[hoconnor6605]

Sufis feel pressure as Salafi power grows
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/388126

Adherents of Sufism, a mystical sect of Islam that has long been popular in Egypt, now see their tolerant traditions threatened by the growth of hard-line Salafism, an Islamic sect that claims to hearken back to the earliest form of Islam. As Salafi groups have been emboldened around the country, Sufis, like Coptic Christians and secular muslims, have come into conflict with the orthodox sect. However, Sufi leaders say they have plans to fight the rising tide of radicalism.

Over the past month, followers of the Salafi movement have been accused of attacking both Muslims and non-Muslim Egyptians in an attempt to impose their strict Islamic views.

In Alexandria, traditionally a stronghold for both Salafi and Sufi groups, at least 16 historic mosques belonging to Sufi orders have been targeted by members of the Salafi movement, who attempted to demolish tombs of important Islamic scholars because they oppose the veneration of saints as heretical. One of the mosques allegedly attacked by Salafis is the historic mosque of al-Mursi Abu al-Abbas, which dates back to the 13th century and is a popular site for visits by Egyptians from across the country.

Alexandria is home to more than 40 historic mosques with tombs belonging to the Sufi movement.

In the Upper Egyptian city of Qena, a group of Salafis allegedly cut off the ear a Coptic man. In area of Fayoum, clashes between “religious people” and vendors at a wine shop lead to one death.

Last week, members of the Salafi movement denied allegations of violence in a statement posting on a website associated with one of Egypt's most influential Salafi preachers. The statement said Salafis preach peaceful methods of change.

Meanwhile, one leading Sufi preacher said that concern over Salafi-inspired violence is justified.

“I don’t underestimate people’s fears concerning Salfis,” said Sheikh Gaber Kasem al-Kholy, the highest-ranking Sufi sheikh in Alexandria. “Of course, Coptic Christians are a main target for those extremists, but we need to speak out about the suffering of the Sufi people who were attacked by the Salafis.”

There are about half a million registered Sufis in Alexandria, which has a population of 4.1 million people. The city contains 36 of Egypt’s 76 registered Sufi orders.

Sitting in a Western-style café at the Imperial Hotel in downtown Alexandria, al-Kholy presented a moderate and modern vision of Sufism. “Sufis believe in good deeds. They don’t force religion on people as the Salafis do. They don’t manipulate religion as the Muslim Brotherhood does.”

In the 18th century, an Islamic scholar in the Arabian Peninsula named Mohamed ibn Abdel Wahhab formulated a strict form of Islam that he claimed conformed to the original values of the religion. He forbade man-made images, art and sculpture, and provided religious support to Arabian rulers in curtailing the rights of individuals and religious minorities.

The Salafi movement has its origins in Abdel Wahhab’s hard-line vision and is relatively new to Egypt, where a more pluralistic version of Islam has flourished much longer.

Al-Kholy, dressed in smart casual Western clothing and apparently unperturbed by the Western music in the café where he sits, sees Salafis as a threat to the Egyptian tradition of tolerance. Salafism “is a Saudi product,” he said, noting that Salafis do not even quote respected Egyptian scholars, but instead defer to their Saudi counterparts.

“Alexandria has been a multi-cultural city," he said. "Throughout history, people here welcomed Islamic scholars from various locations. As for the Salafis, they are people without history. They don’t like Abu al-Abbas. They accuse the great scholar and other Sufi historical figures of heresy.”

Salafis also accuse Sufis of sympathizing with Shia Islam, a main target for Saudi religious propaganda, which describes them as a sect that does not conform to the original Islam.

The issue of scholarship is an important one, al-Kholy said. “What’s alarming is that Salafi preachers don’t practice Ijtihad [progressive legal interpretation], in which they can renew Islamic thinking.”

Even the Sunni Muslim world’s most prominent religious institution is becoming caught up in the struggle between Salafism and more moderate strains. Cairo’s Al-Azhar, which was founded between 970 and 972, has long been the main source for Sunni Islamic learning. Its influence has impacted Islamic thinking throughout the Middle East, Asia and Africa.

