| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Put down your copy of Rumi for a second and remember that the Sufis were for many years at the forefront of the Chechen jihad, and as I explained here, even leading Sufis such as Al-Ghazali made no bones about their supporting jihad warfare against unbelievers and their subjugation under Sharia. The idea that the Sufis represent a perspective in Islam that rejects jihad warfare is, unfortunately, not universally true.
Here they're only targeting Shi'ites, for unclear reasons, but clearly they don't think rock-throwing is incompatible with their mystical exercises. Note also the persecution by the Iranian authorities, noted in the article, and the suspicion in which the orthodox hold the Sufis -- worth noting for those who believe the Sufis to be The Great Peaceful Hope for Islam. Maybe they are, but only if they renounce the ideology of violence and supremacism themselves, and manage to overcome the stigma of unorthodoxy.
"Scores hurt as Iran militia clashes with Sufis: report," from AFP (thanks to Jeffrey Imm):
TEHRAN (AFP) - Scores of people were injured and more than 100 arrested when security forces stormed a Sufi lodge in western Iran after clashes between the Muslim mystics and Shiite worshippers, the Jomhuri Eslami newspaper reported on Monday.According to the report, the unrest broke out on Saturday in the city of Borujerd in Lorestan province following "the desecration of the al-Nabi mosque by Sufis of the deviant Gonabadi order".
"In the intensive clashes, about 80 people from the two sides were injured and 25 motorcycles belonging to the Sufis were burnt," it said.
The hardline daily said that Basij militiamen had later joined residents in destroying the Sufi lodge.
The major of Borujerd, Mohammad Ali Tohidi, told the Fars news agency: "All the wrongdoers have been arrested. Around 180 people have been handed to the judiciary," he said.
The news agency reported that the Sufis had thrown stones at the al-Nabi mosque, breaking windows while prayers were being held inside, drawing an angry reaction from worshippers.
It gave little explanation for the Sufis' action, saying only that they were "dissatisfied with cultural actions in the mosque".
"Five people taken hostage by these people (the Sufis) have been freed by the security forces and hospitalised due to deep injuries," the news agency quoted the mosque's Friday prayers leader, Abdolrahim Biranvand, as saying.
Sufi worship is not illegal in Iran but the practice is frowned upon by many conservative clerics who regard it as an affront to Islam.
An "affront." Not a "variation." Not "a different way of looking at things, which we disagree with but respect." An "affront."
The Islamic mysticism followed by an array of Sufi orders since the early centuries of the faith has always aroused suspicion among orthodox Muslims, whether Shiite or Sunni.In Shiite Islam, some Sufi orders have been further tarnished by the accusation of heresy because of their association with the unorthodox Alevi faith practised in parts of Syria and Turkey.
In late May, the Iranian press reported the arrest of the leader and several members of one of the largest Sufi sects in the northeast of the country.
Clashes pitting Sufis against the security forces and hardline supporters of the official brand of Shiite Islam in the clerical capital of Qom in February last year saw several dozen Sufi mystics sentenced to the lash and a year in jail for public disorder.
Posted by Robert at November 12, 2007 5:29 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Muslims engaging in violence, sometimes agaisnt the non-Muslim, sometimes against each other. Does it ever stop? Wait, I know the answer to this one: No.
Posted by: Wellington![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 12, 2007 5:45 PM
Rumi?
Isn't he the truly inspirational one, the summer-of-love one, the one who wrote "Siddhartha" and then "Jonathan Livingston Seagull" and "Don't Move My Cheese" and "Everything I Ever Learned I Learned in Kindergarten" and didn't he also do a CD of "Songs For Young Lovers"? And hasn't Rumi had a few platinums in the last decade or so? It's that Rumi -- the real Muslim, the authentic Muslim, the Muslim who has won the hearts and minds of those who concoct those fashionable new television "comedy" shows about Muslims, whether it's a matteer of a nice soft-spoken misunderstood exchange student from Pakistan, who wants nothing better than to just be accepted for what he is, or that Little Mosque on the Prairie congregation, every Ali and Omar among them just as Canadian as all get out. Yes, and we can see what ignoramuses the Infidels turn out to be, what fraidy-cats, blinded by their own ignorance and hostility -- where do those Infidels get their mean-minded,troglodytic views, anyway? ,
Rumi, Rumi, Rumi, and of course Sufism, Sufism, Sufism. It's the real Islam. It's the Islam we all know is coming down the pike, any minute now.
Posted by: Hugh at November 12, 2007 6:19 PM
Hugh-
And the elegant Sayyed Hossein Nasr. Follower of Fritjhof Schuon and Rene Guenon a Muslim convert who dreamed of an Islamic Europe under sharia when grandpa was in diapers. They are the 'elegant' window dressing of sharia and jihad for sufi intellectuals now that Idries Shah is dead and proven as fraudulent as Carlos Castaneda.
The transcendental unity of all religions. Yes, I beleive in that. The unity of all religions against Islam.
