Sufi of Kandahar, Afghanistan

[sunni]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...-shia-pilgrims

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL.

man!! this is FUN.

[randolph85]

Really? so what if i post proves of talibans and mujahiden stopping thier oprations only becuz there are civilians, what are you going to say about this?
OH and this videos always gets deleted in youtube, you should know why.

and whats your prove for your claims?

those who work with NATO and western gov aren't civilians.
those who are in the afghan army ( the puppets) aren't civilians.
the ghosts deads who are only number's aren't civilians.

the last opration on the US Base in kabul they claimed there are civilians deads where the taliban disagree to this claims and it was true there are no civilians over there. you believed the F western media over the taliban? you believed the kuffar over muslims without they have proved anything.
you need to fix yourself.

so you follow whatever your minds like or think its right? tell me do you believe in Attributes of God? do you believe allah have hands, face....?

the proof of my claims are the burned out vehicles of people driving by in the al jazeera video that i posted.

i already proved that this wasn't a US base since there were afghans civilians walking around the wreckage of the car bomb. civilians are not allowed in foreign bases.

yes i believe in proof that i can see with my eyes, like the above mentioned evidence. i don't believe idiot talibs who pull numbers out of their ass and idiots like you who believe anything that man says.

these are the same people who said they would NEVER talk to the foreigners as long as they occupied afghanistan, then they start talking to them. the taliban are just like any idiot afghan group that came before it that claims islam as their creed like hezb i islami.

so tell me. when the taliban say so and so number of foreigners died and no civilians were killed, do they have some talib with a pad and a pen along with their bombers and armed attackers who record who died and who didn't?

so you follow whatever your minds like or think its right? tell me do you believe in Attributes of God? do you believe allah have hands, face....?

i say that i don't want to create divisions within the muslim community by claiming sects and now u come at me with this bull****? i am a muslim, and so was the prophet. he never said he was a "sunni" or anything else and neither will i.

and who the **** are you? you are a nobody. i know my din and my country and i don't have to explain anything to you. you are the "muslim" soldat. another idiot who runs rampant with a stick in his ass that justifies the murder of muslims. you deserve as much as soldat to be flogged for stupidity and treason to reason.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

and who the **** are you? you are a nobody. i know my din and my country and i don't have to explain anything to you. you are the "muslim" soldat. another idiot who runs rampant with a stick in his ass that justifies the murder of muslims. you deserve as much as soldat to be flogged for stupidity and treason to reason.

The question he asks is totally irrelevant to whether what Salafis do is harram or not.

But you have more than proven your case that Salafis do the worst sins a Muslim can do. Murdering civilians; which is fasad kabir no matter if the civilian is Muslim or Ghair Muslim

[faye]

suicide, killing of women, children and old people, unless they attack first, also is not allowed either. so i read.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Guys come on now. The term Salafi is not in and of itself equitable to the concept of Takfir.

Salafist could be viewed as the equivalent of orthodoxy. Not every orthodox person has a clear conscious and had wisdom and neither does every sufi.

Now and then you get a Salafi that focuses on a few ankle bones and you get a Sufi that says "anna al haq" --> Neither of which fits with the Prophetic tradition.

Heck the fact that there is a schism between many salafists and the Saudi kingdom clerics itself shows that this is a complex matter.

Elevating or demoting sufis because they are mystics is unfair and assuming all orthodox people are inherently including sin in their cannon is the same.

Take for instance the Iraqi insurgency and the Zarqawi problem. A great number of Salafists viewed Zarqawi with disdain.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Let's suppose the Salafi movement has been wrongfully maligned; the movement as a whole has not done enough to distance themselves from the murderous , immoral and corrupt in their midst and thus they are themselves only to be blamed if they get aligned with them.

Also I don't believe Salafists represent Orthodoxy; they're the antithesis of the Traditional Practice of Islam and thus counter orthodox.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Let's suppose the Salafi movement has been wrongfully maligned; the movement as a whole has not done enough to distance themselves from the murderous , immoral and corrupt in their midst and thus they are themselves only to be blamed if they get aligned with them.