This month, the Salafi movement organized a conference at Al-Azhar University, and one of the movement's key figures, Sheikh Yasser Burhamy, accused the Sufi movement of heresy and of being sponsored by the United States.

“That was so silly. Yes we expect them to accuse us of heresy because the Salafis are single-minded people,” said al-Kholy. “But as for the American support, what we did is simply have visits for two American ambassadors in Egypt, a move we thought would introduce them to a moderate version of Islam.”

Francis Ricciardone, the former US ambassador to Egypt, showed great interest in attending various Sufi festivities.

Perhaps most worrying for the Sufi community is Salafi attempts to bring Sufi mosques under Salafi control. “They are now launching a war over mosques. They try to destroy historic mosques with tombs because they’re not Islamic for them, and also they are trying to have a monopoly over mosques,” said al-Kholy.

One of the mosques that Salafis are trying to bring under their control is Qaed Ibrahim Mosque, a gathering point for protesters during the 18-day uprising that lead to the resignation of former President Hosni Mubarak.

Under Mubarak’s rule, both Salafi and Sufi movements were largely apolitical. But Sufis are ready to become engaged with politics, al-Kholy said.

“That’s a historical trend for Sufis, not to clash with the country leaders. It might be a mistake, but now, after the revolution, I do think that this trend is going to change,” said al-Kholy.

Under the former regime, the highest authorities in Egypt’s various Sufi orders publicly backed Mubarak and his former ruling National Democratic Party (NDP).

“We were people without political aims, so we maintained good relations with the regime. In fact, we were totally wrong. The regime was indirectly putting us in an awkward position through its Ministry of Endowments,” argued Al Kholy.

Mubarak gave officials at the Ministry of Endowments full authority for the control of mosques, regulating the appointment of imams and the distribution of financial donations. Mubarak aimed to reduce the influence of extremists, but that strategy was a failure, al-Kholy said.

“Instead of combating extremism, the state was combating moderate Islam and giving mosques to the Brotherhood and Salafis as deals.”

Sufi followers across Egypt, such as in the Delta city of Monufiya and the Upper Egyptian city of Aswan, have filed complaints against the Ministry of Endowments and the public prosecutor, calling for the state to protect historic mosques from Salafi attacks.

“If the state doesn’t give enough time to protecting these sites, we as Sufis have to do something practical, such as establishing a political party to enable us to address our concerns against those extremists,” said al-Kholy, demonstrating how much Sufis may be willing to break with their apolitical past.

“We have a considerable number of followers, and we are willing and able to protect Egypt’s legacy of moderation,” he said.

[Marat]

The man in the article (al Kholy) is supposed to be the highest-ranking sufi shaykh in Alexandria, but he has no problem sitting in a cafe where Western music is playing? Unbelievable. This kind of thing is what gives salafis fuel to use against tasawwuf, and true sufis who are strict on shariah get caught in the crossfire.

[N95FzmMw]

This article is a slanted, propaganda piece designed to draw political distinctions and project conflict.

First, Egypt is a mess and has been for over 30 years. If so called sufis have been accepting of the mess that is Egypt, then they are undeserving of any consideration to be tied to the righteous shuyukh who they claim to follow.

Second, the worship of saints and shrines is shirk and unacceptable in Islam. Anyone who accepts this is openly in violation of Islam.

Third, if the reaction of so called sufis is to threaten violence to protect saint worship, then they are NOT sufis, rather they are defenders of shirk.

Fourth, the Egyptian people have to be educated on Islam again. And that should happen through the leadership of an Islamic state and amir. All Muslims should be together on this. Shrines, tombs, etc mean nothing compared to reviving Islam in the lives of 85 million Muslims.

Fifth, you have to ask yourself: is it better to see a society which implements Islam and practices and develops Islam in the lives of people, or is it better to stay as things are?

[exschke]

This article is a slanted, propaganda piece designed to draw political distinctions and project conflict.

