26 February, 2020

Blog

Understanding Fundamentalism

By Izeth Hussain

Izeth Hussain

Izeth Hussain

In my last article which dealt with Islamic terrorism I made the point that it is something that comes out of the matrix of Islamic fundamentalism. In this article I want to make some comments on fundamentalism in general, not just in Islam, as it has become one of the important political problems of our time. It is a huge, complex, and difficult problem, requiring in-depth analysis. Here, in these brief comments, I want to make just one point: there is no nexus between fundamentalism and terrorism, between fundamentalism and any sort of violence. This point is crucial for a proper understanding of the Islamic fundamentalism that has been spreading to a seemingly alarming extent in Sri Lanka.

In my earlier article I quoted the opening sentence of Karen Armstrong’s book Battle for God as follows: “One of the most startling developments of the late twentieth century has been the emergence within every major religious tradition of a militant piety popularly known as ‘fundamentalism’.” I cited also another book by two authors which began by noting some details to show that the three monotheisms of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam had in the late ‘seventies entered more or less simultaneously into a process of “political radicalization”. Karen Armstrong saw that process taking place within Hinduism and Buddhism also: “Fundamentalism, moreover, is not confined to the three great monotheisms There are Buddhist, Hindu, and even Confucian fundamentalisms, which also cast aside many of the painfully acquired insights of liberal culture, which fight and kill in the name of religion and strive to bring the sacred into the realm of politics and national struggle”.

Some distinctions have to be made. Political Buddhism or militant Buddhism became a factor of primary importance in our politics after 1956. It is an interesting fact that it was precisely after 1977 that it became most potent: it was the major factor behind the State terrorism of President JR which transformed the ethnic problem into a violent form, leading to the 26-year civil war. But there was no violence in the name of Buddhism. Besides there was no claim that the Buddhist religion was being restored in its pristine form, which is invariably the claim made by the fundamentalists of the three monotheisms. The reason for that of course is that it has always been the proud claim of the Theravada Buddhists that they have never abandoned Buddhism in its pristine form. That applies to Burma also where Buddhist violence has been a very recent phenomenon. There could be a nexus between militant Buddhism and violence, but none between violence and a non-existent Buddhist fundamentalism. As for the three monotheisms, there seems to be no significant violence among Judaic and Christian fundamentalists. They are objectionable mainly for turning to the extreme right. Violence therefore does seem to be a specialty of Islamic fundamentalism. But that has to be explained not in terms of a supposed nexus between Islam and violence but in terms of the sequence of literacy-revolution-lowering of the birth rate of Emmanuel Todd’s brilliant theorizing which I expounded in my last article. There is in brief no nexus between fundamentalism and violence. That should always be borne in mind in considering the phenomenon of Islamic fundamentalism in Sri Lanka.

But of course it all arguably depends on how you define fundamentalism, on how you understand it. Today most people would understand it as an Islamic phenomenon, the typical manifestations of which have been September 11 and the subhuman savagery of the IS. The idea that there could be something positive about fundamentalism will therefore seem perverse to them. I ill now put down what I understand by fundamentalism. All the world religions came to have orthodox forms, which in the case of Sunni Islam took almost six centuries after the death of the Prophet. The orthodox version of a religion is therefore a construct, not something that exists in the immutable form originally propounded by its founder. Consequently it could come to be questioned; parts of it could undergo revision, a process that could lead to a new version of that religion.

Possibly the most important reason why that happens is that the orthodox version of a religion invariably comes to be tied up with state power. This is what Mohammed Arkoun, the Algerian scholar who was a Professor at the Sorbonne, wrote in his essay The Concept of Authority in Islamic Thought: “Orthodoxy – in its Sunni or Shia version – is no more than the official religion resulting from the collaboration of the ulama with the state”. The word “ulama” means theologian. Therefore people who become seriously dissatisfied with the state of affairs under the Orthodox dispensation could seek to change it by effecting changes in the religion. Today, in the case of Muslims, they seek to do this by adapting Islam to the needs of modernity, which results in what I call liberal Islam. But many Muslims, as well as adherents of the other world religions, have sought change by going back to the roots, to what they conceive of as the fundamentals of the religion. It is that process that I regard as fundamentalism. It corresponds to a profound human need to go back to the roots for self-renewal. It could result in a new benign form of a religion, or it could take a morbid form, morbidly violent as in the case of the IS.

I will take my illustrative material – to illustrate my point that fundamentalism could be a benign process – from two American works of art that have acquired iconic status: Fred Zinnemann’s film High Noon and Martha Graham’s ballet Appalachian Spring. The film is available in DVD form through Colombo outlets, material about it is there in the internet, and the ballet is easily accessible through the internet. The film belongs to the genre of the Western but it is really a political film which in my estimation compares with the best work of Wajda and Pontecorvo. The story is about the Marshal of a small town who has done an excellent job in ridding it of criminal elements, which included the bringing to book of a killer who is condemned to death. The killer vows vengeance on the Marshal. He is later pardoned through the intervention of corrupt politicians of the North, and is on the way back to town to join three comrades who will help him in killing the Marshal. The Marshal, who initially flees the town with his newly-wedded Quaker wife, decides to return, against her wishes, to confront his antagonists. His expectation that he would find sufficient supporters in the town to confront his antagonists turns out to be totally mistaken. He is isolated but he manages to kill all his antagonists with the help of his wife. In the famous last scene of the film, he throws his Marshal’s badge in the dust and leaves town with his wife.

