islamic extremism in bangladesh and south-asia needs to be curtailed soon. it's sad that these @sses have nothing better to do than terrorise minority communities, and vilify themselves. hindu's in bangladesh have been suffering since the country became independent, with ripples of fundamentalism during other incidents such as the demolition of the babri masjid, and release of lajja and the satanic verses. they're simply stupid, igonorant, and illogical, and need to be taught a lesson.

I found this article in todays Telegraph by Mihir Bose really interesting - he is referring to a BBC programme shown on Sunday that investigated the main leaders of the Muslim Council of Britain and other stuff and showed that they held some less than moderate views - support for Maududi and some supremacist, separatist organisations:

Today it is rich Saudis who assiduously propagate pan-Islamism. The result has been that British Muslims have become alienated from their roots, both Indian/Pakistani and British. They have been encouraged to forget they belong to a very different cultural strain than the Saudis. They are mostly converts from Hinduism and there is large measure of the gentle Sufi tradition in them. But, influenced by imams, themselves financed by Middle Eastern money, many try to prove they are as Muslim as their co-religionists from the Middle East.

Some from the subcontinent even go to great lengths to deny that they emerged from the wretched Hindus, claiming to be Muslims whose ancestry can be traced to conquering armies of Islam that poured into India through the Middle Ages.

Sadly, however, when these same Muslims go to the Middle East they find that, far from being treated as fellow Muslims, they are often bracketed with the Hindu infidels and not considered real Muslims at all. Privately this causes great angst among the Muslims but it is not a public topic they like to discuss.

A responsible Muslim leader of this country would address this issue and stress the fact that, while those from the subcontinent are part of the worldwide religion that is Islam, they also share many cultural roots with the non-Muslims from the subcontinent. This makes them unique in the Muslim world. Indeed, the subcontinent is the only place on earth where two Islamic countries, Pakistan and Bangladesh, have between them produced three female prime ministers, something inconceivable in the Middle East.

There are brave Muslim leaders, some of whom were bold enough to appear on Panorama, such as Ghayasuddin Siddiqui of the Muslim Institute, and Taj Hargey, the Muslim scholar from St Anthony's College, Oxford, who revealed how Muslims are taught to consider non-Muslims as kaffirs and inferior to them.

These - not Sir Iqbal - are the modern Sir Syed Ahmed Khans. If only they succeeded in explaining to Muslim Britons that there is a difference between politics and religion, non-Muslim Britons would realise there is a difference between the Islam of the subcontinent and the Islam of the Middle East.

they're simply stupid, igonorant, and illogical, and need to be taught a lesson.

How do you reckon they should be taught a lesson?

Whenever I hear the words 'They should be taught a lesson' in an Indian context - it always sounds ominous to me.

it's sad that these @sses have nothing better to do than terrorise minority communities, and vilify themselves. hindu's in bangladesh have been suffering since the country became independent

Wait, exactly HOW was this bombing terrorizing the "minority" community?
I think 63 out of 64 districts in the nation signifies a majority.

And the 2 dead were Muslim.

I'm not saying that the Hindu community has not suffered attacks on the past, but I have no idea what youre trying to say by bringing that up when talking about these bombings.
The incident had nothing to do with attacking minorities, and everything to do with challenging the incumbent government (though Zia in her infinite wisdom and her billowing saris does not see it as so).

... demolition of the babri masjid, and release of lajja and the satanic verses.

I never thought I'd see "babri masjid" and "release of lajja" in the same line. Its one of those unlikely juxtapositions that Amazon talks about. I guess writing a book and a huge mob tearing down a archeological site are the same.

...challenging the incumbent government (though Zia ...

About 9% of terrorists in J&K are Bangladeshis...

M. Nam

islamic extremism in bangladesh and south-asia needs to be curtailed soon.

you should have stopped after that. ;)

"About 9% of terrorists in J&K are Bangladeshis..."

That is very interesting info, MoorNam !!!
What kind of "freedom struggle" is Kashmir, that is fought by aliens ?? :-))
(Looks like they have outsourced the freedom fighting ..ha ha)

Whenever I hear the words 'They should be taught a lesson' in an Indian context - it always sounds ominous to me.

