…and this is a 
Head cases
Category: Kooks
Posted on: December 18, 2007 1:57 AM, by PZ Myers
What the heck is a zebibah?
The zebibah, Arabic for raisin, is a dark circle of callused skin, or in some cases a protruding bump, between the hairline and the eyebrows. It emerges on the spot where worshipers press their foreheads into the ground during their daily prayers.
I didn't really want to know. I especially didn't want to know that this injury caused by bashing one's head into the floor is considered a signifcant accomplishment.
"The zebibah is a way to show how important religion is for us," said Muhammad al-Bikali, a hairstylist in Cairo, in an interview last month. Mr. Bikali had a well-trimmed mustache and an ever-so-subtle brown spot just beneath his hairline. "It shows how religious we are. It is a mark from God."
No, it isn't. It's a mark of self-inflicted brain damage.
Politics
Comments
Posted by: JohnnieCanuck, FCD | December 18, 2007 2:06 AM
Hmm. A self-inflicted mark as a result of self inflicted brain damage. Sounds reasonable.
Posted by: James W. | December 18, 2007 2:09 AM
More like it's the mark of years of carpet burn on your forehead.
Posted by: thadd | December 18, 2007 2:23 AM
hmm which came first the chicken or the egg?
Posted by: Scott Hatfield, OM | December 18, 2007 2:28 AM
Risible.
Posted by: Hank Fox | December 18, 2007 2:34 AM
Holy Jeez! I was picturing a tiny little pip the size of a mole. But when I clicked over to the article, there's a man there with a dark bruise-shape on his forehead that looks to be a good two inches across!
My sense of humor demands to know: If you lived in a house with a low ceiling and open beams, and just kept bashing your head all the time, would you get a reputation for extreme piety?
And to this from the story, oh dang:
Thank you, George W. Bush.
Posted by: taylor | December 18, 2007 2:40 AM
The rooster came first. Ask any experienced hen.
Posted by: Kytescall | December 18, 2007 2:47 AM
That's exactly what I needed. I've always wanted to look like someone bashed me over the head with a hammer.
Posted by: Colugo | December 18, 2007 3:08 AM
Zawahiri has a pretty prominent one.
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=zawahiri&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2
A human behavioral ecologist would call that a hard-to-fake signal of commitment.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | December 18, 2007 3:09 AM
"It shows how religious we are. It is a mark from God."
Dude, check out my penis!!!!! That scar shows you how religious my parents were.
Posted by: Jeanette Garcia | December 18, 2007 3:13 AM
Good Grief! The head banging brings to mind the Yanomano Indians of the South American jungles who bash each other on the head and wear their bumps as badges of manly prowess.
Posted by: Alex Besogonov | December 18, 2007 3:13 AM
There's a Russian proverb: "Заставь дурака богу молиться - так он и лоб расшибет" ("Make a fool pray to God and he'll surely break his forehead").
I guess the people who told it first really knew what they were talking about :)
Posted by: Colugo | December 18, 2007 3:21 AM
http://www.newstatesman.com/200506060012
"It was supposed to be a routine doctor's appointment. Mrs Abbas wanted someone at a hospital in north London to take a look at the rash under her son's arms. But when the doctor asked 14-year-old Firoz to take off his shirt, he noticed something far more worrying. Criss-crossed on Firoz's back were more than 50 lacerations. The doctor asked for an explanation. Mrs Abbas said that Firoz had inflicted the wounds himself during a religious ceremony; there was nothing to worry about. The doctor called in the child protection agency.
Through interviewing the family, a joint police and social services investigation team found that Firoz had made the lacerations by whipping himself with a zanjeer - a long chain with a set of curved knives attached at the end - as part of a flagellation ritual at the Idara-e-Jaaferiya mosque in Tooting, an area of Wandsworth, south London. The ritual, known as "zanjeer zani" or "zanjeer matam", was part of the Shia Muslim festival of Ashura, marked at the mosque every year.
The investigation team also discovered that Firoz's scars had built up over eight years. He had started using a zanjeer when he was seven. His brothers Hanif and Ijaz, who were 12 and nine at the time of the investigation in 2003, had also participated in the ceremony; they, too, had dozens of knife scars on their backs.