What I am now going to do is to provide a reading of what might be called the sub-text of the film. Practically any work of art could be read in more ways than one, all of which could be legitimate. I am informed by a reader, who has provided invaluable help by directing me to important material on the film in the internet, that the Director Zinnemann’s son had in a discussion with Gary Cooper’s daughter stated that the fact that the Marshal’s wife was a Quaker had no importance at all. At this point I must cite D.H. Lawrence’s observation which went something like this: “Trust the tale, never the writer”. I hold that in a work of art the intention of the artist counts for little or nothing: the real meaning of the work of art could burst through without his being aware of it. To my mind the religious dimension of the film is paradoxically intrusive though only implicit, and the film can best be understood in terms of the myth of the frontier and the appeal of fundamentalism in its benign form.

To be continued.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 3
    25

    Dear Izeth,

    Fundamentalism is a huge and DANGEROUS subject, especially when handled by a man with a Muslim name; I admire your courage! There’s half a minute of Obama here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-y4vxs5hxY

    I hope that readers will note that what you have discussed in this opening installment is what your current articles are NOT about (and that the prominent picture illustrates THAT point).

    The last five words I have read are significant: “fundamentalism in its benign form”

    • 5
      22

      Izeth Hussain –

      RE: Understanding Fundamentalism

      This is a general term. A more specific term is Understanding Wahhabism.

      Wahhabism is the most important word in Terrorism, because the Wahhabis Follow Satan.

      It is baffling, therefore, that instead of calling these groups Wahhabis we insist on terms such as ‘Islamist’ or ‘fundamentalist’

      Let’s review the Iblis Satan Following Wahhabis.

      Wahhabism- a history of the origins of ISIS and present day terrorism.

      http://affairstoday.co.uk/wahhabism-a-history-of-the-origins-of-isis-and-present-day-terrorism/

    • 0
      2

      [Edited out]

    • 0
      2

      [Edited out]

    • 2
      3

      Izeth Hussain

      RE: Understanding Fundamentalism

      Another View. What drives religious extremism?

      What drives people to extremes? Why do the people behind Al-Qaeda or the Islamic State (IS) get so charged up and angry? Perhaps to understand we should go back to the 16th century in Europe and the furious debate about the “divine right of kings”. For decades the royal houses of Europe is becoming less accessible to their subjects. William of Orange, ruler of the powerful Netherlands, said he had “received his power from God and God alone.” Philip II of Spain was also a principle protagonist of this theme. Indeed, when Spain conquered Holland, Philip tried to squash the new Protestant “heresy”, using the brutal practices of the Spanish Inquisition.

      It is no wonder that the Dutch were ready for a bloody revolt. They would no longer accept the prerogatives of rulers who claimed a “divine right”. In 1581 the Dutch withdrew their allegiance from Philip II. Accountability of a ruler to his subjects not to his God was the new dispensation. Meanwhile, England, under the rule of Elizabeth 1 and James 1, continued to believe in the divine right of the monarch. Only when James’s son came to the throne, Charles 1, was the belief overturned. Parliament raised an army. Seven years of war was followed by the king’s trial, conviction and execution in 1649. The poet John Milton wrote at the time, “All men naturally were born free”. John Locke wrote 40 years later that “The very objective of government is setting up a known authority to which everyone of that society may appeal upon any injury received……..The legislative power should be placed in collective bodies of men, call them senate, parliament, or what you please” –

      “The Islamic militants of today rage against the kleptocratic and corrupt (apart from Jordan and Morocco) kings of the Middle East (who act as if they have a divine right to rule), and against the governments of the US and Europe who, they believe, help keep them in power.”

      From then on, over the course of two centuries, very much influenced by Locke and other Enlightenment thinkers, a constitutional form of government was slowly built across much of Europe. However, it was the United States that first became a full democracy, with separation of church and state. But, despite the great advance from the days of “divine rule”, parliaments and governments regularly failed the people. Parliaments were often dominated, or at least greatly influenced, by those with inherited titles, people with money, the army and even criminal gangs. Much of the struggle against the divine right of kings and the corrupt policies of the Pope in Rome had led Martin Luther in 1517 to nail his handbill to the doors of a church in Wittenberg in Germany. Faith in God, not in pope or king, was the only way to gain heavenly salvation, he preached. No wonder that Philip II savagely repressed the profession and declarations of Protestant faith in Holland.

      It was in Holland that some Protestants became extremists. In the late 1560s Protestant iconoclasts went into the catholic churches and destroyed the statues of Mary and the Saints. They also destroyed any manifestation of the wealth and riches that the church had been extorting for so long.
      Their anger was such that we would call them today “violent, religious extremists”.

      Sarah Chayes points out in her excellent new book “Thieves of State”, “We can see parallels between the 16th century struggles in Europe against the kings and catholic church and the religious militancy of Al Qaeda and IS. The resemblance between the language used to explain their violence and that of the earlier Protestant insurrectionists castigating the acute corruption of the Catholic Church and its royalist allies (with their belief in the divine right of kings) is unmistakable.”
      Al-Qaeda and IS are as puritanical as some of these early Protestants. They frown on liquor, dancing, romance and festivities and impose gruesome punishments on non-conformists.
      Al Qaeda-linked rebels invaded Timbuktu and trashed historic shrines dedicated to Sufi saints. The two movements have fought against the authoritarianism of Middle Eastern, Afghani and Pakistani rulers.

      The Islamic militants of today rage against the kleptocratic and corrupt (apart from Jordan and Morocco) kings of the Middle East (who act as if they have a divine right to rule), and against the governments of the US and Europe who, they believe, help keep them in power. They also rage against autocratic, secular leaders such as President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, and Presidents Hamid Kharzai and Mohammad Ashraf Ghani of Afghanistan. In Europe governments, royalty and the Catholic church (look at Pope Francis) gradually have discarded much of their old anachronistic beliefs. (Although that didn’t stop their governments precipitating the two Great Wars of the 20th century or their tolerating corruption today and allowing the wealthy to call the shots in US elections.) Al-Qaeda, IS and their like will start to go quiet only when the authoritarians and kleptomaniacs in power (supported by their Western friends) purge themselves of financial excess, the false claims of absolute rulers and open themselves to root and branch democratic political reform.

      http://www.dailymirror.lk/100779/what-drives-religious-extremism

    • 1
      0

      RE: Izeth Hussain

      RE: Understanding Fundamentalism

      Understanding Idiots?

