I shall read up on them when I have more time

Sorry, but what I should or shouldn’t do and what my priorities should be, is not to be dictated to by you or anyone else, I don’t need to spend my entire life sorting out the stupidity and prejudices of others.

Your solutions- make up some imaginary stereotype version of reality, don’t back it up with even a single reference beyond your own assertion and expect people to take you seriously. If you are not trying to convince people what was the point of writing the articles? You are making no sense whatsoever.

If I make any observation or contribution to anything I do it on the basis of reality not my imagination. If these imaginary mystical Sufis vs mad mullahs don’t exist anywhere but in yours and others’ imagination you won’t actually be doing anything to sort out any problems.

Understanding that the issues are far more nuanced than you or people like Al-Mahajaroun like to make out- in fact you resemble them in your over simplification of reality- is far more likely to bring real solutions.

The idea that seems to be bandied around alot on these types of forums that Islam is exclusivist- i.e. it teaches that followers of other religions are not saved- is the main problem is a complete dead end- both in terms of diagnosis and cure.

The problem lies in lack of proper education and integrated self-development appropriate to time and place and that problem is something I am involved in day in day out and doesn’t happen overnight, it takes alot of hard work, commitment, money and sacrifice.

I have never written or edited any Wikipedia articles. And no, I am not interested in providing any references to you beyond what has already been supplied — it’s not my job to convince you of anything and I have no interest in doing so. If you disagree with anything I have written, that’s your prerogative, but I think it is best if you let the matter go.

Your priority should be considering if your actions assist in reducing bigotry, prejudice and hatred towards other Muslims, or actually make matters worse and play right into the hands of both anti-Muslim racist groups and extreme Islamist groups who want to promote certain stereotypes about Muslims for their own ends. More than anything else — including arguing with me — that should be your primary concern.

We can either be part of the problem or we can be part of the solution. I suggest you go and do some thinking about that, as there are far bigger issues at stake.

If you could kindly provide some historical reference works, rather than you just making assertions and linking to an unreferenced wikipedia article which for all I know you wrote yourself it would be helpful for me to verify the whole matter.

I noticed you have failed to actually answer any of the issues I’ve raised, fair enough if you want to leave it at that but it completely undermines your case.

Correct.

(By the way, I’ve just sent you a quick email so please check that when you have a minute).

Jahangir also imprisoned Sirhindi in Gwalior fort for several years.

are you just reading from selective Hindu and Sikh renditions of history.

No.

Also, a great deal of information is also derived from Persian and Urdu records from the period, and both the original writers and the subsequent sources have absolutely nothing to do with either Hindus or Sikhs.

Incidentally, I have relatives who are formal members of Sufi orders in India.

rather he recommended the Guru not to attack Muslims.

Bulleh Shah did no such thing — the very extract you have supplied contains zero information implying that. Banda Singh was not a Sikh Guru.

And Bulleh Shah specifically said (again, in the same extract you have supplied) that he opposed murder and revenge — something, incidentally, which is exactly in line with the teachings and actions of the Sikh Gurus themselves. You should also do some research on exactly why Bulleh Shah referred to Guru Tegh Bahadur as a ‘ghazi’.

************************************

Beyond that, I think we should now amicably agree to disagree and leave it at that. I hope your affiliation with the Naqshbandi Order is working out for you.

We also happen to be Naqshabandis, but we respect and take from the Chisthis as well as they do from us as I’ve already mentioned. I actually know several of the present day Khalifas of Ajmer Sharif and know their views on these points, can you say the same or are you just reading from selective Hindu and Sikh renditions of history.

You miss my points entirely.

I am well aware of who Imam Ahmed Raza Khan was and his stances and support them. My point was that being A Sufi or A Barelvi does not mean that you are not political or legalistic similarly just because someone who is a deobandi or Wahabbi doesn’t mean you are not spiritually inclined.

Also whatever you personally think of Aurangazeb or Imam Ahmed Sirhindi- there is still no getting away from the fact that they were affiliated to Sufi Orders.

Lastly it doesn’t tally with what you wrote- it said most of what we know about Bulleh Shah has little historical certainty and there is certainly nothing there about him taking up arms alongside Sikhs against the Mughals rather he recommended the Guru not to attack Muslims.

What you also fail to understand is that Sufi orders are not exclusive clubs with competing ideologies, people have and do recieve initiations into different orders, are influenced by different orders and may even be masters in several different spiritual orders.

You also fail to deal with the fact that all of the founders of Dar-ul-uloom Deoband all belonged to the Sabri-Chisthi Sufi Order- so your view of all Chisthis as being some sort of happy clappy hippys kind of goes out of the window.

Tolerance is Islamic and the great Chisthi Saints are famous for tolerance but also for bringing hundreds of thousands of Hindus into Islam- they didn’t believe in religious pluralism- Hinduism and Islam were not equivilents, far far from it. Go read Nizam ud Din Awliya’s mafuzalat- this is a man who was one of the leading Chisthi Saints and commanded strict adherence to the Shariah. Poetry contains alot of deep metaphysical symbolism and metaphor- it is not meant to be taken literally.

Thank you for your kind words. The second half of the article is now available, so do check that out when you have some spare time.

