The sinister side of Sufism

Jamie Glazov

“Andropov drinks whiskey!!! And he likes Western movies!!!” gushed the Stockholm Syndrome-affected lefties during the Cold War about a KGB henchman when he came to power — as they were pining for the mythical “moderate” tyrant that they could hug in their fantasy construction of their utopian disinfected paradise …….”Saudi Arabian prince Talal Bin Waleed is visiting Israel!!!….” they were whimpering with twisted ecstasy recently…not realizing the idiocy they were engaging in about a satirical hoax on the internet that was exposing an Islamo-Fascist Jew-Hating theocracy………but now they can go back to “But there’s the Sufis, the Sufis, the Sufis, the Sufis!!……” their pathetic mantra that yearns for that elusive and self-destructive dream of their moderate Islam…….a vicious dream that sacrifices millions of victims on its altar of heartlessness.

The sinister side of Sufism 
An essay showing the dark side of Sufism as practiced throughout history and why we must not uncritically swallow the myth that Sufism promotes religious harmony.| IndiaFacts
.
So yes, lets take a closer look at these mythical Sufis:
 The Beltway sniper and the Ground Zero Imam were Sufis …. but lets not get distracted:
.
Below is what Sufi saint Al-Ghazali actually wrote about jihad war, and the treatment of the vanquished non-Muslim dhimmi peoples (from the Wagjiz, written in 1101 A.D.):

one must go on jihad (i.e., warlike razzias or raids) at least once a year…one may use a catapult against them [non-Muslims] when they are in a fortress, even if among them are women and children. One may set fire to them and/or drown them…If a person of the Ahl  al-Kitab [People of The Book – Jews and Christians, typically] is enslaved, his marriage is [automatically] revoked…One may cut down their trees…One must destroy their useless books. Jihadists may take as booty whatever they decide…they may steal as much food as they need…

…the dhimmi is obliged not to mention Allah or His Apostle…Jews, Christians, and Majians must pay the jizya [poll tax on non-Muslims]…on offering up the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits [the dhimmi] on the protruberant bone beneath his ear [i.e., the mandible]… They are not permitted to ostentatiously display their wine or church bells…their houses may not be higher than the Muslim’s, no matter how low that is. The dhimmimay not ride an elegant horse or mule; he may ride a donkey only if the saddle[-work] is of wood. He may not walk on the good part of the road. They [the dhimmis] have to wear [an identifying] patch [on their clothing], even women, and even in the [public] baths…[dhimmis] must hold their tongue…. (Emphasis added.)

 

Moreover, Al Ghazali’s views regarding non-Muslim dhimmis – which were typical of the prevailing written opinions of Muslim theologians and jurists during the Abbasid-Baghdadian Caliphate – resulted in tangible acts of dhimmi persecution, as recorded, for example, in this contemporary chronicle from Baghdad by Obadyah the Proselyte, in 1100 A.D.:

 

…the Caliph of Baghdad, al-Muqtadi [1075-1094], had given power to his vizier, Abu Shuja… [who] imposed that each male Jew should wear a yellow badge on his headgear. This was one distinctive sign on the head and the other was on the neck- a piece of lead of the weight of a silver dinar hanging round the neck of every Jew and inscribed with the word dhimmi to signify that the Jew had to pay poll-tax. Jews also had to wear girdles round their wastes. Abu Shuja further imposed two signs on Jewish women. They had to wear a black and a red shoe, and each woman had to have a small brass bell on her neck or shoe, which would tinkle and thus announce the separation of Jewish from Gentile [Muslim] women. He assigned cruel Muslim men to spy upon Jewish women, in order to oppress them with all kinds of curses, humiliation, and spite. The Gentile population used to mock all the Jews, and the mob and their children used to beat up the Jews in all the streets of Baghdad…When a Jew died, who had not paid up the poll-tax [jizya] to the full and was in debt for a small or large amount, the Gentiles did not permit burial until the poll-tax was paid. If the deceased left nothing of value, the Gentiles demanded that other Jews should, with their own money, meet the debt owed by the deceased in poll-tax; otherwise they [threatened] they would burn the body.5