      In order to Understand Fundamentalism, need to be brainwashed from an early age so that All they KNOW is fundamentalism.

      It is like training a puppy.

  • 1
    1

    “”Understanding Fundamentalism”

    [Edited out]

  • 2
    24

    In Sinhala Language, ULAMA is not a good word.

    • 2
      23

      Jim softy

      Are only Wahhabis preachers called Ulama? If so, the name is compatible with the Wahhabis as they follow the Devil, Satan, not Allah.

      “In Sinhala Language, ULAMA is not a good word. “

      Devil Bird

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_Bird

      The Devil Bird, locally known as Ulama, is a cryptid of Sri Lanka said to emit bloodcurdling human sounding shrieks in the night from within the jungles. In Sri Lankan folklore, it is believed that the cry of this bird is an omen that portends death. Its precise identity is still a matter of debate although the spot-bellied eagle-owl matches the profile of Devil Bird to a large extent, according to a finding in the year 2001.[1]

      As the bird is not usually seen and its cry only described in vague terms, Ulama records might refer to the Ceylon highland nightjar (Caprimulgus indicus kelaarti); the males of the latter are known to have a screaming flight-call atypical for nightjars[citation needed].

      “Devil Bird or Ulama or Ulalena. The precise identity of this bird is one of the mysteries of the Ceylon jungles. Its eerie cries have been attributed to a variety of birds. The most likely candidates however are: the forest eagle-owl (Bubo nipalensis) for the up country area, the hawk-eagles and the crested honey-buzzard (Pernis ptilorhynchus ruficollis) in the lowland jungles.”

  • 1
    24

    IZETH HUSSEIN is not capable of explaining MUISLIM-MAYHEM with the help of QURAN which is, according to Muslim, given by God. Instead he uses books written by Christians. What ever the, ideas in those books includes their religious – either Christian or Judaic – thinking.

    Hussein cannot explain it though his own religious book.

    Buddhism, after Islam Conquests burned most of those books to ashes in Greater india, now modern pakistan, pali canon still exits. Pali canon can explain the whole universe.

    Let us review the Muslim conquest. In 624, Mohammed led a raid for booty and plunder against a Meccan caravan, killing 70 Meccans for mere material gain. Between 630 A.D. and the death of Mohammed in 632 A.D., Muslims — on at least one occasion led by Mohammed — had conquered the bulk of western Arabia and southern Palestine through approximately a dozen separate invasions and bloody conquests. These conquests were in large part “Holy wars,” After Mohammed’s death in 632, the new Muslim caliph, Abu Bakr, launched Islam into almost 1,500 years of continual imperialist, colonialist, bloody conquest and subjugation of others through invasion and war, a role Islam continues to this very day.

    The Muslim wars of imperialist conquest have been launched for almost 1,500 years against hundreds of nations, over millions of square miles (significantly larger than the British Empire at its peak). The lust for Muslim imperialist conquest stretched from southern France to the Philippines, from Austria to Nigeria, and from central Asia to New Guinea. This is the classic definition of imperialism — “the policy and practice of seeking to dominate the economic and political affairs of weaker countries.”

    The Muslim goal was to have a central government, first at Damascus, and then at Baghdad — later at Cairo, Istanbul, or other imperial centers. The local governors, judges, and other rulers were appointed by the central imperial authorities for far off colonies. Islamic law was introduced as the senior law, whether or not wanted by the local people. Arabic was introduced as the rulers’ language, and the local language frequently disappeared. Two classes of residents were established. The native residents paid a tax that their colonialist rulers did not have to pay.

    Although the law differed in different places, the following are examples of colonialist laws to which colonized Christians and Jews were made subject to over the years:

    Christians and Jews could not bear arms — Muslims could;
    Christians and Jews could not ride horses — Muslims could;
    Christians and Jews had to get permission to build — Muslims did not;
    Christians and Jews had to pay certain taxes which Muslims did not;
    Christians could not proselytize — Muslims could;
    Christians and Jews had to bow to their Muslim masters when they paid their taxes; and
    Christians and Jews had to live under the law set forth in the Koran, not under either their own religious or secular law.
    In each case, these laws allowed the local conquered people less freedom than was allowed the conquering colonialist rulers. Even non-Arab Muslim inhabitants of the conquered lands became second class citizens behind the ruling Arabs. This is the classic definition of colonialist — “a group of people who settle in a distant territory from the state having jurisdiction or control over it and who remain under the political jurisdiction of their native land.”

    This is how Muslims killed buddhists nd Hindus. That is why Indian HIndus don’t like Muslims even to date;

    Muslim historian Firishta [full name Muhammad Qasim Hindu Shah, born in 1560 and died in 1620], the author of the Tarikh-i Firishta and the Gulshan-i Ibrahim, was the first to give an idea to the medieval bloodbath that was India during Muslim rule, when he declared that over 400 million Hindus got slaughtered during Muslim invasion and occupation of India. Survivors got enslaved and castrated. India’s population is said to have been around 600 million at the time of Muslim invasion. By the mid 1500’s the Hindu population was 200 million.

