From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 1 02:47:22 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Suriya Osman) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 09:47:22 +0800 Subject: [Tariqas] Ways of Dealing with the Wahhabis References: Message-ID: <3B16F42A.6F24E786@pd.jaring.my> Dear Muhammad, SalamAlaikum! Do you think that one can invite everybody to be a sufi or to do zikr or to join a Tariqa? regards Suriya muhammad nassar wrote: there are different techniques of dhikr according to waht order one follows. this also means that joining an order is important. reaping the fruit of all the previous efforts requires that one have a true sheikh with a true spiritual linkage to one of the aqtab or the prophet salla Allahu alaihi wa sallam himself. moreover doing all these things within the framework of a tariqa gives the members of the group a sense of belonging; thus they become themselves active in the probagation of the principles of the true path and the repelling of the counter, perverted view. Now I would like to know what you think about these ideas. From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 1 06:59:43 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ibrahim Gamard) Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:59:43 -0700 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: ecstasy teachings References: <200105311148.f4VBm3Ym014709@dns1.stderr.org> Message-ID: <3B172F45.86552EB5@redshift.com> Dear David, As-salaamu `alaykum, You wrote: >Ecstacy IS for kids ... why settle when Allah is "as close as the jugular?" >Love only love, Mevlevi Semanzen, David Isaacs. Delightful response. May Allah (swt) bless you in all ways! Ibrahim Gamard > From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 1 08:18:16 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 08:18:16 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] BIRDS & BUTTERFLIES Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010601081414.01e68070@pop3.britishlibrary.net> ¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø Birds & Butterflies EdJason@mail.com http://pages.britishlibrary.net/lobster/bb/ ¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø Hello all you Star Gazers :-) We are developing a new project to promote Birds and Butterflies IN YOUR GARDEN ON YOUR WINDOW SILL . . . near you anyway :-) Come by our web site To say HI :-) Promote your project in our GUEST BOOK and check out the INSTANT messaging FORUM - that you can set up in seconds for YOUR PROJECT At the moment we are totally web-based . . . So really who would not want more BIRDS & BUTTERFLIES? our Web Site Again: http://pages.britishlibrary.net/lobster/lobster/ Ed Jason :-) From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 1 22:37:23 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 23:37:23 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Ways of Dealing with the Wahhabis Message-ID: wa alaikum as-salam Suriya YOu wrote: Do you think we can invite everybody to be a sufi or to do zikr or to join a tariqa? As far as invitation is concerned the asnwer is yes everybody can be invited since they don't invite themselves; we invite them. their 'can-ness' is not involved here since they can't do anything about being invited by others. I know you'll say this is not what you meant. what you probably mean is: Do you think everybody can become a sufi? the answer is yes and no. what we are after is getting back to a stage when wahhabism did not exist, when sufis were almost unanimously accepted as the spritual vanguard of Islam. so if sufism is not the aim, acceptance of sufism should be the aim. in other words if we don't have everybody acting like a sufi, we should try to have everybody regarding sufis as the true people of Allah and not kuffar. on the other hand the sufis draw a distinction between a sufi and a mutaswwif. a sufi is roughly someone who has reached his desired destination; a mutaswwif is someone who is still trying and may or may never each his goal but never ceases to believe in the validity of his quest. Yet a sufi da‘iya should not proceed from the idea that sufism can never be for everyone. he should rather work on the assumption that everybody should become a sufi becasue this is the right thing. i don't go for what i might term the probagational complacency of some sufis. i am after all speaking from experience. the most important thing is that a probgator should be sincere to his call, patient and learned. sufi call is like anything else in this world: it has to be planned, even based on statistics, sociology and even feasibility studies.Tawfiq,then, is something that we should leave to Allah. Thanks Muhammad Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 2 00:16:46 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (David Isaacs) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 16:16:46 -0700 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Ways of Dealing with the Wahhabis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Yo! Muhammad dude! What in Gods name are you talking about? It surely isn't any sufism that I have ever encountered in books or in person here in the usa. Of course we are just speaking of the work introduced by hazrat inayat kahn- thats about the last century-but even so...you should have heard of it by now. and sufism , while in many ways is rooted in islam, i have never heard it called the "spiritual vangard of same". And "becoming a sufi" does require time, intention, direction and a teacher, not to mention being "ready". realize that sufism does not care if you approve of it or not...thats not what it is about. And it certainly is not about inviting anybody. when the student is ready, the teacher will appear. this is not a proselytizing process. and needing to be planned/supported by statistics etc. where did yo get this from? who told you this ??? this truly has all the markers of really being confused on the concept. And as for wahhabism...the only place I have encountered it is on this LIST. Reassess what you're saying my brother. Love, only love, Davidi. -----Original Message----- From: tariqas-admin@stderr.org [mailto:tariqas-admin@stderr.org]On Behalf Of muhammad nassar Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 2:37 PM To: tariqas@dns1.stderr.org Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Ways of Dealing with the Wahhabis wa alaikum as-salam Suriya YOu wrote: Do you think we can invite everybody to be a sufi or to do zikr or to join a tariqa? As far as invitation is concerned the asnwer is yes everybody can be invited since they don't invite themselves; we invite them. their 'can-ness' is not involved here since they can't do anything about being invited by others. I know you'll say this is not what you meant. what you probably mean is: Do you think everybody can become a sufi? the answer is yes and no. what we are after is getting back to a stage when wahhabism did not exist, when sufis were almost unanimously accepted as the spritual vanguard of Islam. so if sufism is not the aim, acceptance of sufism should be the aim. in other words if we don't have everybody acting like a sufi, we should try to have everybody regarding sufis as the true people of Allah and not kuffar. on the other hand the sufis draw a distinction between a sufi and a mutaswwif. a sufi is roughly someone who has reached his desired destination; a mutaswwif is someone who is still trying and may or may never each his goal but never ceases to believe in the validity of his quest. Yet a sufi da‘iya should not proceed from the idea that sufism can never be for everyone. he should rather work on the assumption that everybody should become a sufi becasue this is the right thing. i don't go for what i might term the probagational complacency of some sufis. i am after all speaking from experience. the most important thing is that a probgator should be sincere to his call, patient and learned. sufi call is like anything else in this world: it has to be planned, even based on statistics, sociology and even feasibility studies.Tawfiq,then, is something that we should leave to Allah. Thanks Muhammad Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 2 07:07:48 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 02:07:48 EDT Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Ways of Dealing with the Wahhabis Message-ID: salaam alaikum davidi, you seem to live within your own dream world. somehow you have managed to take sufism out of its historical and ACTUAL place within Islam, and made it soemthign new, APART from Islam. It is not some mysterious, other than 'thing'. it is THE mysticism of Islam. You say a teacher will just "appear". For the vast ammount of the Muslim world this has never been the case. Some teachers wander searching for students, other students wander seeking a teacher. But most of all, each village/town/city had an Order that people in that area would be a part of (as there standard islamic practise. If we turn Sufism into some random "miracle' waiting to happen the a select few, then what will become of the Islam that is left for all the others? And where do you live that you have been so lucky not to run into wahabiya? they are swarming in just about every muslim community in the world (except for Iran, hamdu'lillah)... I suggest you wake up and take a look at the real world around you. wa salaam shahid In a message dated 6/1/01 4:19:06 PM, whirlderv@ap.net writes: << Yo! Muhammad dude! What in Gods name are you talking about? It surely isn't any sufism that I have ever encountered in books or in person here in the usa. Of course we are just speaking of the work introduced by hazrat inayat kahn- thats about the last century-but even so...you should have heard of it by now. and sufism , while in many ways is rooted in islam, i have never heard it called the "spiritual vangard of same". And "becoming a sufi" does require time, intention, direction and a teacher, not to mention being "ready". realize that sufism does not care if you approve of it or not...thats not what it is about. And it certainly is not about inviting anybody. when the student is ready, the teacher will appear. this is not a proselytizing process. and needing to be planned/supported by statistics etc. where did yo get this from? who told you this ??? this truly has all the markers of really being confused on the concept. And as for wahhabism...the only place I have encountered it is on this LIST. Reassess what you're saying my brother. Love, only love, Davidi. >> From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 2 07:36:58 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (David Isaacs) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 23:36:58 -0700 Subject: [Tariqas] Article on Wahhabism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: -----Original Message----- From: tariqas-admin@stderr.org [mailto:tariqas-admin@stderr.org]On Behalf Of muhammad nassar Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 1:01 AM To: tariqas@dns1.stderr.org Subject: [Tariqas] Article on Wahhabism Dearest Brother Muhammad: I too regret that for you the word "love" reeks of Christian pacifism. To me it merely points inexorably to the 85,000 verses attributed to Mevlana Jelaluddin Rumi, the "Sultan of Love" and the saints and masters who have sustained that path for me for over 700 years. And I truly wonder what Christianity has to do with this discussion. The art of the "big Lie" has been used successfully before in my lifetime. The practitioners nearly destroyed the known world - your might remember them-Goebbels, Goering and Hitler. What is it about Islam that makes its practitioners so gullible that we face spiritual extinction again? I urge you to guard your heart my brother, don't forget to breathe too because you attribute things to comments that were never made as you interpret them. You might even say that in your "fight against ignorance" you are fallingn into the path of those who have been led astray. By all means, follow your heart, expend your energy constructively to promote your beliefs, pray fervently and often and watch what your're doing. Your comments don't generate confidence as I read them that you have any battle plan other than being reactive. I look forward to your considered actionable advice in regard to this issue. May Allah grant you the foresight to accomplish your ends in peace. davidi Shahid refers to the fact that the prophet did not hate anybody but still he fought against ignorance and destructiveness. I could not agree more. So to everyone who talks about love as such, I am sorry to say that the word love reeks of Christian pacifism. Shall we love the Wahhabis until they take the whole Muslim world by storm? Do we not have a duty towards those who haven't been 'salafized' to protect them from salafism? For me any call for loving the Wahhabis as such, for keeping a low profile as activists is just to withdraw from the field at the crucial moment. I am not only defending Islam or unknowing Muslims by fighting against wahhabism, I am also defending my very existence. I am a social being and I need to share my Sufism with fellow-sufis. If these fellow-Sufis are extinct, just as they have been made in some places, I might as well stop being a Sufi at all. You might say that your practice of what you think is true does not depend on other people practising ! it. I say, again, I am a social being. If one person can do without companions, another cannot, can they? So now why don't we all, if we are really concerned about this religion and about the greatest human achievement in history done at the hand of the great Sufis and supported by the infinite gifts that Allah has given them, we don't we all do something about it rather than tell those who try to fight that they are imitating the Sufis. For by the same token Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, abul-Hassan al-Ash'ari and al-Maturidi ought not to have fought against the aberrations of the mu'tazilites, the mushabiha, the khawarij etc. what a nice solution that brings the truth of this life to nice end. The prophet was the mercy of Allah to everybody including the unbelievers; but he fought them at the same time. He did not hate them in order to make the word of Allah supreme. Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 2 03:39:25 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 03:39:25 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Ways of Dealing with the Wannabis In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010602031939.00aa1560@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >And as for wahhabism...the only place I have encountered it is on this LIST. >Reassess what you're saying my brother. Love, only love, Davidi. Dear Friends of the Circle of Lies, Peace (ha, why do I even bother) Jihad! Talking of Islam as the One religion that we all know is the Truth (except for the heretic Wallabies, Sunis, Shites, Amendy, Dervishes and Uncle Ayotallah Sulman Rusty an' allah) I have some questions: Why did the Angel listening Prophet decide that Mary mother of Isa was a Virgin, when this was Christian propaganda based on mistranslation? Why did the Koran have to be put in a different order from the chronological? Is there a chronological version that shows Gods increasing maturity as Mohammed develops his ability to listen? Why are women given the same options as men by a lot of secular and non-moslem societies? I do not think I would want to be a thief, let alone a woman in some merciful religious 'Moslem' states. There must be some decent Moslems, I suppose they are all veiled. In fact if Islam was such a great religion why does even this 'tariqa' end up having to argue about minor points? The above points are of course irrelevant but some irrelevant hot head is bound to give an example of what Islam is not about. We await a surprise. Otherwise it is time to kick the Moslems out of Sufism. They can not handle their religion let alone their mystics . . . What is the best way to go about this - who do we apply to? A A Aziz Yours in the Faith Death to the Unbelievers Cake for the Moslems My life is in the hands of any fool who makes me lose my temper. - Joseph Hunter From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 2 21:18:46 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 20:18:46 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] (no subject) Message-ID:

Peace be upon you,

Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian Sufi. "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized and certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check out the International Association of Sufism website which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second hand spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and devoted themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it.

 

And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know if he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this message alive.

 

 If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, you can be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how Muslim their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a different course.

Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. Whether these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah."

Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism is the heart of Islam.

FYI


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 2 21:19:40 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 20:19:40 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism Message-ID:

Peace be upon you,

Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian Sufi. "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized and certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check out the International Association of Sufism website which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second hand spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and devoted themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it.

 

And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know if he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this message alive.

 

 If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, you can be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how Muslim their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a different course.

Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. Whether these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah."

Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism is the heart of Islam.

FYI


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 01:37:41 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (JIM FRANEY) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 17:37:41 -0700 Subject: [Tariqas] misreferences Message-ID: <002c01c0ebc5$6739cda0$e98b0f3f@pavilion> Sheikh Crustacian I see you are at it again! Pontificating your judgement (because it is so high)(your judgement that is) Your perception is always the highest and the clearest (from your point of view anyway)! Why is it you are always there telling everyone else that there perception is incorrect and yours is? Islam is a perfect religion of surrender. Humans who practice it unfortunatly are not. The Prophet (pbuh) himself said he asked for Allahs forgiveness at least 70 times a day. I wish with my heart I could even remember Allah 70 times a day! Do you know of any Tariqas that are not corrupt ? I do! Why dont you pontificate about them for awhile. Of course no corruption in any Buddist orgs ,right? Sometimes your humor masks your arrogance sometimes it does not! I grow tired of your Islam/Sufi slams. Give em a brake once and awhile would ya! Jim > Date: Thursday, May 31, 2001 7:34 PM Subject: [Tariqas] References >Dear Friends, >peace >In order to facilitate the serious >study of Sufism I have provided >some little known Orders >Most of these have the genuine teachings >lacking in the present derivative and corrupt teriqas. > >May Allah Be Pleased With them >Lobster > > >> ORIGIN DATE: Unknown >> ORDER: SAU (Sufis Are Us) >> PARENT ORDER(S): Assarians, Dravidians, Pre-Raphaelites >> FOUNDING SHAYKH(S): Mises, Al-La-Din, Cucumber Sandwich >> PRESENT GRANDSHAYKH: Nancy Raygun >> UNIQUE BELIEFS OR PRACTICES: Usual stuff > >> ORIGIN DATE: Pre-Historic >> ORDER: Chaos >> PARENT ORDER(S): Do not eat of the Tree of Knowledge >> FOUNDING SHAYKH(S): God, Yar way hey!, Mrs God, The Elohim, >> PRESENT GRANDSHAYKH: Micky Mouse >> UNIQUE BELIEFS OR PRACTICES: Usual stuff > > >> ORIGIN DATE: Post Modern >> ORDER: BP - Behavioural Psychology >> PARENT ORDER(S): Be a good Boy >> FOUNDING SHAYKH(S): Milk and strawberry shake >> PRESENT GRANDSHAYKH: Walnut whip >> UNIQUE BELIEFS OR PRACTICES: Usual stuff > >_______________________________________________ >Tariqas mailing list >Tariqas@stderr.org >http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 12:22:06 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Dr. Suriya) Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 19:22:06 +0800 Subject: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism References: Message-ID: <3B1A1DDE.12A6590C@pd.jaring.my> Dear Blake, Sufism like Islam dates back to the Prophet Adam. I do not think HAzrat Inayat Khan in any way tried to unseat it from Islam. I m a Muslim and I read HIK and I also know he did not write his books, they were dictated and someone else wrote them. I can see the parts which do not seem to be from him but in all of what I can see coming from him, the roots of his teachings come through very clearly. What he did was to make sufism understandable to the West. salam Suriya Blake Ross wrote: > > Peace be upon you, > > > > And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know if > he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi > Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily > acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, > they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. > Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm > going with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic > or mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By > negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even > gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this > message alive. > > From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 12:31:47 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Dr. Suriya) Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 19:31:47 +0800 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Ways of Dealing with the Wahhabis References: Message-ID: <3B1A2023.F8EEA130@pd.jaring.my> Dear Muhammad Sufis brought Islam to Malaysia. ANd in my country , we did not know actually the exact teachings! THat is, until the influence of Hassan al Banna and the Ikhwan reached out shores! we still have what we call zikr, and tahlil and zanji, groups of men/ women singing together..in separate groups of course. Is this what you mean? salam Suriya muhammad nassar wrote: > > > Yet a sufi da‘iya should not proceed from the idea that sufism can never be for everyone. he should rather work on the assumption that everybody should become a sufi becasue this is the right thing. i don't go for what i might term the probagational complacency of some sufis. i am after all speaking from experience. the most important thing is that a probgator should be sincere to his call, patient and learned. sufi call is like anything else in this world: it has to be planned, even based on statistics, sociology and even feasibility studies.Tawfiq,then, is something that we should leave to Allah. > Thanks > Muhammad > From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 14:51:12 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ismail Abushams) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 06:51:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20010603135112.3595.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> --0-1689408055-991576272=:99406 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As Salaam Aleikum Dear Brother As Muslim involved with the teachings of Inayat Khan (actually i came to Islam via the teachings of Pir o Murshid ) it saddens me that you describe him as "one of those Universalists" . The unity of religious ideals (wich actually comprise only a small part of his teachings ) is expressed in often the same words by teachers immersed in Islam like Sheik Nazim of the Haqani-Naqsbandia ,the fact that some of his mureeds ran away with this particular part of the teachings does not reduce the value of the extensive body of teachings that found and created an entryway for the teachings of Tassawuf in the west . Before you judge Inayat Khan by his mureeds it behooves you to read some of his work , or are you like the fundamentalists who judge every work of Sufism as bi"da just because some Turuq moved away from Islam or got involved with the powerstructure. Salaams ismail Abushams Martens Blake Ross wrote: Peace be upon you, Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian Sufi. "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized and certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check out the International Association of Sufism website which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second hand spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and devoted! themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it. And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know if he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this message alive. If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, you can be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how Muslim their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a different course. Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. Whether these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah." Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism is the heart of Islam. FYI --------------------------------- Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-1689408055-991576272=:99406 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

As Salaam Aleikum

Dear Brother

As Muslim involved with the teachings of Inayat Khan (actually i came to Islam via the teachings of Pir o Murshid ) it saddens me that you describe him as "one of those Universalists" . The unity of religious ideals (wich actually comprise only a small part of his teachings ) is expressed in often the same words by teachers immersed in Islam like Sheik Nazim of the Haqani-Naqsbandia ,the fact that some of his mureeds ran away with this particular part of the teachings does not reduce the value of the extensive body of teachings that found and created an entryway for the teachings of Tassawuf in the west . Before you judge Inayat Khan by his mureeds it behooves you to read some of his work , or are you like the fundamentalists who judge every work of Sufism as bi"da just because some Turuq moved away from Islam or got involved with the powerstructure.

Salaams

ismail Abushams Martens

  Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com> wrote:

Peace be upon you,

Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian Sufi. "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized and certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check out the International Association of Sufism website which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second hand spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and devoted! themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it.

 

And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know if he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this message alive.

 

 If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, you can be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how Muslim their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a different course.

Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. Whether these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah."

Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism is the heart of Islam.

