Remarks by Jihad Watch volunteer Patrick Devenny:
Pakistan is hardly a good place to find an active debate over the role of Islam in society, but an editorial, "Outlawing 'incitement to terrorism' and 'call to jihad,'" featured in the Pakistani Daily Times defies this expectation by examining the role of “personal” jihad inside Muslim states, within the context of the UN’s latest efforts to condemn religious extremism. An excerpt:
The real problem in the Islamic world will be two concepts that the West increasingly associates with terrorism. The first is the call to jihad by non-state actors and the second is the freedom to act in defiance of the state under the concept of amr and nahi (enforce that which is good and stop that which is bad). Both concepts violate the sovereignty of the nation-state as it exists today but both are so far only weakly opposed by the states that they undermine. Some Muslim scholars think that the call to jihad should only be given by the state. But they are outnumbered by clerics who lean on a literal interpretation of the scripture to insist that the madrassas should go on teaching the concept of private jihad.
The writers thus confirm what many Muslim apologists have refused to admit: the basis for personal jihad -- as opposed to jihad called by a state authority -- is firmly rooted in Islamic scriptures.
thecid:
Spencer is interested in your offer. I am posting this on multiple threads in the hope that you'll see it. Contact him at director@jihadwatch.org.
Okay, I am NOT an apologist for Islam. But how do you address the "defense" of the personal jihad which states that it is more of an inner, spiritual jihad. In other words, it is the struggle for faith inside a person. (Forgive me if it is in your new book...I've bought it but haven't had a chance to read it) That is the defense always given to me, but I've had a hard time buying the "inner struggle" argument...It sounds too much like a reinterpretation, such as Gandhi's peaceful reinterpretation of the Bhagavad-Gita. It is nice, but something totally at odds with what it always was.
"defense" of the personal jihad which states that it is more of an inner, spiritual jihad
A concept picked up by early muslims when they bumped into christian hermits, monks, etc. Mainly attributed to Sufis. Needless to say this is a load of bunkum and there is much at:
`For a variety of reasons I had not planned to publish any response to Stephen Schwartz's Weekly Standard article touting Sufism as peaceful and tolerant. However, many people have emailed it to me, and I am seeing it pop up here and there as a sign of hope. I am all for hope, but I am not for false hope. Andrew G. Bostom has put together this piece, which will give you a clearer view of the Sufis and what non-Muslims can expect from them:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/004940.php
And from the sub-continent itself:
A similar Sufi saint who died a mere 79 years before Waliullah's birth, was Ahmad Sirhindi (1564-1624). He was always foaming at the mouth against Akbar's policy of peace with the Hindus. He proclaimed himself the Mujaddid-i-alf-i-sdni, 'renovator of the second millennium of Islam'. Besides writing several books, he addressed many letters to several powerful courtiers in the reign of Akbar and Jahangir. His MaktiibCtt-i-Imdm RabbanT have been collected and published in three volumes. According to Professor S.A.A. Rizvi, "Shariat can be fos- tered through the sword' was the slogan he raised for his contemporar- ies.
A few specimens should suffice to show the quality of this man's mind. In letter No. 163 he wrote: "The honour of Islam lies in insulting kufr and kafirs. One who respects the kafirs dishonours the Muslims... The real purpose of levying jiziya on them is to humiliate them to such an extent that they may not be able to dress well and to live in gran- deur. They should constantly remain terrified and trembling. It is intended to hold them under contempt and to uphold the honour and might of Islam."
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/sufi.html
This is an evil cult that nurtures sociopathic tendencies. There is no redemption in it.
And as always there are exceptions:
'MADELEINE'
http://beautifulatrocities.com/archives/2004/12/madeleine_photo.html
Ah, nice information. I wasn't really talking about Sufism, although I didn't know all those things brought up in that post. I was under the impression Sufism was some very minor and mystic branch of Islam that was continually cited so as to distract from the other, more historically violent ones. I got this impression from reading a book about world religions that spends a good deal focusing on Sufism for the vast majority of the chapter about Islam (even my professor openly admitted the bias of the author). But it seems even that notion isn't valid...