    By the time the British arrived to the shores of India and after centuries of Islamic law ruling India, the Hindu population was not behaving like their normal self; they were behaving like Muslims. There are many witness reports from the British archives of horrendous Hindu incidents that were shocking in cruelty to the British – and they therefore sometimes referred to the people as “savages”. Yes, anyone who gets contaminated by the association with Islamic ‘culture’ truly gets tainted and savaged. That is exactly why it is so detrimental and dangerous.

    Today, like other cultures with a soul massacred by Islam, India is not truly a Hindu nation. India is a shadow of Islam, a Hindufied version of Islam, where every human atrocity has been emulated and adopted into a culture previously alien to such brutality. And in association with it’s foreign mohamedan pest, these Islamic habits have become adopted and accepted as a “normal” part of Indian culture. But if we look at pre-Islamic Indian culture it was a in general a benevolent culture of knowledge and learning, much more so than it is today.

    From the time of the Umayyad Dynasty (711AD) to the last Mughal, Bahadur Shah Zafar (1858), so widely praised as great leaders by Indian historians themselves, entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. “Hindu slaughter.”

    • 0
      0

      Jim Softly – you have suddenly become very erudite. Has an Islamophobic group got access to your computer?
      The historical evidence shows that there has been terrific violence under every religion. No matter what a religion says, the human propensity to violence can burst out. The most violent in modern times have been the Christian countries which killed millions in the two World wars.Islamic violence has not matched that. It is therefore idiotic to castigate Islam as the religion of the sword. – IH

  • 1
    23

    Mr. IZETH HUSSEIN:

    You are not capable of the mayhem that muslims going through with the help of your religious book Book Quran. Buddha explained that is the eternal and natural law.

    Hatred never ceases by hatred, but by love alone is healed. This is an ancient and eternal law

  • 3
    23

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiLbWG9bUJ4&bpctr=1451086130

    Above is stoning of a 17 year Muslim girl stoning to death for writing a letter toa Christian boy. thsi specific case is from IRaq.

    But, similar things happens regularly in African society.

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=176_1364022789

    • 2
      10

      Jim, although the picture quality of this video was very poor, it is absolutely disgusting. Since so much of religion, and not only Islamic religion, is of this sort, it may be that we are going to be better off without any of it. I don’t recommend that anybody else sees this.

      For many people this is what fundamentalism means. I feel that what Izeth is going to show us is that this is not true religion at all. Let me stress that I have had no personal contact with Izeth. No telephone number, no email address. I have never seen him in person. I think I’d like to have his contact details.

      But even more, I would like to see what he shows us to be benign forms of religious fundamentalism.

  • 3
    23

    The picture is disgusting, it is certainly pundermentalism.

  • 3
    23

    Izeth Hussain

    RE: Understanding Fundamentalism

    “I cited also another book by two authors which began by noting some details to show that the three monotheisms of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam had in the late ‘seventies entered more or less simultaneously into a process of “political radicalization”. Karen Armstrong saw that process taking place within Hinduism and Buddhism also: “Fundamentalism, moreover, is not confined to the three great monotheisms There are Buddhist, Hindu, and even Confucian fundamentalisms, which also cast aside many of the painfully acquired insights of liberal culture, which fight and kill in the name of religion and strive to bring the sacred into the realm of politics and national struggle”.

    Thanks for the write up. How true1 This is what others have said.

    “Religion is the Opium of the Masses”- karl marx

    “To get good people to do bad things, it takes religion”- Stven Weinburg, Physics Nobel Laureate.

    “Some distinctions have to be made. Political Buddhism or militant Buddhism became a factor of primary importance in our politics after 1956. It is an interesting fact that it was precisely after 1977 that it became most potent: it was the major factor behind the State terrorism of President JR which transformed the ethnic problem into a violent form, leading to the 26-year civil war.”

    This was racism, Sinhala “Buddhism”, not Buddhism per se.

    “But many Muslims, as well as adherents of the other world religions, have sought change by going back to the roots, to what they conceive of as the fundamentals of the religion. It is that process that I regard as fundamentalism. It corresponds to a profound human need to go back to the roots for self-renewal. It could result in a new benign form of a religion, or it could take a morbid form, morbidly violent as in the case of the IS.”

    This is where Science, Philosophy ( Love of Wisdom), age of reason comes in. Europe was at it 500 years ago. The ,Muslims have yet to be fully confronted by this exchange. The fundamentalists are resisting that because they probably know that they will lose, both power and prestige.

    So, there is need to confuse and confront the fundamentalists with facts and reason.

    Adam and Eve vs. 46 Chromosomes. Ken Miller on Human Evolution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi8FfMBYCkk

    From The Big Bang To The Present Day

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eKIjkk0NVY

  • 2
    22

    Understanding Fundamentalism

    Here is one Christian Fundamentalist Says that Evolution is not compatible with the bible. Confused Fundamentalists.

    Can a Christian Believe Evolution? (Part 1)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_oIuLVlmWM

    Ken Miller on Human Evolution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi8FfMBYCkk

  • 2
    25

    It is simple to understand Izeth’s fundamentalism.

    It is: Fund—–a—–mental—–(Izeth)ism.

    No further analogy needed.

    • 3
      22

      R K Raghavan

      “It is: Fund—–a—–mental—–(Izeth)ism. No further analogy needed.”

      Read the whole article.

      Then look at your mirror. What would you see?

      • 1
        14

        [Edited out] Amare

        You are mad to read this man’s writings.

        He is Ayatholla brand and he hates the Tamils so much.

        In disgust I do not read.

        For you it is OK. You too have his mindset.

        Be careful. You are slowly and steadily being converted.

        Do not forget to invite me for the buriyani meal when the real chop takes place.

        God bless you.

        • 3
          10

          Are you really so sure that so many of us hate Tamils? I am asking you because I think that you are basically a good man.