Simply put, the views of the much lionized Al-Ghazali are identical to those of countless classical and contemporary Muslim theologians, including Qaradawi, who justify jihad terror, including the “incidental” killing of non-combatants, and the sacralized inferiority of non-Muslims. And second tier apologists such as Ormsby also choose to not to discuss the theological realities which are at the root of the unique Islamic institution of jihad itself, expressed eloquently by the contemporary scholar Bassam Tibi:

At its core, Islam is a religious mission to all humanity. Muslims are religiously obliged to disseminate the Islamic faith throughout the world. “We have sent you forth to all mankind” (Q. 34:28). If non-Muslims submit to conversion or subjugation, this call (da’wa) can be pursued peacefully. If they do not, Muslims are obliged to wage war against them. In Islam, peace requires that non-Muslims submit to the call of Islam, either by converting or by accepting the status of a religious minority (dhimmi) and paying the imposed poll tax, jizya. World peace, the final stage of the da’wa, is reached only with the conversion or submission of all mankind to Islam…Muslims believe that expansion through war is not aggression but a fulfillment of the Qur’anic command to spread Islam as a way to peace. The resort to force to disseminate Islam is not war (harb), a word that is used only to describe the use of force by non-Muslims. Islamic wars are not hurub (the plural of harb) but rather futuhat, acts of “opening” the world to Islam and expressing Islamic jihad. Relations between dar al-Islam, the home of peace, and dar al-harb, the world of unbelievers, nevertheless take place in a state of war, according to the Qur’an and to the authoritative commentaries of Islamic jurists. Unbelievers who stand in the way, creating obstacles for the da’wa, are blamed for this state of war, for the da’wa can be pursued peacefully if others submit to it. In other words, those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them. Only when Muslim power is weak is “temporary truce” (hudna) allowed (Islamic jurists differ on the definition of “temporary”). 6

Read it all…

3 thoughts on “The sinister side of Sufism”

  1. http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com.au/2007/10/sitaram-goel-on-chisti-ajmer-school-of.html

    It is very fashionable among the Indian dhimmis, including some so-called nationalists to praise Sufism, it’s “syncretic culture” and it’s alleged “moderation” to the skies.
    Therefore, one should not lose sight of these pertinent facts about it.

    True Face of Sufism

    “But the evidence that is available points towards a contrary conclusion. ….
    ……..

    A study of this literature leaves little doubt that sufis were the most fanatic and fundamentalist elements in the Islamic establishment in medieval times.

    Hindus should go to this literature rather than fall for latter-day Islamic propaganda.

    The ruin of Hindus and Hinduism in Kashmir in particular, can be safely credited to sufis who functioned there from the early thirteenth century on wards. “

  2. Pages 68 to 70 in “Living by the Point of My Spear – A study of the Life of Muhammad and his Personality”, by ex-muslim Zaki Ameen, give some b/g info on Sufism, which originally borrowed some aspects of Greek thought (“sophia” = wisdom) but is now marked by mind-numbing rituals, plus the usual savagery of Islam.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/74912195/Living-by-The-Shadow-of-My-Spear

    “Ultimately, Sufism failed to topple Islam, mainly due to the Mogul attack on Baghdad and the burning of their literature. Islamic Sufism, as taken from the Greek, was an intellectual movement full of philosophy and analytical thought, while the Indian part was calling for contemplation and daily practices. Muslim clergymen fought the intellectual version of Sufism – represented by analytical thought, writing and reading – and encouraged the contemplative version, emptying it from any thinking activities and filling it with dancing, fasting, singing and repetition, so Sufis nowadays are parrots able to sing, dance and learn by heart poems of Omar Alkhayyam, Al Romi and Al Hallaj without understanding their real meaning, being full of love, tolerance and respect for others. They think that Muhammad was calling for these principles and words, not Buddha.”

    The “Whirling Dervishes” of Islam are famous. The “zikr” might be more usual. Consider the hypnotic effect:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UEfxFJXql0
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih395-JcvQo

Comments are closed.