First, Egypt is a mess and has been for over 30 years. If so called sufis have been accepting of the mess that is Egypt, then they are undeserving of any consideration to be tied to the righteous shuyukh who they claim to follow.

Second, the worship of saints and shrines is shirk and unacceptable in Islam. Anyone who accepts this is openly in violation of Islam.

Third, if the reaction of so called sufis is to threaten violence to protect saint worship, then they are NOT sufis, rather they are defenders of shirk.

Fourth, the Egyptian people have to be educated on Islam again. And that should happen through the leadership of an Islamic state and amir. All Muslims should be together on this. Shrines, tombs, etc mean nothing compared to reviving Islam in the lives of 85 million Muslims.

Fifth, you have to ask yourself: is it better to see a society which implements Islam and practices and develops Islam in the lives of people, or is it better to stay as things are?

Exactly.

It's probably obvious by now to most people, but whenever a media piece references "Salafis," it is actually referring to fundamentalists, including Deobandis and other proper Sufi groups, and whenever they mention "Sufi," they actually mean people like Nazim Haqqani, or even worse in many cases.

[pipojambo]

Brother Warrior1 did you open this thread to show that the Salafis are forcing their will upon others?? But this thread just shows that you have no idea abot the arab world!!

You really choosed the wrong country! Why?? Can you deny that the Salafi 'Ulama in Misr have done very much da'wa and tabligh?? Or can you deny that thousands of youngsters in Misr made tawba because of the Salafi 'Ulama?? Ohh and almost all of these Salafi 'Ulama do not say to the people "be Salafi!" and they've even spoken against calling oneself "Salafi"!

As for leveling the graves: This is not a "Salafi" or "Sufi" issue!!! It was Sayyidina Rasulallah who ordered Imam Ali to level the graves, so whoever is against leveling graves is actually against the order of our Prophet and is against Imam Ali !!!


And since you seem to know nothing about the arab world, let's tell you something:
In Mosul (in Iraq) there is a tomb called "Nabi Yunus" (they say that this is the place where Hz. Yunus is burried) and many people make ziyarah of this tomb! My mother told me "You won't hear the name of ALLAH mentioned there!"... you know what that means?? Many many people commit shirk there!!!!! And there are people in Egypt who are just like that and these are the "Sufis" that are mentioned in the article!! They are NOT Sufi like the Deobandis, rather they're either hardcore bid'atis or even mushrikeen!!

And while you mention the "Sufis and Salafis in Egypt", the enemies of Islam in Egypt want to change the second article of the Egyptian constitution (the article that states that the deen of the state is Islam and that the laws of the state are the shari'ah)!! And many Salafi 'Ulama (while they also said that they support the changing of the constitution, but they said that the second article is an article which is "fawq al dastur" (=above the constitution) and that they would never ever accept it that anyone changes it!) have defended Islam against the mal'oon 'Ilmaniyeen (=secularists) like for example Shaykh Muhammad Hassan did:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI21EMM4sYY

And the same Shaykh calls the muslims to unity and he says that the muslims should be united especially in this very important period for Egypt (he said that in a very recent video)!!

Ohh and read the comment of brother Usama2!!

[hellencomstar]

Brother Warrior1 did you opened this thread to show that the Salafis are forcing their will upon others?? But this thread just shows that you have no idea abot the arab world!!

You really choosed the wrong country! Why?? Can you deny that the Salafi 'Ulama in Misr have done very much da'wa and tabligh?? Or can you deny that thousands of youngsters in Misr made tawba because of the Salafi 'Ulama?? Ohh and almost all of these Salafi 'Ulama do not say to the people "be Salafi!" and they've even spoken against calling oneself "Salafi"!

As for leveling the graves: This is not a "Salafi" or "Sufi" issue!!! It was Sayyidina Rasulallah who ordered Imam Ali to level the graves, so whoever is against leveling graves is actually against the order of our Prophet and is against Imam Ali !!!