FYI


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

_______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-1689408055-991576272=:99406-- From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 08:31:43 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 00:31:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Sufis and sufis? In-Reply-To: from "Blake Ross" at Jun 02, 2001 08:18:46 PM Message-ID: <200106030731.f537Vhs09732@sonic.net> 50010602 Vom assalam alaykum, my kin. "Blake Ross" : > ...Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still alive and > well even in California. I can attest to this. I didn't know there was any question. > Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the universalists who tried to unseat > the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. you will find that I am VERY interested in this debate, so much so that I have suggested a model of language and concept for those who have an interest to discuss the matter with respect in reflection of various expressions in Tariqas Elist: http://www.luckymojo.com/avidyana/gnostik/sufimodel.h a review of which I would enjoy seeing. > By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were > the mystics of Islam. this seems a common enough claim. > They started as a group of people, living at the time of the Prophet > Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the Platform." > They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and devoted! > themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of the > Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power > than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always > represented the "Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the > US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it. this claim is certainly made by Muslim Sufis, but I am curious, since we're talking about events which would have occurred numerous centuries previously, upon what you are basing your assertions here. do you have some kind of reliable source you are using to support this claim? > ...I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi Movement, Sufi Order of > the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism as a > Islamic tradition. apparently they do not agree with you. I wonder, at times, whether they would agree that Sufism developed within Islam rather than outside it or previous to it. what do you think of such theories (by such reputable sources as Nicholson)? > Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. while generally true, there are those who identify similarly who are Christian ('cabalists'), Hermetic ('qabalists'), and Thelemic ('qaballists'). such reputable sources as Scholem (as in "Kabbalah") do acknowledge such individuals (e.g. Pico della Mirandola and the host of Lurianics who sought to create a Christian alternative to Kabbalism), though do not class them as traditional so much as competing mystics and magicians. while I would agree after some studies that Kabbalah appears to have developed within Judaism, it does contain facets which preceded Judaism, such as gematria, even though (Jewish) kabbalists may have made them popular. > Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. agreed. are there Quietist Buddhists? > Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. yes, though there do appear to be people combining Zen Buddhism with Wicca (Wiccan branches). > You see where I'm going with this? All major religious traditions > have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, that movement > is Sufism or Tasawouf. did the religious tradition spawn the mystical, or did the mystical tradition spawn the specific religious sect involved? in the case of Kabbalah it seems clear that Judaism was around before it. with Zen we must admit that the Japanese form of this Buddhist school developed later than Gautama Buddha, but did the Indian original (Dhyana, which became Chan'na in China and Zenna in Japan) actually constitute the seed about which Buddhism sprang? is there some kind of necessity that religion breeds mystics rather than the other way around? if so, what is this necessity? what convinces you that sufis could not have preceded Islam? > By negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that > even gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep > this message alive. * what is the value of this message? * why can't we pay attention to these Muslim Sufis while also considering those whom some describe as non-Muslim sufis? > Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is > at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends > on the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little > outside of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or > ummah." doesn't the Testimony of Faith (Shahadah) provide a context for this conversion? is it not considered one of the 'Five Pillars of Islam'? is it not used to acknowledge guidance by a Sufi shaykh? > Old school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules > and traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering > proper. yes, but is this a convention or is it based on something historical? > Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally > Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and > Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. the question becomes whether disciples are *also* trained and such but nonIslamic rules. I gather some people think so, but what is their assertion that such a thing is possible based upon, other than their prejudice? what is yours likewise? it is easy to make such claims and far different than justify them and identify one's sources. > Whether these masters accept a student and watch over her or him > is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah." again this seems disputed. > Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is > no problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny > that Sufism is the heart of Islam. there are Muslims who deny that Sufism is Islamic. how could they deny the very heart of their religion? would you say also that, like those who identify as sufis that you say 'are not true Sufis' those who say Sufism is not Islamic 'are not true Muslims'? I don't remember that Sufism is one of the Five Pillars, for example. I would appreciate any clarity of thought and citation of sources you would be able to lend to this subject and dispute. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@yronwode.com From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 17:14:15 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 12:14:15 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism In-Reply-To: <20010603135112.3595.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Dear Brothers and Sisters, I have just one question regarding this discussion. What gives any of us the wisdom or the right to pass judgment as to whether another truly is a Sufi? With Love, Farishtah From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 17:34:31 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Simon Bryquer) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 12:34:31 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism References: <20010603135112.3595.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002e01c0ec4b$56c49500$ad8f1d18@nyc.rr.com> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C0EC29.89F01200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Greetings - Just a brief observation. The result of a teaching is what counts. For = whatever reason, perhaps you in your wisdom can answer it, the majority = of people coming from the Sufi Order of the West in some form or another = come away with that very same notion addressed by Ross Blake and others. = Now there are exception but those are in the minority. The writings may one thing and indeed adhere and follow traditional = Sufism, or should I say just Sufism. Because Sufism, no matter what one = convinces oneself of, is the mystic portal of Islam and you have to walk = through that Islamic door. Just as Kabbalah is the mystic portal of = Judaism. Now it is of course possible as one sheikh I know use to say = 'to be parachute in' by a variety of means, but if you are going to be a = practicing Sufi and not an lover or empathizer or a so to speak a = mystical accountant ( that is accountant in knowing how that mystical = gold came about but not yours to do as you chose) of their way of being = -- you walk in the footsteps of Islam and all those who came before. Now = it is also possible in defense of your statements that no matter what = the writing - even the Quran -you have many followers or 'adherents who = call themselves by the name of Muslim but profess ideas which are = antithetical to the very Faith they proclaim -- the Wahhabis being a = prime example, and the rightist fundamental born again Christian in US = and anywhere else. But the SOW has an unusual number of individual that = walk away with a cacophony of believes that does make them unusual in = the sense that they proclaim their is the real all embracing Sufism. = Now you can practice anything you want and it all can be valid but don't = fool yourself into calling it Sufism. Now in terms of traditional Sufism, because I believe the mystic of any = religion is at once the traditionalist and the anarchist. Thus I am not = advocating that this means you should still use oil lamps because that's = what they used way back then into the centuries but if examined with an = open mind all religions, particularly the mystic side, can be lived in = a contemporaneous way.. In other words you cannot improve upon the shape of an egg. Thought it was going to be brief but there you nothing in life is as it = seems and predictable. Greetings to one and all, Simon =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Ismail Abushams=20 To: tariqas@dns1.stderr.org=20 Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 9:51 AM Subject: Re: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism As Salaam Aleikum=20 Dear Brother=20 As Muslim involved with the teachings of Inayat Khan (actually i came = to Islam via the teachings of Pir o Murshid ) it saddens me that you = describe him as "one of those Universalists" . The unity of religious = ideals (wich actually comprise only a small part of his teachings ) is = expressed in often the same words by teachers immersed in Islam like = Sheik Nazim of the Haqani-Naqsbandia ,the fact that some of his mureeds = ran away with this particular part of the teachings does not reduce the = value of the extensive body of teachings that found and created an = entryway for the teachings of Tassawuf in the west . Before you judge = Inayat Khan by his mureeds it behooves you to read some of his work , or = are you like the fundamentalists who judge every work of Sufism as bi"da = just because some Turuq moved away from Islam or got involved with the = powerstructure.=20 Salaams=20 ismail Abushams Martens=20 Blake Ross wrote:=20 Peace be upon you, Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian Sufi. = "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more = universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized and = certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check = out the International Association of Sufism website which is cradled in = the very heart of new age, second hand spirituality movements, you'll = see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still = alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the = universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. = By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were the = mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living at the time = of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the = Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and = devote! d! themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of = the Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power = than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always = represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the US long = ago and I'm surprised you missed it.=20 And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know = if he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi = Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily = acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, = they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. = Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm going = with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic or = mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By = negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even = gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this message = alive.=20 If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, you can = be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how = Muslim their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a = different course. Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is = at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on = the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside = of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old = school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and = traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. = Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally = Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith = of the Prophet Muhammad. Whether these masters accept a student and = watch over her or him is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the = "will of Allah."=20 Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no = problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism = is the heart of Islam. FYI -------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list = Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with = Yahoo! Mail. ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C0EC29.89F01200 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Greetings -
 
 
Just a brief observation.  The result of a = teaching is=20 what counts.  For whatever reason, perhaps you in your wisdom can = answer=20 it, the majority of people coming from the Sufi Order of the West in = some form=20 or another come away with that very same notion addressed by Ross Blake = and=20 others. Now there are exception but those are in the = minority.
 
The writings may one thing and indeed adhere and = follow=20 traditional Sufism, or should I say just Sufism.  Because Sufism, = no matter=20 what one convinces oneself of, is the mystic portal of Islam and you = have to=20 walk through that Islamic door.  Just as Kabbalah is the mystic = portal of=20 Judaism.  Now it is of course possible as one sheikh I know use to = say 'to=20 be parachute in' by a variety of means, but if you are going to be a = practicing=20 Sufi and not an lover or empathizer or a so to speak a mystical = accountant=20  ( that is accountant in knowing how that mystical gold came about = but not=20 yours to do as you chose)  of their way of being -- you walk in the = footsteps of Islam and all those who came before. Now it is also = possible in=20 defense of your statements that no matter what the writing - even the = Quran -you=20 have many followers or 'adherents who call themselves by the name of = Muslim but=20 profess ideas which are antithetical to the very Faith they proclaim -- = the=20 Wahhabis being a prime example, and the rightist fundamental born again=20 Christian in US and anywhere else. But the SOW has an unusual number of=20 individual that walk away with a cacophony of believes that does make = them=20 unusual in the sense that they proclaim their is the real all embracing=20 Sufism.  Now you can practice anything you want and it all can be = valid but=20 don't fool yourself into calling it Sufism.
 
 
Now in terms of traditional Sufism, because I = believe the=20 mystic of any religion is at once the traditionalist and the = anarchist. =20 Thus I am not advocating that this means you should still use oil lamps = because=20 that's what they used way back then into the centuries but if examined = with an=20 open mind all religions, particularly the mystic side,  can be = lived in a=20 contemporaneous way..
 
 In other words you = cannot improve=20 upon the shape of an egg.
 
 
Thought it was going to be brief but there you = nothing in life=20 is as it seems and predictable.
 
 
Greetings to one and all,
 
 
Simon
 
 
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Ismail=20 Abushams
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 = 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Tariqas]=20 Pseudo-Sufism

As Salaam Aleikum=20

Dear Brother=20

As Muslim involved with the teachings of Inayat Khan (actually i = came to=20 Islam via the teachings of Pir o Murshid ) it saddens me that you = describe him=20 as "one of those Universalists" . The unity of religious ideals (wich = actually=20 comprise only a small part of his teachings ) is expressed in often = the same=20 words by teachers immersed in Islam like Sheik Nazim of the = Haqani-Naqsbandia=20 ,the fact that some of his mureeds ran away with this particular part = of the=20 teachings does not reduce the value of the extensive body of teachings = that=20 found and created an entryway for the teachings of Tassawuf in the = west .=20 Before you judge Inayat Khan by his mureeds it behooves you to read = some of=20 his work , or are you like the fundamentalists who judge every work of = Sufism=20 as bi"da just because some Turuq moved away from Islam or got involved = with=20 the powerstructure.=20

Salaams=20

ismail Abushams Martens=20

  Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com> = wrote:=20

Peace be upon you,

Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian = Sufi.=20 "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more = universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized = and=20 certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you = check out=20 the International Association of = Sufism=20 website which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second = hand=20 spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and = motivated by the=20 call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat = Inayat Khan=20 is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word = Sufism=20 from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our = friend=20 meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a = group of=20 people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called = the Ahle=20 Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform = of the=20 Mosque of the Prophet and devote! d! themselved entirely to the = meaning of=20 the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no = more=20 interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. = In this=20 sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This = message=20 has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it. =

 

And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't = know if he=20 would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi = Movement, Sufi=20 Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism = as a=20 Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. = Quietists=20 are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid = and=20 Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious=20 traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, = that=20 movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the = contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the = hands=20 of different Muslims to keep this message alive.

 

 If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, = you can=20 be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim = how Muslim=20 their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a = different=20 course.

Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I = believe is=20 at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends = on the=20 gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside = of the=20 orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old = school,=20 proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and = traditions which=20 must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are = trained=20 and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules = completely in=20 accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. = Whether=20 these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a = matter of=20 accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah."

Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is = no=20 problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that = Sufism is=20 the heart of Islam.

FYI


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

_______________________________________________ Tariqas = mailing list=20 Tariqas@stderr.org=20 http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! = Mail Personal=20 Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo!=20 Mail. ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C0EC29.89F01200-- From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 17:34:31 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Simon Bryquer) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 12:34:31 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism References: <20010603135112.3595.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002e01c0ec4b$56c49500$ad8f1d18@nyc.rr.com> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C0EC29.89F01200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Greetings - Just a brief observation. The result of a teaching is what counts. For = whatever reason, perhaps you in your wisdom can answer it, the majority = of people coming from the Sufi Order of the West in some form or another = come away with that very same notion addressed by Ross Blake and others. = Now there are exception but those are in the minority. The writings may one thing and indeed adhere and follow traditional = Sufism, or should I say just Sufism. Because Sufism, no matter what one = convinces oneself of, is the mystic portal of Islam and you have to walk = through that Islamic door. Just as Kabbalah is the mystic portal of = Judaism. Now it is of course possible as one sheikh I know use to say = 'to be parachute in' by a variety of means, but if you are going to be a = practicing Sufi and not an lover or empathizer or a so to speak a = mystical accountant ( that is accountant in knowing how that mystical = gold came about but not yours to do as you chose) of their way of being = -- you walk in the footsteps of Islam and all those who came before. Now = it is also possible in defense of your statements that no matter what = the writing - even the Quran -you have many followers or 'adherents who = call themselves by the name of Muslim but profess ideas which are = antithetical to the very Faith they proclaim -- the Wahhabis being a = prime example, and the rightist fundamental born again Christian in US = and anywhere else. But the SOW has an unusual number of individual that = walk away with a cacophony of believes that does make them unusual in = the sense that they proclaim their is the real all embracing Sufism. = Now you can practice anything you want and it all can be valid but don't = fool yourself into calling it Sufism. Now in terms of traditional Sufism, because I believe the mystic of any = religion is at once the traditionalist and the anarchist. Thus I am not = advocating that this means you should still use oil lamps because that's = what they used way back then into the centuries but if examined with an = open mind all religions, particularly the mystic side, can be lived in = a contemporaneous way.. In other words you cannot improve upon the shape of an egg. Thought it was going to be brief but there you nothing in life is as it = seems and predictable. Greetings to one and all, Simon =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Ismail Abushams=20 To: tariqas@dns1.stderr.org=20 Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 9:51 AM Subject: Re: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism As Salaam Aleikum=20 Dear Brother=20 As Muslim involved with the teachings of Inayat Khan (actually i came = to Islam via the teachings of Pir o Murshid ) it saddens me that you = describe him as "one of those Universalists" . The unity of religious = ideals (wich actually comprise only a small part of his teachings ) is = expressed in often the same words by teachers immersed in Islam like = Sheik Nazim of the Haqani-Naqsbandia ,the fact that some of his mureeds = ran away with this particular part of the teachings does not reduce the = value of the extensive body of teachings that found and created an = entryway for the teachings of Tassawuf in the west . Before you judge = Inayat Khan by his mureeds it behooves you to read some of his work , or = are you like the fundamentalists who judge every work of Sufism as bi"da = just because some Turuq moved away from Islam or got involved with the = powerstructure.=20 Salaams=20 ismail Abushams Martens=20 Blake Ross wrote:=20 Peace be upon you, Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian Sufi. = "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more = universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized and = certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check = out the International Association of Sufism website which is cradled in = the very heart of new age, second hand spirituality movements, you'll = see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still = alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the = universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. = By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were the = mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living at the time = of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the = Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and = devote! d! themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of = the Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power = than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always = represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the US long = ago and I'm surprised you missed it.=20 And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know = if he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi = Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily = acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, = they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. = Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm going = with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic or = mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By = negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even = gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this message = alive.=20 If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, you can = be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how = Muslim their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a = different course. Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is = at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on = the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside = of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old = school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and = traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. = Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally = Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith = of the Prophet Muhammad. Whether these masters accept a student and = watch over her or him is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the = "will of Allah."=20 Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no = problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism = is the heart of Islam. FYI -------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list = Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with = Yahoo! Mail. ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C0EC29.89F01200 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Greetings -
 
 
Just a brief observation.  The result of a = teaching is=20 what counts.  For whatever reason, perhaps you in your wisdom can = answer=20 it, the majority of people coming from the Sufi Order of the West in = some form=20 or another come away with that very same notion addressed by Ross Blake = and=20 others. Now there are exception but those are in the = minority.
 
The writings may one thing and indeed adhere and = follow=20 traditional Sufism, or should I say just Sufism.  Because Sufism, = no matter=20 what one convinces oneself of, is the mystic portal of Islam and you = have to=20 walk through that Islamic door.  Just as Kabbalah is the mystic = portal of=20 Judaism.  Now it is of course possible as one sheikh I know use to = say 'to=20 be parachute in' by a variety of means, but if you are going to be a = practicing=20 Sufi and not an lover or empathizer or a so to speak a mystical = accountant=20  ( that is accountant in knowing how that mystical gold came about = but not=20 yours to do as you chose)  of their way of being -- you walk in the = footsteps of Islam and all those who came before. Now it is also = possible in=20 defense of your statements that no matter what the writing - even the = Quran -you=20 have many followers or 'adherents who call themselves by the name of = Muslim but=20 profess ideas which are antithetical to the very Faith they proclaim -- = the=20 Wahhabis being a prime example, and the rightist fundamental born again=20 Christian in US and anywhere else. But the SOW has an unusual number of=20 individual that walk away with a cacophony of believes that does make = them=20 unusual in the sense that they proclaim their is the real all embracing=20 Sufism.  Now you can practice anything you want and it all can be = valid but=20 don't fool yourself into calling it Sufism.
 
 
Now in terms of traditional Sufism, because I = believe the=20 mystic of any religion is at once the traditionalist and the = anarchist. =20 Thus I am not advocating that this means you should still use oil lamps = because=20 that's what they used way back then into the centuries but if examined = with an=20 open mind all religions, particularly the mystic side,  can be = lived in a=20 contemporaneous way..
 
 In other words you = cannot improve=20 upon the shape of an egg.
 
 
Thought it was going to be brief but there you = nothing in life=20 is as it seems and predictable.
 
 
Greetings to one and all,
 
 
Simon
 
 
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Ismail=20 Abushams
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 = 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Tariqas]=20 Pseudo-Sufism

As Salaam Aleikum=20

Dear Brother=20

As Muslim involved with the teachings of Inayat Khan (actually i = came to=20 Islam via the teachings of Pir o Murshid ) it saddens me that you = describe him=20 as "one of those Universalists" . The unity of religious ideals (wich = actually=20 comprise only a small part of his teachings ) is expressed in often = the same=20 words by teachers immersed in Islam like Sheik Nazim of the = Haqani-Naqsbandia=20 ,the fact that some of his mureeds ran away with this particular part = of the=20 teachings does not reduce the value of the extensive body of teachings = that=20 found and created an entryway for the teachings of Tassawuf in the = west .=20 Before you judge Inayat Khan by his mureeds it behooves you to read = some of=20 his work , or are you like the fundamentalists who judge every work of = Sufism=20 as bi"da just because some Turuq moved away from Islam or got involved = with=20 the powerstructure.=20

Salaams=20

ismail Abushams Martens=20

  Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com> = wrote:=20

Peace be upon you,

Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian = Sufi.=20 "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more = universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized = and=20 certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you = check out=20 the International Association of = Sufism=20 website which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second = hand=20 spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and = motivated by the=20 call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat = Inayat Khan=20 is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word = Sufism=20 from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our = friend=20 meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a = group of=20 people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called = the Ahle=20 Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform = of the=20 Mosque of the Prophet and devote! d! themselved entirely to the = meaning of=20 the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no = more=20 interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. = In this=20 sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This = message=20 has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it. =

 

And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't = know if he=20 would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi = Movement, Sufi=20 Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism = as a=20 Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. = Quietists=20 are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid = and=20 Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious=20 traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, = that=20 movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the = contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the = hands=20 of different Muslims to keep this message alive.

