Sufism: The sweetest poison of them all

PM Modi recently went to Iran and went over the top praising Sufism for teaching love and brotherhood. Sadly, historical facts completely refute his assertion as Sufism did more damage to native faiths than any other form of Islam by selling the poison called Islam by honey coating it. Sufism was not a real sect but a small cooked up sect which was artificially manufactured to serve as part of Islam’s diplomatic outreach. There was no Sufi emperor in India because there was never a Sufi emperor in the history of humanity. It was simply a propaganda department created to whitewash the brutal image of Islam. Even ‘secular’ Akbar slaughtered 6 lakh Hindus while still being under the influence of Sufi Saint Mounundin Chisti.

Have you ever seen photographs of American soldiers distributing food to poor Afghans? That’s basically what Sufism was- an obfuscation of the invader’s real intent. Do you ever wonder why there is only American empire and puppet nations but no such thing as ‘Kingdom of philanthropy’ anywhere on the planet, despite seeing so many images of American philanthropy? No- but why? Because that would be plain stupid. It is the same with Sufism. It is not real but only an attempt at obscurantism. It was just a medieval way to conduct diplomacy.

Just a few months ago, a popular Sufi announced a reward for the head of Kamlesh Tiwari. If that is love and brotherhood taught by Sufism, then everyone is better off without it. Sufism is nothing but cloak for Wahhabis to be wolf in sheep’s clothing. Below is important historical information on how Sufis accompanied invading armies of Islam in India by Ram Ohri and Purushootam:

  1. Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti of Ajmer had accompanied the army of Shihabuddin Ghori and finally settled down at Ajmer in the year 1233 A.D.
  2. Khawaja Qutubuddin came to Delhi in the year 1236 in the train of Shihabuddin Ghori and stayed on to further the cause of Islam.
  3. Sheikh Nizamuddin Auliya of Dargah Hazrat Nizamuddin came to Delhi in the year 1335 accompanying a contingent of the Muslim
  4. Sheikh Faridudin came to Pattan (now in Pakistan) in the year 1265.

Additionally, the famous Sufi Shihabuddin Suhrawardy of Baghdad was brought to India for carrying out the missionary work of conversions by Bahauddin Zakariya of Multan several decades after the Hindu ruler had been defeated and his kingdom laid waste after large scale plunder and manslaughter.

The well known authority on Sufism, S.A.A. Rizvi has recorded in his book, ‘A History of Sufism in India’ that Nizamuddin Auliya used to unhesitatingly accept enormous gifts given to him by Khusraw Barwar which implied that the Auliya was unconcerned with the source of the gift, provided it was paid in cash. Yet the Auliya was a firm believer in the need for a Muslim’s unquestioned loyalty and obedience to the Ulema. As reiterated by K.A. Nizami, Auliya used to preach that the unbeliever is the doomed denizen of Hell. In his Khutba he would leave no one in doubt that Allah has created Paradise for the Believers and Hell for the infidels “in order to repay the wicked for what they have done”.

It is claimed in Jawahar-i-Faridi that the Khwaja had dried the two holy lakes of Annasagar and Pansela by the magical heat of Islamic spiritual power. He is even stated to have made the idol of the Hindu temple near Annasagar recite the Kalma. The Khwaja had a burning desire to destroy the rule of the brave Rajput king, Prithiviraj Chauhan, so much so that he ascribed the victory of Muhammad Ghori in the battle of Tarain entirely to his own spiritual prowess and declared that “We have seized Pithaura alive and handed him over to the army of Islam”. [Source: Siyar’l Auliya, cited by Rizvi on page 116 of ‘A History of Sufism in India’].

It was almost a taboo for Sufis, the so-called saints, to accept a Hindu ascending the throne of any kingdom during the heydays of the Muslim rule. In an example narrated by S.A.A. Rizvi on page 37 of his well researched book, The Wonder That Was India (Vol.II, Rupa & Co, 1993, New Delhi) it is pointed out that when the powerful Bengali warrior, King Ganesha captured power in Bengal in the year 1415 A.D.

Ibrahim Shah Sharqi attacked his kingdom at the request of outraged Ulema and numerous Sufis of Bengal. In the ensuing strife, the leading Sufi of Bengal, Nur Qutb-i-Alam, interceded and secured a political agreement to the benefit of the Muslim community and satisfaction of Sufis.

Under dire threat, King Ganesha was forced to abdicate his throne in favour of his 12 year old son, Jadu, who was converted to Islam and proclaimed as Sultan Jalaluddin – to the satisfaction of the Sufi masters. Similarly Sultan Ahmed Shah of Gujarat (1411-42), though a practitioner of Sufi philosophy, was a die hard iconoclast who took delight in destroying temples, as stated in the same tome, by S.A.A. Rizvi. The Sultan also used to force the Rajput chieftains to marry their daughters to him so that they would become outcastes in their own community. And the endgame of the Sultan could as well be that perhaps some of the outcaste Rajputs might then opt to become Muslims.