Also I don't believe Salafists represent Orthodoxy; they're the antithesis of the Traditional Practice of Islam and thus counter orthodox.

There are movements that are sometimes very close to eachother.
For instance, one Sufi reportedly wrote: "I am one with the divine."
The Quran chides such terminology and takes special pains to refer to Christ as the son of Mary and repeatedly attempts to construct a fast solid wall between creation and the creator (in terms of nature, power, knowledge).
However, no Afghan sufi that I have met or even Americans such as Hamza Yusuf have ever conflated the two.
I have met some Turks though that were sufis and prayed for the dead at a Christian cemetery despite direct orders from the Quranic text against such action.

By the same token, Takfirists are Hobbsian and can be conflated with Salafists. The two actually clash frequently. Egypts current turmoil politically and distinct salafi party that opposed certain aspects of the Brotherhood unmasks this.

There is no lead Salafi figure thats like the Pope that can speak for all Salafis... so to punish all of these folks for the crimes of Takfirists is more than a little judgemental.

Im surprised as thats a very FOX newish demand. Its like when they demand again and again: Well Muslims need to disown these folks. I dont know what else could be a disownership than when Takfirists tried to kill prominent Salafis.

For that matter, are you sure that Salafis haven't written against Takfirists?

The same goes for punishing al Sufis for "Anna Al Haq" .. not everyone is a whilring dervish that things that they can skip prayers because they are unified with the divine. There is no super sufi divine sitting out there that speaks for all Sufis and attempts to distance themselves from this sort of thing nor do I expect that. Its my duty as an educated person to investigate their beliefs or the beliefs of mormons when hear them castigated to find out the truth of the matter.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

it doesn't matter; if they were so resolutely against these types they should make a very public and unanimous declaration. Using Fox News as a scapegoat is the typical attempt to avoid responsibility that mires our communities. Look at UnknownPrinces' latest statements; he says Taliban's CHOICE to suicide bomb civilians is NATO's fault. Why would they decide to use such tactics specifically in civilian areas in the first place? It is all an attempt to remove accountability. Likewise Salafis use "Fox News" and such as their scapegoats. If they really oppose this stuff it is time to show it, vocally and directly. Not whimsically mumble under their breath.


And the analogy of Deviant Sufis is not anywhere comparable to Salafists; Mansur al Hallaj saying "An'al Haq" harms no one, Whirling Dervishes harm no one. They're at worst a nuisance. Salafists and their thugs murder people from Algeria to Afghanistan. They're criminals. This is the problem the Salafist consciousness, they put "thought crime" above real crime. It's time things are treated in their proper context and proportion.

[faye]

didn't people get killed by muslims for stating they are one with god or words to that effect?
don't you guys get sick of all this divisiveness within your religion? it will get you nowhere except like what is happening in iraq. first this mob will rule then they fight, then this mob will rule and so on.
you have all these quarrels and divisions within islam and then tribal divisions. it is like a never ending fight you are all having with yourselves, yet you blame the west for everything which is not working within the muslim world.
can't people accept that people have different beliefs without having to prove that their belief is the 'truth' and everyones elses isn't?
if your belief is the 'truth' and the only 'truth', then go for it but why have to argue with others about their beliefs?
if your god is judging then let those who are doing wrong, be judged by allah.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

didn't people get killed by muslims for stating they are one with god or words to that effect?
don't you guys get sick of all this divisiveness within your religion? it will get you nowhere except like what is happening in iraq. first this mob will rule then they fight, then this mob will rule and so on.
you have all these quarrels and divisions within islam and then tribal divisions. it is like a never ending fight you are all having with yourselves, yet you blame the west for everything which is not working within the muslim world.
can't people accept that people have different beliefs without having to prove that their belief is the 'truth' and everyones elses isn't?
if your belief is the 'truth' and the only 'truth', then go for it but why have to argue with others about their beliefs?
if your god is judging then let those who are doing wrong, be judged by allah.