 

 If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, = you can=20 be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim = how Muslim=20 their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a = different=20 course.

Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I = believe is=20 at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends = on the=20 gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside = of the=20 orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old = school,=20 proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and = traditions which=20 must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are = trained=20 and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules = completely in=20 accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. = Whether=20 these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a = matter of=20 accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah."

Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is = no=20 problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that = Sufism is=20 the heart of Islam.

FYI


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

_______________________________________________ Tariqas = mailing list=20 Tariqas@stderr.org=20 http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! = Mail Personal=20 Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo!=20 Mail. ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C0EC29.89F01200-- From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 21:39:02 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ismail Abushams) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 13:39:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism In-Reply-To: <002e01c0ec4b$56c49500$ad8f1d18@nyc.rr.com> Message-ID: <20010603203902.64213.qmail@web9009.mail.yahoo.com> --0-1059780080-991600742=:62282 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As Salaam Aleikum It is in my opinion due to several reasons that lots of the members of my Tariqa see themself and Sufism as lose from the main body of Islam. The first is that the ideas and ideals of the Universal Worship , a ritual that was originally developed beside Murshid Inayat Khan's teachings on Sufism got mixed with and mistaken for the essence of his teachings (this is my standpoint , Inayaties are free to disagree with me on this ) the second is that a lot of the current membership came from groups like the Universalist Unitairians and brought some of their thought-world with them the third is that despite all their spiritual aspirations "regular Sufis" seldom take time to listen to these people (us),instead of teaching or instructing from our comonalities they (actually as muslim-sufi i can say we ) immediately focus on the issues of conflicting opinions , i remember from my pre-Islamic time how hurt i felt by this automatic judgement ,if i would not have met people with more openness and paitience i would have assumed that all those grumpy judgementalists can never be Sufis .Alhamdullilah i found Islamic Traditional Sufiteachers that introduced me to their teachings without the need to first push me in the mud the fourth reason / point is . Inaiaty Chisty Sufism has been in the west for 90 years ,through hard times ,and for most of the time within a world where Moslims where nothing more than the losers of kolonial wars or terrorists in the peoples minds , They ,Allah knows best,may have addapted to much to the west , that certainly is my opinion , but we will see where all the other Turuq will be when they have spend so much times living within the claws of the western world , the behavior of some teachers does not bode well . salaams ismail Simon Bryquer wrote: Greetings - Just a brief observation. The result of a teaching is what counts. For whatever reason, perhaps you in your wisdom can answer it, the majority of people coming from the Sufi Order of the West in some form or another come away with that very same notion addressed by Ross Blake and others. Now there are exception but those are in the minority. The writings may one thing and indeed adhere and follow traditional Sufism, or should I say just Sufism. Because Sufism, no matter what one convinces oneself of, is the mystic portal of Islam and you have to walk through that Islamic door. Just as Kabbalah is the mystic portal of Judaism. Now it is of course possible as one sheikh I know use to say 'to be parachute in' by a variety of means, but if you are going to be a practicing Sufi and not an lover or empathizer or a so to speak a mystical accountant ( that is accountant in knowing how that mystical gold came about but not yours to do as you chose) of their way of being -- you walk in the footsteps of Islam and all those who came before. Now it is also possible in defense of your statements that no matter what the writing - even the Quran -you have many followers or 'adherents who call themselves by the name of Muslim but profess ideas which are antithetical to the very Faith they proclaim -- the Wahhabis being a prime example, and the rightist fundamental born again Christian in US and anywhere else. But the SOW has an unusual number of individual that walk away with a cacophony of believes that does make them unusual in the sense that they proclaim their is the real all embracing Sufism. Now you can practice anything you want and it all can be valid but don't fool yourself into calling it Sufism. Now in terms of traditional Sufism, because I believe the mystic of any religion is at once the traditionalist and the anarchist. Thus I am not advocating that this means you should still use oil lamps because that's what they used way back then into the centuries but if examined with an open mind all religions, particularly the mystic side, can be lived in a contemporaneous way.. In other words you cannot improve upon the shape of an egg. Thought it was going to be brief but there you nothing in life is as it seems and predictable. Greetings to one and all, Simon ================================================================= ----- Original Message ----- From: Ismail Abushams To: tariqas@dns1.stderr.org Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 9:51 AMSubject: Re: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism As Salaam Aleikum Dear Brother As Muslim involved with the teachings of Inayat Khan (actually i came to Islam via the teachings of Pir o Murshid ) it saddens me that you describe him as "one of those Universalists" . The unity of religious ideals (wich actually comprise only a small part of his teachings ) is expressed in often the same words by teachers immersed in Islam like Sheik Nazim of the Haqani-Naqsbandia ,the fact that some of his mureeds ran away with this particular part of the teachings does not reduce the value of the extensive body of teachings that found and created an entryway for the teachings of Tassawuf in the west . Before you judge Inayat Khan by his mureeds it behooves you to read some of his work , or are you like the fundamentalists who judge every work of Sufism as bi"da just because some Turuq moved away from Islam or got involved with the powerstructure. Salaams ismail Abushams Martens Blake Ross wrote: Peace be upon you, Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian Sufi. "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized and certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check out the International Association of Sufism website which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second hand spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and devote! d! themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it. And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know if he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this message alive. If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, you can be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how Muslim their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a different course. Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. Whether these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah." Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism is the heart of Islam. FYI --------------------------------- Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-1059780080-991600742=:62282 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

As Salaam Aleikum

It is in my opinion due to several reasons that lots of the members of my Tariqa see themself and Sufism as lose from the main body of Islam.

The first is that the ideas and ideals of the Universal Worship , a ritual that was originally developed beside Murshid Inayat Khan's teachings on Sufism got mixed with and mistaken for the essence of his teachings (this is my standpoint , Inayaties are free to disagree with me on this )

the second is that a lot of the current membership came from groups like the Universalist Unitairians and brought some of their thought-world with them

the third is that despite all their spiritual aspirations "regular Sufis" seldom take time to listen to these people (us),instead of teaching or instructing from our comonalities they (actually as muslim-sufi i can say we ) immediately focus on the issues of conflicting opinions , i remember from  my pre-Islamic time how hurt i felt by this automatic judgement ,if i would not have met people with more openness and paitience i would have assumed that all those grumpy judgementalists can never be Sufis .Alhamdullilah i found Islamic Traditional Sufiteachers that introduced me to their teachings without the need to first push me in the mud

the fourth reason / point is .

Inaiaty Chisty Sufism has been in the west for 90 years ,through hard times ,and for most of the time within a world where Moslims where nothing more than the losers of kolonial wars or terrorists in the peoples minds , They ,Allah knows best,may have addapted to much to the west , that certainly is my opinion , but we will see where all the other Turuq will be when they have spend so much times living within the claws of the western world , the behavior of some teachers does not bode well .

salaams

ismail

  Simon Bryquer <sbryquer@nyc.rr.com> wrote:

Greetings -
 
 
Just a brief observation.  The result of a teaching is what counts.  For whatever reason, perhaps you in your wisdom can answer it, the majority of people coming from the Sufi Order of the West in some form or another come away with that very same notion addressed by Ross Blake and others. Now there are exception but those are in the minority.
 
The writings may one thing and indeed adhere and follow traditional Sufism, or should I say just Sufism.  Because Sufism, no matter what one convinces oneself of, is the mystic portal of Islam and you have to walk through that Islamic door.  Just as Kabbalah is the mystic portal of Judaism.  Now it is of course possible as one sheikh I know use to say 'to be parachute in' by a variety of means, but if you are going to be a practicing Sufi and not an lover or empathizer or a so to speak a mystical accountant  ( that is accountant in knowing how that mystical gold came about but not yours to do as you chose)  of their way of being -- you walk in the footsteps of Islam and all those who came before. Now it is also possible in defense of your statements that no matter what the writing - even the Quran -you have many followers or 'adherents who call themselves by the name of Muslim but profess ideas which are antithetical to the very Faith they proclaim -- the Wahhabis being a prime example, and the rightist fundamental born again Christian in US and anywhere else. But the SOW has an unusual number of individual that walk away with a cacophony of believes that does make them unusual in the sense that they proclaim their is the real all embracing Sufism.  Now you can practice anything you want and it all can be valid but don't fool yourself into calling it Sufism.
 
 
Now in terms of traditional Sufism, because I believe the mystic of any religion is at once the traditionalist and the anarchist.  Thus I am not advocating that this means you should still use oil lamps because that's what they used way back then into the centuries but if examined with an open mind all religions, particularly the mystic side,  can be lived in a contemporaneous way..
 
 In other words you cannot improve upon the shape of an egg.
 
 
Thought it was going to be brief but there you nothing in life is as it seems and predictable.
 
 
Greetings to one and all,
 
 
Simon
 
 
=================================================================
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism

As Salaam Aleikum

Dear Brother

As Muslim involved with the teachings of Inayat Khan (actually i came to Islam via the teachings of Pir o Murshid ) it saddens me that you describe him as "one of those Universalists" . The unity of religious ideals (wich actually comprise only a small part of his teachings ) is expressed in often the same words by teachers immersed in Islam like Sheik Nazim of the Haqani-Naqsbandia ,the fact that some of his mureeds ran away with this particular part of the teachings does not reduce the value of the extensive body of teachings that found and created an entryway for the teachings of Tassawuf in the west . Before you judge Inayat Khan by his mureeds it behooves you to read some of his work , or are you like the fundamentalists who judge every work of Sufism as bi"da just because some Turuq moved away from Islam or got involved with the powerstructure.

Salaams

ismail Abushams Martens

  Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com> wrote:

Peace be upon you,

Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian Sufi. "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized and certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check out the International Association of Sufism website which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second hand spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and devote! d! themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it.

 

And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know if he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this message alive.

 

 If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, you can be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how Muslim their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a different course.

Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. Whether these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah."

Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism is the heart of Islam.

FYI


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

_______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-1059780080-991600742=:62282-- From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 21:47:40 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 20:47:40 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #166 - 5 msgs Message-ID:



All: I assume Br. Lobster et. al. take passionate postings with a pinch of salt. I want to write and respond in a lively manner but my intentions are never to insult or hurt feelings. I will also remember to be patient if any of you are harsh with my words. That being said:
 

>Sufism like Islam dates back to the Prophet Adam.

 

Dear Dr. Suriya
Asalaam Aleikum
A tipping of the hat to the Prophet Adam (s) from Sufism is appropo, isn't it also true that Sufism is concerned with that realm beyond space and time? In such a realm, it is possible that Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) is the origin and completion of Islam. As such, we have the puzzling statement, "I was a prophet when Adam was in a state between water and clay," attributed to Prophet Mohammad. I think it is a mistake to think of mysticism and specifically Sufism in strictly linear terms. And while Adam represents the purity of the Insan e Kamal, he doesn't represent the summit. He is the beginning. Sufism has more to say.
>I do not think HAzrat Inayat Khan in any way tried to unseat it from Islam.
As with all prophets and saints, one cannot necessarily judge the person by his/her followers. I don't know what was in the heart of Inayat Khan. I see his legacy in the shrines and places of worshp which contain symbols and idols of monotheism and polytheism. I'm not for religious intolerance and don't want my comments to be miscontrued that way. I do advocate religious coherence and I don't believe one can follow serat al mostaghim with traces of Prophet's instructions mixed with Buddha, Shiva and Vishnu. They are all separate routes to the same distant destination. We can hardly have a leg on every path up the mountain without pulling a muscle! The first letter in the Sufi alphabet is Alef, to satnd straight. To stand straight we must heve both legs on the same path going in the same direction.
>What he did was to make sufism understandable to the West.
I think Sufism was already understandable to the West without any additions or deletions from its initial system. In an indirect way, perhaps I should give him credit for introducing a spirituality which embraces Sufism as it embraces many religions. Meher Baba did the same and though I've never been very interested in their teachings, it seems that their message springs from love and a desire to see disparate people get along. (I say the same to Ismail Abushams Martens, point taken Sir.) In the US, we already have a constitution that is supposed to do that job. But in other parts of the world where religious and racial intolerance is even more brutal than here in the US, perhaps these messages serve humanitarian needs even if they do less service to Islam/Sufism.

PS. Dr., what do you think of the mix of Sufism or Islam and Pencak Silat? Are you aware of these schools in your area of Malaysia?

 

To Haramullah
Peace be upon you

Your model. I promise to review at length. As a precursor to that discussion let me say that lots of people want to say Sufism has other origins than Islam. Nicholson is a Christian with an axe to grind in my opinion and he has still offered valuable service to English speaking peoples with the translations of Persian texts like (Hujwiri's Kashf ul Mahjub) which is the source for my Ahl e Suffa origin story. I think that book, which represents the oldest (translated) Sufi text may answer many of your schematic questions. It is a great book, in my opinion, written by a fair minded, scientific Sufi scholar. Nicholson did not skew it towards his Christian, neoplatonic gnostic idea. There is a very unvaluble debate regarding the word Sufism which amonts to a Coke - Pepsi marketing ploy in my opinion. I do not have my Sufu texts at hand, but I believe there was an ealy Islamic gnostic named "al-Sufi" and the word Sufi (which no one else can lay claim to) seems to belong to him. But no matter, the real term for Sufism is TaSaWouF which is an acronym attributed first to Imam Ali (first Imam of Shia sect and fourth "Rightly Guided" Caliph of Sunni sect.). There are 3 principles for each the T, S, W and F:

Tark (Abandonment)
Tubeh (Repentance)
Tugha or Taghva (Virtue and Abstinence)
Sabr (Patience)
Sedgh (Truthfulness)
Safa (Purity)
Vud (Love)
Verd (Zekr, Remembrance)
Vafa'a (Loyalty)
Fard (Isolation)
Faghr (Poverty)
Fana (Annihilation)

of the acronym that descibe the "Principles of Sufism" which was expounded by Quoshayri and, later, recapitulated by Dr. Nahid Angha, author of same title (Principles of Sufism). This is a word and a concept which has reliable textual basis to refer to. Any debate about the origin of the word Sufism and its framers would ultimately be unfounded.

as for:
"doesn't the Testimony of Faith (Shahadah) provide a context for this
conversion? is it not considered one of the 'Five Pillars of Islam'?
is it not used to acknowledge guidance by a Sufi shaykh?"
 
Devil's advocate huh, both sides of the fence. OK, I'll play along Mulla Haramullah. Yes, yes - everyone who says, "There is no god except Allah and Mohammad is His Prophet" is a true believer and a convert. And everyone that says, "There is only one God and Christ is His only begotten son" is also a real believer and a "convert." What I was saying, as you may well know, is that these verbal formulas get you in the door of orthodoxy and that's all well and good. In my opinion, the real "conversion" is from that of faith and belief to that of direct experience. This is a specialty of Islamic Sufism (Tasawouf) and other mystical schools which have their own unique set of priciples and techniques (distinct from Sufism) for getting close to the Divine.
 
