There's no "I" in "The Other"

Last night our Nigerian-Saudi friend Ahmed-Fellata met us at the West Gate of the University with a friend of his. His friend, who for pronunciation purposes we will call “MJ”, is an Irbid native also studying Engineering at Yarmouk. He introduced himself and said that he had “insisted” that Fellata allow him to accompany us to the café – a remark that caught me as funny because several of Fellata’s friends who’ve met us have told me exactly the same thing (I picture Fellata cowering while they approach, sternly slapping a ruler against the inside of their hands, growling, “Let me come. . . .”).

Our conversation roamed from movies, to immigration issues, to school. MJ mentioned a history course that both he and Fellata had taken, called “Jerusalem.” Daph and I couldn’t stand the curiosity, and we asked what they studied in the course. They described it as starting at the founding of the city, with great weight on the Crusades, and ending in the present day.
What, we asked, did it say about the present situation?

Now, you should know that we are outed to Fellata. He knows that we are Jewish, and is aware that Daphna speaks fluent Hebrew. So, when MJ began to talk about how Arabs could not rest until Jerusalem was under their control, Fellata tried to steer the conversation in as “PC” a way as he could manage, while trying to contain the laughter that was slipping into one of his big, loopy smiles. MJ talked about the injustices that have occurred in the past sixty years, some of which we had heard of, and some of which, like Israeli soldiers not allowing Muslims under the age of 45 into the Dome of the Rock, we had not / had reason to doubt. MJ suggested that under Arab rule, everyone would have uninhibited access to their holy sights. Fellata suggested that it be an international city. MJ mentioned that Jewish control of Jerusalem was merely a sign of Muslim deviance, and that once Muslims were again on the proper path in front of God, it would again be their city.

As our Arabic has improved, and as we have begun to read the newspaper (oh so slowly) and other texts, we have learned much more about the Jordanian view of Israel. We did several classes on reading newspaper articles about “suicide bombers,” a term which was in most of the texts we read, though our teacher contended that Muslims call them “Martyr bombers.” We did a listening exercise that suggested that Jews had stolen a cornerstone of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. On Friday we took a test, the text of which claimed that Ajloun Castle is a reminder to Muslims to re-take Palestine and restore the glory days of Saladin.

It is difficult to know where to stand when these issues arise. There is already a terrific amount of pressure in knowing, simply, that the people we meet may never meet another Jew in their lives, and that the impression we make may be incredibly important. When, though, do we speak up? How can we without alienating, or even endangering ourselves? And what does it mean if we simply say that we hope for peace?

After carrying on in our discussion, MJ paused for a moment and said, “We don’t have a problem with the Jews, though. Just the Zionists.” He mentioned that there are Arab Jews, though many of the communities he mentioned no longer exist or have thoroughly diminished: in Iraq, in Syria, in Yemen, in Iran, in Morocco (which is still fairly sizeable). When we chatted later in the night, alone, Daph asked if I thought he had realized that we were Jewish. But really, I think he was just trying to remind, or show, the Americans that the Jordanians are not a hateful people.

Finally, Fellata said, “And what’s so funny is that we’re all cousins,
Muslims, Christians, and Jews!”
And Daphna said, “Yes, brothers.”
And, for a moment, the table was silent.

Your Arabic Phrases of the day:
Mumkin – Possibly, Possible, Maybe
Yan-ni – it means. . . (Used as “I mean” or as a mid-sentence pause for thought reorganization like “Like”)