AsceticRosé 01:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Nothing is "wrong" with it, nothing is wrong with The Da Vinci Code either, but it's embarrassing to add a citation to either book as if it helps us prove a point Shii (tock) 01:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

AsceticRose have you seen the RS check on it? The bigger the claim the stronger and more authoritative a source should be. --Inayity (talk) 01:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)--Inayity (talk) 01:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

It's a big claim, but hardly a controversial one, and certainly not a derogatory one. In any case, the source probably isn't that good, I came to realize in the end. But I do protest Inavity's bad faith assumption, which I still don't understand where it came from. Debresser (talk) 06:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

It not a WP:AGF issue, it is a I could not conceive of any possible rationale for the WP:EDITWAR. IF you liked the book, i could at least have understood that.--Inayity (talk) 09:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

The word "edit war" also seems an exaggeration in this case. If you don't understand why an editor does something, in the future you should perhaps visit his talkpage and ask him? That seems a better idea than publicly ascribing ulterior motives. Debresser (talk) 11:01, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Lack of ulterior motives in this case, almost like pointless. And no discussion on talk for edits. b/c I watched it and was trying to understand what it was about. Then I went to the R/S noticeboard and then favored Shii.--Inayity (talk) 11:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I've just seen the WP:RSN on it. Like Debresser, I also realize at the end that it is probably better to avoid such source for such claims. But Inayity again, no personal attack, please. It reflects poorly on you. Thanks Shii for sharing his view. -AsceticRosé 15:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hajj. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110811073422/http://www.easyhajj.co.uk:80/throwingpebbles.php to http://www.easyhajj.co.uk/throwingpebbles.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:07, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Hajj as the largest gathering: some observations

The article currently says: The Hajj is the largest annual gathering of people in the world which is supported by reliable sources. A google search shows many more sources saying the same. Someone correctly placed a dubious tag on it because the Arbaeen Pilgrimage article claims the same. One important point is that the claim that Hajj is the largest annual gathering is supported by more reliable sources and relatively large number of sources than the Arbaeen claim.

However, I'm personally not so interested in this largest-claim game. If row ensues in future, we can do away with it by saying The Hajj is one of the largest annual gatherings of people in the world. -AsceticRosé 15:53, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Layout issues

Why is the tawaf not under what is done on the 8th day? -Russell's teapot (talk) 07:48, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Hajj. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.hajj.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=53
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140815124605/http://www.saudiembassy.net/issues/hajj/ to http://www.saudiembassy.net/issues/hajj/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141010162904/http://www.saudiembassy.net/about/country-information/transportation_and_communication/air_travel.aspx to http://www.saudiembassy.net/about/country-information/transportation_and_communication/air_travel.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151021010152/http://www.adahi.org/adahisite/default.aspx to http://www.adahi.org/adahisite/default.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006095319/https://ph.news.yahoo.com/saudi-arabia-cuts-hajj-quota-foreign-pilgrims-20-213053607.html to https://ph.news.yahoo.com/saudi-arabia-cuts-hajj-quota-foreign-pilgrims-20-213053607.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://xrdarabia.org/2007/12/23/how-many-attended-the-hajj/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100612115203/http://saudiembassy.net/affairs/recent-news/news12060801.aspx to http://www.saudiembassy.net/affairs/recent-news/news12060801.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100612012925/http://saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news11290904.aspx to http://www.saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news11290904.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120628155317/http://www.saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news11061102.aspx to http://www.saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news11061102.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130426005515/http://www.saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news10271201.aspx to http://www.saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news10271201.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140221200746/http://www.saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news10131302.aspx to http://www.saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news10131302.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141009221349/http://www.saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news10021401.aspx to http://www.saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news10021401.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:17, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Haj

Until 4 October this year Haj redirected here but was retargetted to Hannover Airport (IATA code HAJ) on that date. At Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 October 29#Haj I have proposed that it be retarggeted back to this article. You are invited to contribute to the discussion there. Thryduulf (talk) 09:41, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Sexual harassment of female pilgrims in Mecca

The #metoo movement has outed the practice of sexual harassment of women pilgrims in Mecca making the Hajj.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-middle-east-43174322/groped-by-holy-mosque-guard-during-hajj-in-mecca

109.147.100.127 (talk) 04:26, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Hijra

Does the Hajj, at least in part, commemorate the Hijra, Mohammed's journey from Makkah to Medina in 622CE?

No, Hajj dated back to the time of Abraham (Prophet Ibrahim (a)).--Ali.shakeri.1987 (talk) 05:33, 1 August 2016 (UTC) Hajj is only for those people who can afford it and are physically, financially and mentally fit(point to be noted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.186.120.194 (talk) 13:42, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Masjid Nimrah.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:51, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

"annual gathering"

To say "annual gathering" is true if you mean the Islamic "annus" but not the one people normally mean. As the article says below, every 33 years it can fall twice in one Gregorian year. I suggest "annual" be replaced with "regular" or kept with the comment (according to the Islamic year).--2607:FEA8:D5DF:FEF6:9995:35A:3713:2FAB (talk) 15:18, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Hajj

How does hajj makes us responsible 202.47.33.68 (talk) 15:28, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

WP:NOT#FORUM.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  01:05, 23 February 2023 (UTC)