Salaam
 

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 23:35:56 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 00:35:56 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: The Spirit Message-ID: These questions are for those non-muslim 'sufis' to answer: Since your chosen form of gnosticism claims to develop the spirit, 1- what is the spirit? 2- is there a difference (significant for your order) between the soul (nafs) and spirit? 3- where is the spirit located 1) during one's life 2) after one dies? 4- does the spirit affect our life in this physical world? If it does, does it influence our world during or after one's life in this world? 5- Is it possible for a human being to fly (not jsut hang in the air)? 6- Is it possible for a human being to exist in two different places at the same time? 7- Can a human being revive someone from the dead? 8- is it possible for a body not to decay after death without any chemical interefence? is there a rule for that? Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 23:40:09 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 00:40:09 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: The Spirit Message-ID: Thanks Blake, you have been of the utmost help. let me also add to what you have said about the origin of the word sufi. the name of the first man with the title in his name of al-sufi is Abu-Hashim as-Sufi, teacher of the well-known faqih sufyan al-thawri. as far as the chronological, linear argument introduced by Dr Suriya is concerned, the Qur'an states clearly that all the prophets preached one faith-- the belief in Allah as the one and only god. while islam, christianity, judaism all belong to prophet Ibrahim (pbuh), islam insists that Ibrahim himself was a muslim. the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the culmination of that one belief. the Qur'an also tells us that Allah took an oath from the other prophets to adhere to the Prophet Muhammad and acknowledge the divine origin of his message. certainly we cannot see religion as developing in a linear fashion. why should we in the first place? the sufism of prophet Adam (pbuh) is subsumed in the message of Islam. this is a plausible idea. Allah is one. this unity certainly appears in the one link that unifies all prophets. Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 23:41:03 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 00:41:03 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Linearity Message-ID: Thanks Blake, you have been of the utmost help. let me also add to what you have said about the origin of the word sufi. the name of the first man with the title in his name of al-sufi is Abu-Hashim as-Sufi, teacher of the well-known faqih sufyan al-thawri. as far as the chronological, linear argument introduced by Dr Suriya is concerned, the Qur'an states clearly that all the prophets preached one faith-- the belief in Allah as the one and only god. while islam, christianity, judaism all belong to prophet Ibrahim (pbuh), islam insists that Ibrahim himself was a muslim. the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the culmination of that one belief. the Qur'an also tells us that Allah took an oath from the other prophets to adhere to the Prophet Muhammad and acknowledge the divine origin of his message. certainly we cannot see religion as developing in a linear fashion. why should we in the first place? the sufism of prophet Adam (pbuh) is subsumed in the message of Islam. this is a plausible idea. Allah is one. this unity certainly appears in the one link that unifies all prophets. Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 23:41:44 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 00:41:44 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Linearity Message-ID: Thanks Blake, you have been of the utmost help. let me also add to what you have said about the origin of the word sufi. the name of the first man with the title in his name of al-sufi is Abu-Hashim as-Sufi, teacher of the well-known faqih sufyan al-thawri. as far as the chronological, linear argument introduced by Dr Suriya is concerned, the Qur'an states clearly that all the prophets preached one faith-- the belief in Allah as the one and only god. while islam, christianity, judaism all belong to prophet Ibrahim (pbuh), islam insists that Ibrahim himself was a muslim. the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the culmination of that one belief. the Qur'an also tells us that Allah took an oath from the other prophets to adhere to the Prophet Muhammad and acknowledge the divine origin of his message. certainly we cannot see religion as developing in a linear fashion. why should we in the first place? the sufism of prophet Adam (pbuh) is subsumed in the message of Islam. this is a plausible idea. Allah is one. this unity certainly appears in the one link that unifies all prophets. Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 23:42:25 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 00:42:25 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Linearity Message-ID: Thanks Blake, you have been of the utmost help. let me also add to what you have said about the origin of the word sufi. the name of the first man with the title in his name of al-sufi is Abu-Hashim as-Sufi, teacher of the well-known faqih sufyan al-thawri. as far as the chronological, linear argument introduced by Dr Suriya is concerned, the Qur'an states clearly that all the prophets preached one faith-- the belief in Allah as the one and only god. while islam, christianity, judaism all belong to prophet Ibrahim (pbuh), islam insists that Ibrahim himself was a muslim. the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the culmination of that one belief. the Qur'an also tells us that Allah took an oath from the other prophets to adhere to the Prophet Muhammad and acknowledge the divine origin of his message. certainly we cannot see religion as developing in a linear fashion. why should we in the first place? the sufism of prophet Adam (pbuh) is subsumed in the message of Islam. this is a plausible idea. Allah is one. this unity certainly appears in the one link that unifies all prophets. Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 3 23:45:55 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 00:45:55 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Ibn Arabi Message-ID: In what way can we compare other sufisms to the true sufism of Islam. actually how can they compare? there is only one Ibn Arabi in this world. ibn Arabi is the greatest sufi writer of all time. the very existence of the Meccan Revelations is itself a miracle that points upward to the greatest miracle, that of the Qur'an. the fact that the Qur'an is the supereme book that humanity has in hand should mean that texts resulting from the initial text will be proportionately miraculous, that is, inimitable. the Meccan Revelations is simply an inimitable book. the whole sufi phenomenon in Islam, greater in size and quality from any other mystic system with a claim to originality attests to the dwarfishness of any attempt at getting in on the act. how many hundreds of names of great, original writers should we cite? what variety attesting to the infinite originality of the prototext, the Qur'an! Anything comprable does anybody know of? Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 00:11:09 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 16:11:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Sufistry and Assessing Others (was Pseudo-Sufism) In-Reply-To: from "Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com" at Jun 03, 2001 12:14:15 PM Message-ID: <200106032311.f53NB9M21472@sonic.net> 50010603 Vom assalam alaykum, my kin. : > ...What gives any of us the wisdom or the right to pass judgment > as to whether another truly is a Sufi? I presume it a sad function of language barriers that every time that I have tried to seriously address the rantings of religious here in Tariqas that my questions and the issues I was raising were ignored or never addressed. I hope it is not simply dogmatism without scholarly backing (though it does give this appearance when I ask for some kind of authoritative reference and receive repeated claims). the problem of the term 'sufism' is that, like many others of its ilk, it is used simultaneously in many ways, from membership in an order to an ideal to which one might aspire. the added dimension of controvery over whether sufis must be Muslim makes the quagmire of attempting to discuss it fairly impassible. here I'll respond to your query and hope that someone will reply to my very serious questions elsewhere.... MEMBERSHIP where 'sufi' means someone who is part of a sufi group or order wisdom * knowledge of the orders of sufism gives the wisdom to pass judgement to those who know of their regulations and means of admittance (i.e. if I know that you are not a member of any sufi order, then I have the wisdom to ascertain that you are not a sufi by this definition) right * anyone with mediocre rationality can logically determine by proof or investigation whether someone is part of a sufi order, and then go on to testify to this by right of that privilege afforded any participant in a public forum IDEAL where 'sufi' means someone who has attained some measure of spiritual success, whatever this may mean to the listener wisdom * exposure to and knowledge of the personal state of another might afford one the ability to assess whether that other had qualified for whatever one associates with 'sufism', whether that be a particular activity or quality of character right * what right has anyone to evaluate the spiritual state of another? by virtue of one's relation to that individual, a response to claims made by the individual in question, and a reflection purely on the basis of one's own ability to provide this kind of evaluation (one's reliability in this regard determines the value of the assessment) one might exercise any right so presumed. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 00:35:57 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 19:35:57 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Sufistry and Assessing Others (was Pseudo-Sufism) In-Reply-To: <200106032311.f53NB9M21472@sonic.net> Message-ID: Salaam dear brother Haramullah, My own definition is one that would have to come from within my heart, and this would be difficult to make clear in a forum such as this. I agree, one limitation is language. I believe another, though, is our sense of "self", not only in pursuit of truth but in even discussing the matter. I asked my question in the hope of making this latter point in an oblique way. I appreciate your thoughtful answer. I found your questions most serious and interesting, and hope that they are, indeed, answered elsewhere in this discussion. Be in peace. Farishtah on 6/3/01 7:11 PM, nagasiva@luckymojo.com wrote: > 50010603 Vom > > assalam alaykum, my kin. > > : >> ...What gives any of us the wisdom or the right to pass judgment >> as to whether another truly is a Sufi? > > I presume it a sad function of language barriers that every time > that I have tried to seriously address the rantings of religious > here in Tariqas that my questions and the issues I was raising > were ignored or never addressed. I hope it is not simply dogmatism > without scholarly backing (though it does give this appearance > when I ask for some kind of authoritative reference and receive > repeated claims). > > the problem of the term 'sufism' is that, like many others of its > ilk, it is used simultaneously in many ways, from membership in > an order to an ideal to which one might aspire. the added dimension > of controvery over whether sufis must be Muslim makes the quagmire > of attempting to discuss it fairly impassible. > > here I'll respond to your query and hope that someone will reply > to my very serious questions elsewhere.... > > MEMBERSHIP > where 'sufi' means someone who is part of a sufi group or order > > wisdom > > * knowledge of the orders of sufism gives the wisdom to > pass judgement to those who know of their regulations > and means of admittance (i.e. if I know that you are not > a member of any sufi order, then I have the wisdom to > ascertain that you are not a sufi by this definition) > > right > > * anyone with mediocre rationality can logically determine > by proof or investigation whether someone is part of a > sufi order, and then go on to testify to this by right > of that privilege afforded any participant in a public forum > > > IDEAL > where 'sufi' means someone who has attained some measure of > spiritual success, whatever this may mean to the listener > > wisdom > > * exposure to and knowledge of the personal state of another > might afford one the ability to assess whether that other > had qualified for whatever one associates with 'sufism', > whether that be a particular activity or quality of character > > right > > * what right has anyone to evaluate the spiritual state of > another? by virtue of one's relation to that individual, > a response to claims made by the individual in question, > and a reflection purely on the basis of one's own ability > to provide this kind of evaluation (one's reliability in > this regard determines the value of the assessment) one > might exercise any right so presumed. > > peace be with you, > > haramullah > nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 02:11:13 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (-Nancy) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 20:11:13 -0500 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: The Spirit References: Message-ID: <009001c0ec93$f49dbde0$efe270cf@oemcomputer> I have two simple questions for you in return, Mr. Nassar. What is your motivation for asking these questions? Are you asking because you want to know what the belief system/teaching program is for those who are affiliated with non-muslim sufi orders or is it because you want to tell people the Right Answers? If it is the latter, then I must assume that you are neither a sufi nor a student of a true teacher. From what I know of a genuine sufi order and its teaching, a muslim one to be sure, one is not to ask questions of this nature in a tone that appears ~as if~ one is wagging his/her finger self-righteously at another. One is not to be contentious. One is not to be argumentative. One does not challenge the students of other orders. One is to stick to what is his/her own learning program and leave the teaching to the teachers. -Nancy "naf-ridden and contentious" ----- Original Message ----- From: muhammad nassar > These questions are for those non-muslim 'sufis' to answer: From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 03:09:50 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Simon Bryquer) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 22:09:50 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: The Spirit References: Message-ID: <013301c0ec9b$f61c26e0$ad8f1d18@nyc.rr.com> I don't understand the impulse of your question or rather I do understand it and your questions can be answerable from many a point view and be legitimate in the sense of a realization of ones spirits. These questions to 'separate or give greater credo to 'Muslim Sufi. --look, anyone can answer/pass this 'test' and it would mean nothing in terms of Sufism. Also your approach to the group, is somewhat high handed and although I would not put you in the same boat with the Wahhabis, you do have a self-righteous tone that many might find offensive, particularly in your assumption as who the people in this tariqas list are and know. I don't know your background but I do know that merely speaking Arabic does not give one a greater understanding of the Quran only of its words. I make this analogy because I sense you might feel your ethnicity gives an edge in the realm of Sufism and perhaps even the spirit -- that in itself is a spiritual self deception. Simon ----- Original Message ----- From: "muhammad nassar" To: Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 6:35 PM Subject: [Tariqas] Re: The Spirit > These questions are for those non-muslim 'sufis' to answer: > Since your chosen form of gnosticism claims to develop the spirit, > 1- what is the spirit? > 2- is there a difference (significant for your order) between the soul (nafs) and spirit? > 3- where is the spirit located 1) during one's life 2) after one dies? > 4- does the spirit affect our life in this physical world? If it does, does it influence our world during or after one's life in this world? > 5- Is it possible for a human being to fly (not jsut hang in the air)? > 6- Is it possible for a human being to exist in two different places at the same time? > 7- Can a human being revive someone from the dead? > 8- is it possible for a body not to decay after death without any chemical interefence? is there a rule for that? > > > Get 250 color business cards for FREE! > http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ > _______________________________________________ > Tariqas mailing list > Tariqas@stderr.org > http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 06:50:42 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Suriya Osman) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 13:50:42 +0800 Subject: [Tariqas] Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #166 - 5 msgs References: Message-ID: <3B1B21B2.D9E7A223@pd.jaring.my> Dear Sir, About Nur Muhammad, yes that is certainly a Hadith I am familiar with. Nur Muhamad is as I understand it , the spirit of guidance, present before man existed. I will not try to expound something I have not much knowledge of. About Hazrat Inayat Khan's followers, I do not think you know enough of Allah's purpose to pass judgement. * Maa Khalaqta Haza Batilla* ..Allah does not create anything in vain. And to quote again something from the Quran," may it be that you dislike something in which Allah has placed a lot of good.?" About Pancak Silat, Yes I do know they use zikr and in some of the silat, the movements once the gelanggang ( silat circle) is opened , is inspired or channelled as the new age term would put it.Inspiration or chanelling is not exclusive to any religion , it is part of the human heritage. Qi Gong is also an inspired form of exercise where there are channelled movements.All are from Allah. I do not know who you are, and what your roots are, which culture ,which set of beliefs you grew up with. As for me, I was born a Muslim, I say my Fatihah at least 17 times a day, except on days I m excused from prayers. In the Fatihah there is the verse *IH Di Na Siratal Mustaqim*, Show me the Straight Path. Which for me means , i try my best to evaluate each and every action in accordance with Allah's will. It also means that I am aware that my straight path may not be another's straight path and I do not know enough about the circumstances of another's life or needs to be a judge of right and wrong. As to the disservice to Islam and Sufism, Sir, what is in a name? Where is this Islam?Where in the world is it? I see bits and pieces of it everywhere in the world. In the environmental consciousness of environmentalists, in the compassion of volunteers to war zones..., in some so called Christians, Hindus, Jews and....in some..... Muslims....... You said... Would you blame Maryam for the statues of her? Or Budha for his?What is this polytheism that you speak of? When I made a decision to become a sufi, I dreamt a whole set of idols *I had been worshipping* came tumbling down...I had a shock , how could I ,a born Muslim abhorent of idol worhip have had idols, yet that is what my dream told me, I had been worshipping many many idols. I won t say what they were, but my shifting perspectives show me my false Gods are still present. As for having a leg on many mountains. I agree with you that one cannot have a leg on many mountains but, are you saying for example that someone born a Jew is not allowed to do sufi practises? I do not think anybody would want to purposely take on say Hinduism and then also take on Sufism. That some terms get interspersed for eg, saying Chakra instead of Lataif is to me a small matter. These technical aspects are common to all spiritual schools..is there any harm in learning from each other? Did not the Quran say * We created you nations that you may know one another?* Being a born Muslim, I tend to shrink away from statues and icons and other symbols I instinctively associate with polytheism, noting that the Prophet Muhammad destroyed all the idols in the Kaabah but are there really sufis who worship these idols and icons? When there is something of great value and worth , there will certainly be imitators and whole groups of people who want to be associated with it, this cannot be denied but who am I to be the judge of who is what? (As an aside, here in my country, there are shrines of religious people that have become places of worship for all races in my multiracial country. And what do you think they go there to pray for? Well, some of them go and pray for winning lottery numbers.) I see in the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh a perfection of the Deen, of Man's spirituality and the Quran as a light for all times.The influence of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh has been felt the world over, not just among the Muslims . It would be a shame to insist his teachings be only for Muslims and for those who have the capacity to accept a belief system other than that they inherited. I would Allow sufis, pseudo sufis, Muslim sufis all manner of people who want the Love of the Creator to reign uppermost in their hearts their freedom to travel their straight paths though it may not be mine and I reserve my energy to neutralise the vitriol and intolerence of those who have strayed from the path of Love. wasallam Suriya Blake Ross wrote: > > > > > Dear Dr. Suriya > Asalaam Aleikum > A tipping of the hat to the Prophet Adam (s) from Sufism is appropo, > isn't it also true that Sufism is concerned with that realm beyond > space and time? In such a realm, it is possible that Prophet Mohammad > (pbuh) is the origin and completion of Islam. As such, we have the > puzzling statement, "I was a prophet when Adam was in a state between > water and clay," attributed to Prophet Mohammad. I think it is a > mistake to think of mysticism and specifically Sufism in strictly > linear terms. And while Adam represents the purity of the Insan e > Kamal, he doesn't represent the summit. He is the beginning. Sufism > has more to say. > >I do not think HAzrat Inayat Khan in any way tried to unseat it from > Islam. > As with all prophets and saints, one cannot necessarily judge the > person by his/her followers. I don't know what was in the heart of > Inayat Khan. I see his legacy in the shrines and places of worshp > which contain symbols and idols of monotheism and polytheism. I'm not > for religious intolerance and don't want my comments to be miscontrued > that way. I do advocate religious coherence and I don't believe one > can follow serat al mostaghim with traces of Prophet's instructions > mixed with Buddha, Shiva and Vishnu. They are all separate routes to > the same distant destination. We can hardly have a leg on every path > up the mountain without pulling a muscle! The first letter in the Sufi > alphabet is Alef, to satnd straight. To stand straight we must heve > both legs on the same path going in the same direction. > >What he did was to make sufism understandable to the West. > I think Sufism was already understandable to the West without any > additions or deletions from its initial system. In an indirect way, > perhaps I should give him credit for introducing a spirituality which > embraces Sufism as it embraces many religions. Meher Baba did the same > and though I've never been very interested in their teachings, it > seems that their message springs from love and a desire to see > disparate people get along. (I say the same to Ismail Abushams > Martens, point taken Sir.) In the US, we already have a constitution > that is supposed to do that job. But in other parts of the world where > religious and racial intolerance is even more brutal than here in the > US, perhaps these messages serve humanitarian needs even if they do > less service to Islam/Sufism. > > PS. Dr., what do you think of the mix of Sufism or Islam and Pencak > Silat? Are you aware of these schools in your area of Malaysia? From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 07:15:23 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 06:15:23 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #169 - 11 msgs Message-ID:

Peace be upon you friends

There is a perpetual set of misconceptions that should be bridged. Westerners see Easterners as rigid, uncompromising and sin of all sins, intolerent (un-PC) as dictated by our zealous ( and often impotent) laws to see everyone has their position and ideals protected regardless of race, creed, etc. This is necessary because we live in a diverse society with many cultures. This makes us seek compromise amongst ourselves though less so abroad. (so Madonna wants to dance with dervishes...so what?)

Easterners see the Westerners as presumptuous, base and all-too-willing to take a precious and sacred idea of the East and profane it as fad. Islam is the final message of monotheism and as such it has spoken out strongly against the lows of human nature. It is the final assault, after so many failed attempts, against the tyranny of nafs. It is a holy war against the baser elements of human nature. This militancy comes out in useful and unuseful ways depending upon the interpreter. The integrity of the Holy Qur'an is protected with vigor and innovation is strictly forbidden. This makes the mentality strict and most of the time I appreciate this and allow for what seems to be overkill because of the duty Easterners have accepted willingly to protect the Message without any diversion. (and if Salman Rushdie's first amendment rights are imposed upon by a fatwah...well so be it)

So the Message reaches the West and the clash begins. Understanding the motivations and conditions of various cultures is an important step to understanding and dealing effectively across these lines.

Sufism is a good place to exercise tolerance. We should try to understand each other better.