And since you seem to know nothing about the arab world, let's tell you something:
In Mosul (in Iraq) there is tomb called "Nabi Yunus" (they say that this is the place where Hz. Yunus is burried) and many people make ziyarah of this tomb! My mother told me "You won't here the name of ALLAH mentioned there!"... you know what that means?? Many many people commit shirk there!!!!! And there are people in Egypt who are just like that and these are the "Sufis" that are mentioned in this article!! They are NOT Sufi like the Deobandis, rather they're either hardcore bid'atis or even mushrikeen!!

And while you mention the "Sufis and Salafis in Egypt", the enemies of Islam in Egypt want to change the second article of the Egyptian constitution (the article that states that the deen of the state is Islam and that the laws of the state are the shari'ah)!! And many Salafi 'Ulama (while they also said that they support the changing of the constitution, but they said that the second article is an article which is "fawq al dastur" (=above the constitution) and that they would never ever accept it that anyone changes it!) have defended Islam against the mal'oon 'Ilmaniyeen (=secularists) like for example Shaykh Muhammad Hassan did:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI21EMM4sYY

And the same Shaykh calls the muslims to unity and he says that the muslims should be united especially in this very important period for Egypt (he said that in a very recent video)!!

Ohh and read the comment of brother Usama2!!

Brother, why are you making an assumption that Warrior1's intentions in opening this thread were to do that? Is it not more likely that he opened it to draw attention precisely to what Usama2 was pointing out- that there is an ongoing framing in the media of 'Sufism' as 'the musicing dancey type peace-lovin' hippie muslims who won't bother being angry about the murder of their brothers' while 'Salafism' is framed as 'the Muslims what have beards and enjoin the good and forbid the evil and all that stuff that us seculary-types don't be liking at all?'

It's part of the ongoing strategy of 'secularization' of Islamic society which would signal the deathknell of deen among the masses (to even more of an extent). This is what occurred with Christian society after the vernacularization of the Bible in the 16th century (although it's not like the Catholic Church was really the model of civilization, but that's beyond the point).

Anyway, given that the brother didn't comment on the article but just posted it I think it's not a good idea one way or the other to assume something about his intentions.

[hoconnor6605]

Brother Warrior1 did you open this thread to show that the Salafis are forcing their will upon others?? But this thread just shows that you have no idea abot the arab world!!

You really choosed the wrong country! Why?? Can you deny that the Salafi 'Ulama in Misr have done very much da'wa and tabligh?? Or can you deny that thousands of youngsters in Misr made tawba because of the Salafi 'Ulama?? Ohh and almost all of these Salafi 'Ulama do not say to the people "be Salafi!" and they've even spoken against calling oneself "Salafi"!

As for leveling the graves: This is not a "Salafi" or "Sufi" issue!!! It was Sayyidina Rasulallah who ordered Imam Ali to level the graves, so whoever is against leveling graves is actually against the order of our Prophet and is against Imam Ali !!!


And since you seem to know nothing about the arab world, let's tell you something:
In Mosul (in Iraq) there is a tomb called "Nabi Yunus" (they say that this is the place where Hz. Yunus is burried) and many people make ziyarah of this tomb! My mother told me "You won't hear the name of ALLAH mentioned there!"... you know what that means?? Many many people commit shirk there!!!!! And there are people in Egypt who are just like that and these are the "Sufis" that are mentioned in the article!! They are NOT Sufi like the Deobandis, rather they're either hardcore bid'atis or even mushrikeen!!

And while you mention the "Sufis and Salafis in Egypt", the enemies of Islam in Egypt want to change the second article of the Egyptian constitution (the article that states that the deen of the state is Islam and that the laws of the state are the shari'ah)!! And many Salafi 'Ulama (while they also said that they support the changing of the constitution, but they said that the second article is an article which is "fawq al dastur" (=above the constitution) and that they would never ever accept it that anyone changes it!) have defended Islam against the mal'oon 'Ilmaniyeen (=secularists) like for example Shaykh Muhammad Hassan did:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI21EMM4sYY

And the same Shaykh calls the muslims to unity and he says that the muslims should be united especially in this very important period for Egypt (he said that in a very recent video)!!