At the Abbas family home, officers found video footage that the family had shot during the ceremony in 2002. Spaced well apart in a circle and beating themselves with zanjeers were the two eldest sons, Firoz and Hanif. But they were not the only children involved: the film showed sons from other families flagellating with the same instrument. According to a report by the Crown Prosecution Service (which was asked by the investigation team to give formal advice), the youngest child at that particular ceremony was just six years old."
Posted by: The Science Pundit | December 18, 2007 3:30 AM
I had read somewhere that the whole 72 virgins was a mistranslation and that what had been promised was 72 zebibahs.
Posted by: The Science Pundit | December 18, 2007 3:32 AM
I hit "post" too quickly. I just remembered that I read it in a Salman Rushdie interview.
Posted by: bago | December 18, 2007 3:45 AM
Two Words:
Wesley Willis.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | December 18, 2007 3:52 AM
According to a report by the Crown Prosecution Service (which was asked by the investigation team to give formal advice), the youngest child at that particular ceremony was just six years old."
Dudes, I was barely born when the Christians started hacking at my pee-pee!!!!!!!!
Posted by: H. Humbert | December 18, 2007 4:00 AM
To be fair, it looks less painful than that other "mark from god"--the stigmata--if a bit more silly.
Posted by: Azkyroth | December 18, 2007 4:00 AM
PZ, to be fair, they said "pressing" not "slamming", so it's not necessarily the case that the behavior producing such marks would cause brain damage (being symptomatic, of course, is another matter entirely).
Posted by: Reynold | December 18, 2007 4:02 AM
Not to derail the topic too much, but there are worse things than physical abuse: psychological abuse is worse. And in this case, it's not self-inflicted.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoldChristianLiving/message/121
As many of you know, the Lord has granted me the privilege to encourage a
small, but growing number of saints in India to homeschool their children.
(My family will be going with me for an extended time of ministry there from
December through February.) One father who has just begun homeschooling his
daughter wrote me this week with an interesting concern. He subsequently
gave me permission to share his note and my response. He wrote:
> We noticed that she doesn't like to play with the other kids
> as much now and prefers to play alone. Any idea what could be happening?
That's GREAT! I often hear from new homeschoolers that their children are
preferring to play with the parents, siblings, and alone, soon after
beginning homeschooling.
In my opinion, that's part of the goal. Congratulations! She was becoming
addicted to interaction with her peers, who were, perhaps unintentionally,
stealing her heart from you. She had already started down the road to
becoming peer-dependent. But now, she is preferring being with you, being
with her little brother, and being alone. I think that's really healthy.
Many people worry that this will make children unable to relate to others.
In fact, it makes them less intimidated by others' acceptance/rejection of
them. She will be less likely to be pressured into conformity with the world
(Rom. 12:1-2). And as you spend time with her, her emotional focus is
turning to you. God is "turning the hearts of the children to the fathers,
and the hearts of the fathers to their children" (Mal. 4:6). Ultimately this
will make it easier for Grace to give her heart to you (Prov. 23:26) in
preparation for fully yielding and trusting her heart to the Lord.
Training your kids to shun contact with their peers??
Posted by: Reynold | December 18, 2007 4:04 AM
Not to derail the topic too much, but there are worse things than physical abuse: psychological abuse is worse. And in this case, it's not self-inflicted.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoldChristianLiving/message/121
As many of you know, the Lord has granted me the privilege to encourage a
small, but growing number of saints in India to homeschool their children.
(My family will be going with me for an extended time of ministry there from
December through February.) One father who has just begun homeschooling his
daughter wrote me this week with an interesting concern. He subsequently
gave me permission to share his note and my response. He wrote:
> We noticed that she doesn't like to play with the other kids
> as much now and prefers to play alone. Any idea what could be happening?
That's GREAT! I often hear from new homeschoolers that their children are
preferring to play with the parents, siblings, and alone, soon after
beginning homeschooling.
In my opinion, that's part of the goal. Congratulations! She was becoming
addicted to interaction with her peers, who were, perhaps unintentionally,
stealing her heart from you. She had already started down the road to
becoming peer-dependent. But now, she is preferring being with you, being
with her little brother, and being alone. I think that's really healthy.