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 10:31:26 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Dr. Suriya) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 17:31:26 +0800 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #169 - 11 msgs References: Message-ID: <3B1B556E.C2CFB499@pd.jaring.my> Dear Blake Ross, Whoever you are. we are all products of our upbringing and environment. The sufi is one who is able to transcend his/her upbringing and environment and automatic reactions to beocome his/her true self. East and West are aspects of the whole. Salam Suriya Blake Ross wrote: > > Peace be upon you friends > > There is a perpetual set of misconceptions that should be > bridged. Westerners see Easterners as rigid, uncompromising and sin of > all sins, intolerent (un-PC) as dictated by our zealous ( and often > impotent) laws to see everyone has their position and ideals protected > regardless of race, creed, etc. This is necessary because we live in a > diverse society with many cultures. This makes us seek compromise > amongst ourselves though less so abroad. (so Madonna wants to dance > with dervishes...so what?) From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 08:05:48 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 08:05:48 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] God Knows Best In-Reply-To: References: <20010603135112.3595.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604075800.00a9fa50@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >I have just one question regarding this discussion. What gives any of us the >wisdom or the right to pass judgment as to whether another truly is a Sufi? > >With Love, >Farishtah Dearest Farishtah, A worthy question that no one here is able to answer and as I am no one I shall do so to the best of my lack of ability. Wisdom gives the right to pass or withhold judgement on the basis of 'by their own mouths do they judge themsleves'. On this basis and on the basis that The only Knower and Lover of God is God Herself and who can judge God? Not even God is able to 'Judge' herself as a Sufi for the Love and Beloved are One. So your question is answered simply as 'Know Thyself Know Thy God' In this way the opinions of others and the nature of opposition, experience and support are as nothing. Gods Knows Best And Don't We Know it! Lobster From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 09:07:30 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 09:07:30 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] misreferences In-Reply-To: <002c01c0ebc5$6739cda0$e98b0f3f@pavilion> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604085540.01e693d0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >Sheikh Crustacian I see you are at it again! Pontificating your judgement >(because it is so high)(your judgement that is) Your perception is always >the highest and the clearest (from your point of view anyway)! Why is it you >are always there telling everyone else that there perception is incorrect >and yours is? Islam is a perfect religion of surrender. Humans who practice My perception is always incorrect and partial. Islam is a perfect religion of surrender. Those who practice, do not need to know otherwise. >it unfortunatly are not. The Prophet (pbuh) himself said he asked for Allahs >forgiveness at least 70 times a day. I wish with my heart I could even >remember Allah 70 times a day! Do you know of any Tariqas that are not >corrupt ? I do! Why dont you pontificate about them for awhile. Of course no >corruption in any Buddist orgs ,right? Sometimes your humor masks your >arrogance sometimes it does not! I grow tired of your Islam/Sufi slams. Give >em a brake once and awhile would ya! Jim 'Everything that goes into the salt mine becomes salt' So Perfect Moslems, Lobsters, Buddhists or advisers exist how? Just as the imperfect exist by the power of imagination - I imagine . . . The masks of tiredness and arrogance and humour and your need for a break are to be met and addressed by you. As imperfect as I am I will continue to do what I feel is necessary just as I will give you a break when I feel you are near to breaking and not like me - near to inflation. Anything else I should do for your comfort, please do not expect compliance for. Anything else I could do to improve your Perfect Religion please apply your self. Good Luck :-) Perfect salty Lobster Break From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 11:00:28 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 11:00:28 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Ibn Arabi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604105815.01e76990@pop3.britishlibrary.net> At 00:45 04/06/01 +0200, you wrote: >In what way can we compare other sufisms to the true sufism of Islam. >actually how can they compare? there is only one Ibn Arabi in this world. >ibn Arabi is the greatest sufi writer of all time. the very existence of >the Meccan Revelations is itself a miracle that points upward to the >greatest miracle, that of the Qur'an. the fact that the Qur'an is the >supereme book that humanity has in hand should mean that texts resulting >from the initial text will be proportionately miraculous, that is, >inimitable. the Meccan Revelations is simply an inimitable book. the whole >sufi phenomenon in Islam, greater in size and quality from any other >mystic system with a claim to originality attests to the dwarfishness of >any attempt at getting in on the act. how many hundreds of names of great, >original writers should we cite? what variety attesting to the infinite >originality of the prototext, the Qur'an! Anything comprable does anybody >know of? Nope! Here is what a recent convert says: JERUSALEM--In a surprise announcement with far-reaching theological implications, Jesus Christ The Nazarene, founder of Christianity and spiritual leader of nearly two billion people, revealed Monday that He has converted to "the one true religion" of Islam. Above: Christ (left) consults with his new spiritual advisor, the Righteous Hassan Abdul al-Aziz. The controversial announcement has sent shockwaves through religious circles around the globe. "Allah is the name of the One and Only God," Christ said. "Allah has 99 beautiful names: He is known as The Gracious, The Merciful, The Beneficent, The Creator, The All-Knowing, The All-Wise, The Lord Of The Universe, The First, The Last and many more. He has revealed Himself unto Me through the holy words of the blessed Qur'an, and I have put My trust and faith in Him." As part of His conversion, Christ said He has taken a new name, Isa Ibn Maryam al-Salaam Christ Shabazz. Christ, 33, is urging Christians worldwide to renounce His former religion of Christianity and join Him in embracing the Muslim way of life. "People of all nations, in the past, you have heard Me say that whosoever shall believe in Me shall not die, but have eternal life," Christ said. "But now, I say unto you, forget I ever said that. There is only one holy revelation of Allah, the Qur'an, which was dictated to the Prophet Mohammed, Praise Be Unto Him, by the Archangel Jibreel in the seventh century after I died." According to Christ, the beauty and perfection of the Qur'an's Surahs are without equal in all creation, encompassing and surpassing both the Judaic Torah and the New Testament Gospels of His apostles. The former Christian messiah went on to cite Surah Aal'imraan 3:67, which reads, "This day I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." "What could be more clear?" Christ said. "I was wrong, and I know that now," He added. "I deeply regret any problems or confusion I may have caused." The controversial retraction of two millennia of Christian doctrine has provoked strongly divided reaction. Millions of devout Christians, insisting that obeisance to Christ's commands is the cornerstone of their faith, have heeded His instructions and converted to Islam. Millions more, however, have decried the recalcitrant Christ's apostasy, breaking ties with Him and calling His conversion "a heathen act" of "utmost blasphemy before Himself." "Jesus, or Isa Shabazz, or whatever He's calling Himself these days, is the way, the truth and the light. It says so in the Bible," said devout Catholic Kathleen Langan of Cork, Ireland, kneeling toward Mecca for the first time. "My loyalty to Him is absolute. If He told me to be a Buddhist, I'd do it. All praise and thanks to Allah." Ruth-Anne Girolamo, a Sunday school teacher in Stillwater, OK, disagreed. "I've been a Bible-believing Christian all my life, and nothing, not even a direct order from Christ Himself, is going to change that," Girolamo said. "If Christ is going to leave the fold and become a sinner, we'll just have to go on worshipping Him against His will." Above: Christ (uppermost left) joins fellow Muslims in prayer. The Roman Catholic Church is just as divided: Approximately half the members of the Vatican's College of Cardinals have advocated embracing Islamic law, while the other half is calling for Christ's immediate excommunication and recommending the interim worship of Pope John Paul II until a suitable replacement deity can be found. In perhaps the oddest development, the Jews For Jesus organization announced Monday that it has split into three separate groups: Jews Still For Jesus, Jews For Allah, and Jews For Just Being Jews Again. Christ said He arrived at the decision to convert after centuries of deep soul-searching and contemplation. But it was not until last week's Good Friday holiday, He said, that His true spiritual path became clear. "I was in church, watching all these people hold a candlelight vigil on the day of My crucifixion, when I suddenly felt a profound sense of emptiness," Christ said. "I got up and walked out, and just sort of wandered aimlessly for a while, wondering what it all meant. Then, I saw something I'd never noticed before. At the mosque down the street, supplicants were gathering to celebrate their weekly holy day of worship, which, by sheer coincidence, happens to be Friday." "I walked in nervously, unsure of why I was even there. After all, during the Crusades, My followers had slaughtered thousands of these people in My name, and I thought maybe they wouldn't accept Me," Christ said. "But as I listened to the Imam deliver the weekly sermon, or khutba, I felt the power of Allah in My heart. For the first time, I knew I'd found true inner peace." "I now know it wasn't random chance that brought Me to that mosque," Christ continued. "It was the will of Allah." When asked about His future plans, Christ said His next move will be to undertake the Hajj, the holy pilgrimage to Mecca all Muslims are required to make at least once in a lifetime. After that, Christ said He hopes to take a few months off to rest and meditate before starting the next phase of His ministry: traveling to churches around the world and imploring the Christian faithful to stop believing in Him. "My new spiritual advisor, the Righteous Hassan Abdul al-Aziz, has explained to Me that I am not--nor was I ever--actually the Son of God, but merely one of many Prophets of the divine revelation which was to come after Me," Christ said. "After all, there is only one God, so any belief in a triune god, or 'trinity,' is polytheistic and contradicts the word of Allah Himself." "For it is written, in Surah Al-Maa'idah 5:116, 'And behold, Allah will say--O Jesus Son of Mary, did you say to men, worship me and my mother as gods beside Allah? He will reply--Glory to you, I could never say what I had no right [to say].'" Christ said. "You see? It turns out, worshipping Me isn't the key to the Gates of Heaven, after all. Salvation can only be found in the Five Pillars of Shahada, Salat, Saum, Zakat and Hajj. I can't believe how obvious it all seems to Me now." Neither the Father nor the Holy Ghost could be reached for comment. From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 11:20:26 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 11:20:26 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: The Spirit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604110617.01e6eec0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >These questions are for those non-muslim 'sufis' to answer: I am a non sufi answerer so please forgive me . . . :-) >Since your chosen form of gnosticism claims to develop the spirit, Thank goodness the spirit does not develop through choice. >1- what is the spirit? Nobody knows or if they do nobody told me about it . . . >2- is there a difference (significant for your order) between the soul >(nafs) and spirit? Allah I always thought of as One not one and a half or a bit of this and a bit of other . . . >3- where is the spirit located 1) during one's life 2) after one dies? Personally I believe life is a fantasy therefore if the spirit has a location then that would be truly fantastic I vote for a location near the beach . . . >4- does the spirit affect our life in this physical world? If it does, >does it influence our world during or after one's life in this world? Well I suppose any fantasy for example the fantasy that one is asking what one knows the answer to influences ones thought. >5- Is it possible for a human being to fly (not jsut hang in the air)? We have flies for flying >6- Is it possible for a human being to exist in two different places at >the same time? Aren't mobile phones wonderful? >7- Can a human being revive someone from the dead? Modern medicine is truly wonderful . . . >8- is it possible for a body not to decay after death without any chemical >interefence? is there a rule for that? Oh it must be musn't it coz saints do it all the time maybe all that prayer does something to the tissue preservation or it could be a miracle. What say you - miracle of importance. Another party trick to impress the soul less. Hope this answers all your questions. Do you have any more or will you now provide the Right answers? I do not think I even got 10% gosh . . . Pray for Dunce Lobster From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 13:37:10 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ismail Abushams) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 05:37:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Sufistry and Assessing Others (was Pseudo-Sufism) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20010604123710.73023.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> --0-547833175-991658230=:70639 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As Salaam Aleikum Pir o Murshid Inayat Khan once descibed himself as "dirt under the feet of Sufis" a good position to know onesself in ,may we ever make it that high !!, the best thing coming out of this discussion is that we are all exposing ourselves as frauds on the path worried about wahabis , the sufi-ness of others and our being right before and not after we "worry" about Allah. ismail Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com wrote: Salaam dear brother Haramullah, My own definition is one that would have to come from within my heart, and this would be difficult to make clear in a forum such as this. I agree, one limitation is language. I believe another, though, is our sense of "self", not only in pursuit of truth but in even discussing the matter. I asked my question in the hope of making this latter point in an oblique way. I appreciate your thoughtful answer. I found your questions most serious and interesting, and hope that they are, indeed, answered elsewhere in this discussion. Be in peace. Farishtah on 6/3/01 7:11 PM, nagasiva@luckymojo.com wrote: > 50010603 Vom > > assalam alaykum, my kin. > > : >> ...What gives any of us the wisdom or the right to pass judgment >> as to whether another truly is a Sufi? > > I presume it a sad function of language barriers that every time > that I have tried to seriously address the rantings of religious > here in Tariqas that my questions and the issues I was raising > were ignored or never addressed. I hope it is not simply dogmatism > without scholarly backing (though it does give this appearance > when I ask for some kind of authoritative reference and receive > repeated claims). > > the problem of the term 'sufism' is that, like many others of its > ilk, it is used simultaneously in many ways, from membership in > an order to an ideal to which one might aspire. the added dimension > of controvery over whether sufis must be Muslim makes the quagmire > of attempting to discuss it fairly impassible. > > here I'll respond to your query and hope that someone will reply > to my very serious questions elsewhere.... > > MEMBERSHIP > where 'sufi' means someone who is part of a sufi group or order > > wisdom > > * knowledge of the orders of sufism gives the wisdom to > pass judgement to those who know of their regulations > and means of admittance (i.e. if I know that you are not > a member of any sufi order, then I have the wisdom to > ascertain that you are not a sufi by this definition) > > right > > * anyone with mediocre rationality can logically determine > by proof or investigation whether someone is part of a > sufi order, and then go on to testify to this by right > of that privilege afforded any participant in a public forum > > > IDEAL > where 'sufi' means someone who has attained some measure of > spiritual success, whatever this may mean to the listener > > wisdom > > * exposure to and knowledge of the personal state of another > might afford one the ability to assess whether that other > had qualified for whatever one associates with 'sufism', > whether that be a particular activity or quality of character > > right > > * what right has anyone to evaluate the spiritual state of > another? by virtue of one's relation to that individual, > a response to claims made by the individual in question, > and a reflection purely on the basis of one's own ability > to provide this kind of evaluation (one's reliability in > this regard determines the value of the assessment) one > might exercise any right so presumed. > > peace be with you, > > haramullah > nagasiva@luckymojo.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-547833175-991658230=:70639 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

 As Salaam Aleikum

Pir o Murshid Inayat Khan once descibed himself as "dirt under the feet of Sufis" a good position to know onesself in ,may we ever make it that high !!, the best thing coming out of this discussion is that we are all exposing ourselves as frauds on the path worried about wahabis , the sufi-ness of others and our being right before and not after we "worry" about Allah.

ismail

  Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com wrote:

Salaam dear brother Haramullah,

My own definition is one that would have to come from within my heart, and
this would be difficult to make clear in a forum such as this. I agree, one
limitation is language. I believe another, though, is our sense of "self",
not only in pursuit of truth but in even discussing the matter. I asked my
question in the hope of making this latter point in an oblique way. I
appreciate your thoughtful answer. I found your questions most serious and
interesting, and hope that they are, indeed, answered elsewhere in this
discussion.

Be in peace.

Farishtah



on 6/3/01 7:11 PM, nagasiva@luckymojo.com wrote:

> 50010603 Vom
>
> assalam alaykum, my kin.
>
> :
>> ...What gives any of us the wisdom or the right to pass judgment
>> as to whether another truly is a Sufi?
>
> I presume it a sad function of language barriers that every time
> that I have tried to seriously address the rantings of religious
> here in Tariqas that my questions and the issues I was raising
> were ignored or never addressed. I hope it is not simply dogmatism
> without scholarly backing (though it does give this appearance
> when I ask for some kind of authoritative reference and receive
> repeated claims).
>
> the problem of the term 'sufism' is that, like many others of its
> ilk, it is used simultaneously in many ways, from membership in
> an order to an ideal to which one might aspire. the added dimension
> of controvery over whether sufis must be Muslim makes the quagmire
> of attempting to discuss it fairly impassible.
>
> here I'll respond to your query and hope that someone will reply
> to my very serious questions elsewhere....
>
> MEMBERSHIP
> where 'sufi' means someone who is part of a sufi group or order
>
> wisdom
>
> * knowledge of the orders of sufism gives the wisdom to
> pass judgement to those who know of their regulations
> and means of admittance (i.e. if I know that you are not
> a member of any sufi order, then I have the wisdom to
> ascertain that you are not a sufi by this definition)
>
> right
>
> * anyone with mediocre rationality can logically determine
> by proof or investigation whether someone is part of a
> sufi order, and then go on to testify to this by right
> of that privilege afforded any participant in a public forum
>
>
> IDEAL
> where 'sufi' means someone who has attained some measure of
> spiritual success, whatever this may mean to the listener
>
> wisdom
>
> * exposure to and knowledge of the personal state of another
> might afford one the ability to assess whether that other
> had qualified for whatever one associates with 'sufism',
> whether that be a particular activity or quality of character
>
> right
>
> * what right has anyone to evaluate the spiritual state of
> another? by virtue of one's relation to that individual,
> a response to claims made by the individual in question,
> and a reflection purely on the basis of one's own ability
> to provide this kind of evaluation (one's reliability in
> this regard determines the value of the assessment) one
> might exercise any right so presumed.
>
> peace be with you,
>
> haramullah
> nagasiva@luckymojo.com