Posted by: poetcomic1 at November 12, 2007 6:47 PM
The "cultural actions" that the Sufi's were dissatisfied with at the mosque seems to have been reports of several clerics from the al-Nabi mosque calling Sufism "illegitimate." The pacifist branch of the religion of peace responded by attacking the al-Nabi mosque and the clerics sparking this retaliation by the Iranian government.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/11/11/africa/ME-GEN-Iran-Religious-Clash.php
at November 12, 2007 6:56 PM
Islam itself appears to be the religion of death. Choosing between Sunni, Shiite and even Sufi variations is like choosing between death by disembowelment, quartering or stoning. It's a choice between types of death, without the option of life. What else can one conclude?
Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at November 12, 2007 7:57 PM
I think that we can all be certain that the Shi'ites are morally outraged that the Sufis would throw rocks at a Shi'ite Mosque. If they were really good Muslims, they'd be out killing innocent people in subways and schools.
Posted by: rational at November 12, 2007 8:26 PM
"The Islamic mysticism followed by an array of Sufi orders since the early centuries of the faith has always aroused suspicion among orthodox Muslims, whether Shiite or Sunni."
The Shiites are orthodox Muslims? They're not the breakaways? And all this time I thought it was the Wahhabists of Sunni Islam that considered themselves orthodox and all others heretical.
Well, well, well.
Posted by: PMK at November 12, 2007 8:37 PM
Prince Charles de LGF has decreed that this thread is non-racist and both halal and kosher. Peace, brothers.
Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at November 12, 2007 9:24 PM
Don't underestimate the influence of Rumi. EVERY major Western city - and many small ones - have a "New Age" bookstore. Check yours out and you will see an entire section on Rumi, and his Sufi predecessors and successors. (the books of Teheran doormat, al-Nasr, fill out the rest of the Islamic session)
"Rage Boy" declared himself a Kashmir Sufi. The late Hindu convert, Anwar Shaikh, noted Sufi borrowings from Islam, and attributed same to many conversion to the murder cult.
However, Muslim adherence is irrevelant. A recent poll in Bosnia has found that Wahabism is now adhered to by over 13% of Bosnian Muslims. Probably a quarter of Muslims in the West are Wahabis, and many of the rest are Jamaati or Ikhwani (Muslim Brotherhood) jihadis.
See free book on Jamaat i Islamis. That cult, which holds most American Pakis in ideological abjection, invited Osama bin Laden to attend their 1998 convention in Lahore, Pakistan. Still, their US puppets (ISNA) have an open invitation to Bush's dhimmi White House.
http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=ft9j49p32d&brand=ucpress
Posted by: supercargo at November 12, 2007 9:29 PM
Let he who casts the first stones...
be glorified and get 72 nubile virgins.
They may look like porno stars in their prime but they never touched a man until you blew yourself up, Mr. Jihad Warrior Man. All things are possible in the whorehouse heaven in the sky, including a nice "menage a 73!" They are all virgins. Even though your are dead now, don't worry a bit, if they pregnant, the kids are yours. You don't need to cover 'em up in Paradise.
Sorry, but what a sick sexually obsessed religion!
Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at November 12, 2007 10:07 PM
Martin Sullivan's mega-dhimmi website, Islamophobiawatch, focuses on a single comment, to trash Jihad Watch. Sullivan loves jihadis, and hates counter-jihadis.
Posted by: supercargo at November 12, 2007 10:19 PM
So they threw a few stones, and broke a few windows of a mosque; for Islam that's real pacifism. Real rootin'-tootin' Moslems would have gone in with AK-47's blazing, or sent in a few boys in suicide-bomb vests. No wonder the other Moslems regard them with suspicion: they don't know how to kill.
Posted by: ebonystone at November 12, 2007 10:49 PM
supercargo: Thanks for the link to Islamophobia Watch. I went to it and spent some time checking it out. Everyone who regularly posts here at JW and finds Islam troubling in many respects should take a look at this site. It functions as a kind of whitewash for Islam, mouthing all kinds of platitudes that are inane or easily proved wrong.
Most ironic are all the assessments that critics of Islam make of the religion, which of course are overwhelmingly true, but which are presented quite unconsciously (and stupidly) by IW as evidence of ignorance and prejudice by those who hold Islam in low regard. It characterizes JW as Robert Spencer's "hate-filled website."
Well, this is what those of us who try to get the truth out about what Bertrand Russell, Winston Churchill, Thomas Jefferson, Alexis de Tocqueville, John Quincy Adams, Edward Gibbon, Oriana Fallaci, Arthur Schopenhauer, Ernest Renan and David Hume already knew about Islam are up against. Foolishness takes many forms and Martin Sullivan's Islamophobia Watch is a classic example of foolhardiness masquerading as tolerance and enlightenment. In one respect it's a hoot. But in another respect it's troubling because it reveals what an up-hill struggle it will continue to be to effectively convey to people everywhere in the West Islam's many predatory, parasitical, violent, intolerant and destructive features. Our problem isn't just Islam but Western apologists for Mohammed's creed. IW is proof of this.
Thanks again, supercargo, for this information.
Posted by: Wellington at November 12, 2007 11:16 PM
This is an interesting article on Iran. Per the Asia Times, Iran’s birth rate under the Mullahs has fallen to 0.66 (!?) children per female. The author argues that the current large crop of military-aged Iranian males is the reason for Iran’s push for Empire.