I am sick of how everthing is an excuse to kill or take a life. I am not a pacifist but the spilling of blood is very serious, it is not worth robbing a person of their right to life just because they think they're one with God. Are they foolish? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean they deserve to be destroyed, at least not by human hands.


I am all for proving certain, ideas , beliefs concepts etc etc etc is the "truth"; but not at such high stakes; whatever alleged truth that exists, one "truth" stands above that, and that is people's lives should be protected.; I have in the past sanctioned the death of people who I may have perceived as immoral. but I recant that, not because I changed my view of their moral stature, but because I realize their behavior is a symptom of a sickness, and sick people should be treated not exterminated.

[faye]

i'll just specify that i am not saying all that to be critical or nasty. it actually often makes me feel sad.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

i'll just specify that i am not saying all that to be critical or nasty. it actually often makes me feel sad.

the inner battles you see in the Muslim world is really about who holds power; lie is good enough for them if they're in power. Look at how these Taliban propagandists will outrightly LIE about the deaths caused by Taliban suicide attacks

[BarakzaiAbdali]

it doesn't matter; if they were so resolutely against these types they should make a very public and unanimous declaration. Using Fox News as a scapegoat is the typical attempt to avoid responsibility that mires our communities. Look at UnknownPrinces' latest statements; he says Taliban's CHOICE to suicide bomb civilians is NATO's fault. Why would they decide to use such tactics specifically in civilian areas in the first place? It is all an attempt to remove accountability. Likewise Salafis use "Fox News" and such as their scapegoats. If they really oppose this stuff it is time to show it, vocally and directly. Not whimsically mumble under their breath.


And the analogy of Deviant Sufis is not anywhere comparable to Salafists; Mansur al Hallaj saying "An'al Haq" harms no one, Whirling Dervishes harm no one. They're at worst a nuisance. Salafists and their thugs murder people from Algeria to Afghanistan. They're criminals. This is the problem the Salafist consciousness, they put "thought crime" above real crime. It's time things are treated in their proper context and proportion.

Starting off the conversation by somehow equating orthodox Salafism, say as espoused by Ibn Tamiyyah (Im not offering him respect, Im just noting) with a Talib educated in a madrassah and being a part of a resistance movement utilizing assymetric warfare and Islam as his political language is a nonstarter. Thats like equating James Moffatt, the orthodox biblical translator with that idiot at the Pentagon review course, James Dooley.

For instance, some might call you Salafi for your view on how aspects of Pashtunwali defy Islamic law and go against it (e.g. inheriting women). Ibn Tamiyaah's biggest thought crime of sorts was opposing the Mongols, not because they were Mongol converts, but because of their utilization of a tribal system superimposed over Islam. So in 500 when someone reads Tarikh e Scimitar X they may call you a Salafi. Some guy in a town somewhere may even do damage in your name. Does that mean that you were wrong? Should a Pashtun view you as Salafist for opposing certain aspects of his tribal code despite the idea that he has reached a semblance of societal stability by melding his tribal code with Islam? To this day in many villages women are inherited.

The FOx News point was not about their reporting quality but their calls for Muslims to apologise for 9/11. That sort of idiocy is glossing over a whole bunch of complexity that is historical and needs to be hashed out. For instance, I wouldnt see why you have to apologise to the world for something you obviously abhor. From what I gauged in my readings of their work, Salafis find all sorts of textual reasons to not endorse action as well. Their concern is basis in the text.

And as I said, the guy in Egypt that is a Salafist in that party isnt thinking about apologising because he thinks to himself that he hasn't done a thing wrong except be orthodox in his approach and demand textual proof for his belief system. He may not have committed violence, just as you and I have not. He may not condone violence, just as you and I have not. In fact, he may have spoken out against it. But as I said, its absurd to ask a group that is not Takfirist to apologise for being Takfirists.