_______________________________________________
Tariqas mailing list
Tariqas@stderr.org
http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-547833175-991658230=:70639-- From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 14:40:50 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 09:40:50 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Sufistry and Assessing Others (was Pseudo-Sufism) In-Reply-To: <20010604123710.73023.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --MS_Mac_OE_3074492450_4683766_MIME_Part Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit As Salaam Aleikum Ismail, Thank you very much! Farishtah on 6/4/01 8:37 AM, majnoonullah@yahoo.com wrote: As Salaam Aleikum Pir o Murshid Inayat Khan once descibed himself as "dirt under the feet of Sufis" a good position to know onesself in ,may we ever make it that high !!, the best thing coming out of this discussion is that we are all exposing ourselves as frauds on the path worried about wahabis , the sufi-ness of others and our being right before and not after we "worry" about Allah. ismail Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com wrote: Salaam dear brother Haramullah, My own definition is one that would have to come from within my heart, and this would be difficult to make clear in a forum such as this. I agree, one limitation is language. I believe another, though, is our sense of "self", not only in pursuit of truth but in even discussing the matter. I asked my question in the hope of making this latter point in an oblique way. I appreciate your thoughtful answer. I found your questions most serious and interesting, and hope that they are, indeed, answered elsewhere in this discussion. Be in peace. Farishtah on 6/3/01 7:11 PM, nagasiva@luckymojo.com wrote: > 50010603 Vom > > assalam alaykum, my kin. > > : >> ...What gives any of us the wisdom or the right to pass judgment >> as to w! hether another truly is a Sufi? > > I presume it a sad function of language barriers that every time > that I have tried to seriously address the rantings of religious > here in Tariqas that my questions and the issues I was raising > were ignored or never addressed. I hope it is not simply dogmatism > without scholarly backing (though it does give this appearance > when I ask for some kind of authoritative reference and receive > repeated claims). > > the problem of the term 'sufism' is that, like many others of its > ilk, it is used simultaneously in many ways, from membership in > an order to an ideal to which one might aspire. the added dimension > of controvery over whether sufis must be Muslim makes the quagmire > of attempting to discuss it fairly impassible. > > here I'll respond to your query and hope that someone will reply > to my very serious questions elsewhe! re.... > > MEMBERSHIP > where 'sufi' means someone who is part of a sufi group or order > > wisdom > > * knowledge of the orders of sufism gives the wisdom to > pass judgement to those who know of their regulations > and means of admittance (i.e. if I know that you are not > a member of any sufi order, then I have the wisdom to > ascertain that you are not a sufi by this definition) > > right > > * anyone with mediocre rationality can logically determine > by proof or investigation whether someone is part of a > sufi order, and then go on to testify to this by right > of that privilege afforded any participant in a public forum > > > IDEAL > where 'sufi' means someone who has attained some measure of > spiritual success, whatever this may mean to the listener > > wisdom > > * exposure to and knowledge of th! e personal state of another > might afford one the ability to assess whether that other > had qualified for whatever one associates with 'sufism', > whether that be a particular activity or quality of character > > right > > * what right has anyone to evaluate the spiritual state of > another? by virtue of one's relation to that individual, > a response to claims made by the individual in question, > and a reflection purely on the basis of one's own ability > to provide this kind of evaluation (one's reliability in > this regard determines the value of the assessment) one > might exercise any right so presumed. > > peace be with you, > > haramullah > nagasiva@luckymojo.com --MS_Mac_OE_3074492450_4683766_MIME_Part Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: [Tariqas] Sufistry and Assessing Others (was Pseudo-Sufism)</TIT= LE> </HEAD> <BODY> As Salaam Aleikum Ismail,<BR> <BR> Thank you very much!<BR> <BR> Farishtah<BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> on 6/4/01 8:37 AM, majnoonullah@yahoo.com wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><BR> As Salaam Aleikum <BR> <BR> Pir o Murshid Inayat Khan once descibed himself as "dirt under the fee= t of Sufis" a good position to know onesself in ,may we ever make it th= at high !!, the best thing coming out of this discussion is that we are all = exposing ourselves as frauds on the path worried about wahabis , the sufi-ne= ss of others and our being right <U>before </U>and not <U>after </U>we "= ;worry" about Allah. <BR> <BR> ismail <BR> <BR>  <B><I>Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com</I></B> wrote: <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>Salaam dear brother Haramullah,<BR> <BR> My own definition is one that would have to come from within my heart, and<= BR> this would be difficult to make clear in a forum such as this. I agree, one= <BR> limitation is language. I believe another, though, is our sense of "se= lf",<BR> not only in pursuit of truth but in even discussing the matter. I asked my<= BR> question in the hope of making this latter point in an oblique way. I<BR> appreciate your thoughtful answer. I found your questions most serious and<= BR> interesting, and hope that they are, indeed, answered elsewhere in this<BR> discussion. <BR> <BR> Be in peace.<BR> <BR> Farishtah<BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> on 6/3/01 7:11 PM, nagasiva@luckymojo.com wrote:<BR> <BR> > 50010603 Vom<BR> > <BR> > assalam alaykum, my kin.<BR> > <BR> > :<BR> >> ...What gives any of us the wisdom or the right to pass judgment<B= R> >> as to w! hether another truly is a Sufi?<BR> > <BR> > I presume it a sad function of language barriers that every time<BR> > that I have tried to seriously address the rantings of religious<BR> > here in Tariqas that my questions and the issues I was raising<BR> > were ignored or never addressed. I hope it is not simply dogmatism<BR> > without scholarly backing (though it does give this appearance<BR> > when I ask for some kind of authoritative reference and receive<BR> > repeated claims).<BR> > <BR> > the problem of the term 'sufism' is that, like many others of its<BR> > ilk, it is used simultaneously in many ways, from membership in<BR> > an order to an ideal to which one might aspire. the added dimension<BR= > > of controvery over whether sufis must be Muslim makes the quagmire<BR> > of attempting to discuss it fairly impassible.<BR> > <BR> > here I'll respond to your query and hope that someone will reply<BR> > to my very serious questions elsewhe! re....<BR> > <BR> > MEMBERSHIP<BR> > where 'sufi' means someone who is part of a sufi group or order<BR> > <BR> > wisdom<BR> > <BR> > * knowledge of the orders of sufism gives the wisdom to<BR> > pass judgement to those who know of their regulations<BR> > and means of admittance (i.e. if I know that you are not<BR> > a member of any sufi order, then I have the wisdom to<BR> > ascertain that you are not a sufi by this definition)<BR> > <BR> > right<BR> > <BR> > * anyone with mediocre rationality can logically determine<BR> > by proof or investigation whether someone is part of a<BR> > sufi order, and then go on to testify to this by right<BR> > of that privilege afforded any participant in a public forum<BR> > <BR> > <BR> > IDEAL<BR> > where 'sufi' means someone who has attained some measure of<BR> > spiritual success, whatever this may mean to the listener<BR> > <BR> > wisdom<BR> > <BR> > * exposure to and knowledge of th! e personal state of another<BR> > might afford one the ability to assess whether that other<BR> > had qualified for whatever one associates with 'sufism',<BR> > whether that be a particular activity or quality of character<BR> > <BR> > right<BR> > <BR> > * what right has anyone to evaluate the spiritual state of<BR> > another? by virtue of one's relation to that individual,<BR> > a response to claims made by the individual in question,<BR> > and a reflection purely on the basis of one's own ability<BR> > to provide this kind of evaluation (one's reliability in<BR> > this regard determines the value of the assessment) one<BR> > might exercise any right so presumed.<BR> > <BR> > peace be with you,<BR> > <BR> > haramullah<BR> > nagasiva@luckymojo.com <BR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> </BODY> </HTML> --MS_Mac_OE_3074492450_4683766_MIME_Part-- From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 14:44:24 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (David Isaacs) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 06:44:24 -0700 Subject: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism In-Reply-To: <20010603135112.3595.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <MABBIOHGFGIDCBCONFFMEEOECCAA.whirlderv@ap.net> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C0ECC1.CB1EA3C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ismail: I am not even a drop in the bucket in my Sufi practices, but I do know my own heart, whatever its limitations. The Sufism of YOUR practice, in its details, is not mine. Yet this did not prevent me from attending and enjoying from every perspective, a three day annual Gathering of Sufi's in the Bay Area here in California. The Pir Shabda Kahn and other Sheiks were in attendance. The spirit of Samual Lewis and Murshid Inayat Kahn was in the air. Hearts were open and all were welcome. "Come, come, a thousand times come. This is not a caravan of despair." We would not define you or limit you or measure your perfection as any more or less than any other child of Allah. Sufism thrives as Allah wills, Inayat Kahns' visions have carried beliefs that I may never have heard of otherwise into my life. I am grateful for that. Alhamdulilah! None of us were there at the planting of the roots of Sufism. Stories abound. Tales too numerous to mention. Scholars expound on every imaginable thing. Students proclaim their different truths at the drop of a hat. Fundamentalists clutch their beliefs to their heart as a shield against anyone who is different. So it goes my brother. Recently, I had the opportunity to travel locally here in California and on the day of my visit to the ocean the beauty of the place was beyond measure. My heart filled to bursting with the reality of love, harmony and beauty, I stepped up to the edge of the precipice, and expounded at the very top of my voice, "ALLAH HO AKBAR!" I am blessed to live in a place where I could do that without consequenses. Without judgement. Without limitations. May your part of the world enjoy such too. And may you discover peace and light within your soul. Love, only love, Davidi. -----Original Message----- From: tariqas-admin@stderr.org [mailto:tariqas-admin@stderr.org]On Behalf Of Ismail Abushams Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 6:51 AM To: tariqas@dns1.stderr.org Subject: Re: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism As Salaam Aleikum Dear Brother As Muslim involved with the teachings of Inayat Khan (actually i came to Islam via the teachings of Pir o Murshid ) it saddens me that you describe him as "one of those Universalists" . The unity of religious ideals (wich actually comprise only a small part of his teachings ) is expressed in often the same words by teachers immersed in Islam like Sheik Nazim of the Haqani-Naqsbandia ,the fact that some of his mureeds ran away with this particular part of the teachings does not reduce the value of the extensive body of teachings that found and created an entryway for the teachings of Tassawuf in the west . Before you judge Inayat Khan by his mureeds it behooves you to read some of his work , or are you like the fundamentalists who judge every work of Sufism as bi"da just because some Turuq moved away from Islam or got involved with the powerstructure. Salaams ismail Abushams Martens Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com> wrote: Peace be upon you, Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian Sufi. "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized and certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check out the International Association of Sufism website which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second hand spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and devote! d! themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it. And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know if he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this message alive. If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, you can be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how Muslim their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a different course. Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. Whether these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah." Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism is the heart of Islam. FYI ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C0ECC1.CB1EA3C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" = http-equiv=3DContent-Type> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D000355412-04062001>Ismail:</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D000355412-04062001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN = class=3D000355412-04062001>I am=20 not even a drop in the bucket in my Sufi practices, but I do know my own = heart,=20 whatever its limitations.  The Sufism of YOUR practice, in its = details, is=20 not mine.  Yet this did not prevent me from attending and enjoying = from=20 every perspective, a three day annual Gathering of Sufi's in the Bay = Area here=20 in California.  The Pir Shabda Kahn and other Sheiks were in=20 attendance.  The spirit of Samual Lewis and Murshid Inayat Kahn was = in the=20 air. Hearts were open and all were welcome.  "Come, come, a = thousand times=20 come.  This is not a caravan of despair."  We would not define = you or=20 limit you or measure your perfection as any more or less than any other = child of=20 Allah.  Sufism thrives as Allah wills, Inayat Kahns' visions have = carried=20 beliefs that I may never have heard of otherwise into my life.  I = am=20 grateful for that.  Alhamdulilah!</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D000355412-04062001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN = class=3D000355412-04062001>None=20 of us were there at the planting of the roots of = Sufism.  Stories=20 abound.  Tales too numerous to mention.  Scholars expound on = every=20 imaginable thing.  Students proclaim their different truths at the = drop of=20 a hat.  Fundamentalists clutch their beliefs to their heart as a = shield=20 against anyone who is different.  So it goes my brother.  = Recently, I=20 had the opportunity to travel locally here in California and on the day = of my=20 visit to the ocean the beauty of the place was beyond measure.  My = heart=20 filled to bursting with the reality of love, harmony and beauty, I = stepped up to=20 the edge of the precipice, and expounded at the very top of my voice, = "ALLAH HO=20 AKBAR!"</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D000355412-04062001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN = class=3D000355412-04062001>I am=20 blessed to live in a place where I could do that without = consequenses. =20 Without judgement.  Without limitations.  May your part of the = world=20 enjoy such too.  And may you discover peace and light within your=20 soul.  Love, only love, Davidi.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr><FONT = face=3DTahoma=20 size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> = tariqas-admin@stderr.org=20 [mailto:tariqas-admin@stderr.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Ismail=20 Abushams<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, June 03, 2001 6:51 AM<BR><B>To:</B>=20 tariqas@dns1.stderr.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Tariqas]=20 Pseudo-Sufism<BR><BR></DIV></FONT> <P>As Salaam Aleikum=20 <P>Dear Brother=20 <P>As Muslim involved with the teachings of Inayat Khan (actually i = came to=20 Islam via the teachings of Pir o Murshid ) it saddens me that you = describe him=20 as "one of those Universalists" . The unity of religious ideals (wich = actually=20 comprise only a small part of his teachings ) is expressed in often = the same=20 words by teachers immersed in Islam like Sheik Nazim of the = Haqani-Naqsbandia=20 ,the fact that some of his mureeds ran away with this particular part = of the=20 teachings does not reduce the value of the extensive body of teachings = that=20 found and created an entryway for the teachings of Tassawuf in the = west .=20 Before you judge Inayat Khan by his mureeds it behooves you to read = some of=20 his work , or are you like the fundamentalists who judge every work of = Sufism=20 as bi"da just because some Turuq moved away from Islam or got involved = with=20 the powerstructure.=20 <P>Salaams=20 <P>ismail Abushams Martens=20 <P>  <B><I>Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com></I></B> = wrote:=20 <BLOCKQUOTE=20 style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> <DIV> <P>Peace be upon you,</P> <P>Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian = Sufi.=20 "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more = universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized = and=20 certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you = check out=20 the <A href=3D"http://www.ias.org/">International Association of = Sufism=20 website </A>which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second = hand=20 spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and = motivated by the=20 call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat = Inayat Khan=20 is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word = Sufism=20 from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our = friend=20 meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a = group of=20 people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called = the Ahle=20 Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform = of the=20 Mosque of the Prophet and devote! d! themselved entirely to the = meaning of=20 the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no = more=20 interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. = In this=20 sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This = message=20 has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it. = </P> <P> </P> <P>And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't = know if he=20 would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi = Movement, Sufi=20 Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism = as a=20 Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. = Quietists=20 are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid = and=20 Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious=20 traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, = that=20 movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the = contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the = hands=20 of different Muslims to keep this message alive. </P> <P> </P> <P> If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, = you can=20 be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim = how Muslim=20 their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a = different=20 course.</P> <P>Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I = believe is=20 at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends = on the=20 gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside = of the=20 orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old = school,=20 proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and = traditions which=20 must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are = trained=20 and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules = completely in=20 accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. = Whether=20 these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a = matter of=20 accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah." </P> <P>Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is = no=20 problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that = Sufism is=20 the heart of Islam.</P> <P>FYI</P></DIV><BR clear=3Dall> <HR> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <A=20 href=3D"http://explorer.msn.com/">http://explorer.msn.com</A><BR> <P></P>_______________________________________________ Tariqas = mailing list=20 Tariqas@stderr.org=20 http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas</BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> <HR SIZE=3D1> <B>Do You Yahoo!?</B><BR><A=20 href=3D"http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=3Dmailiyfoot">Yahoo! = Mail Personal=20 Address</A> - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo!=20 Mail.</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C0ECC1.CB1EA3C0-- From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 12:06:54 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 12:06:54 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] path of Love In-Reply-To: <3B1B21B2.D9E7A223@pd.jaring.my> References: <F32z2Mb1s7nlT2NqFJ300000314@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604120021.01e66d30@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >Would you blame Maryam for the statues of her? Or Budha for his?What is >this polytheism that you speak of? When I made a decision to become a >sufi, I dreamt a whole set of idols *I had been worshipping* came >tumbling down...I had a shock , how could I ,a born Muslim abhorent of >idol worhip have had idols, yet that is what my dream told me, I had May Allah the Baraka of His Near Ones Sustain and amplify your intention and commitment. >I would Allow sufis, pseudo sufis, Muslim sufis all manner of people who >want the Love of the Creator to reign uppermost in their hearts their >freedom to travel their straight paths though it may not be mine and I >reserve my energy to neutralise the vitriol and intolerence of those who >have strayed from the path of Love. > >wasallam > >Suriya :-) Allah Knows Best Lobster From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 14:56:37 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 09:56:37 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] God Knows Best In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604075800.00a9fa50@pop3.britishlibrary.net> Message-ID: <B7410BD4.6CAD%Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com> on 6/4/01 3:05 AM, lobster@britishlibrary.net wrote: > Gods Knows Best > And Don't We Know it! And so, dear Lobster, it comes back to continuing to polish the mirror :-) Fondly, Farishtah From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 15:25:23 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (David Isaacs) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 07:25:23 -0700 Subject: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism In-Reply-To: <F129RBaYFkuutSgcOrB000035c0@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <MABBIOHGFGIDCBCONFFMGEOFCCAA.whirlderv@ap.net> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0025_01C0ECC7.84ADBEC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks for the compliments Blake. Since childhood in the Bronx, N.Y., where the words Sufi, Islam, Murshid were never heard in any way, shape or form, and where few of my people expounded anything akin to "spirit", I have been fortunate indeed to have come to the belief that there was more to life than meets the eye. Twenty five years of experience, study and prayer have expanded my horizons through much more than even the universal worship alludes to. Drawn to Sufism in the Chisti tradition, I have been fortunate beyond measure in personal experience with teachers in the body and beyond. Localized, certainly. Limited, I think not. Chisti, Naqshibandi, Mevlevi and other schools, three generations of the line of Inayat Kahn, Murshid Samual Lewis, my Budddist[just spent a weekend with the Dali Lama], Baptist, Jewish, Christian and yes , even Zoroastrian, friends, have all shared their flavors with me. Although my name for God when I pray is ALLAH, my firm belief is in the brotherhood of all men/women. I have encountered the 32 flavors of compassion and mercy in houses of worship everywhere and am always amazed at the maifestations of "spiritual truth". GOD works in mysterious ways. Take for example, your heartfelt explanation of the roots of Sufism "people of the platform". Not anything I have ever read in English. Or heard from any teacher or Sheik. Does it mean that you are right?correct? It only means that you heard a different story than I did. As Allah wills. WE are each drawn in different ways. I am, heart and soul, as revealed to me by the present day Postneshin, a Mevlevi Semazen. I do not wander the desert of despair anymore. May Allah grace you with an open heart. Love, only love, David. -----Original Message----- From: tariqas-admin@stderr.org [mailto:tariqas-admin@stderr.org]On Behalf Of Blake Ross Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 1:20 PM To: tariqas@dns1.stderr.org Subject: [Tariqas] Pseudo-Sufism Peace be upon you, Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian Sufi. "Sufi Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more universal point of view while your take on sufism is very localized and certainly not a complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check out the International Association of Sufism website which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second hand spirituality movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call of Islam is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just one of the universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its Islamic roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that Sufis were the mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People of the Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the Prophet and devoted! themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of the Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics or power than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the US long ago and I'm surprised you missed it. And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know if he would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi Movement, Sufi Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism as a Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. Quietists are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid and Wicca roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious traditions have spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, that movement is Sufism or Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the contributions of many Muslims that even gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to keep this message alive. If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, you can be sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how Muslim their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a different course. Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I believe is at the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on the gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside of the orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old school, proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and traditions which must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are trained and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules completely in accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. Whether these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a matter of accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah." Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no problem, but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism is the heart of Islam. FYI ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas ------=_NextPart_000_0025_01C0ECC7.84ADBEC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" = http-equiv=3DContent-Type> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN = class=3D730433813-04062001>Thanks=20 for the compliments Blake. Since childhood in the Bronx, N.Y., where the = words=20 Sufi, Islam, Murshid were never heard in any way, shape or form, and = where few=20 of my people expounded anything akin to "spirit", I have been fortunate = indeed=20 to have come to the belief that there was more to life than meets the=20 eye.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN = class=3D730433813-04062001>Twenty=20 five years of experience, study and prayer have expanded my horizons = through=20 much more than even the universal worship alludes to.  Drawn to = Sufism in=20 the Chisti tradition, I have been fortunate beyond measure in personal=20 experience with teachers in the body and beyond.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001>Localized, certainly.  Limited, I think = not.=20 Chisti, Naqshibandi, Mevlevi and other schools, three generations of the = line of=20 Inayat Kahn, Murshid Samual Lewis, my Budddist[just spent a weekend with = the=20 Dali Lama], Baptist,</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001>Jewish, Christian and yes , even Zoroastrian, = friends,=20 have all shared their flavors with me.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001>Although my name for God when I pray is = ALLAH, my firm=20 belief is in the brotherhood of all men/women.  I have encountered = the 32=20 flavors of compassion and mercy in houses of worship everywhere and am = always=20 amazed at the maifestations of "spiritual truth".  GOD works in = mysterious=20 ways.  Take for example, your heartfelt explanation of the roots of = Sufism=20 "people of the platform".  Not anything I have ever read in = English. =20 Or heard from any teacher or Sheik.  Does it mean that you are=20 right?correct?  It only means that you heard a different story than = I did.=20 As Allah wills.  WE are each drawn in different = ways.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN = class=3D730433813-04062001>I am,=20 heart and soul, as revealed to me by the present day Postneshin, a = Mevlevi=20 Semazen.  I do not wander the desert of despair anymore.  May = Allah=20 grace you with an open heart. Love, only love,  = David.</SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D2><SPAN=20 class=3D730433813-04062001> </SPAN>-----Original = Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>=20 tariqas-admin@stderr.org [mailto:tariqas-admin@stderr.org]<B>On Behalf = Of=20 </B>Blake Ross<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, June 02, 2001 1:20 = PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20 tariqas@dns1.stderr.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> [Tariqas]=20 Pseudo-Sufism<BR><BR></DIV></FONT> <BLOCKQUOTE></FONT> <DIV> <P>Peace be upon you,</P> <P>Yo David Duuuuuuuude!!! You are the true emblem of Californian = Sufi. "Sufi=20 Lite" Our brother Muhammad is speaking, I believe, from a more = universal point=20 of view while your take on sufism is very localized and certainly not = a=20 complete picture of the US Sufism movement. If you check out the <A=20 href=3D"http://www.ias.org">International Association of Sufism = website=20 </A>which is cradled in the very heart of new age, second hand = spirituality=20 movements, you'll see that Sufism inspired and motivated by the call = of Islam=20 is still alive and well even in California. Hazrat Inayat Khan is just = one of=20 the universalist who tried to unseat the word Sufism from its = Islamic=20 roots. By the vanguard of Islam, perhaps our friend meant that = Sufis were=20 the mystics of Islam. They started as a group of people, living = at the=20 time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), called the Ahle Suffa or "People = of the=20 Platform." They lived on the platform of the Mosque of the = Prophet and=20 devoted! themselved entirely to the meaning of the inspired message of = the=20 Prophet Muhammad. They were no more interested in politics = or power=20 than they were in wealth or title. In this sense, Sufism has always=20 represented the"Vanguard of Islam." This message has reached the = US long=20 ago and I'm surprised you missed it. </P> <P> </P> <P>And while Muhammad is much too polite to be blunt, and I don't know = if he=20 would agree with me, I find it rude and manipulative for Sufi = Movement, Sufi=20 Order of the West and other groups to not readily acknowledge Sufism = as a=20 Islamic tradition. Kabbalist are not Hindus, they're from Judaism. = Quietists=20 are not Buddhist, they are Christian. Zen isn't developed from Druid = and Wicca=20 roots. You see where I'm going with this? All major religious = traditions have=20 spawned a gnostic or mystical path. In Islam, that movement is = Sufism or=20 Tasawouf. By negating this, we ignore the contributions of many = Muslims=20 that even gave their lives at the hands of different Muslims to = keep this=20 message alive. </P> <P> </P> <P> If Islam ever came into favor in the general US zeitgeist, = you can be=20 sure EVERYONE would be jumping in front of each other to claim how = Muslim=20 their Sufi group is. For now, political climates dictate a = different=20 course.</P> <P>Does one need to convert to Islam to be a Sufi, which I = believe is at=20 the heart of "Can everyone be invited to a Sufi zekr." It depends on = the=20 gathering, in my opinion. "Conversion" to Islam means little outside = of the=20 orthodox "now I belong to such and such community or ummah." Old = school,=20 proper Sufism is a lineage and there are certain rules and traditions = which=20 must be observed to be called a Sufi gathering proper. Disciples are = trained=20 and convened as masters according to totally Islamic rules completely = in=20 accordance with the Holy Qur'an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. = Whether=20 these masters accept a student and watch over her or him is also a = matter of=20 accordance to Islam or the "will of Allah." </P> <P>Everything else is a shade of Sufism and that is fine, there is no = problem,=20 but we should never, under any circumstance, deny that Sufism is the = heart of=20 Islam.</P> <P>FYI</P></DIV><BR clear=3Dall> <HR> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <A=20 href=3D"http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</A><BR> <P></P>_______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing = list=20 Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas=20 </BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0025_01C0ECC7.84ADBEC0-- From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 16:06:30 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (David Isaacs) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 08:06:30 -0700 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Ways of Dealing with the Wahhabis In-Reply-To: <bd.f0fee23.2849dcb4@aol.com> Message-ID: <MABBIOHGFGIDCBCONFFMCEOGCCAA.whirlderv@ap.net> My real world is bounded by the physical limits of the USA.East Coast, West Coast, Midwest, Hawaii, ... the very word Wahabbi has not ever been mentioned. No notice, warning, explanation by mureed, sheik, newsletter or otherwise. Just this List. And yes, Sufism and Islam, as I first encountered it 30 years ago in the USA, were not of one piece. That's the way it was, a cultural diversion. And the notion of student and teacher as a mystical happening is just how it was first presented to me. The mystical needle in a haystack. Things are not as you might expect here in the USA. For example, on a recent visit to Dallas, Texas. I opened the phone directory to locate a mosque. Of the thousands of churches listed, there was just one "garden of Allah". And despite these cultural differences, none of it matters. As long as I know the magic words, "Alhamdulilah" and "inshallah", I am instant brother to millions wherever I encounter them. Allah Ho Akbar! Love, only Love Davidi -----Original Message----- From: tariqas-admin@stderr.org [mailto:tariqas-admin@stderr.org]On Behalf Of UPRISING9@aol.com Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 11:08 PM To: tariqas@dns1.stderr.org Subject: Re: [Tariqas] Re: Ways of Dealing with the Wahhabis salaam alaikum davidi, you seem to live within your own dream world. somehow you have managed to take sufism out of its historical and ACTUAL place within Islam, and made it soemthign new, APART from Islam. It is not some mysterious, other than 'thing'. it is THE mysticism of Islam. You say a teacher will just "appear". For the vast ammount of the Muslim world this has never been the case. Some teachers wander searching for students, other students wander seeking a teacher. But most of all, each village/town/city had an Order that people in that area would be a part of (as there standard islamic practise. If we turn Sufism into some random "miracle' waiting to happen the a select few, then what will become of the Islam that is left for all the others? And where do you live that you have been so lucky not to run into wahabiya? they are swarming in just about every muslim community in the world (except for Iran, hamdu'lillah)... I suggest you wake up and take a look at the real world around you. wa salaam shahid In a message dated 6/1/01 4:19:06 PM, whirlderv@ap.net writes: << Yo! Muhammad dude! What in Gods name are you talking about? It surely isn't any sufism that I have ever encountered in books or in person here in the usa. Of course we are just speaking of the work introduced by hazrat inayat kahn- thats about the last century-but even so...you should have heard of it by now. and sufism , while in many ways is rooted in islam, i have never heard it called the "spiritual vangard of same". And "becoming a sufi" does require time, intention, direction and a teacher, not to mention being "ready". realize that sufism does not care if you approve of it or not...thats not what it is about. And it certainly is not about inviting anybody. when the student is ready, the teacher will appear. this is not a proselytizing process. and needing to be planned/supported by statistics etc. where did yo get this from? who told you this ??? this truly has all the markers of really being confused on the concept. And as for wahhabism...the only place I have encountered it is on this LIST. Reassess what you're saying my brother. Love, only love, Davidi. >> _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 17:10:47 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 16:10:47 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #171 - 3 msgs Message-ID: <F236ZcIVMm0LzEDYZqB0000d16b@hotmail.com> <html><DIV>"Pir o Murshid Inayat Khan once descibed himself as "dirt under the feet of Sufis" a good position to know onesself in ,may we ever make it that high !!, the best thing coming out of this discussion is that we are all exposing ourselves as frauds on the path worried about wahabis , the sufi-ness of others and our being right <U>before </U>and not <U>after </U>we "worry" about Allah."