I seem to recall tussling with you before, I hink bodegas were mentioned at some point, seems you like to attack rather than discuss, nye problema. It's not MY definition of Islam. Its a reading of Islam based upon how the central tenets demand to be read, i.e., accoding to the rules by which they were themselves adumbrated. One of the key drivers of conflict in Indonesia, for instance, is that between Ahmaddiyya adherents and adherents of (any) one of the Sunni branches. Their argument, and they're not arguing about Jihad but rather other peripheral issues but the implications are the same, is that the Ahmaddiya have innovated (tantamount to bid'a) by ignroing how the Quran and the sharia in particular are meant to be implemented. The Ahmaddiya are some of the foremost adherents of the meccan verses (those that have been abrogated) and one of the fears they have is that their youth (again talking about Indonesia in partilucar but the import is universal) have been "weened" away from them by persuasive arguments based wholly upon Islamic methodologies. As I said in my original post its not about how many Islams there are out there but rather how many variations/deviations on the theme and how the whole discursive field has a strong system steering/maintenance capability (i.e., the rules which it itself lays down about how to interpret/implement it). Listen, agree with me or don't, I really don't care but provide me with evidence to the contrary and maybe we can talk.
T, over and out
Bookmarks