******************************************

Persephone,

Are there are examples of women from that bygone era who were noteworthy? I know it was a male dominated world but did not any break through, albeit in a small way?

My article focused more on religious issues, but on a political level Muslim women like Noorjahan (one of Emperor Jahangir’s wives) were often very much “the power behind the throne” (some say she was the de facto ruler of the empire). Much later, Umrao Jaan was obviously renowned for her skill as a poet as well as her fame as a courtesan. And there were influential non-Muslim women such as Ahilyabai Holkar — the “Philosopher Queen” — along with Meerabai, Akbar’s wife Jodhabai, the Queen of Jhansi etc.

Mujaddid Alf-e-Thani Ahmed Sirhindi (RAA) who denounced Akbar and his religion din-e-ilahi (Naqshbandi Sufi Order)

Ahmed Sirhindi was effectively ejected from the Mughal court because of his extreme bigotry and his opposition to Emperor Akbar’s policy of promoting peaceful coexistence, tolerance and secular equality with non-Muslims, especially the Hindu majority. And given Sirhindi’s poisonous anti-Hindu tracts in response to Emperor Akbar’s numerous reforms (including abolishing the ‘jizya’ poll tax for non-Muslims), not to mention Sirhindi’s virulent anti-semitism (eg. his statement “Whenever a Jew is killed, it is for the benefit of Islam”) despite no evidence of him ever having come into contact with any Jewish people, the breakdown of his relations with Akbar was fully deserved and none too soon.

Some examples of Sirhindi’s writings, from his numerous books and letters:

In letter no. 163 Sirhindi wrote: “The honour of Islam lies in insulting kufr and kafirs. One who respects the kafirs dishonours the Muslims…..The real purpose of levying jizya on them is to humiliate them to such an extent that they may not be able to dress well and to live in grandeur. They should constantly remain terrified and trembling. It is intended to hold them under contempt and to uphold the honour and might of Islam.”

After the Sikh Guru Arjan had been tortured and killed upon the orders of Jahangir, Sirhindi wrote in letter no. 193 that “the execution of the accursed kafir of Gobindwal is an important achievement and is the cause of the great defeat of the Hindus.”

And so on and so forth. Even Aurangzeb thought that some of Sirhindi’s writings were so extreme that he considered banning their distribution in the Mughal empire.

Fortunately, Aurangzeb ultimately rejected that kind of mentality towards non-Muslims, and as I stated in the main article, the Naqshbandis are not representative of mainstream Sufism as far as India is concerned. The Chishtis are far more popular and influential. The influence of the Naqshbandis declined considerably after the death of Aurangzeb (although their ideology was a major influence during the creation of the problematic Deobandi school of political & religious thought).

By the time of the last Mughal emperor, Bahadur Shah II, the Chishti Order was once again most closely affiliated with the 19th century Mughal imperial court and the liberal, tolerant culture and interpretation of Islam which the latter epitomised and promoted.

Jai, you linked to Wikipedia as your reference to Bulleh Shah and yet it almost completely contradicts what you are claiming for him:

On the contrary. That entire extract matches exactly what I said — as would be confirmed by anyone who has a comprehensive understanding of Bulleh Shah’s life, message, affiliation with the Sikh Gurus, the lives, message and actions of the Gurus themselves (especially Guru Tegh Bahadur and Guru Gobind Singh), and the actions and eventual fate of Banda Singh Bahadur.

Including the late Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, incidentally.

Go see Aurganzeb’s sword see what is inscribed on it-

What’s inscribed on his sword is irrelevant (and it also depends on exactly how and when Aurangzeb came into possession of the sword). Aurangzeb was affiliated with, and most strongly influenced by, the Naqshbandis (and Ahmed Sirhindi’s writings in particular) for most of his life.

However, at the very end of his life, as confirmed in his own memoirs and letters to his sons, Aurangzeb deeply regretted his previous actions, renounced the particular interpretation of Islam he’d previously believed in, and ceased all hostilities with the Sikhs, Hindus, and other religious groups he’d spent his life persecuting — a fact that those who admire him for his previous activities conveniently forget or ignore.

And as far as Qadiri Sufis in India were concerned, they (particularly Hazrat Mian Mir) supported Dara Shukoh, and therefore opposed Aurangzeb and his attitude to religion.

and bear in mind I am a Brealwi-Sufi myself

That’s an interesting assertion. Ahmad Raza Khan, the founder of the Barelvis, issued fatwas (with the support of numerous members of the Muslim clergy in the subcontinent and Mecca) against the Deobandis and the Wahhabis, accusing them of ‘takfir’.

And modern-day Barelvis have continued to forcefully oppose Deobandis and Wahhabi-Salafis, both in terms of organising mass protests and rallies against the “Talibanisation” of South Asia and in terms of having suffered extreme violence at the hands of Deobandi-affiliated terrorists and activists aiming to seize control of Barelvi-affiliated mosques.

Excellent post – and very very informative.

I would read the second half with much interest later on today.

Are there are examples of women from that bygone era who were noteworthy? I know it was a male dominated world but did not any break through, albeit in a small way?

I’m just wondering if there is a hidden Muslim woman, like Mary Seacole, who did something against the odds but it was never promulgated & so the role model never set.