</DIV> <DIV></DIV>> <DIV>Ismail</DIV> <DIV>Peace be upon you</DIV> <DIV>I embrace your positive message with all my heart. It is most encourging to have someone like you in a <U>discussion group</U> setting us all straight. I am dirt under your feet big boy. What might we discuss O humble one? What would be acceptable to your Absolute Annihilatedness? Expose thy self to us you big sham!</DIV> <DIV>sheeeeeeeeeesh!</DIV> <DIV>Blake</DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html> From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 17:19:54 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 16:19:54 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #171 - 3 msgs Message-ID: <F230b1ZVihIHukLnkbX0000619f@hotmail.com> <html><DIV>Salaam-Peace be upon you</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Members of tariqas</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I had no idea you all were in the throws of some sensitivity training intensive. If someone will kindly tell me where the sacred ground ends (if it does) and where we may safely tread, I'd be most appreciative.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I have chill pills for sale. WWW.LIGHTENUP.COM</DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html> From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 17:29:23 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 16:29:23 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #171 - 3 msgs Message-ID: <F580bHwrMM7X4rBgPD700004d9b@hotmail.com> <html><DIV> <P><BR><BR></P></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV>To: David I</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am glad that you had a nice weekend. Where is that Sufi gathering. I've heard it is a Sufi Camp in the Mendocino woods? Ever been to Sufism Symposium? </DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html> From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 17:33:59 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (elijah wright) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 12:33:59 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #171 - 3 msgs In-Reply-To: <F230b1ZVihIHukLnkbX0000619f@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0106041233270.28386-100000@eckhart.stderr.org> hee hee... chill pills are occasionally helpful :) staying cool, elijah > Salaam-Peace be upon you > > Members of tariqas > > I had no idea you all were in the throws of some sensitivity training > intensive. If someone will kindly tell me where the sacred ground ends > (if it does) and where we may safely tread, I'd be most appreciative. > > I have chill pills for sale. WWW.LIGHTENUP.COM > > ________________________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list > Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas > -- -- $ chown us:us yourbase -R From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 16:16:45 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 16:16:45 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] God Knows Best In-Reply-To: <B7410BD4.6CAD%Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604075800.00a9fa50@pop3.britishlibrary.net> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604161237.00a9dcb0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> At 09:56 04/06/01 -0400, you wrote: >on 6/4/01 3:05 AM, lobster@britishlibrary.net wrote: > > > Gods Knows Best > > And Don't We Know it! > > >And so, dear Lobster, it comes back to continuing to polish the mirror :-) > >Fondly, >Farishtah :-) Hi Dear Farishtah, Peace and joy. Do you feel if we polish off the glass and the silver the mirror will be . . . GONE? (I live in Hope) Lobster through the looking glass From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 16:30:07 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 16:30:07 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Sue fism before Sue Fism fisms you In-Reply-To: <MABBIOHGFGIDCBCONFFMEEOECCAA.whirlderv@ap.net> References: <20010603135112.3595.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604162038.01e73ec0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> At 06:44 04/06/01 -0700, you wrote: >None of us were there at the planting of the roots of Sufism. Stories >abound. Tales too numerous to mention. Scholars expound on every >imaginable thing. Students proclaim their different truths at the drop of >a hat. Fundamentalists clutch their beliefs to their heart as a shield >against anyone who is different. So it goes my brother. Recently, I had >the opportunity to travel locally here in California and on the day of my >visit to the ocean the beauty of the place was beyond measure. My heart >filled to bursting with the reality of love, harmony and beauty, I stepped >up to the edge of the precipice, and expounded at the very top of my >voice, "ALLAH HO AKBAR!" > >I am blessed to live in a place where I could do that without >consequenses. Without judgement. Without limitations. May your part of >the world enjoy such too. And may you discover peace and light within >your soul. Love, only love, Davidi. Yes the ocean is a drop in the ocean of Gods Greatness. Sometimes we can shout quietly. As an ocean dweller it is a pleasure to encourage those that must fly in order to find his Heart. So the harmony comes to those who express it. If you can remember the ocean in a drop you might drop in here . . . http://birdsandbutterflies.cjb.net/ say a little Lobster sent you . . . From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 17:46:49 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 16:46:49 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #170 - 7 msgs Message-ID: <F52Bp8ZKxsu9cEpSWdH0000114a@hotmail.com> <html><DIV>Lobster wrote:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"Dearest Farishtah,<BR>A worthy question that no one here is able to answer and<BR>as I am no one I shall do so to the best of my lack of ability.<BR>Wisdom gives the right to pass or withhold judgement<BR>on the basis of 'by their own mouths<BR>do they judge themsleves'.<BR>On this basis and on the basis that<BR>The only Knower and Lover of God<BR>is God Herself and who can judge<BR>God? Not even God is<BR>able to 'Judge' herself as a Sufi<BR>for the Love and Beloved are One......"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Dearest Lobster - peace to you</DIV> <DIV>I am so enamored with your answer that I could smother you with butter and lemon. (Don't get steamed) (Have you heard EVERY lobster joke by now?) Wisdom does give us the right to judge the truth. Why some of you feel that you're instantly on the chopping block is beyond me.And to say nothing is still an opinion.</DIV> <DIV><BR> </DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html> From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 18:00:25 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 13:00:25 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] God Knows Best In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604161237.00a9dcb0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> Message-ID: <B74136E8.6CD0%Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com> on 6/4/01 11:16 AM, lobster@britishlibrary.net wrote: > (I live in Hope) Me, too, bless your little crustacean heart :-) Farishtah From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 18:17:05 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 17:17:05 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #170 - 7 msgs Message-ID: <F264m70rM3TbhyF2fPm0000efa5@hotmail.com> <html><DIV> <P><I DIV < contain which worshp of places and shrines the in legacy his see></I> </P> <P><I DIV < contain which worshp of places and shrines the in legacy his see>Lobster</I></P> <P>Peace be upon you </P> <P>I really enjoyed that fake news story, especially the part about worshipping Christ against his will in Oklahoma. Perhaps he could have had a metaphysical restraining order issued. "That shall not approach (nearer a distance than 5 apostles) with supplication in or about the person of ... One thing puzzles me though. Was thete a point to it? </P> <P>And didn't I detect just a tinge of lobster aroma around the Christ character? Mass exodus to the Mosque....Bravo.</P></DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html> From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 19:05:26 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 18:05:26 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #170 - 7 msgs Message-ID: <F32BaYFkuutSgcOrBLS00001257@hotmail.com> <html><DIV> <P>Dear Dr. Suriya</P> <P>Peace be upon you</P> <P>Whoever you are............</P> <P>About judging Inayat Khan, other people, etc. No comment. I've stated my intentions before you even responded. Think as you wish.</P> <P>About Pencak Silat. I have practice Pencak Silat for some years and belong to an on-line gelanggang. Not quite the same as being there I'm afraid. Silat is very impressive. I had the good fortune to have some instruction by a very talented Dutch Indonesian. I have tried to think whether jurus and langkas infused with Islam/Sufism is useful or not. For a seeker, everything becomes the Path, I guess.</P> <P>About the rest, I generally disagree with you. I think we can call "Sufism" Islamic and other gnostic routes "other gnostic routes similar to Sufism but called something else." It is part preservation and part paranoia that spurs me to such a course. I'll give you an example. It is rumored that the Brits (sorry Lobster) had trouble dealing with the Iranian Shia and getting Iran to do with Iran as the Brits wanted them to do, the old "divide and conquer" tool box came out. ( maybe some Indonesians can relate with this when "hosting" the Dutch) The Baha'i were supposedly the result. A new set of vehement universalist believers in an otherwise homogenous (mostly) Shia nation. The Baha'i, while embracing parts of Islam also condemn other aspects. And so, as the story goes, a religious virus is created to weaken the Shia Islamic strong hold the religious leadership has over the govenment and their policies and BUDGETS. </P> <P>Don't know if its true, I just see the point.  You seem perfectly willing to mix and match religious terms (a "small matter"). I see corruption of a delicate system that is supposed to be "finer than a hair and sharper than a sword." I would say the same of  Vedanta (which is my second choice for great spiritual path) or Zen or Quietism. They are unique, delicate systems. I don't think they mix and match at any level. This is just good sense. You can't save time ( and everyone's feelings) by attending a university which has gotten beyond that whole "independent schools" thing. They offer optimized courses like Great Chemist/Physicists who are also Marxist and Nihilists. The course if offered in introductory Swahili and we'll be conjugating Swahili verbs while we determine atomic weight and if there is indeed any real point to our existence!</P> <P>I do agree with you on one point. And it has given me pause for thought. It would be sad that non-Muslims should not be allowed to benefit from Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) wisdom. This is true. I assume that many non-Muslims don't *want* to know his wisdom. But if Muslims/ Sufis are the best examples they can be of his wisdom, perhaps non-muslims will want to know more. Anyway, while I see your point, I have to say it doesn't address anything at hand. I love the writings of Swami Vivekananda, I have read alot and I've attended Vedanta meetings and retreats. I am not <U>about </U>to call myself Hindu, Vedantists or anything vaguely resembling that. I am just a seeker and an admirer. The same goes for Lao Tze, Jesus Christ, etc.</P> <P>Finally, as for:</P> <P>>"we are all products of our upbringing and environment<EM>. </EM>The sufi is one who is able to transcend his/her upbringing and environment and automatic reactions to beocome his/her true self. East and West are aspects of the whole."</P> <P>I couldn't agree more.<I DIV < contain which worshp of places and shrines the in legacy his see></P></DIV></I><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html> From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 20:36:37 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ismail Abushams) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 12:36:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #171 - 3 msgs In-Reply-To: <F236ZcIVMm0LzEDYZqB0000d16b@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <20010604193637.28156.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> --0-566988493-991683397=:27541 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As Salaam Aleikum Dear Blake if you read my message again you may notice the fact that i spoke about we . Do you have problems with one worm telling his fellow worms that in truth we are all living in a pile of dung ? or with the fact that Inayat Khan said something that may teach us all ?I am well aware that this is a discussion group but does it have to be a personal attack group ? if you felt personally attacked by my message please forgive me !! ismail Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com> wrote: "Pir o Murshid Inayat Khan once descibed himself as "dirt under the feet of Sufis" a good position to know onesself in ,may we ever make it that high !!, the best thing coming out of this discussion is that we are all exposing ourselves as frauds on the path worried about wahabis , the sufi-ness of others and our being right before and not after we "worry" about Allah."> IsmailPeace be upon youI embrace your positive message with all my heart. It is most encourging to have someone like you in a discussion group setting us all straight. I am dirt under your feet big boy. What might we discuss O humble one? What would be acceptable to your Absolute Annihilatedness? Expose thy self to us you big sham!sheeeeeeeeeesh!Blake --------------------------------- Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-566988493-991683397=:27541 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii <P> As Salaam Aleikum <P>Dear Blake <P>if you read my message again you may notice the fact that i spoke about we . Do you have problems with one worm telling his fellow worms that in truth we are all living in a pile of dung ? or with the fact that Inayat Khan said something that may teach us all ?I am well aware that this is a discussion group but does it have to be a personal attack group ? if you felt personally attacked by my message please forgive me !! <P>ismail <P>  <P>  <B><I>Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com></I></B> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> <DIV>"Pir o Murshid Inayat Khan once descibed himself as "dirt under the feet of Sufis" a good position to know onesself in ,may we ever make it that high !!, the best thing coming out of this discussion is that we are all exposing ourselves as frauds on the path worried about wahabis , the sufi-ness of others and our being right <U>before </U>and not <U>after </U>we "worry" about Allah."</DIV> <DIV></DIV>> <DIV>Ismail</DIV> <DIV>Peace be upon you</DIV> <DIV>I embrace your positive message with all my heart. It is most encourging to have someone like you in a <U>discussion group</U> setting us all straight. I am dirt under your feet big boy. What might we discuss O humble one? What would be acceptable to your Absolute Annihilatedness? Expose thy self to us you big sham!</DIV> <DIV>sheeeeeeeeeesh!</DIV> <DIV>Blake</DIV><BR clear=all> <HR> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <A href="http://explorer.msn.com/">http://explorer.msn.com</A><BR> <P></P>_______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas</BLOCKQUOTE><p><br><hr size=1><b>Do You Yahoo!?</b><br> <a href="http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=mailiyfoot">Yahoo! Mail Personal Address</a> - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-566988493-991683397=:27541-- From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 03:06:08 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Suriya Osman) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 10:06:08 +0800 Subject: [Tariqas] Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #170 - 7 msgs Message-ID: <3B1C3E90.56CA31DC@pd.jaring.my> Dear Blake, Oh yes I love to mix and match. One of my favourite outfits is a shalwar kameez . A taste I acquired when I went to India.I still wear my baju kurung occasionally but sometimes I also put on a jubah like the Arabs.. I also like full and falafel , besides the dosai and even though I still like satay very much , I also enjoy a steak every now and then. Oh yes, I m certainly a mixer and a matcher! Guess what I even practise Reiki as well as sufi healing..funny though.... they both work well together! Some of my friends are into Qi Gong..even though I m dead certain they never miss a prayer! I even call Allah God sometimes...and I sometimes call God Tuhan..I m sure its a Pagan term..although it is in Malay..funny how if you turn the words over it read Hantu which means a devil in Malay... We need purists to make sure we don t go astray. You go ahead Blake...Thank you Blake for being there and being pure because I m certainly unable to keep myself pure.. salam Suriya Blake Ross wrote: Don't know if its true, I just see the point. You seem perfectly willing to mix and match religious terms (a "small matter"). I see corruption of a delicate system that is supposed to be "finer than a hair and sharper than a sword." I would say the same of Vedanta (which is my second choice for great spiritual path) or Zen or Quietism. They are unique, delicate systems. I don't think they mix and match at any level. This is just good sense. You can't save time ( and everyone's feelings) by attending a university which has gotten beyond that whole "independent schools" thing. They offer optimized courses like Great Chemist/Physicists who are also Marxist and Nihilists. The course if offered in introductory Swahili and we'll be conjugating Swahili verbs while we determine atomic weight and if there is indeed any real point to our existence! From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 03:26:18 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Suriya Osman) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 10:26:18 +0800 Subject: [Tariqas] Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #170 - 7 msgs Message-ID: <3B1C434A.3FE78581@pd.jaring.my> btw, Blake, About Silat, are you sure that is ok? I know for sure that this art of defence is very very old and predates Islam's coming to the Malay peninsula. Surely it has Hindu elements and was *Islamized* with the coming of Islam. salam from the mixed up creature, Suriya ( even my name is a sanskrit name but somehow there is also an Arabi meaning..I wonder how the this word can mean almost the same in Arabic as well as Sanskrit..?)( My ancestors were also guilty of mixing races/languages and culture I m afraid so I m truly a mongrel creature!) btw Chilli is a Malay word. ( From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 04:32:57 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 23:32:57 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #170 - 7 msgs In-Reply-To: <3B1C3E90.56CA31DC@pd.jaring.my> Message-ID: <B741CB29.6CFA%Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com> Dear Ones, "The goal is to get to the flat roof of the house, which affords an unobstructed view of the entire countryside. You can reach this highest point by climbing stone stairs, wooden steps, bamboo slats, or rope ladders. You can even climb a nearby tree and somehow clamber onto the roof along a large limb. Just get there! Then you will see how clearly the unimaginable variety of prayerful or meditative methods all lead to the same goal, to the same panoramic vision, to the same timeless awareness." Ramakrishna Paramahamsa My heart was split, and a flower appeared; and grace sprang up; and it bore fruit for my God. You split me, tore my heart open, filled me with love. You poured Your spirit into me; I knew You as I know myself. Odes of Solomon Everyone churns milk and yogurt, lovers churn fire. The body the pot, the spirit the churn, they stir it with sighs. Pulling the strap of heartache, they add the sparkling water of sorrow. They are true mystics, Bahu, who draw out butter from bones. Sultan Bahu To see a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an Hour. William Blake I have lived on the lip of insanity, wanting to know reasons, knocking on a door. It opens. I've been knocking from the inside! Rumi If you want to shrink something you must first allow it to expand. If you want to get rid of something, you must first allow it to florish. If you want to take something, you must first allow it to be given. This is called the subtle perception of the way things are. Tao te Ching The love of God, unutterable and perfect, flows into a pure soul the way that light rushes into a transparent object. The more love that it finds, the more it gives itself; so that, as we grow clear and open, the more complete the joy of heaven is. And the more souls who resonate together, the greater the intensity of their love, and, mirror-like, each soul reflects the other. Dante The lover is wretched; he submits to the path of God. Whatever you say, he accepts; it is impossible to hurt his feelings. We knew that those who came passed on; we saw that those who settled down passed on. But souls who have drunk the wine of love do not accord with passing or settling. Yunus's soul was not trapped; it passed beyond Hell and Heaven. He has set out to go to His beloved, to sink into His essence. Yunus Emre My personal view is this. It is possible to find truth, beauty and inspiration in the words of any enlightened human being, no matter what his or her tradition. It is how we take the truth of what we see, hear and experience into our hearts, and the resultant conversation between our meagre selves and Allah, that is important. The rest of it is just friendly talk. If this makes me less of a Sufi in the eyes of some, no matter. It is a part of our teachings that as our horizon broadens, it is possible to hold many points of view, even those that our limited ego may not agree with.... Farishtah on 6/4/01 10:06 PM, jsmasna@pd.jaring.my wrote: > > > > Dear Blake, > > Oh yes I love to mix and match. > One of my favourite outfits is a shalwar kameez . A taste I acquired > when I went to India.I still wear my baju kurung occasionally but > sometimes I also put on a jubah like the Arabs.. > I also like full and falafel , besides the dosai and even though I still > like satay very much , I also enjoy a steak every now and then. > Oh yes, I m certainly a mixer and a matcher! > Guess what I even practise Reiki as well as sufi healing..funny > though.... they both work well together! Some of my friends are into Qi > Gong..even though I m dead certain they never miss a prayer! I even call > Allah God sometimes...and I sometimes call God Tuhan..I m sure its a > Pagan term..although it is in Malay..funny how if you turn the words > over it read Hantu which means a devil in Malay... > We need purists to make sure we don t go astray. You go ahead > Blake...Thank you Blake for being there and being pure because I m > certainly unable to keep myself pure.. > > salam > Suriya > > > > Blake Ross wrote: > > Don't know if its true, I just see the point. You seem perfectly > willing to mix and match > religious terms (a "small matter"). I see corruption of a delicate > system that is supposed to be > "finer than a hair and sharper than a sword." I would say the same of > Vedanta (which is my > second choice for great spiritual path) or Zen or Quietism. They are > unique, delicate systems. I > don't think they mix and match at any level. This is just good sense. > You can't save time ( and > everyone's feelings) by attending a university which has gotten beyond > that whole > "independent schools" thing. They offer optimized courses like Great > Chemist/Physicists who > are also Marxist and Nihilists. The course if offered in introductory > Swahili and we'll be > conjugating Swahili verbs while we determine atomic weight and if there > is indeed any real > point to our existence! > From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 22:29:15 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 22:29:15 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] The Real News In-Reply-To: <F264m70rM3TbhyF2fPm0000efa5@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604221205.01e6ae20@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >Lobster > >Peace be upon you :-) Peace Dear Friend, >I really enjoyed that fake news story, especially the part about >worshipping Christ against his will in Oklahoma. Perhaps he could have had >a metaphysical restraining order issued. "That shall not approach (nearer >a distance than 5 apostles) with supplication in or about the person of >... One thing puzzles me though. Was thete a point to it? Sometimes enjoyment is more important than speaking with ones brain full. :-) (I am talking of myself here :-) I think most people would find this funny. I often get the feeling that if the Prophet converted to Christianity . . . the Moslem laughter would not be as forthcoming from all factions . . . :-( Seriously I find fanaticism and lack of humour something that permeates a certain sombre 'truth' asceticism. :-( If anyone wishes to be devout - go ahead just do not whip others into your frenzy. Frenzy is not part of religion it is part of primitive pre human behaviour. Devotion and group practice is the refinement of this tendency of mob/lemming 'godliness'. We all have our way to Allah and some do not even use the name. Cecil has always seemed a good name for the Ultimate Deity. :-) >And didn't I detect just a tinge of lobster aroma around the Christ >character? Mass exodus to the Mosque....Bravo. I would say the Messiah complex is more than a tinge in me. As for a successful submission I would submit that Allah Knows Best No one knows Allah and so we move on - hurrah! Lobster and Cecil ('Cecil Ultimate Deity' is (c) 2001 Lobster Heresies) Mass exodus to the Mosque....Bravo. From tariqas@stderr.org Mon Jun 4 22:29:15 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 22:29:15 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] The Real News In-Reply-To: <F264m70rM3TbhyF2fPm0000efa5@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010604221205.01e6ae20@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >Lobster > >Peace be upon you :-) Peace Dear Friend, >I really enjoyed that fake news story, especially the part about >worshipping Christ against his will in Oklahoma. Perhaps he could have had >a metaphysical restraining order issued. "That shall not approach (nearer >a distance than 5 apostles) with supplication in or about the person of >... One thing puzzles me though. Was thete a point to it? Sometimes enjoyment is more important than speaking with ones brain full. :-) (I am talking of myself here :-) I think most people would find this funny. I often get the feeling that if the Prophet converted to Christianity . . . the Moslem laughter would not be as forthcoming from all factions . . . :-( Seriously I find fanaticism and lack of humour something that permeates a certain sombre 'truth' asceticism. :-( If anyone wishes to be devout - go ahead just do not whip others into your frenzy. Frenzy is not part of religion it is part of primitive pre human behaviour. Devotion and group practice is the refinement of this tendency of mob/lemming 'godliness'. We all have our way to Allah and some do not even use the name. Cecil has always seemed a good name for the Ultimate Deity. :-) >And didn't I detect just a tinge of lobster aroma around the Christ >character? Mass exodus to the Mosque....Bravo. I would say the Messiah complex is more than a tinge in me. As for a successful submission I would submit that Allah Knows Best No one knows Allah and so we move on - hurrah! Lobster and Cecil ('Cecil Ultimate Deity' is (c) 2001 Lobster Heresies) Mass exodus to the Mosque....Bravo. From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 12:59:00 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 07:59:00 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Interview with God In-Reply-To: <3B1C434A.3FE78581@pd.jaring.my> Message-ID: <B74241C3.6D1E%Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com> http://www.dbtech.net/umc/flash.html From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 17:25:17 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (-Nancy) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 11:25:17 -0500 Subject: [Tariqas] Interview with God References: <B74241C3.6D1E%Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com> Message-ID: <3B1D07ED.9219EE53@tbcnet.com> Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com wrote: > > http://www.dbtech.net/umc/flash.html Thank you for sending that - it was quite lovely, -Nancy From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 19:06:21 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 20:06:21 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Relativism Message-ID: <NPMOIOLGONONMBAA@mailcity.com> The thoughts that I found rife among the people in this list are all relativist ones. The truth is scattered in a million places; nobody has the right to say that they know the absolute truth or just know the way towards it; everybody will do what they want, just as an American friend used to tell me before he converted to Islam. The relativist idea goes directly against the existence of God. If God exists, then there is an absolute truth. If God exists fro us, then there is a way we can know about that absolute truth. If different creeds and Gnostic systems have different ideas about God, and if god is the absolute existing truth, mutually exclusive creeds cannot just be equally right. If these belief systems are not equally right then all but one are flawed and simply lead away from the absolute truth since the word flawed and the word absolute are themselves mutually exclusive. Why one? Because there has to be a way of knowing that absolute truth—God. When we talk of benefit ing from contradictory belief systems, we are not talking Sufism, we are not talking religion; we are not talking about God in himself as He really is. We are talking about ‘our god’, the figment of our imagination; we are talking the god of our nafs, hawa. On the other hand if the absolute truth exists, this absolute truth should lead those who believe in it to a spiritual supremacy of some kind, or for that matter infinite kinds, over others; hence the questions about the spirit. When it comes to the spirit it seems that metaphor is the preferred mode of discussion, for a lot of people seem to be talking about something they know nothing or little about. What is the spirit? What do you know about it, if you lay any claim to develop spiritually: “ Say, bring forth thy evidence if thou be truthful.” Do not invent a god of your own liking; seek God on his own terms. That is the test. For the search for Allah is itself a search for getting rid of egoistic comfort with the ways you like to think about him. Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 20:38:27 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 15:38:27 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Where pseudo-sufism, msgs, relativism, etc. have brought us... In-Reply-To: <NPMOIOLGONONMBAA@mailcity.com> Message-ID: <B742AD73.6D51%Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com> Forgot something in my last posting. I also believe that God has one exquisitely well developed sense of humor. Farishtah From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 21:07:36 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 20:07:36 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: humor Message-ID: <F147jTyWXc6YkNTy7TM00004611@hotmail.com> <html><DIV> <P><BR><BR></P></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <P>regarding God having a sense of humor. Yeah, how 'bout that wacky diety huh?</P> <P>If you want to laugh more, try the "shiatalk" site. I got "thrown off the island" after about 4 or 5 posts.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <DIV></DIV>>From: "Sukru Kaya" <SUKRUKAYA@MUSIAD.ORG.TR> <DIV></DIV>>To: <TARIQAS@ECKHART.STDERR.ORG> <DIV></DIV>>Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 11:25:20 +0200 <DIV></DIV>>Subject: [Tariqas] A Reading of Ibn Arabi <DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: tariqas@stderr.org <DIV></DIV> <DIV></DIV>> <DIV></DIV>>Ahlu-s-Sunnah in Defense of Ibn Arabi (www.dolcetta.com/ibnarabi.htm) <DIV></DIV>> <DIV></DIV>>From: Majlis al-Ulema of the Italian Muslim Association <DIV></DIV>>islam@spqr.net <DIV></DIV> <DIV>I can think of  317 hadith <STRONG>maudu' </STRONG>that forbid the reposting of messages originally sent on teh first of January, 1997. I curse the filthy finger that pushed the send button on this bida'at email.  <BR></DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html> From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 21:16:50 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:16:50 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: humor In-Reply-To: <F147jTyWXc6YkNTy7TM00004611@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <B742B672.6D5C%Farishtah@blueskyfarm.com> > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --MS_Mac_OE_3074602610_3690514_MIME_Part Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Thanks, Blake. I'm about laughed out for awhile. I've been doing something wacky enough -- like, cleaning out the henhouse here on our farm. It's one sure way to get humble quick...though the baby chicks really are cute.... Farishtah on 6/5/01 4:07 PM, blake_ross@hotmail.com wrote: regarding God having a sense of humor. Yeah, how 'bout that wacky diety huh? If you want to laugh more, try the "shiatalk" site. I got "thrown off the island" after about 4 or 5 posts. >From: "Sukru Kaya" >To: >Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 11:25:20 +0200 >Subject: [Tariqas] A Reading of Ibn Arabi >Reply-To: tariqas@stderr.org > >Ahlu-s-Sunnah in Defense of Ibn Arabi (www.dolcetta.com/ibnarabi.htm) > >From: Majlis al-Ulema of the Italian Muslim Association >islam@spqr.net I can think of 317 hadith maudu' that forbid the reposting of messages originally sent on teh first of January, 1997. I curse the filthy finger that pushed the send button on this bida'at email. Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --MS_Mac_OE_3074602610_3690514_MIME_Part Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable <HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>Re: [Tariqas] Re: humor Thanks, Blake. I'm about laughed out for awhile. I've been doing something = wacky enough -- like, cleaning out the henhouse here on our farm. It's one s= ure way to get humble quick...though the baby chicks really are cute....