With respect to having a choice to attack civilians, Im not going back into that with you as I see the two points as unrelated and believe I have already conveyed my views on that. Just as I dont think the drone drivers or the Army go into a place thinking... "hmmm how many kid can I off today" I simply dont agree with your view on assymetric warfare being a responsive element that has little to do with religion.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I'm not the one who developed that equation; they did; I am only showing their affiliations has created a regressive linear projection. We can play equivocation regarding the word Salafi; but we know what the term means in 2012 context.

The analogy of fox news to ask Muslims to apologize for 911 is totally incongruent as Muslims are not a movement; Salafism is a Movement they represent a specific trend called "Dawa'atus Salafiiyyah" and this is specifically funded and promoted. The fact is Non-Violent Salafis are seldom united in condemning these acts which tells me even the few who do don't see it as important enough an issue to put a stop to it. Thus they have incited their own guilt

It isn't an issue of someone saying "how many kids can I off today" it's an issue of "God's given me the right to do this and if civilians die ..so what? ...God's will".

[BarakzaiAbdali]

didn't people get killed by muslims for stating they are one with god or words to that effect?
don't you guys get sick of all this divisiveness within your religion? it will get you nowhere except like what is happening in iraq. first this mob will rule then they fight, then this mob will rule and so on.
you have all these quarrels and divisions within islam and then tribal divisions. it is like a never ending fight you are all having with yourselves, yet you blame the west for everything which is not working within the muslim world.
can't people accept that people have different beliefs without having to prove that their belief is the 'truth' and everyones elses isn't?
if your belief is the 'truth' and the only 'truth', then go for it but why have to argue with others about their beliefs?
if your god is judging then let those who are doing wrong, be judged by allah.

Al Hallaj is someone we Pashtuns learn about when we read Rahman Baba, Khushaal Khan etc. The poets were effusive in their praise and scholars of the day saw him a threat to their worldview.

The issue I see with some of your comments at times is that they are broad as the generalizations you say Muslims make of others! Instead the data in the Muslim world shows that
1) Muslims have a deep respect for the Wests accomplishments
2) That they dont blame everything on the West. Rather they do tend to put the blame on their own doorstep
3) A large number view their local governance as the first problem
4) Their legitimate issue with the West is sustained colonialism via 3.

YOu are discussing things with Western Muslims. This particular group tends to do as you say. There are probably multiple social and cultural confrontational reasons for this. However, its unfair of you to put the whole Muslim world into the same play pen as Western Muslims like Anjum Chaudry.

What you are saying is simply like:
"jeesh why does that drunkard blame everything on the mafioso thug that is beating him with a crowbar."

Yeah the drunkard is self responbile, but you cannot simply dismiss the mafioso.

With with respect to your question, there were others besides Hallaj in the Muslim world that flourished, were not killed, and contributed to literature.

Its like asking... whats up with you Westerners and Christians for giving Galileo beat downs? Or what was up with that whole set of beat downs and executions Henry gave his wives when he didnt like aspects of his religion.

Thats not reflective to me, at least of some of the writings of Moffat and Goodspeed and other earlier Church Fathers.

Also, the reason why Muslims are keen to discuss the issue of pantheism with you here is that it is in direct contradistinction to monotheism. Islam prescribes that the one unforgivable sin is to die purposefully associating lies to God. The reason for this is that God, in the Quran, tells man that he was created to seek his face and to be in the service of God. The notion is that if one truly strives for and fulfills the destiny God put forth for man: to find him and believe in him... that from this will spring forth social justice and balance. To deny God's oneness is not as the Bible puts it an affront to man. Its actually a sin against the universe and all of mankind as the idea is that from God flows perfect justice and perfect mercy. To not seek his face purposefully or to deny it is to basically deny mankind of justice that flows from acting on a 1:1 ratio with the Prophetic character which was a walking reflection of the Quran per his wives.