Many people worry that this will make children unable to relate to others.
In fact, it makes them less intimidated by others' acceptance/rejection of
them. She will be less likely to be pressured into conformity with the world
(Rom. 12:1-2). And as you spend time with her, her emotional focus is
turning to you. God is "turning the hearts of the children to the fathers,
and the hearts of the fathers to their children" (Mal. 4:6). Ultimately this
will make it easier for Grace to give her heart to you (Prov. 23:26) in
preparation for fully yielding and trusting her heart to the Lord.
Training your kids to shun contact with their peers??
Posted by: bernarda | December 18, 2007 4:09 AM
What can you expect from people who think that getting together in groups and sticking their asses in the air simultaneously is a worthwhile activity.
Muhammad must have a tough time servicing all these guys in this spiritual circle-jerk.
Posted by: DLC | December 18, 2007 4:21 AM
smoosh your head against the floor 7 to 9 times in a row, five times a day, and see what you get ?
Some things the witch-doctors order their followers to do have little physical harm to them, but this is the least smallest effect. Ritual abuse, scarring, cutting, mutilating and psychological abuse are all in the Witch-Doctor's toolkit.
Posted by: bad Jim | December 18, 2007 4:23 AM
Colugo, Reynold, are you trying to tell us that, at least sometimes, religious instruction involves child abuse? Thanks.
Those of us who grew up without it may need to be reminded from time to time of what we missed.
Posted by: wobert | December 18, 2007 4:36 AM
I've actually seen this before,it's where a second penis is starting to sprout.
These men are so lucky,they can pull their pants down and count to 22. Where as the rest of us....
It never ceases to amaze me how so many people, can waste so much time in this life, worrying about the next life. Must be truly disappointing for them.
Posted by: Colugo | December 18, 2007 4:43 AM
In other body mod news...
http://tinyurl.com/2vfphj
"The rise in Islamic fundamentalism is being blamed for the growing trend for hymenoplasties, where the hymen is re-created from the already torn tissue, or a new membrane is inserted using a gelatine-like substance.
In some cases, the vaginal lining can also be used to create a "false" hymen.
A blood capsule can be inserted into the lining to ensure realistic blood flow when the false hymen is broken.
Twenty-four women in the UK had the procedure on the NHS between 2005 and 2006, but it is thought that hundreds or even thousands more - Aisha included - have plundered their savings to pay up to £4,000 to have private surgery."
Posted by: Brian W. | December 18, 2007 5:05 AM
damn, i was hoping to be the first person to mention Wesley Willis
Posted by: Phill | December 18, 2007 6:01 AM
I, also, was hoping to be the first to mention Wesley Willis. I can still be the first to link to a photo of his head-butting callus, though.
Posted by: AJS | December 18, 2007 6:02 AM
@Thadd
At some stage in the dim and distant past, a creature that was a direct ancestor of the modern chicken but not quite the same, laid an egg; out of which hatched a bird that would have been recognisable as the first modern chicken. (Modern chickens would have to have been capable of reproducing with these ur-chickens, though not necessarily with any of their ancestors. Intermateability would cease to be a concern once the last of the ur-chickens died off.)
If we assume that an egg is always an egg no matter what bird it came out of, then it was the egg that came first. If we insist for a chicken's egg to have come from a chicken, then the chicken came first.
Posted by: nn | December 18, 2007 6:17 AM
Re #28
Do non-amniote eggs count too?
Posted by: Don Quijote | December 18, 2007 6:39 AM
Isn't the answer already in the definition? It is like saying if you insist that B comes from A, B must come from A.However, I like chicken and eggs, they both taste good.
Posted by: ajay | December 18, 2007 6:39 AM
My first thought was that it's not a hard-to-fake signal of commitment at all; in fact, it should be easy (and highly lucrative) to set up a discreet clinic in some Muslim country which specialises in implanting a small lump of silicon under the skin of the forehead, along with a bit of dye tattooed in...
Posted by: ajay | December 18, 2007 6:40 AM
Aargh. "Silicone", not "silicon". These guys clearly don't need brain implant chips - their brains are under control already. (Also, a chip would be overkill. A couple of transistors would probably be enough.)
