Beliefnet
City of Brass

This article in the Economist takes an interesting and detailed look at the religious practices of South Asia’s Sufi muslims. There is a large amount of syncretism between Hinduism and Islam in the region, as there is between Islam and and Christianity in the Balkans and between Islam and Confucian thought in western China. What is notable about South Asian Sufism however is the explosion in art and architecture that it has spurred, particularly in teh building of large tombs for venerated saints.

As the article points out, the practice of building these tombs is at odds with conservative orthdoxy (notably salafist doctrines like Wahhabism). Muslims of that persuasion have characterized these tombs as expressions in shirk (idolatry), and that is the same general argument used by the Saudi religious authorities to justify their systematic obliteration of Mecca’s historical legacy.

In other words, the argument is that those muslims who build these tombs are replacing Allah with the people buried within. They are, in the view of salafists in general and Wahhbis in particular, rejecting the basic oath of a muslim (there is no God but God) and praying to these mortal men instead for intercession. What they do not see is that the act of building a tomb is an expression of love, not for the deceased to replace God but to thak them for helping the muslim strengthen their faith. These people to whom tombs are built range from minor saints like Hafiz Iqbal to great martyrs of the faith like Imam Husain AS. Without exception, these great people showed muslims the true path towards the light of Islam, not away from it.

Personally, I find it deeply offensive to reductively characterize the beliefs of a third of the world’s muslims as shirk simply because they build tombs. To argue that the simple expression of love in building a tomb and engaging in ziyarat (remembrance) is necessarily equivalent to the blasphemy of the Khawarij is to infantilize muslims rather than treat them as brothers in faith. This is a condescending argument, in many ways analogous to the colonial attitude that justified so much misery and outright destruction of heritage and culture, for “their own sake”.

That condescension is not limited to, nor even a necessary feature of, Wahabism. Rather it is a general human tendency, to rationalize our own actions by declaring the actions of others inferior, thereby to avoid the hardest thing of all, to engage in critical self-examination .I don’t think any of us is truly capable of engaging ourselves critically, which is why it is important that we maintain diversity within Islam, so that we may provide a healthy check and balance to each other, and thus keep us all moving forward. But if we were all to be the same, then we would be all the more easily led astray.

Regardless of how you pronounce it, ?? ???? ??? !

My friend Ron Coleman has a great links roundup in honor of the occasion at his blog, Likelihood of Confusion. Also, the Wikipedia entry is a great reference about this holiday that everyone, Jewish and non-Jewish alike, should know more about.

If this is sincere, then good:



An
Iraqi journalist arrested after throwing his shoes at George Bush, the
US president, has reportedly sent a letter to the Iraqi prime minister
to apologise for the incident and seek a pardon.

A spokesman for Nuri al-Maliki, Iraq’s prime minister, said on
Thursday that Muntazer al-Zaidi had acknowledged his shoe-throwing
during a news conference in Baghdad as “an ugly act”.

Yasin
Majeed, al-Maliki’s media adviser, told the Reuters news agency that
“al-Zaidi said in his letter that his big ugly act cannot be excused”.

According to Majeed, al-Zaidi asked the prime minister to recall the
kindness al-Maliki showed him during a 2005 interview when he invited
the journalist to his home.

“I appeal to your fatherly feelings to forgive me,” al-Zaidi was quoted as saying by Majeed.

[…]

However, Dhargham al-Zaidi, the journalist’s brother, questioned whether the statement was genuine.

Of course, he is being held by the Maliki government, so it’s equally likely he’s been roughed up, in which case this is just making the whole thing worse (and kind of proving his point in throwing the shoes in the first place, actually).

UPDATE: Yes, looks like he was beaten while in captivity, quite severely. As Thabet at Talk Islam wryly observes, “Under Saddam he would have been killed. Under the Newly Liberated Government Of Iraq, he ‘only’ gets a beating. At least that’s progress.” No wonder al-Zaidi is an instant hero to the Arab world.

Steven Waldman points out that despite the lashing Obama is getting from the left about Rick Warren, there’s a lot of angst about it on the right as well. These reactions from Free Republic are illuminating:

Pray for them, yes! try to convert them, yes! Recognize their authority over you, yes!
Support them and give them credence, no! Rick Warren is their to just
cover up the smell. Front man and a shill for a corrupt presidency.
–by dirtymac

Methinks Mr. Warren’s pride is getting the better of him. Giving the
invocation at a presidential inauguration IS a big deal, but I’m sure
that standing before Jesus on Judgement Day will make it seem less than
trivial.
–by MrB

Rick Warren is one of those new age, book author, get rich thanks to
Jesus like Joel Osteen – TV pastors. I thought Warren was decent but he
is a phony.
–by Frantzie

Geez…the False Prophet swearing in the Anti-Christ…how nice.
–by ravingnutter

What Obama has in mind is to use religious socialists to move his socialist agenda.
–by stockpirate

Warren is a symbolic loss to the progressive left, but will probably be a material, tangible gain to mainstream liberalism. Evangelicals will notice and they will remember. What the progressive left needs to remember is that Obama was a candidate for the left, but will be a President for everyone.