No Muslim, nor any Sufi, has ever agreed to worship in a Hindu temple, nor make obeisance before the images of Hindu Gods and Goddesses. Unfortunately due to relentless colonization of the Hindu mind during 1000 years long oppressive Muslim rule, the Hindu masses till date have failed to realize that the so-called Sufi philosophy of religious harmony is a one-way street. This trend of Hindus praying at tombs and dargahs has been nurtured by the strong undercurrent of belief in spiritualism among Hindu masses, even educated classes. That is the crux of the matter.

The west has done an interesting experiment to undermine Islam which a lot of people haven’t realized. They started promoting Muslim pop-culture icons as a means to override the conventional message of political Islam with the hip version of modern Islam. There are youtube channels dedicated to designer Hijabs, halal restaurants, halal make up brands and other cool stuff, which are being promoted behind the scenes by the agencies. It’s basically the promotion of capitalism through other means. Basically, they smartly tried to strip Muslims of their political thought to reduce the idea of being a Muslim to simply appearance.

By promoting these hip Muslim icons like Zidane they are providing a template to Muslim youth to emulate in such a way that being a Muslim is nothing more than simply roaming around in the cosplay of a muslim, while simultaneously installing the western DNA in their brains. It worked fine for a while then it backfired when these same hip icons reverted back to echoing the voices of political Islam.

Compare this:

With this:

Moral of the story is that west is only deluding themselves by thinking that these people will change. The doctrine of ideological subversion or ‘Disha Bhool’ that west is trying doesn’t work on people whose philosophy is like ‘Kutte ki poonch’ i.e. dog’s tail.

West is giving them education, food, electricity, roads, respect and accepting them as their own. But it doesn’t matter to these people, no matter whichever country they have immigrated to, as they will always hold the opinion that the Islamic society which they came from is superior to the one where they are presently living, simply by virtue of being Islamic.

Don’t confuse an ideology’s fate with the number of its current adherents. The Mongols were non-Muslim and yet they led to the spread of Islam because the descendants of Chengiz Khan adopted Islam. Same way, conventionally declared Muslim nations might be under siege but the ideology is spreading itself elsewhere. Check the statistics of adherents who have taken up Islam in the western world. It’s not alarming yet but it’s showing a growing trend as Islam uses pop culture icons to lure liberals to the religion by making it sound hip. It’s not uncommon to see western women embrace it like a fashion statement.

Islamic pop culture liberalism is to the west what Sufism was to India when it was invaded. These are obscurantist tactics being used to market an ideology while shielding the underlying core ideology from criticism. The Sufi saints who came to India existed at the same time when Akbar was slaughtering Hindus, but Hindus couldn’t figure it out because they were mesmerized by the Sufi mystics while being butchered by Ghazi Muslims. Same way the US today is mesmerized by the liberal ideology (same way as Indian liberals are mesmerized by ‘philanthropic’ Christian NGOs). The ideology has metamorphosed into another form (liberalism), buying time for conventional Islam to regroup, organize and grow. Combine the number of converts with the numbers that Muslim immigrants in western countries are contributing by breeding more momins and you have a very grim picture.


Think about why the PM of Britain invites Sri Sri for a spiritual event in his country. Is it out of reverence for Sri Sri? Obviously not. It’s because they are worried about the attrition rate of people leaving Christianity to join Islam given its growing influence. In that context, realpolitik dictates that if the west cannot control the attrition then they would rather let the dissidents move towards Hinduism than Islam, just like Ambedkar asked people to move towards Buddhism instead of Abrahamic faiths. Check this:

It is a fact that Islam is growing rapidly in the West. In the U.S. alone the number of Muslims has risen dramatically, from about 10,000 in 1900 to 3 million or more in 1991 (some authorities say 4.5 million). Most of this growth is due to recent immigration and the high birth rate of Muslims (5 children per family on average), rather than to conversion. Still, the number of those who convert to Islam is significant. In the U.S., the majority are African-American (a third of all Muslims according to most authorities), but there have also been significant numbers of Anglos to convert as well, many of them well-educated.

What is motivating people to turn to Islam? A recent article in Christianity Today  reported that in the U.S., the average age of those converting to Islam (31) is about twice that for conversion to Christian faith (age 16). It listed five main reasons given for becoming Muslim: Islam’s doctrine is simple and rational, all believers are equal, it is a practical religion, and lacks a priesthood. These “reasons” merely parrot the arguments Muslim apologists use to propagate Islam.




India too has its own pop culture where Khans are promoted as suave modern Muslims through Bollywood. But every now and then they show their true colours by bashing Hindu traditions and paganism. Given these parallelisms one can easily identify the connection between Muslim pop culture of today with Sufism of the medieval period. Both are equally dangerous as they fool the regular folks by selling peaceful image of Muslims thus lowering their guard against the core ideology of Islam, which wants to convert or obliterate all the kafirs.