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | December 18, 2007 6:56 AM
Personally, I think its the scar from whenst the penis was removed from. Dickheads. Bring on my Fatwha!!!!
Posted by: Chris | December 18, 2007 7:05 AM
Am I the only one who's immediately reminded of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsJcYed0fyw ?
Posted by: T_U_T | December 18, 2007 7:09 AM
Build yourself a RC muslim. Two axis control up/down forward/back, and a big button for LOUD head bang.Posted by: csrster | December 18, 2007 7:31 AM
Some of us elderly British types have the sentence "Meanwhile in Iran the search for the Ayatollah's missing contact lens continues" wandering around in our brains.
Posted by: Peter Ashby | December 18, 2007 7:46 AM
In my head I had:
I'm a headbanger, headbanger yeah!
I love to bang my head
And when my head falls off
Going to bang my neck instead.
Also I am not elderly, yet. Just middle aged.
Posted by: Josh | December 18, 2007 7:49 AM
A lot of Muslims I know in the Middle East have friends who hit or rub themselves in the head in addition with various things to the daily prayers to try and make the mark even more distinct. There is a status to it, so of course...
Posted by: Kcanadensis | December 18, 2007 7:59 AM
Looks silly to me. Like a toddler who's just learning to walk and has bumped their head on the table...
Posted by: maxi | December 18, 2007 8:00 AM
Chris @34
Darnit! You beat me to it, I was just on my way to posting that link.
I think I have a nifty little head-raisin coming along too, from all the *headdesk* I seem to be doing nowadays.
Posted by: Eric | December 18, 2007 8:34 AM
Oh... I wondered what that thing on the head of the guy I work with was. And why he left two or three times a day at the same time every day.
Seriously though, his is huuuuuge.
Posted by: wheatdogg | December 18, 2007 8:48 AM
Anwar Sadat had one.
Posted by: CalGeorge | December 18, 2007 9:10 AM
I finally get it!
Head banging = Destroyed brain cells = Self-inflicted stupidity = Compliant follower of religious doctrine.
Brilliant!
Hey you, head banger, go walk around in a circle.
Duh, okay!
Posted by: dogmeatib | December 18, 2007 9:18 AM
Of course studies have shown the emergence of a new mark of secularism, the following has begun to appear on the foreheads of secularists:
5678
ertyuio
sdfghjkl;'
zxcvbnm,./
It's from smashing our heads against our keyboards at the stupidity of religious people.
Posted by: dogmeatib | December 18, 2007 9:19 AM
Bummer, I had it laid out all nifty and forehead-ish looking and the board reset it to left margin.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | December 18, 2007 9:43 AM
If you search google images for religious self mutilation pictures you'll find plenty. Religions just love this kinda stuff! Cut the end of your child's penis off! Smash your head on the floor! Slash your back with a knife! Flog yourself with a sisal rope!
God loves blood. Haven't you noticed?
Sick motherf*@cker be the name of the lord...
Posted by: Umilik | December 18, 2007 9:44 AM
Having had to meet many a grant application deadline in my life, I have one of those thingies on my forehead. And a matching dent in my desk.
Posted by: jeebus | December 18, 2007 9:48 AM
I read somewhere that the molecular cascade pathways leading to callus formation are irreducibly complex.
Posted by: Janine | December 18, 2007 9:48 AM
You all better cut this out right now. We have a reputation as atheists to maintain here. We are supposed to be soft on Islam.
Posted by: raindogzilla | December 18, 2007 9:56 AM
My first thought was of a slightly mistargeted attempt at a nose-first trip between the cheeks of the Almighty but I've already been accused once today of having scat for brains.
Posted by: DaveX | December 18, 2007 9:57 AM
@ #15-- HILARIOUS!
Posted by: stopmyabortion | December 18, 2007 9:58 AM
I'll see your zebibah, and raise you some welts, courtesy of my official Opus Dei cilice...
Posted by: Kseniya | December 18, 2007 10:04 AM
Well, sure. One can still mock the carpet-burned faithful while plotting for Islam to take over Europe.
Posted by: Monado | December 18, 2007 10:08 AM
A dedicated karateka has the tendons on his or her first two knuckles moved over to the side from years of doing knuckle pushups. It's a sign of dedication. It also means that when they punch someone the blow is delivered by bone, not vulnerable tendon. Now that's a useful alteration!
