Some in Australia are in debate:
Should people be able to climb the Rock? That curious red rock close to the geographical centre of Australia, known as Uluru. As yet the government will not ban climbing, and won't think of it until the percentage of tourists wanting to climb it drops to 20%, from the current level of 38%.
The Western world is burdened with 'politically correct' viewpoints, praising multiculturalism, religious tolerance and respect for indigenous culture. In Australia, the intellectual left tends also to embrace convenient elements of Buddhism and earth based Eastern religion, often teamed with a respect for multicultural India (the respect, perhaps, in inverse proportion to their experience of the reality of the sometimes deadly undercurrents in India). A number of articles on Europe and experience of the rhetoric of Europeans, indicate that 'politically correct' speak is echoed in Europe, at the level of expressed policy.
It is safe to conclude it is politically correct in the educated European-West to respect indigenous religions.
In Australia the culture has embraced elements of Aboriginal religion, including totems on school grounds, in a kind of pluralistic acceptance verging on poly-theism. Even if people don't believe, there is a growing respect for the Aboriginal form of belief, and a respect for sacred places.
The evidence of this respect is the sacred rock. It was given “back” to its “traditional owners” in 1985 (Though it is possible these mainland Aboriginals dispossessed the Tasmanian Aboriginal). The Australian Government website proclaims,
“Nganana Tatintja Wiya - 'We Never Climb'”
That's a really important sacred thing that you are climbing... You shouldn't climb. It's not the real thing about this place. The real thing is listening to everything. And maybe that makes you a bit sad. But anyway that's what we have to say. We are obliged by Tjukurpa to say. And all the tourists will brighten up and say, 'Oh I see. This is the right way... no climbing.' Kunmanara, Traditional Owner
The website continues,
The proportion of visitors who climb Uluru has dropped. It is estimated that around 38 per cent of visitors climb each year, down from 74 per cent in 1990. Visitors from some countries are much more likely to climb than others. At the last survey visitors who didn't climb generally mentioned the request from traditional owners and their desire to show respect for Anangu and their culture. Other reasons include lack of interest in climbing, safety concerns, lack of fitness and fear of heights.
Having been there I suspect that the “some countries” is a politically correct way of not naming a few nations who through tourism bring a large income to Australia, and who might be offended if named. I suspect, I don't know. They are unlikely to be Europeans (excepting sub-class of young adrenalin junkies), as the Europeans I met there, in general, seemed to “desire to show respect for Anangu and their culture”.
It is to be suspected that the sacredness of this rock is due to its use in narrative as landmark, perhaps more than the narrative from the Anangu god, but that is not the point. Clearly, since 1990 there has been a shift to respecting the sacred places of indigenous cultures.
There is another ancient indigenous tribal people, with a narrative about their sacred place. The population experienced decimation due to European conquest of their land and their numbers have been further reduced by Europeans killing them and assimilation. They have finally in recent years obtained possession of part of their sacred place. Their sacred narrative speaks of how their God has given them this place, and how their God dwells there, but due to international interest in resources their sacred place is under threat.
Am I speaking of the Peruvian Indians fighting against exploitation? An American Indian tribe calling for recognition? Or struggles over the sacred sacred mount Mauna Kea in Hawaii or the telescope complex on the Western Apache sacred mountain.Perhaps Glen Cove Sacred Place California?
Obama spoke in his election campaign Obama '08 of
Barack Obama supports legal protections for sacred places and cultural traditions, including Native ancestors’ burial grounds and churches.
Clearly, Obama would, at least in rhetoric, support legal protection of this tribal sacred place, wherever it is, and for these people.
The Europeans and Americans who would not climb the rock Ularu would at least say they respect this sacred place.
But the ancient people I was writing about are the descendants of the tribes of Israel, the sacred place, where their God dwells, is Jerusalem.
The incredibly ancient text, the Torah, mentions 'Salem' as being the place of worship of the 'most high God', who was the God of Abraham. It is the only place Abraham participates in a communal religious ritual.
Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God. (Genesis 14:18)
Salem is later called Zion (Psalm 72:6) and also Jerusalem (I Kings 8:1). The Temple built there was called 'the house of the LORD'. It is recorded that King Solomon told all the people that his father King David was told by his God,
But I have chosen Jerusalem, that my name might be there (2Chronicles 6:6)
It is recorded that Solomon prays,
Now, my God, ..let your ears attend unto the prayer that is made in this place. (2Chronicles 6:40)
This prayer is answered visibly and spectacularly
Now when Solomon had made an end of praying, the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the LORD filled the house. And the priests could not enter into the house of the LORD, because the glory of the LORD had filled the LORD'S house. And when all the children of Israel saw how the fire came down, and the glory of the LORD upon the house, they bowed themselves with their faces to the ground upon the pavement, and worshipped, and praised the LORD, saying, For he is good; for his mercy endures for ever. (2Chronicles 7:1-3)
This tribal God showed his people a miracle, and confirmed their king's prayer, and for this reason the temple site in this place is sacred to the tribes of Israel. Nehemiah claimed when they rebuilt the temple and destroyed city that Jerusalem was only for Israel,
The God of heaven, he will prosper us; therefore we his servants will arise and build: but you (the people imported by the Assyrians and Babylonians to Samaria and Judah/Judea) have no portion, nor right, nor memorial, in Jerusalem. (Nehemiah 2:20)
The prophet Joel confirmed this,
The LORD also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake: but the LORD will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel. So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more. (Joel 3:16-17)
Tjukurpa of Uluru allegedly has few rules, one being that the rock not be climbed. In 1990, 20 years ago, a minority respected this. But now a majority respect indigenous sacred places, even if they don't believe. This majority should be evident in dealing with the sacred place of Jews, if people are at all consistent.