          I have never met Izeth Hussain, but I am the guy who recently began to give him some positive feedback. I am sure that he is a very nice man.

          We are all thinking human beings. However, we allowing far too much of our thinking to be dictated by the accidents of birth. Can’t you and I work together?

          As for Muslims, many of us are uncomfortable with things that are written in the Quran. Millions of people are born as Muslims. Are you telling me that they must always be our enemies? Izeth is writing about some things that he believes in. It may be that we do not have time to read it all. But if we have time, it is good to read and understand. What we should not do is to condemn everything that comes from a Muslim person without even reading it. Haven’t many people here written exactly like that? Besides which somebody seems to have decided to organize people to give thumbs down for all comments without reading them. At this moment there are 20 comments that I see. The last one is by “cholan”. It has been edited out. No text at all. Yet 9 people have disapproved it.

          The first comment on this article is by me. What I have said there has been fully vindicated. This is clearly not a way forward. I appeal to all readers to first read, then think, and finally to respond in any way you think fit.

          If we cannot do that, then we human beings have no justification don’t think ourselves superior to other life forms.

        • 2
          6

          R K Raghavan

          “He is Ayatholla brand and he hates the Tamils so much.” ( I thought it was the Tamils who hated the Northern Muslims, to Ethnically cleanse them from the North, a war crime)

          “In disgust I do not read.”
          “For you it is OK. You too have his mindset.”
          “Be careful. You are slowly and steadily being converted.”

          The Fundamentalists and the Wahhabi need to be exorcised out of the Satan and Iblis for civilization to progress. Anybody who helps should be encouraged.

          Ottoman–Wahhabi War
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman%E2%80%93Wahhabi_War

          The Ottoman–Wahhabi War also known as the Ottoman–Saudi War or the Ottoman-Salafi War, was fought from early 1811 to 1818, between Egypt Eyalet under the reign of Muhammad Ali Pasha (nominally under Ottoman Empire rule) and the army of the Emirate of Diriyah, the First Saudi State, resulted in the destruction of the latter.

          Anybody who is against the Satan following Fundamentalists, especially the Wahhabi Fundamentalists and their Clones, should be appreciated. This is the current fundamental problem, that is being faced.

          These anti-Fundamentalists being anti-Tamil, abti-Hundi, anti-Sinhala, anti-Russian, anti-Arabic, anti-Spanish, ant-capitalism, ant-socialism, anti-Communism, anti-gay, anti-women, anti-caste or anti-atheists is secondary.