Agreed. The entire concept of "group guilt"/"collective responsibility" needs to be torn right out of Indian culture worldwide. A person is only responsible for his/her own crimes/sins, nobody else's. "Guilt by association" is a disgusting way of thinking.

However, giving Raam the benefit of the doubt, I'm assuming he was referring to dealing only with the specific terrorist/extremist groups and supporters, and not with their innocent co-religionists.

It's interesting -- albeit in a nasty, depressing way -- how some Bangladeshis have also now jumped on the jihadist bandwagon, whether we're talking about the bombs a few days ago or MoorNam's surprising statistic regarding Kashmir.

This makes them unique in the Muslim world.

china has tens of millions of "indigenous" muslims.

also, as a point of fact, many of the south asian sufi orders seem 'gentle' only by way of contrast with salafism. the naqsbandiya order which was prominent in india is considered one of the more orthodox sufi sects as regards sharia, and it was the dominant one in india institutionally from what i recall. sufism is to some extent an elite practice whose time has passed i think (ie; common people need a relatable way of religious expression, and for islam, those alternatives are not particularly gentle right now).

What kind of "freedom struggle" is Kashmir, that is fought by aliens ?? :-))

Talk about fundies ...
Check out Pat Robertson calls for assasination of Hugo Chavez

Its amazing !!!

Hmm....So, you run with the Pat Robertson crowd. This morning NPR was discussing him too.

It all make sense now.

Amen !!!

sufism is to some extent an elite practice whose time has passed i think.

I tend to disagree. On the contrary, Sufism is one sect which has a lot of appeal among the more rational kind, and they do a whole lot of philosophical discussions in their circles and are inspired by the works of poets like Rumi and so on, contrary to what traditional sunnis or salafis do. It is in par with other mystical traditions and in U.S alone I am seeing more and more people attracted to it.

On the contrary, Sufism is one sect which has a lot of appeal among the more rational kind

and...

in U.S alone I am seeing more and more people attracted to it.

as i said, *elite*. the esoteric gnosis one can attain via sufi practice is not accessible to the $1 a day bangladeshi, it requires a level of cultivation (spiritual) and focus that they don't have time for in their seasonal-crop focused life. also, there is the issue that "sufism" is in some ways a diverse and numinous term as "hinduism." organized sufis are very diverse, and many singletons who affirm that they are sufis are even harder to pin down.

but anyway, elite esoteric rational-mysticism (whatever that means) in all religions tends to be a minority practice in relation to orthodox devotionalism. you can see this most starkly in therevada buddhism, which was designed from first principles to be a somewhat elitist mystical retreat from the world, but in practice has allowed a pantheon of gods, godlings and institutional devotionalism just like other religions.

p.s. many groups that favor very strict islamic practice, like tableegh, are also partly sufi. so it certainly doesn't necessarily imply liberalism of practice, though some groups like the bekatishi drink alcohol as part of their heterodoxy.

and just to be clear, if you state that X has appeal to 'the rational kind,' i think that is basically implying that X has a narrow appeal. "the rational kind" are a tiny minority of humans, and i suspect that you need an IQ at least 1 standard deviation above the norm (115) to comprehend and cognitively manipulate rational abstractions to really even live a 'rational' life (which is more a way of looking at the world than particular conclusions). as it is though, much of organized sufism is built around almost idolatrous devotion to shayks who initiate their pupils, who are obligated to obey and listen to their masters in a very slavish fashion. this is not how sufis operate in the USA operate all the time, but, i've seen the tendency even in new agey circles. obviously, it isn't peculiar to sufis.... (ie; gurus, preachers, bhikkus, lamas, etc. fill in the blank, one of a kind).

"the rational kind" ... who are obligated to obey and listen to their masters in a very slavish fashion.

Razib, I work in a group of fairly intelligent people. The person we work for is one of the most respected astrophysicists in the world. When he says something we all stop whatever it is we are saying and pay close attention. Sometimes he says things which seem wrong. We do it anyways, and many more times than not, he turns out to be correct. It is not irrational to to pay close attention to what your teacher is saying. Why have a teacher otherwise? The sign of intelligence is picking the right teacher, not constantly being in contest with the teacher and other students.