Ohh and read the comment of brother Usama2!!

it is as if you have made your own imaginary friend, and you are having an argument with him....

Brother, why are you making an assumption that Warrior1's intentions in opening this thread were to do that? Is it not more likely that he opened it to draw attention precisely to what Usama2 was pointing out- that there is an ongoing framing in the media of 'Sufism' as 'the musicing dancey type peace-lovin' hippie muslims who won't bother being angry about the murder of their brothers' while 'Salafism' is framed as 'the Muslims what have beards and enjoin the good and forbid the evil and all that stuff that us seculary-types don't be liking at all?'

It's part of the ongoing strategy of 'secularization' of Islamic society which would signal the deathknell of deen among the masses (to even more of an extent). This is what occurred with Christian society after the vernacularization of the Bible in the 16th century (although it's not like the Catholic Church was really the model of civilization, but that's beyond the point).

Anyway, given that the brother didn't comment on the article but just posted it I think it's not a good idea one way or the other to assume something about his intentions.

you are right in what you say, brother. i am against FAKE sufis, and im also against extremist-salafis. both are a problem in egypt.... and just yesterday i read that egypt is now considering re-establishing ties with iran!! all these deviant groups ar an embarrassment to muslims.... however, there is still a lot of extremism being done by salafis also, as there is repetively attacks against christians by certain salafi groups. i think egypt is sinking itself into muddy water...

[hoconnor6605]

This article is a slanted, propaganda piece designed to draw political distinctions and project conflict.

First, Egypt is a mess and has been for over 30 years. If so called sufis have been accepting of the mess that is Egypt, then they are undeserving of any consideration to be tied to the righteous shuyukh who they claim to follow.

Second, the worship of saints and shrines is shirk and unacceptable in Islam. Anyone who accepts this is openly in violation of Islam.

Third, if the reaction of so called sufis is to threaten violence to protect saint worship, then they are NOT sufis, rather they are defenders of shirk.

Fourth, the Egyptian people have to be educated on Islam again. And that should happen through the leadership of an Islamic state and amir. All Muslims should be together on this. Shrines, tombs, etc mean nothing compared to reviving Islam in the lives of 85 million Muslims.

Fifth, you have to ask yourself: is it better to see a society which implements Islam and practices and develops Islam in the lives of people, or is it better to stay as things are?

you are certainly right. i think the proper islamic groups need to step up inorder to counter both these salafis and these fake-sufis. problem is, in the middle-east the role of madhab (maliki, shafii) is decreasing more and more. thats why whenever people get frustrated with crimes/failures of society, the problems of israel, etc. they want to get religiously involved (or even jihad), they resort to salafism, or hamas, or ikhwan (all ghair-muqallids). there is no maliki, shafii groups that these people can turn to...

Exactly.

It's probably obvious by now to most people, but whenever a media piece references "Salafis," it is actually referring to fundamentalists, including Deobandis and other proper Sufi groups, and whenever they mention "Sufi," they actually mean people like Nazim Haqqani, or even worse in many cases.

brother, you are only assuming this (theyre not talking aboy deobandis; infact, i dont think there are many in egypt). if you read the media reports, both muslim or western sources. the salafis have definately been taking up a more profound role in the past few months. alot of anti-coptic sentiments are being spread around, and this is against islam. there has been several bombings aginst churches, attacks against christians, and not to mention attacks againt sufi places as well (both good sufis or bad)....

so i think if actual good-sufis or proper-muslims were to fight back (be it against the fake-sufis or salafis) as you thought, that would actually be the best option. otherwise, we are losing the battle of hearts and minds. cause its more efficient for these groups to subjugate someone using force/violence, then to do so using argument/winning-them-over. so we are slowly losing the battle under our own noses.

[RSAccountssy]

Wa `alaykum as-Salam

Exactly.

