Reddit mentions of The Sufis

Absolutely, Shah is amazing.
My recommendations are Learning How to Learnand Caravan of dreams.

But, The Sufis is probably a better introduction.

>Well, if you're going to ignore all Christian beliefs besides the "greatest hits" then please call that out.

I do. Often. Do you think I should make it a signature thingie on all of my posts?

> I'm usually much more interested in the deeper thought and reasoning and what kind of religion that tends to create. Universalism, Quakers, Sufis, Kabbalists, Gnostics, the many esoteric/initiatory traditions of Hinduism, etc. These are the sorts of religious beliefs that I think are worthy of deeper debate and discussion.

That's great. One of my favorite books is ["The Sufis" by Idries Shah](
http://www.amazon.com/The-Sufis-Idries-Shah/dp/0385079664). But the topic is Christianity.

>That's not a false dichotomy. At best it's a failure to include larger swaths of mainstream Christians, but the dichotomy is very real.

OK. It's a false dichotomy in that it fails to include larger swaths of mainstream Christians.

"Without demolishing religious schools (madrassahs) and minarets and without abandoning the beliefs and ideas of the medieval age, restriction in thoughts and pains in conscience will not end. Without understanding that unbelief is a kind of religion, and that conservative religious belief a kind of disbelief, and without showing tolerance to opposite ideas, one cannot succeed."

• Rumi
  
  "The truly religious man does not embrace a religion; and he who embraces one has no religion."
  
  
• Kahlil Gibran

>If the ulema does not do his job then the religion of the state loses support,

Then apparently the ulema's job is to advocate sharia'h because the ulema enjoys significant popular support.

I can easily divorce religion from the equation, as you suggest, and call the movement we are talking about "Arab nationalism" but that is not what the movement calls itself. And I fully understand that political grievances can create Islamic radicalism but Wahabism and Salafism precede U.S. hegemony by a century or two. I can even concede your point about US interference in the region and it's effects. But what do you propose as a solution? We have already seen what the Arab street will do when left to it's own devices (i.e. the Taliban, Iran and the election in Algeria). Wherever it came from and whatever one wants to call it, Islamic Radicalism or Arab nationalism, it's not acceptable to US interests. When the clerics and the ummah start calling for freedom of speech, and equality for all people regardless of gender, religion or sexual preference then I will start to support them. But not before. BTW, I am not exactly a Christian in the traditional sense. In fact I am a great admirer of Sufism in some respects. One of the greatest influences upon my world view is a book called The Sufis by Idries Shah.