Posted by: Willo the Wisp | December 18, 2007 10:24 AM
So they want to disfigure themselves in order to demonstrate how gullible and irrational they are? Fine by me: it just makes it easier to spot the fundies!
Posted by: Metalhead | December 18, 2007 10:46 AM
Hey! I resent them being called "headbangers". The bangers in the mosh pits aren't quite as abusive.(Besides, all us metalhead headbangers worship Satan, don't ya know?)
Posted by: Bob L` | December 18, 2007 11:22 AM
So they are giving themselves Dutch rubs? That's hilarious.
Posted by: cognitive dissident | December 18, 2007 11:22 AM
Why don't they just pound nails into their skulls as a mark of piety?
See this MindHacks article: http://www.mindhacks.com/blog/2007/12/man_hammers_nail_int.html
Posted by: Sergiy Grynko | December 18, 2007 11:26 AM
Ahhhh, so THAT'S what Ayman al-Zawahiri has on his forehead! I used to think he was Gorbachev's hairier twin brother or something.
Posted by: Umilik | December 18, 2007 11:45 AM
I always thought Gorbachev had the map of Russia on his forehead. No ?
Posted by: Interrobang | December 18, 2007 11:46 AM
Honestly, is this actually weirder or stupider than a lot of other body mods, voluntary or not? My early-20s sister is going to have to have plastic surgery if she ever wants to get a straight job, as she has stretched her earlobes out to a grotesque extent so she can put what amounts to plastic grommets in them... Why? No idea. She also has four tattoos in various places, and more metal in her face than the grille of an Edsel. (And that's not even getting into the subject of, say, something like a Prince Albert.)
I'm personally, dare I say, quite agnostic on the subject of what people want to do with their bodies, even if I think it's icky and weird. (Thus proving myself once again staunchly pro-choice -- a lot of people think abortion is icky and weird, too, but the ones I can live with don't attempt to fuck with the law to prevent it.)
Posted by: cognitive dissident | December 18, 2007 11:50 AM
Umilik (#60):
I think Gorby's birthmark was actually a map of Afghanistan.
Posted by: AJS | December 18, 2007 12:01 PM
@30
"Isn't the answer already in the definition?" -- Not quite.
Is it a chicken's egg because it was laid by a chicken (the possessive implying an association with the parent), or is it a chicken's egg because it is going to hatch into a chicken (the possessive implying an association with the offspring) ?
Actually, the original question did not specify what kind of egg. Dinosaurs probably were laying recognisable hard-shelled eggs before even ur-chickens evolved, so I still say eggs came first.
Posted by: Reynold | December 18, 2007 12:04 PM
Unfortunately, physical mistreatment isn't the only thing that religions encourage:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoldChristianLiving/message/121
This is just plain creepy:
-----
One father who has just begun homeschooling his
daughter wrote me this week with an interesting concern. He subsequently
gave me permission to share his note and my response. He wrote:
> We noticed that she doesn't like to play with the other kids
> as much now and prefers to play alone. Any idea what could be happening?
That's GREAT! I often hear from new homeschoolers that their children are
preferring to play with the parents, siblings, and alone, soon after
beginning homeschooling.
In my opinion, that's part of the goal. Congratulations! She was becoming
addicted to interaction with her peers, who were, perhaps unintentionally,
stealing her heart from you. She had already started down the road to
becoming peer-dependent. But now, she is preferring being with you, being
with her little brother, and being alone. I think that's really healthy.
Posted by: Rey Fox | December 18, 2007 12:06 PM
Interrobang: Think of all the innocent cartilage that is murdered for the sake of your sister's fashion. Think of the STEM CELLS!
Posted by: RamblinDude | December 18, 2007 12:10 PM
This is just too funny: this morning I was thinking of writing a little essay comparing the coercion of religion to a guy hitting himself over the head with a hammer because he's been told to all his life. And now I see this.
Posted by: Mc Atilla | December 18, 2007 12:32 PM
Lots of hindus paint dots on their foreheads, catholics smudge ash on their foreheads before Easter, there are turbans, crucifixes, saffron robes - the list goes on. It's not enough to have personal beliefs, you gotta advertise!