It's probably obvious by now to most people, but whenever a media piece references "Salafis," it is actually referring to fundamentalists, including Deobandis and other proper Sufi groups, and whenever they mention "Sufi," they actually mean people like Nazim Haqqani, or even worse in many cases.

Is that really the case here? Are the Wahhabis referred to here in reality Sufis? And the Sufis are all pseudo-Sufis? Was that also the case in the media's report on Somalia? Were those Wahhabi groups in fact Sufis? Are the enemies of the Maliki madhhab in North Africa also Sufis in reality? Are the enemies of the Sunnis in Chechnya and Central Asia also Sufis?

And why unnecessarily mention the name of Shaykh Nazim?

[rarpAcconavox]

Salam

there has been several bombings aginst churches, attacks against christians, yes but why should we have any reason to believe that practicing muslims, in this case salafis, had anything to do with those?

we don't trust the media when it lies abt deobandies or the mujahideen, why trust them to report accurately on salafis?

the media is obviously going to portray/deceive the public regarding individuals who are very outspoken regarding their view that shariah should be the law, while the "moderate" "fake sufis" entertain secularism and describe democracy - a man-made system that allows the constitution to change according the whims of the era - as being consistent/compatible with islam.

i remeber recently watching this report on the growing power of the "salaphists" in egypt, and let me say they spared no effort to portray them as neo-fascists or worse. and what was the their crime?...they wanted to do away with secularism.

[hoconnor6605]

Wa `alaykum as-Salam


Is that really the case here? Are the Wahhabis referred to here in reality Sufis? And the Sufis are all pseudo-Sufis? Was that also the case in the media's report on Somalia? Were those Wahhabi groups in fact Sufis? Are the enemies of the Maliki madhhab in North Africa also Sufis in reality? Are the enemies of the Sunnis in Chechnya and Central Asia also Sufis?

And why unnecessarily mention the name of Shaykh Nazim?

..... brother, i dont know if you are being sacrcastic, or are you seriously asking this question?.... but i believe what maneatinglizard was trying to get is that in the media. sometimes any muslim who is seen as strict is sometimes referred to as "wahhabis". this goes for deobandis, or any group who actually follows madhab and are strict, sometimes uneducated ppl label them as "wahhabi" .

as for those people who are targetting malikis in north africa, they are certainly not "sufi" or deobandi or madhabi of any kind. they are salafi. and as for chechneya, central asia, and also khorasaan. there is no salafi-vs-sufi violence there. under the guidance of hanafi leaders, both the salafi and sufi are brothers. if "sufis" are being attacked its not because theyre sufi, but because they are probably working with the govt against muslims. so they are targetted. media incorrectly says that they have been targetted for being "sufi". if that was the case, what about all those sufis who werent targetted??... if there are a hundred sufi masjids and only one is working against mujahid. then only that one is targetted. so them being "sufi" has nothing to do with why they were targetted, thats how it is in south/central-asia.

[hoconnor6605]

Salam

yes but why should we have any reason to believe that practicing muslims, in this case salafis, had anything to do with those?

we don't trust the media when it lies abt deobandies or the mujahideen, why trust them to report accurately on salafis?

the media is obviously going to portray/deceive the public regarding individuals who are very outspoken regarding their view that shariah should be the law, while the "moderate" "fake sufis" entertain secularism and describe democracy - a man-made system that allows the constitution to change according the whims of the era - as being consistent/compatible with islam.

i remeber recently watching this report on the growing power of the "salaphists" in egypt, and let me say they spared no effort to portray them as neo-fascists or worse. and what was the their crime?...they wanted to do away with secularism.

you dont need kuffar media to report on salafis. salafis have their own websites and media. and some salafais are calling for targetting of christians there.

it sparked because there was a controversy not so many days ago. that 2 wives of coptic priests came out saying that they have converted to islam, so they want to divorce their husbands. because under egyptian-law only the church can grant someone divorce, and they were not granted. so some think they just pretended to be muslim, inorder to divorce their husbands. but many also think they sincerely became muslim, but the christians dont want them to be muslims.