          • 1
            1

            Amarasiri,we Tamils do not hate Muslims. It is these Sri Lankan Muslims who have a chip on their shoulder and have been brainwashed to hate their real Tamil origin, all non Muslim Tamils, to claim a fake Arab origin, (that even the Arabs have stated they do not have. The Arabs have correctly classified them as largely low caste converted South Asian Muslims. Basically largely low caste Dravidian Tamil converts to Islam) and worship anything remotely Arab. To the extent that they have now discarded their South Asian form of dressing, their almost 1000 year old vibrant tolerant Sufi form of Islam, their Tamil customs and Tamil Muslim caste names like Rawther, Marrikar, Lebbai, Kutti, Pitchchai ETC and have now become like some pathetic clones of the Arabs. Arabs treat all non Arab Muslims like dirt. Especially the South Asian varieties and hate their non Arab Muslims neighbours. Like the Turks the Iranians and Kurds. Leave alone the Sunni Shia rift, even the different Sunni sects fight amongst themselves and an Arab from one country does not identify or like an Arab from another land and these pathetic low caste Tamil Dravidian converts to Islam from Sri Lanka think the Arabs will accept and embrace them as theirs. The Rich Gulf Arab states don’t care tow hoots for the plight of the Palestinian Arabs and see how their pathetic response the plight of the largely Sunni Muslim Syrian Arab refugees. It is the Kaffir Christian west that is largely helping them and they also know that and are fleeing there. Not to some Muslim or another Arab land.
            Now to these fake Arab converted Tamil Dravidian Sri Lankan Muslims. These largely refugee immigrants from South India, have always worked against all their fellow non Muslim Tamils from the word go. All they want is to destroy us and steal our land. To this effect from the time of independence all their politicians and elite have overtly and covertly joined hands with the all racist Sinhalese led Sri Lankan governments to destroy the Tamil language culture, deny Tamils higher education employment and to steal their lands. Especially in the east, where they first arrived as refugees a few centuries ago. It was a Muslim minister who connived with the Sinhalese to standardise marks in order to deny Tamils higher education. It was during his time that the Muslims started to ethnically cleanse Tamils in the east. Especially in the Amparai district. ( the Sinhalese had already started this but they joined after this minister came into power). Muslim mobs and thugs with the connivance of powerful Muslim politicians/elite and with the Sinhalese government and armed forces help killed looted raped Tamil homes businesses down south and in the east Muslim home guards with the help of the STF was killing and ethnically cleansing Tamils. Non of these Tamils have not been allowed to return to their lands and villages by these Muslims and their number is large. No one ever speaks of this and these backstabbers are very mum about this and everything else they did to the Tamils but dance up and down about the northern Muslims.
            Now to the Northern Muslims. No one not even the LTTE harmed at the beginning, however these refugee backstabbers, instead of minding their own business and going on with their lives, as usual started to connive with the Sinhalese armed forces spy for them and hide arms. The LTTE caught them and did not want a repeat of what happened to the Tamils in the south or in the east, so asked them to leave. No one was harmed raped or killed they were asked to leave. I do not condone this or justify this but this is what happened, It may have been a bad tactic but it was a war and as usual these low caste fake Arab converted Indian Tamil immigrants, took the side or the Sinhalese armed forces, who were killing bombing raping and looting the Tamils, by spying for them and hiding arms. hiding arms against whom may is ask? The Tamils even the LTTE, never harmed them until then, It was to attack the Tamils with the help of the Sinhalese armed forces. They acted like enemy aliens in a time of war against their host population and fellow Tamils, so were treated as one.
            It was the Tamils who greatly lost everything their homes lands wealth, around 300000 dead and one million chased out the country and many still internal refugees. Why? It is because they fought for what is their land language and culture to preserve this for them and their future generations from state sponsored Sinhalese racism and genocide that has been unleashed on them since independence. Only when it is your child your home your land you will fight for it. Undergo any hardship your life wealth and even your loved ones. This is what the Eelam Tamils did because it was their land their culture religion ETC, where they have lived for thousands of years under their own rulers, until the European colonisation. Even the European colonists did not want to steal if from them like the Sinhalese and these Muslims. Just like the story of King Solomon the baby and the two women.
            Other than the northern Muslims who number around 70000 the most. The rest of the Muslim population in the island greatly benefited from the suffering of the Tamils. Because these low caste converted immigrants from South India were openly conniving with the Sinhalese to deny the island’s Tamils their due rights and were getting thrown lots of crumbs and tit bits by all ruling Sinhalese governments for their part in this. Especially during the time of Baddudin Mohammed. When the Gulf Arabs became wealthy they cunningly used their Islamic identity to obtain more power and wealth from all Sinhalese governments and to get more funds from the Gulf Arab countries and Porksitan to build more mosques and further Islamise the country. Unlike the Tamils they never fought or suffered to defend any land, as they did not care they were fairly recent immigrants and this was not their land. They were only cunningly using the situation and the historic genocidal hatred that the Sinhalese had for the Tamils to further their own interests for their own immigrant community. This is the reason their denied their own Tamil Dravidian South Indian immigrant heritage and claimed a fake Arab origin for the entire community, when only around a hundred families amongst them were able to prove that they partially had it. Even this was negligible. They came like a cuckoo into the Eelam Tamil nest/land asking refuge and asylum and then like the cuckoo started to kick out the Tamils and steal their lands with the help of the Sinhalese racists and are still are doing this especially in the east. Unlike the Tamils they have no attachment or love for the land as their immigrants and refugees, that is why they will never fight or give up their lives, as it is not theirs to begin with. They are only cunningly using the situation to steal Tamil lands as they feel they are weak and helpless so can be taken advantage of. Over 70% of them live amongst the Sinhalese, they love the Sinhalese and hate their fellow Tamils so why don’t they ask for Islamic homelands in the Sinhalese south. Why only in the Tamil areas. The answer is they know they can steal from the Tamils but not from the Sinhalese. This is the reason they do not want any agreement and reconciliation between the Sinhalese and the Tamils and always come as party poopers to put a stop to it. ” what about us, we want lots of Tamil land to steal” they never had it fought for it but want to steal it from the Tamils and always spoil everything for them. It has always been their aim from the time they arrived as refugees from South India. Gradually everything from the Tamils, even their land and make an Islamic homeland for their refugee Immigrant fake Arab converted low caste Dravidian Indian Tamil community. At one time there was an agreement to take the border Sinhalese areas in the east and join it with the adjoining Sinhalese areas and the rest of the Tamil east to merge with the north. However these recent immigrant refugee party poopers howled and put a stop to it stating they will not by the king pins and cannot steal further land for an Islamic homeland like Pakistan/Bangladesh was carved from India. What homeland other than the religion they share a common language culture and the same Dravidian origins like the island’s Tamils and the Tamils have never forbidden them to practice Islam. It is they who create these religious problems. There was no Islamic rule or homeland in any part of Sri Lanka from ancient times. The island was Sinhalese and Tamil from ancient times. Buddhist and Hindu. Ruled by Sinhalese and Tamil kings only. The north and east is the land of the Tamils and the rest of the island the land of the Sinhalese. This is a historically proved facts and was recognised by the British the Dutch the Portuguese various agreements by the Sri Lankan government and Tamil parties like the BC pact the Dudley Chelvanayagam pace and lastly the 1987 international Indo/Sri Lankan. Nowhere in history or in the records of the European colonial powers or international agreements or Sri Lankan government agreements was a historical Muslim homeland ever spoken of or recognised, as it was never there. Now these recently migrated sly selfish backstabbing converted low caste fake Arab , Dravidian Muslim Tamil refugee immigrants from India are trying to claim this by stealing ethnically cleansed Tamil lands in the east with the help of a racist Sinhalese government and armed forces. Illegal Sinhalese migration, annexation of adjoining Sinhalese areas to the east, high Muslim birth rate and large scale ethnic cleansing and killing of Tamils in the east, have now mad the Tamils who until recently were a majority, a 40% minority in their own land, thereby emboldening these opportunistic recently migrated refugee backstabbers from South India to claim Tamil lands in the east for a Salafist/ISIS/Wahhabi Islamic homeland that will be overtly and covertly funded by the Gulf Arab states and Porkistan, to create chaos in the region

            • 1
              1

              I read Paul’s passionate comments with concern more than interest. I know many Tamils who feel this way and fear “today Batticaloa and Eastern Province, tomorrow Jaffna and the Northern Province”.

              I just read an article on the Comoros Islands off the Indian Ocean/East African Coast. While the Islands were the home of many races and religions for centuries, it has now become totally Islamised – the same fate of the boiling Maldives. I am not entirely against Islam as a religion. In Sri Lanka we have pious, peaceful and liberal Muslims, though silent and in the minority. But we are all against conspiracies to conquer the world and forcibly make it a totally Islamic world. Looks like the conscience of the world has gone through a sea-change in the past few months. It is just as well.