Even leaving aside the historical truth of the text, of all the Gods to pick to disrespect, the one that claims to be the creator and sustainer of all life is not a wise choice. In terms of a tribal God, this one pulls no punches, and the sacred text speaks of an enormous power over his sacred place. The following are a few examples,
For thus has the LORD spoken unto me, Like as the lion and the young lion roaring on his prey, ...so shall the LORD of hosts come down to fight for mount Zion..As birds flying, so will the LORD of hosts defend Jerusalem; defending also he will deliver it; and passing over he will preserve it. (Isaiah 31:4-5)
the LORD, whose fire is in Zion, and his furnace in Jerusalem. (Isaiah 31:9)
Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned: for she has received of the LORD'S hand double for all her sins. (Isaiah 40:2)
Thus says the LORD of hosts; I am jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with a great jealousy. (Zechariah 1:14)
The LORD has taken away thy judgements, he has cast out thine enemy: the king of Israel, even the LORD, is in the midst of thee: thou shall not see evil any more. In that day it shall be said to Jerusalem, Fear thou not: and to Zion, Let not thine hands be slack. (Zephaniah 3:15-16)
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks.. (Daniel 9:25)
Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it. (Zechariah 12:2-3)
Deliver yourself, O Zion, that dwells with the daughter of Babylon. For thus says the LORD of hosts; After the glory has he sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that touches you touches the apple of his eye. (Zechariah 2:7-8)
It might not be wise to poke the tribal God of Israel in the eye when He will fight for His place like a lion at His appointed time. This is only a small portion of references to Jerusalem in the ancient sacred text. But History indicates there is substance to what many label as mere tribal 'superstition'. The Selucids who thought to make Jerusalem Hellenistic and Jews serve the Greek pantheon, were soon after this action destroyed and are so forgotten few even know who they are. Once may people called themselves Romans, but after becoming Christian their eviction of Jews from Jerusalem and the building of a church on the Temple Mount marked the beginning of the decline of their empire. Romans are now remembered by ruins, and even people in Rome call themselves Italian. There is nothing left of the Crusader kingdom of Jerusalem that evicted Jews from Jerusalem, and as a result of this action so briefly did it exist that few remember it. These all thought to despise Jewish connection to the sacred place of which the God of Israel said, “that my name might be there“
There are other claimants to this sacred place, but as Daniel Pipes points out Jerusalem is not even mentioned in the Koran and his analysis of the weakness of the Arab claim to Jerusalem cannot be bettered.
While there is no evidence that those that disrespect Tjukurpa the God of Anangu and who climb Uluru suffer divine wrath, there is some history that indicates that the tribal God of Israel is another matter. The increase of 36% from 1990 who now respect the Anangu God, by their actions, condemn the leaders of the nations and all those who seek to divide Jerusalem, or take it from Israel.
The greatest condemnation, ironically for the Quartet, including the United Nations, might be from the United Nations own declaration
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Adopted by General Assembly Resolution 61/295 on 13 September 2007
Recognizing the urgent need to respect and promote the inherent rights of indigenous peoples which derive from their political, economic and social structures and from their cultures, spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies, especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources,
The Balfour declaration of 1917 is echoed in the following, from the UN declaration,
Article 11
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature.
2. States shall provide redress through effective mechanisms, which may include restitution, developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples, with respect to their cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property taken without their free, prior and informed consent or in violation of their laws, traditions and customs.
Article 25
Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned or otherwise occupied and used lands, territories, waters and coastal seas and other resources and to uphold their responsibilities to future generations in this regard.
An indigenous culture is the earliest existing culture or ethnicity occupying a land. Jews occupied Israel from their very first tribal formation, from Abraham. The identification of the Sacred place of Jerusalem pre-dates the nation, and has not changed since. All their earliest ancestors are documented as buried on land now disputed. Only a cohesive group of proven descendants of Canaanites who have maintained their recognised culture of Baal worship may have an equal claim with Jews as the indigenous inhabitants of greater Israel including Judea and Samaria. And being indigenous peoples, dispossessed by Europeans (the Romans to be precise) the United Nations has declared in effect, that Jews have “the right to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned..lands” and the right to “the restitution” of their sacred place: the whole of Jerusalem, the place where the tribal God of Israel placed his name.
But notice how from Australia, to America and to Africa in relation to land affected by resources, rhetoric about sacred places and land rights doesn't match action. The Quartet involvement with the issue of land ownership of indigenous (often warring) tribes of the Middle East has always been tainted by resource issues: oil and gas.