so after they declared their conversion, soon within a few days, the women came out again saying that they actually havent. theyre christians. and then the priests said that we are sending them to monastery for treatment/education. and so many people started speculating that they are being kidnapped/hostage. ever since then, many salafi gorups have been increasingly targetting christians. even though most copts have nothing to do with this incident.

there are videos online, but if you check any salafi-jihadi site, you will get the real picture exactly what kind of campaign is goin on. they are calling for attacks against them. and if you check aljazeera on youtube, im sure you will see some reports/videos of attacks and victims.

during the egyptian protests, i was very glad. because two things were being achieved, one is the fight against hosni mubarak the dictator. and two, because this united copts and muslims in egypt to oust mubarak. so attacks against copts stopped, but just as the revolution was over. the violence has resumed again.

[resegooredo]

Sufis feel pressure as Salafi power grows
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/388126

This month, the Salafi movement organized a conference at Al-Azhar University, and one of the movement's key figures, Sheikh Yasser Burhamy, accused the Sufi movement of heresy and of being sponsored by the United States.

“That was so silly. Yes we expect them to accuse us of heresy because the Salafis are single-minded people,” said al-Kholy. “But as for the American support, what we did is simply have visits for two American ambassadors in Egypt, a move we thought would introduce them to a moderate version of Islam.”

picture removed, please refer to rule 2.19

Yes and we all know that it is pure nonsense to suggest that some Sufi's are sponsored by the US/Great Britain, dont we?

I mean the Sufi Muslim Council is not really funded by the CIA as suggested by oneof these American Ambassedors like Craig Murray! No preposterous!!

http://www.mpacuk.org/os/content/view/5469/103/

Or that the Rand Corporation- a US Govt think tank has called for quote "The Reformation of Islam" by promoting Sufism as an alternative to Islam.

Or even more unbelievable...the hard right neocon think tank the Nixon Center published a document by Zeyno Baran which encouraged using Sufism as a means to attack Islam.

[http://www.nixoncenter.org/publicati...hs/Sufism.pdf]


We all know they are neither heretics nor support the US..... right?

[BundEnhamma]

Egyptian people are much too enlightened, educated ... Salafis have no chance in hell of ever running things in Egypt.

[hoconnor6605]

Yes and we all know that it is pure nonsense to suggest that some Sufi's are sponsored by the US/Great Britain, dont we?

I mean the Sufi Muslim Council is not really funded by the CIA as suggested by oneof these American Ambassedors like Craig Murray! No preposterous!!

http://www.mpacuk.org/os/content/view/5469/103/

Or that the Rand Corporation- a US Govt think tank has called for quote "The Reformation of Islam" by promoting Sufism as an alternative to Islam.

Or even more unbelievable...the hard right neocon think tank the Nixon Center published a document by Zeyno Baran which encouraged using Sufism as a means to attack Islam.

[http://www.nixoncenter.org/publicati...hs/Sufism.pdf]


We all know they are neither heretics nor support the US..... right?

brother, who are you talking to?....

my reason to post this article is to show how there are several deviant groups in egypt. not that if one is bad the other must be good. the world is obviously not black and white, but several shades of gray...

if i was trying to defend the deviant sufis, i would not have posted this article. as there are several hints of unislamic practices in this very article....

[resegooredo]

brother, who are you talking to?....

my reason to post this article is to show how there are several deviant groups in egypt. not that if one is bad the other must be good. the world is obviously not black and white, but several shades of gray...

if i was trying to defend the deviant sufis, i would not have posted this article. as there are several hints of unislamic practices in this very article....

LOl...yes the unislamic practices.

I was responding to a quote in the article by the Sufi who said "That was so silly. Yes we expect them to accuse us of heresy because the Salafis are single-minded people,” said al-Kholy. “But as for the American support..."

I found that protestation just a little unconvincing, especially in the light of my own research in this area.

