Odd reporting on Pakistan from the NYT

The April 4 New York Times reported a suicide bombing against Sufis at a Sufi shrine in the Punjab region of Pakistan. At least 42 people were killed and over 100 wounded. Leaving aside for the moment this horrible act, and the despairing thoughts one has for people who live in such a horrible country where Muslim fanatics murder everyone who doesn’t share their beliefs, the story contains this confusing passage:

The attack on Sunday was seen as another attempt by militants to exacerbate the ideological divides that exist within different schools of Sunni Islam.

Deobandis are a puritanical branch of Sunni Islam to which most of the country’s militant groups belong. Followers of the Barelvi sect, on the other hand, believe in mysticism, revere saints and shrines, and are considered to be tolerant and accommodating of other faiths.

Though no accurate statistics are available, it is estimated that more than 75 percent of Pakistan’s population adheres to the Barelvi school of thought, which follows many Sufi practices. Punjab, the country’s most prosperous and populated province, has a Barelvi majority. Hard-line Deobandis consider Barelvis heretics.

On the face of it, that last paragraph is absurd. Three-quarters of the population of Pakistan, the most fanatical Muslim nation on earth, are quasi-Sufis? Perhaps a knowledgeable reader can ‘splain this to us.

- end of initial entry -

Sage McLaughlin writes:

Your skepticism at that NYT article seems warranted. Reading between the lines of that last paragraph, you can easily come up with two things:

First, “no accurate statistics are available,” meaning we have no idea whether Barelvi mystics actually predominate in Pakistan. Second, that “it is estimated” that more than 75 percent of Pakistani Muslims are not Deobandi. Well, naturally, since the only people doing the estimating are liberal academics. But since we have no accurate statistics, one immediately senses that “it is estimated” that this is the case because it is ideologically attractive to Central Asian Studies professors to claim (even in the absence of real evidence) that it is the case.

At university, I studied Central Asia under some of the world’s foremost authorities on the region, and I can tell you that they were just about as politically radical and intellectually blinkered a gang of leftist ideologues as you could hope to meet. Notwithstanding their encyclopedic (though generally valueless) knowledge of Central Asian history, I would not trust any one of them to come up with a fair “estimate” of Muslim radicalism in any single location where the facts were not definitely known. This is particularly true where “no accurate statistics” are available, and we are fed estimates which are at odds with common experience and observation.

What is just as likely is that the words “Sufi mystic” conjure in the ignorant liberal mind an image of a Muslim so estranged from Islamic orthodoxy and sharia law that he is barely distinguishable from a mountain-dwelling Buddhist monk. Even if 80 percent of Muslims in Pakistan are under the tutelage of Barelvi sheikhs, the conclusion I would draw from that is that Barelvi spirituality probably isn’t the infidel-loving universal bear hug that Westerners would like to think. Like you said—this is Pakistan we’re talking about here.

April 8

Clark Coleman writes:

I think the New York Times should have phrased it this way, in keeping with the Pastor Jones story:

“Sufis have mystical beliefs considered heretical by Deobandis. Barelvis also have some mystical beliefs and are tolerant of Sufis, which forced Deobandis to attack the Barelvis. The Barelvis and Sufis, therefore, have blood on their hands.”

Oops: I forgot that Barelvis and Sufis, as with Deobandis, cannot be moral actors, so my analogy fails.

April 9

Roland D. writes:

You asked: “How is this reconciled with the statement that 3/4 of Pakistanis subscribe to a sufi-like belief system?”

It can’t in fact be reconciled because the statement about a “Sufi-like belief system” is a lie. About 80 percent of Pakistanis are Sunni, 15 percent Shia. [LA notes: “Sufi-like belief system” was my phrase characterizing the Times’ description of the Barelvi school of thought.]

If there are any Sufis at all in Pakistan, they’d best keep their heads down, else they might wake up losing said heads.

LA replies:

So then the Times passage which I questioned, which said

Though no accurate statistics are available, it is estimated that more than 75 percent of Pakistan’s population adheres to the Barelvi school of thought, which follows many Sufi practices. Punjab, the country’s most prosperous and populated province, has a Barelvi majority. Hard-line Deobandis consider Barelvis heretics.

is simply false?

How could the Times make such a gross error? It would almost be as bad as saying that Pakistan is a 75 percent Christian country.

Roland replies:

Barelvi is a subcurrent of Sunni theology, and it shares some common general themes with Sufism. Lots of the Sunnis within Pakistan do in fact accept Barelvi precepts. The differences between Barelvi and Deobandi are reminiscent of the disputes of the early Christian Church regarding the triune nature of God, the divinity of Christ, the dual nature of Christ, and so forth.

But it’s important to understand what Barelvi is not. It’s not a bunch of happy, go-lucky, grinning, hashish-smoking Sufi whirling dervishes. It’s basically some of the very abstract general precepts of Sufi thought, plus beheadings.

So, what the Times wrote is factually true. They’re using this fact out of context to try and create an impression that Pakistand is full of friendly, lovable semi-Sufis.

Daniel S. writes:

The notion that Sufis or Barlevi Muslims are some who more peaceful and tolerant is a lot of nonsense. It is based on the faulty premise that anything less militant than the Deobandi Muslims (who spawned the Taliban) is moderate. The radical Muslim that assassinated Pakistani politician Salmaan Taseer for criticizing Pakistan’s blasphemy laws is a Barlevi and received praise from Barlevi clerics for his jihad-assassination. As for Sufi thought in general, it is just as pro-jihad as other currents within Islam. The notion that Sufi and Barlevi Muslims are some how moderate or peaceful, simply because they are less aggressive than the Taliban, is a pure wishful thinking.


Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 07, 2011 09:50 AM | Send
    

Email entry

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):