What the hey. I was wrong. You’re not a troll. You’re simply a piece of shit. Not that there’s very much functional difference between troll and you, though.
Left off something to that jerk, bldysabba: Don’t even try to pretend that post #176 isn’t trolling.
You do realize it’s possible to support one but not the other.
What? Next you’ll be saying there’s a difference between Sharia and Fiqh.
Here’s the story of how a user on the SDMB slashdotted Wikipedia. 
Heh.
Um, Tamerlane was a Muslim, and justified (for example) the sack of Delhi on explicitly religious grounds.
A very large percent of American Catholics (for example) are totally unaware of what the Catholic Church teaches about, say, the eucharist. Why would you assume all Indonesian Muslims know the content of sharia law?
That Tamerlane was a Muslim has already been pointed out more than once, thank you. (Try to keep up, eh?)
Well, was he an insanely fanatical Shia Muslim, or a bloodthirsty jihadist Sunni Muslim? Makes a difference, you know.
It wasn’t. I was making fun of you for your knee jerk reactions to a reasoned and reasonable viewpoint about Islam and the hardline(mainly Salafist) influence on it that is held by a large number of well informed people. If you think that’s the same thing as trolling, you have just as much shit for brains(on this issue at least) as I’ve come to suspect since we first interacted on this topic.
I know you weren’t seriously asking, but Tamerlane’s specific religious beliefs vis-a-vis the Sunni-Shia split were apparently the subject of some debate, and if his skull-stacking descendent (sugar skulls, of course) knows something about it, I’d love to hear. AFAIK he was taught by Hanafi Sunnis, like most other Central Asians, but I have no idea how he identified later.
Jihad is also a Shia thing but its violent expression is not as prominent in their histories. Twelver Shiism in particular tended to produce more quietist traditions, until Khomeini. The Assassins saw what they were doing as jihad but they mellowed out after the Mongols almost destroyed them.
The Pew surveycaptures this by asking Muslims who support sharia law generally whether they specifically support various elements thereof. So it’s not a gotcha game of asking, “Do you support sharia law?” “Yes.” “Aha! So you therefore support stoning adulterers!”
In the case of Indonesia, there’s lots of support among Muslims for making sharia the law of the land (72%), but among that subset of Muslims, only 18% support the death penalty for leaving Islam. In Afghanistan, 99% of Muslims support sharia, and of those, supposedly 79% support death for leaving Islam. If the numbers are even to be believed, evidently Indonesian Muslims and Afghan Muslims have very different attitudes and very different beliefs about what constitutes sharia law.
No doubt the extreme variances across countries tell you that these attitudes have more to do with local conditions than Islam per se.
My representative, the Hon. Keith Ellison, is a Lutheran sort of Muslim, spends more time on Garrison Keillor than al-Zawahri. But now I know beneath his placid hot-dish eating exterior is a boiling cauldron of rage and fury, just biding his time as he plots some outrage. Either that, or he is exactly what he appears to be. Hmmm. Tough call…
Most evidence seems to point to him being at least nominally Sunni throughout his life, probably with a strong slant towards folky Naqshbandi Sufism then becoming current in the area, infused with a wee bit of residual Mongol shamanism. The controversy arises because he had a spurious genealogy created showing descent from Ali and the fact that he employed Shi’a troops as well as Sunnis. But his official religious counselor was a Hanafi Sunni, Abd al-Jabbar Khwarazmi. Less convincingly ( because he was an opportunist that loved excuses ) but still tellingly, he occasionally waged campaigns against Shi’a potentates based on a claim of defending Sunnism. The above by the way pretty much paraphrased from Beatrice Forbes-Manz.
Basically he was most likely a conventionally religious man who didn’t really give a crap about the intricacies of sects and theology, but used religious justifications when it suited him. Much like Nadir Shah ( that other sacker of Delhi ), who was probably raised nominally Shi’a but leaned heavily on Sunni troops and as far as anyone can tell couldn’t have given a spit’s difference between the two. He actually tried to normalize Twelver Shi’ism as just another Sunni madhab ( to be called Ja’fari ) through a combination of Ottoman mediation and a cracking down on what were regarded as the more offensive traditions of Shi’ism ( to Sunni ideologues ). A quite fascinating approach, though probably always doomed to failure even if Nadir hadn’t gone insane in his final years and gotten himself assassinated.
Too late to add quote:
In religion as in other aspects of his life Temur was above all an opportunist: his religion frequently served to further his aims, but almost never to circumscribe his actions. His attitudes towards men of religion is well summarized in Jean Aubin’s felicitous phrase, as a mixture of “intellectual curiosity and superstitious prudence.”
The Rise and Rule of Tamerlane by Beatrice Forbes-Manz, 1989 Cambridge University Press.
Particular Sunni Muslim communities do not necessarily have strong affiliations with the traditional schools of fiqh (madhab) and in any case, traditionally speaking there is a distinction to make between Islamic law and Islamic policy. Variance on the ground doesn’t mean that ‘Islam’ is not playing a role but rather that it is very flexible.
Ironically, in order to assert their authority and de-legitimize those they call terrorists, governments have increasingly turned to the elite scholarly tradition, imposing ‘orthodox’ authority on local groups and demanding conformity to their constructed ideal of Islam.
Tamerlane - Thanks! Dabbling with the Naqshbandi sounds appropriate for him, at least in that time period.
The LRA are at least as Muslim as they are Christian.
Cite?
Your skepticism is justified. Although the LRM/A is not affiliated with any mainstream Christian movement and I don’t doubt that there may be individuals who are originally and/or nominally Muslim associated with it, there’s no question that the LRM/A ideology, insofar as it is “religious”, is rooted in identification with African Christian and indigenous beliefs rather than Muslim ones.
Specifically, the blend of missionary Christianity and indigenous beliefs in the “Holy Spirit Movement” of Alice Lakwena was the justification for the original formation in the mid-1980s of the so-called “Holy Spirit Mobile Forces”. The militants following former altar boy Joseph Kony adapted this “crusading” mysticism to a more specifically Acholi-nationalist terror movement, the “Lord’s Resistance Movement” or “Lord’s Resistance Army”. Its cult motifs include the Ten Commandments as well as indigenous spirits or deities.
Of course, the LRM/A has no problem with attacking/abducting/slaughtering victims who are Christian or associated with Christian institutions, just as radical-Islamist terrorists are perfectly happy to attack Muslims who don’t support their violent fanaticism.