              Pandaranayagam

            • 1
              0

              Paul – Could you tell me about what proportion of Tamils share your views on the Muslims. Would it be over fifty per cent? – IH

  • 1
    21

    Quran ( copy of Jewish TORA) itself encourage murder and rape ….

    Easy loopholes to escape …from these crimes also in this book …..

    This fanatic sect started during 4th century and written on few 100 goat skins only in 6th century ….there would have been 10000s of omissions ……surprisingly today there are 1000 volumes about Quran ..how come???.

    German TV Last week telecasted a program me about Maldives Islands in the name of “Terrorist Paradise” soon Maldivians are going back to their fishing else starving.

    Maldives Islands today living because of non-muslims tourists but ban christmas celebration at resorts ..

    Brunei Sultan has banned Christmas celebration in Brunei …any violation will be punishable by 5 years prison.but his personal property Dorchester Hotel in London is celebration christmas what a joke?.

    Why these people are scared about other religions …something rotting among themselves..

    Saudi money is using to spread this hatred….but Maldivians today men and women enjoy drugs and liquor …

    So Islam only preach hatred ..terrorism ….masacare ..rape in the name of marrying kids…there is nothing about changing world and modernization …but Islam permit followers to use all inventions by infidels ..another joke ..

    Malaysia recently launched a halal Airline ..how is this joke ? No liquor…always chanting Quran …Funny this airline is launched by a Malaysian Hindu Couple ….cant stop laughing

    Fools haven’t realized that Emirates..Etihad..Qatar airlines offer unlimited liquor to passengers also on A 380 first class area there is a bar serviced by Muslim air hostess .not to mention most of 1st class passengers are religious Arabs ……another joke ..

    why the fanatic ulamaahs never protested this ..fearing their cut of quota ???

    Cheers

    • 3
      23

      cholan

      “Malaysia recently launched a halal Airline ..how is this joke ? No liquor…always chanting Quran …Funny this airline is launched by a Malaysian Hindu Couple ….cant stop laughing “

      It is called supply and demand.

      The Hindu couple saw brainwashed passengers who wanted “No liquor…always chanting Quran …” and are trying to meet the demand. If they don’t somebody will, and there will be competition.

      See what brainwashing can do? It can make people believe in anything and do anything.

      1, Believe man was born with sin, and therefore, had to be redeemed by the Son p God, who had to die for their sins.

      2. There is Hell, Heaven and purgatory.

      3. There is Satan, Iblis, Devil Mara etc.

      4. Just add yours..to this list..

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAxgnd8mYr0

      • 1
        21

        @ Amarasiri

        There are no hell and heaven…after death ..or 37 virgins waiting to embrace fanatics…

        Hell and Heaven both are in this world …some enjoy hell others enjoy heaven…..

        Islamic fanatsm with Saudi money has gone out of limit in multi culture ..multi ethnic Malaysia…

        and these Hindu couple as usual are intelligent…FYI …in racist Malaysia it is the Tamils who are majority in medical..accounting ..and law ..sectors simply by hard work….and also 2nd richest man there is also a Tamil who is giving loans to Malay majority government.. he he he ..

        With this FANATIC Islam soon Maldives Island and Malaysia are going to burn…like Syria…

        Cheers

        • 3
          24

          cholan

          “Hell and Heaven both are in this world …some enjoy hell others enjoy heaven…..”

          “With this FANATIC Islam soon Maldives Island and Malaysia are going to burn…like Syria…”

          Yes, they brainwash, brainwash and brainwash.

          The Amarasiri Hypothesis, not a Theory yet. is that the Wahhabis and their Clones, Salafis, Tsauheess, Talibans, Boko Haram, Deobandis, Al-Nusra etc. are all agents of the Devil, Satan, Iblis, aided Abetted and Funded by Saudi Wahhabi Money.

          Yes, they want to create Hell here on Earth for everybody, especially the Shia Muslims, Sufi Muslims, The Ahmedia Muslims, and other non-Wahhabis and people of other faiths, religions, as shown by ISIS and others.

          Unless the non-Wahhabi Muslims and others strep in and expose these Devil, Satan, Iblis following Wahhabis and their clones, yes they will create Hell here on Earth, just like they have created at other places, with the help pf the Great Satan (USA) and Small Satan ( Wahhabi Saudi Arabia).

          References in Support of Amarasiri Wahhabi Satan Hypothesis, (not yet a Theory).

          1. Hadith of Najd

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_of_Najd

          2. al-azhar cleric about wahabis/salafis

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAvWmZfGjTU

          3. Devil (Islam), Satan.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_(Islam)

          Iblis was proud and considered himself superior to Adam, since Adam was made from clay and Iblis from smokeless fire.[Quran 2:30] For this act of disobedience, God cursed him to Jahannam (Hell/Purgatory) for eternity, but gave him respite until the Day of Judgment, after Iblis requested it.[16] Iblis obtained permission from God and vowed that he would use this time to lead all men and women astray to Hell. In this way, he would prove humanity’s inferiority, and justify his act of defiance.For refusing to abide by the will of God, Iblis was cast out of Heaven, and thereafter he was called “Shaytan” (Satan).

          • 3
            22

            cholan

            Further Support for the Amarasiri Hypothesis on Wahhabism. as a Satanic Verion of Iblis, Devil.

            Wahhabism- a history of the origins of ISIS and present day terrorism.