Ever feel like wearing a red A?
Posted by: Jaycubed | December 18, 2007 1:37 PM
I had never heard of Wesley Willis before. After looking up his wiki listing I find it interesting how much of his act appears copied from Daniel Johnston.
-
Here's one of my songs (sing to tune of Camp Granada):
Hello Mudra,
Hello Fatwah,
I Am Here At,
Camp Nirvana,
We'll Fluff Your Aura,
But It Will Cost Ya,
Some Big Bucks Now,
When You Come To Camp Nirvana.
.
Posted by: llewelly | December 18, 2007 3:07 PM
Interrobang:
She'll fit right in at any game development company, so long as she can do code, art, or sound.
Posted by: Jaycubed | December 18, 2007 3:22 PM
llewelly,
There was a wonderful Bizzaro cartoon a short while ago of a young tattooed woman & an old tattooed woman whose tats were blurry messes.
The older woman is telling the younger one (not an exact quote, but you get the idea):
"This one used to be a flying Pegasus, and this one used to be an angel, and this one used to be..."
.
Posted by: Sastra, OM | December 18, 2007 4:39 PM
The zebibahs and flagellations seem to be such a bother, when one can suffer torments for God by enduring "Happy Holidays" from the store clerks at Target.
Posted by: Jon H | December 18, 2007 6:24 PM
"The investigation team also discovered that Firoz's scars had built up over eight years."
Eh, it probably isn't terribly painful. The back isn't really densely supplied with nerves.
Other shia cut their foreheads, but it's like when wrestlers do it: a minor laceration produces what appears to be a lot of blood, especially if there is sweat that can be colored by the blood.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | December 18, 2007 9:17 PM
To be fair, this is mostly the blame of Nasser and Mubarak ("Pharaoh Hos-Mu"). When all opposition is more or less forbidden, only the most radical opposition survives, and after the collapse of communism this leaves the religious fundies. It's the same all the way from Algeria to Uzbekistan.
Not the Christians. The Americans. In case you didn't know, Christianity does not require circumcision, and Christians are never circumcised except if they are born in the middle 19th century or in the USA (or of course converts from a religion that does require it).
LOL!!!
Posted by: AlanWCan | December 18, 2007 10:27 PM
Chris #34: Am I the only one who's immediately reminded of...
No, but #21's sticking their asses in the air simultaneously
reminded me of this and it took 15 minutes to stop laughing.
Posted by: John C. Randolph | December 19, 2007 2:50 AM
"Honestly, is this actually weirder or stupider than a lot of other body mods, voluntary or not? "
It's all weird. What I find hilarious are kids who get tats "to be different".
-jcr
Posted by: strewelpeter | December 19, 2007 10:25 AM
I have watched this phenomenon grow with each and every visit to Cairo over the last few years.
What I find most interesting but not really surprising when you look at it is the difference in intensity of religious practice between different countries in the Middle East, particularly between the officially secular Egypt and the officially theocratic Iran.
I have never noticed anyone in Iran with one of these scars while it seems that everyone in Egypt now has one. This despite the fact that one of the differences in practice between the Shia of Iran and the Sunni in Egypt is that the Shia pray while bowing their head onto a stone rather than carpet!
Posted by: jba | December 19, 2007 10:32 AM
"(And that's not even getting into the subject of, say, something like a Prince Albert.)"
Are you saying your *sister* has a prince albert...? That would be a challenge, unless it means something differant where you are than it does around here. Plus, I can't think of a single straight job where anyone would even be able notice it...
Posted by: coathangrrr | December 19, 2007 11:18 AM
I think Gorby's birthmark was actually a map of Afghanistan.
Which explains why the Russians got beaten there. Their leader was looking at the map backwards.
Posted by: Peter Ashby | December 19, 2007 2:04 PM
strewelpeter:
"I have never noticed anyone in Iran with one of these scars while it seems that everyone in Egypt now has one. This despite the fact that one of the differences in practice between the Shia of Iran and the Sunni in Egypt is that the Shia pray while bowing their head onto a stone rather than carpet!"
That explains the colour of the zebibah, it's a constantly repeated carpet burn. I understood everything except the colour before now. Thankyou.