When you say, the time has passed for soemthing - I think you are predicting that less people would follow it in the future, but I am not seeing that happening here in the U.S or anywhere else. On the contrary, even in '$1' places, people are finding more time to think beyond the basic needs, much more compared to a few centuries ago. In that regard, I tend to think more people are likely to follow the mystical traditions without a strong structure - that Christiantiy or traditional Islam provides - associated with it.

many groups that favor very strict islamic practice, like tableegh, are also partly sufi.

Oh. puhleez. They have nothing to do with Sufis. There is no group among Sufis that I know of who thinks Quran, Prophet and Sunnah and thats all there is to it in life - like pretty much all tableeghis think. Tableegi's literal, stupid ideology to recreate the exact life of 1400 years ago could create another Taliban, if not worse. There is no room for discussion - oh no, yes there is - they discuss about whether you should wear your pants long enough to cover your angles or not. There are no parallels here.

'ankles' I meant.

Tableegi's literal, stupid ideology to recreate the exact life of 1400 years ago could create another Taliban, if not worse

Um and worshipping dead religious men is a sign of enlightment ?

Um and worshipping dead religious men is a sign of enlightment ?

Please don't put words into my mouth. But, Sufis as far as I know don't really worship dead or alive men.

In the global scheme, they are all irrational - I could agree to that. But, I believe there are different degrees of rationality and I certainly think Sufis are far more rational than other sects of Islam, esp Tableeghis

and on your question about worshipping dead men - even if it is true - why is it worse than worshipping an unknown, unseen fantasy god?

I certainly think Sufis are far more rational than other sects of Islam, esp Tableeghis

I am not sure if Sufis are rational at all.
Slavish devotion to some mystic doesnt seem rational to me.

Modern-day Islam could certainly benefit from a greater Sufi influence, especially to counteract OBL and his fellow jihadists worldwide. The dominant Islamic religious figures of today seem to either support that extremist ideology, or are ineffective, or silent.

It really makes me wonder, where are the 21st Century equivalents of Bulleh Shah, Baba Farid, and so on ? Where are the modern-day Sufi saints ?God knows, the world is crying out for people like that -- especially considering what is now happening with regards to Islam, its more extreme adherents, and the wider world's perception of both the religion and its followers.

why is it worse than worshipping an unknown, unseen fantasy god?

I think its equally foolish.
You for some reason do think that worshipping dead men is sign of reason.

is A sign of reason.

You for some reason do think that worshipping dead men is sign of reason.

Again, you are saying something that I haven't said. If you want me to make it simple, My point is that Sufi interpretation of Islam is more evolving than Tableeghi - any system that evolves incorporates some rationality in order to do that. Sufi version is not about adhering to 100% of someone's teachings - more liberal in their outlook that there are different ways to get to God.

On the contrary, even in '$1' places, people are finding more time to think beyond the basic needs, much more compared to a few centuries ago. In that regard, I tend to think more people are likely to follow the mystical traditions without a strong structure - that Christiantiy or traditional Islam provides - associated with it.

rod stark's work on the sociology of religion, as laid out in books like a theory of religion tend to imply that lower SES groups tend to gravitate toward sects, which are yes not part of established institutions, but very controlling and codified. there are certainly people who are 'mystics' and wish to achieve gnosis of the One, etc. etc. but i think that that is an atypical personality. these people are often important, and the ones who start religions. but those who perpetuate religions are a different breed. think jesus vs. st. paul.

as for tableegh and their fixation on ankle length, outside the west adherence to the exoteric (sharia) practice of islam (if not a salafist interpretation) is normative among sufis from what i gather. a few heterodox groups like bekatishis are a bit different, but they are a minority.

in sum, i think your conception of 'sufism' differs a lot from mine, and is somewhat orthogonal.

any system that evolves incorporates some rationality in order to do tha

in some ways all conversations about religions devolve into self-referential semantical quibbles when you are talking about definitions of belief and generalization instead of practice. but note that my impression is that a 'rational' tendency is generally found much more in shia groups, where mutazillite rational modes are not frowned up as they are in sunnism. the "sufism" you are talking about might exist in the USA, but, in reference to south asia, the sufism there is very different. sufi shayks were not above calling akbar unislamic for removing jizya from non-muslims. that is another face of sufism, and if you read the quran and hadith as they are, that is 'rational' as well.

At least they caught SOMEONE:

Hope it continues!