[Drysnyaty]

Egyptian people are much too enlightened, educated ... Salafis have no chance in hell of ever running things in Egypt.

I spent a couple years in Egypt and every major salafi shaykh that I met was either a Doctor or a Phd in a secular field as well.

Dr. Muhammad Isma'il - psychiatrist
Dr. Yasir Burhami - physician
Dr. Ahmad Hutaybah - dentist
Dr. Muhammad Yusri - phd. in engineering

There was a salafi shaykh in a small masjid I used to attend who used to teach us Zad al-Ma'ad. He was a physician and had a phd. in Usul al-Fiqh from al-Azhar.

To be honest, the only people in Egypt I encountered who really fit this description: "Egyptian people are much too enlightened, educated" were the salafi brothers.

[BundEnhamma]

^

So you're saying only the Salafis are educated?


Egyptians as a whole are amongst the most educated people in the Arab world if not the entire world.They even have 1 or two Noble prizes under their belts, every year they produce thousands of doctors, engineers, lawyers, etc etc. Compare that with Salafi Saudiarabia...despite being a super rich country with billions to pour into the education sector....produces nothing. Their education system is deplorable and their youth amount to nothing. I have studied with egyptians and almost every single one of my classmates was highly intelligent. I was amazed. They will never accept Salafis to rule them, even the practising amongst them is averse to these sorts of people.Their way is a moderate rational one like Amr Khaled etc.


but returning back to your point if even the salafis of Egypt are this educated what about the masses? you shouldn't look at it in isolation, but see these salafis {especially in relation to their fellow salafis across the sea } as a product of their environment.An environment were there are great educational opportunities, where education is not only pursued but valued.

[Auzuigcx]

The Ulamaa' of al Islaam can see a fitnah emerging, while the ignorant masses only realize a fitnah came after it passes. This is exactly what is happening in Egypt. The Ulamaa' of al Islaam, especially the great Ulamaa of Saudi Arabia knew from the very beginning of the street protests and disturbances that this is a big fitnah. Did these ignorant people who march on the streets, carrying crosses to show their "Solidarity" with Christians, ever ask a single scholar of the Sunnah whether this is something they should do?

Since when is marching on the streets, carrying posters, burning flags, rioting, etc., from our Religion? Doesn't the Quraan say that fitnah is worse than killing? Islaam is a religion of order, discipline and security. A tyrannical and corrupt government is a million times better than anarchy and disorder. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم strictly told us to obey the ruler, even if he is flogging people and taking their wealth unjustly.

So the 'Ulamaa of Al Islaam advised the people not to participate in this "Revolution", to stay in their homes and lock the doors. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم himself warned of a fitnah where the person who is sitting is better than the person who is standing.

Now what has come as a result of this "revolution", one that was ironically supported by the so called "Muslim Brotherhood"?? More secularism, more anti-Islaamic ideas, and more Westernization. Elections have been announced. I ask any sincere Muslim...since when is elections allowed in our Religion? Democracy is a Greek word that means "Power of the People", it is a concept that is foreign to our Religion.

Of course, all the deviant groups, the Soofis, the Asharis, the Ikhwaanis, the secularists, the socialists, the Coptics, the feminists, etc., all supported this "Revolution" in the common name of Egypt nationalism. It was only the Ghurabaa (the strangers who have been given glad tidings of Jannah by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم) who remained aloof from this Fitnah, and adhered to the advice of the 'Ulamaa of Al-Islaam.

Now we can see that the prophecies that knowledge will be taken away by the eventual demise of the scholars is becoming fulfilled. Now people are taking the ignorant Soofis, Peers, Mullahs, etc., are their leaders and as a result they are falling into all sorts of tribulations.

May Allaah guide this Ummah back to the Sunnah [aameen]

[Drysnyaty]

^

So you're saying only the Salafis are educated?

I'm not saying that at all. I just don't think it is accurate to say that one who adheres to salafism is illiterate and ignorant and one who adheres to whatever you feel to be "moderate Islam" is educated and enlightened, although that may not fit in to your agenda.