Why Iran is Dying for a Fight:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IK13Ak01.html
at November 12, 2007 11:39 PM
If you want to see what the American branch of the Mevlevis think go check out,its really bad stuff:
And check out their articles:
http://www.sufism.org/society/articles/BreatheAndRemember.htm
(a article that makes excuses for 9/11 - it will make you mad as hell too)
http://www.sufism.org/society/articles/Islam%20and%20Logos.html
(this one attacks and distorts Pope Benedict's for the words of the Byzantine emperor and distorts what the Koran says as well!)
http://www.sufism.org/society/articles/ACommonWord.pdf
(this is the Al-bayt Institute letter)
Its clear from these articles that even western Sufis have the same agenda as mainstream Islam.
The only real difference is that they sugar coat their agenda much better than the CAIR thugs do.
IMO their main job is to recruit westerners into Islam.
at November 13, 2007 2:29 AM
"It gave little explanation for the Sufis' action, saying only that they were "dissatisfied with cultural actions in the mosque".
...secret Islamic gay initiation ceremonies?.....
at November 13, 2007 6:17 AM
In all honestly, I can't blame the Sufis in Iran for lashing out in this way. They've been treated horribly for so long, this was bound to happen sooner or later. (I was under the impression that Ahmadinejad himself belonger to one or another of the Sufi tariqas in Iran. Is that true?)
...and yes, I do like Rumi's poetry.
Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at November 13, 2007 6:18 AM
Rumi? Can't be bothered.
But the other day I pulled an old Nietzsche from the shelf, 'Der Wille zur Macht'-and I must say, there is quite a lot that is increasingly lacking in modern day scriptures...
Churchill understood that.
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at November 13, 2007 7:21 AM
Hey...My Allah is better than your Allah. Your Allah is fake, and we, who represent the real Allah, will kill you for representing the fake Allah. Allah can have no partners, so obviously only 'our' Allah is the real one. Your fake has to die along with you.
Stated by Sunni's, Shia, and Sufi's, talking about each other...It's good to see this kind of consensus in Islam...
Sorry, but what a sick sexually obsessed religion!
Posted by: Wimbledon Womble
Yep, I noted before that Islam is loaded with sexual symbolism...how about those minarets...Islam is not simple, it has different aspects like spokes in a wheel. One of the spokes is that of a violence prone sex cult...
Posted by: duh_swami at November 13, 2007 9:47 AM
I wonder if Mr. Sullivan's use of the Jihad Watch logo constitutes an actionable copyright infringement...
Posted by: Abscedere at November 13, 2007 9:52 AM
"But the other day I pulled an old Nietzsche from the shelf, 'Der Wille zur Macht'-and I must say, there is quite a lot that is increasingly lacking in modern day scriptures..."
Good to see a fellow Nietzsche reader on these boards. I thought I was the only one!
Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at November 13, 2007 12:47 PM
Sticks and STONES will break my bones, but names will never hurt me.
Posted by: tanstaafl at November 13, 2007 12:52 PM
Here they're only targeting Shi'ites, for unclear reasons, but clearly they don't think rock-throwing is incompatible with their mystical exercises.
.........
It gave little explanation for the Sufis' action, saying only that they were "dissatisfied with cultural actions in the mosque".
...........
It appears to have been a pre-emptive strike by the Sufis, albeit not a very effective one.
From the AP article:
"Local journalist Morteza Bourbour said the violence in Boroujerd began Saturday morning when Sufis attacked a nearby mosque, injuring several Shiite Muslim clerics who had urged their followers to shut down the Sufi lodge bacause it was "illegitimate."
from above:
According to the report, the unrest broke out on Saturday in the city of Borujerd in Lorestan province following "the desecration of the al-Nabi mosque by Sufis of the deviant Gonabadi order"
Now that's objective journalism! It would have been different if the writer had credited the quote. As it stands, it seems to be the opinion of the journalist--and probably is.
Not only was the Sufi lodge set on fire, it was was largely destroyed (according to the AP story) by a *bulldozer*. Was the Sufi lodge located right near a construction site, or perhaps a handy earth-moving equipment rental yard? Or had the Shi'ite clerics and their followers procured the bulldozer for just this purpose? The AP story describes the destroyers of the lodge as members of "an unidentified group".
Then, just as you begin to feel terribly sorry for the persecuted Sufis, you find that they had taken several hostages who wound up severly injured--either at the hands of their kidnappers, or in the general melee.
The often reiterated idea is that if non-Muslims truly want safety that all they have to do is convert to the "Religion of Peace" (tm). This is given the lie again and again. Muslims are at least as brutal in suppressing their co-religionists of other sects as they are the "filthy kuffar".
at November 13, 2007 1:34 PM
Who says Islam isn't mystical? The Kuran mentions talking rocks and talking trees (neither of which exist). That's quite a mystique they have going (perhaps fueled by copious amounts of camel poop-smoking).
Let us hope fervently that the Sufis aren't throwing the Kuran's talking rocks at its talking trees!
Posted by: pythagoras at November 13, 2007 2:14 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)