            After every well covered ‘Islamic’ terrorist attack the same opposing narratives are played out before the mainstream media. There are those who seek to demonize the entire religion and do so by adding a pinch of false rationale; “it’s in their faith”, “it’s written in the Qu’ran” they say. Opposing them fiercely are those who say it’s just the extremists, the ‘Ku Klux Klan of Islam’, right? Omitted from any discussion, opinion piece, social media debate is the single most important word in this discussion -Wahhabism.

            http://affairstoday.co.uk/wahhabism-a-history-of-the-origins-of-isis-and-present-day-terrorism/

  • 1
    12

    [Edited out]

  • 1
    10

    I regret to say that Izeth has to do a lot more studying on the subject of Understanding Fundamentalism before he ventures on telling the reader about the subject. Bensen

    • 1
      8

      Dear Bensen Berner,

      Well, he hasn’t really begun telling us much yet! It looks as though he’s ponderously preparing to write a good many installments.

      I began responding to him only a few weeks ago; and this I must say: when he got a few details wrong, I found him very responsive. Also, he appears to be writing this because he feels there is a need for such a subject to be tackled. He has no way of contacting me direct (he doesn’t even know my name), but he has graciously acknowledged that, “I am informed by a reader, who has provided invaluable help by directing me to important material on the film in the internet . . .”

      I hope that you will wait for the next installment, and make detailed comments. The fact is that probably no one can make definitive statements on a subject of this nature.

      • 1
        0

        Sinhala Man – thanks for your “invaluable help” but you were mistaken on one point. Zinneman’s son was asked what was the response from the Quakers to High Noon and he replied that he had no idea. That was all.That had no bearing on the question whether Quakerism is important in the film or not.
        I have no intention of “ponderously” writing a good many installments on what is meant by fundamentalism. That will not be necessary because I have already done so,quite simply, in the above article. Some people try to meet the crises of transition by going back to the roots, to what they conceive of as the fundamentals of a religion. “It is that process that I regard as fundamentalism”.
        I will expand on that just a little here.”Fundamentalism” used to have a very specific meaning as applying to Christian sects that insisted, among other things, on a literal interpretation of the Bible.That meaning changed with the Iranian Revolution of 1979 because there was no insistence there on a literal interpretation of the Koran.It was rather an insistence on going back to what was conceived as the fundamentals of Islam. It was in that sense of going back to fundamentals that Karen Armstrong uses the term in her book Battle for God subtitled Fundamentalism in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The period covered is from 1492 to the present day.- IH

  • 0
    0

    Sinhala Man is a muslims, So what else he must do.

    • 1
      0

      Dear Jim softly,

      I’m not sure that I understand exactly what you are saying. I am as Sinhalese as can be, except that I’m also reasonably proficient in English.

      I’m NOT a Muslim, and I have already stated that like most others in the World today, I am more uncomfortable about some of the manifestations of “Islamism” than of almost any other religious group.

      However, I’m sure that by any standards, Izeth is a good man – even “saintly” – although that will be repudiated by him.

      We forget so easily:

      http://transcurrents.com/tamiliana/archives/546

      That is the way that we’ve been treating innocent children. No, it isn’t something gory that you will see – nothing that can’t be discussed with the entire family: but it what you should be aware of when you comment.

  • 1
    0

    Dear Izeth,

    Yes, guys like me were probably expecting too much; it is great that you have directed our attention to Quakerism and to the ballet “Appalachian Spring”, telling us also where we could find them.

    I think that you have also clearly indicated, through your own example, that there are Muslims who are peace-loving. There is a retired Professor of Sanskrit who feels that many in our country have forgotten a wonderful man who tried to get back to the fundamentals of Buddhism. Professor Palihawadana, who is actually older than even Izeth, says that he has once met the latter. Quite independently of that, he has rehashed an article on Dr E.W. Adikaram and published it in two parts yesterday and today, because he feels it a pity that few younger Sri Lankans have even heard of Dr Adikaram:

    http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=137773

    and the second part today:

    http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=137791

    This is part of the tragedy (in a sense) of the human condition. Insights are obtained by individuals, but how do we pass them on to the millions in the next generation? We have developed the technological means, but those same means lead to such a proliferation of rubbish that it all gets drowned in the plethora of commercialised exploitation. It was in this light that I sympathise with the man whom we have entrusted with the administration of our country:

    https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ada-derana-calls-president-maithripaka/

    He can ultimately be held responsible only for his own actions, but I think that having taken the heavy yoke upon himself, he will have to bear it for a few years more.

    I know little of political theory. To understand Marxism, and its aberration under Stalin, I’m the sort of guy who reads Orwell’s (very readable parable) “Animal Farm” rather than Marx’s “Das Kapital”.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm

    But we have people who have devoted their stupendous intellects to the study of Marxism, but do we listen to the benign exposition of their thinking?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spBXxT5dVf0

    Note that the comments made, for the most part, are ruder than the majority of those made when a Muslim writes something!

    It’s the fourth anniversary of the founding of his Party (of which I am NOT a member – yet!), and, in response to an sms, followed by a chat, I’m just preparing to go along to the New Town Hall (that’s a smallish place on Greenpath, isn’t it?). Last year there were just about a hundred gathered there, but most were people of quality – many poor, it is true!

    So, it goes for many ideologies; thanks Izeth, for the insights that you have given us. You are indeed heroic to be continuing to write with such discipline. May he blessings of Allah be upon you!

  • 0
    0

    To all idol worshippers, throw your idols which won’t benefit you
    In this life or here after. To the aithist did you create your self or
    Did you get evolved from a monkey, if so why can’t we see now
    Half monkey half man specimens.
    Islam is the only way, Allah has decreed,
    Be it Buddhism,Hinduism,aithist and all idol worshipping Christians and Jews
    Your abode is in hell.
    Taking partners to the creator by praying at idols leads to hell.
    Learn about Islam , become a Muslim.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 300 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically shut off on articles after 10 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.