Farishtah


on 6/5/01 4:07 PM, blake_ross@hotmail.com wrote:



regarding God having a sense of humor. Yeah, how 'bout that wacky diety huh= ?

If you want to laugh more, try the "shiatalk" site. I got "t= hrown off the island" after about 4 or 5 posts.




>From: "Sukru Kaya"
>To:
>Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 11:25:20 +0200
>Subject: [Tariqas] A Reading of Ibn Arabi
>Reply-To: tariqas@stderr.org
>
>Ahlu-s-Sunnah in Defense of Ibn Arabi (www.dolcetta.com/ibnarabi.htm) <= BR> >
>From: Majlis al-Ulema of the Italian Muslim Association
>islam@spqr.net
I can think of  317 hadith maudu' that forbid the reposting of = messages originally sent on teh first of January, 1997. I curse the filthy f= inger that pushed the send button on this bida'at email.  


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
_______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqa= s@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas

--MS_Mac_OE_3074602610_3690514_MIME_Part-- From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 21:43:23 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 22:43:23 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Humour Message-ID: Mr Farishtah Allow me to say this without being offended: you might as well stop taking that whole discussion seriously, but do you take what you say seriously? Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 22:15:15 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 17:15:15 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Humour In-Reply-To: Message-ID: on 6/5/01 4:43 PM, nassar68@lycos.com wrote: > > > Mr Farishtah > Allow me to say this without being offended: you might as well stop taking > that whole discussion seriously, but do you take what you say seriously? > My dear brother, it has, thank God, become more difficult of late for me to take offense at anything or anyone. This is what I meant when I spoke of holding many points of view simultaneously and seeing them all as equally valid. This is not relativism. It is tolerance, and it includes taking seriously and accepting the point of view of everyone who has contributed to this discussion, whether I agree with them or not. That each of us is blessed with a unique point of view makes apparent, at least to me, the absolute truth of unity. We each are like snowflakes, with a unique and beautiful pattern yet also with the same clear essence. By the way, I am a Ms., not a Mr. No offense taken :-) With Love and Respect, Farishtah From tariqas@stderr.org Tue Jun 5 23:51:20 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 15:51:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Truth, Relativism, and the Real (was Relativism) In-Reply-To: from "muhammad nassar" at Jun 05, 2001 08:06:21 PM Message-ID: <200106052251.f55MpKU25699@sonic.net> 50010605 Vom assalam alaykum, my kin. "muhammad nassar" : > The thoughts that I found rife among the people in this list are all > relativist ones. The truth is scattered in a million places; nobody has > the right to say that they know the absolute truth or just know the way > towards it; everybody will do what they want.... does this mean that such ideas are prevalent in the Sufi culture? > The relativist idea goes directly against the existence of God. only by a certain idea of what or who "God" is. > If God exists, then there is an absolute truth. this does not follow logically. God could be more powerful that our philosophy allows, Horatio. > If God exists [for] us, then there is a way we can know about that > absolute truth. that does not follow strictly by logic. it is possible, for example, that any God could be unknowable. many mystics claim that absolute truth cannot be known, especially by mere religious means (usually a particular form of mysticism is advised). some (Nihilists) believe that knowledge of anything is itself impossible. > If different creeds and Gnostic systems have different ideas about God, > and if god is the absolute existing truth, mutually exclusive creeds > cannot just be equally right. again not logically necessary. any deity (especially an omnipotent one) could ordain it a facet of Hir character that composites of opposite qualities could be Hir true nature, that intellectual truth is the foolish playset of those doomed to fail in Hir apprehension. > If these belief systems are not equally right then all but one are > flawed and simply lead away from the absolute truth since the word > flawed and the word absolute are themselves mutually exclusive. this is logic which depends upon Aristotlean dualism and what is called 'the excluded middle'. it has a limited application and may well not apply to the divine. > Why one? Because there has to be a way of knowing that absolute truth > God. this appears to be merely a statement of faith on your part. why should we consider it necessary or self-evident? > When we talk of benefiting from contradictory belief systems, we are > not talking Sufism, we are not talking religion; we are not talking > about God in himself as He really is. We are talking about 'our god', > the figment of our imagination; we are talking the god of our nafs, hawa. it is possible that discussion about any kind of dualism is hip-deep in nafs, and that what both you and I may have claimed *also* proceeds from incomplete understanding and futile selections amongst faulty choices. > On the other hand if the absolute truth exists, this absolute truth > should lead those who believe in it to a spiritual supremacy of some > kind, or for that matter infinite kinds, over others; hence the > questions about the spirit. of what character is any 'absolute truth'? is it rational (mental)? is it ontological (existential)? is it somatic (bodily)? is it fictional (imaginary)? is it transcendental (metaphysical)? there are very many options here available, and what you seem to be considering only concerns some kind of rational certainty amongst a number of ideal options. it seems to proceed from a presupposition that the universe is hierarchical, dominated by your God, and that this God has dictated a clear rational formula of truth to all. if this is accurate, then how can you show this to others without just attempting to dominate them into submission to your (and your God's) truth? note that I am not suggesting you are wrong, only that your choice seems limited and you are not telling us WHY you have made it, just that you have done so and that it seems to you an exclusive choice. > When it comes to the spirit it seems that metaphor is the preferred > mode of discussion, for a lot of people seem to be talking about > something they know nothing or little about. are these two descriptions related? does metaphoric speech equate to ignorant speech? > What is the spirit? What do you know about it, if you lay any claim > to develop spiritually: 'Say, bring forth thy evidence if thou be > truthful.' the spirit is a subjective experience of the real, changing cosmos. it is not eternal, it is not identifiable, it is not consistent in form or substance, but a facet of sensate consciousness. > Do not invent a god of your own liking; seek God on his own terms. you seem to believe that these are mutually exclusive. why? perhaps a God would wish us to invent Hir and enjoy Hir character rather than to accept the scraps from the table of the priests and imams. how are we to know this except to explore, consider carefully the instructions of the wise, and test our best guesses in earnest and forthright experience? > That is the test. For the search for Allah is itself a search for > getting rid of egoistic comfort with the ways you like to think > about him. ego can select anything to support itself, and knowledge about the world, about a God, or about a religion are all prime candidates for the selection of ego in social one-upsmanship, preserving the position of 'correctness' as a lever to justify one's authority, one's purity, or one's special status with respect to a presumed spiritual cosmogenitor. it is for this reason that I presume it is not knowledge so much as CERTAINTY which is an indicator of arrogance and a lack of spiritual development, regardless of what 'spirit' and 'spiritual' might mean to any individual. the ability to suspend knowledge, to dwell in the present and presence of one's kindred without the prop of correctness and the fiction of right mental frameworks, offering love to all who enter into one's sphere of influence and attention to the thoughts and considerations of one's struggling kindred, is what I identify as abiding the Real, resting in the arms of the Most Compassionate, and wielding the weapons of the Most Powerful. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 01:25:15 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 00:25:15 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Take a stand Message-ID:
Peace be upon us
 
I agree with Muhammad Nassar on most of his points, I guess that's why I defend his posts, he says the same kinds of things I would. (you must be Persian, studied under Persian Sufis or both???) This reminds me of the Ghazzali sufi text "Refutation of the Refutation."
 
>> The relativist idea goes directly against the existence of God.

>only by a certain idea of what or who "God" is.
They don't know what God is. In fact there is no God proper, "it just depends..".
>> If God exists, then there is an absolute truth.

>this does not follow logically. God could be more powerful that our
philosophy allows, Horatio.
 
As a matter of doctrine and definition, the statement is symmetrical and completely logical
If A=B then B=A, yes?
Let's define our terms
A:What is God? God is that which is unchanging and eternal. Everything we know of is subject to the ravages of time. Except God which is Infinite and Eternal.
B: What is absolute truth. That which is not relative. That which exists now and will remain unchanged. Not subject to time or place.
You do the math.

>> If God exists [for] us, then there is a way we can know about that
>> absolute truth.

>that does not follow strictly by logic. it is possible, for example,
>that any God could be unknowable. many mystics claim that absolute
>truth cannot be known, especially by mere religious means (usually
>a particular form of mysticism is advised). some (Nihilists) believe
>that knowledge of anything is itself impossible.
Actually, it does. If we admit the existence of God, a Creator and a Source, is it possible that we can think of things or develop desires that "It" hasn't taken into consideration. God can subsume our field of possibilities. I don't think the opposite is true. (This is a intricate, yet perfectly logical argument, it requires perspective and an open mind about "God" (as not something outside of us))
 


>> If different creeds and Gnostic systems have different ideas about God,
>> and if god is the absolute existing truth, mutually exclusive creeds
>> cannot just be equally right.

>again not logically necessary. any deity (especially an omnipotent one)
>could ordain it a facet of Hir character that composites of opposite
>qualities could be Hir true nature, that intellectual truth is the
>foolish playset of those doomed to fail in Hir apprehension.

Sorry Charlie, 0-4 in my book. The "mutually exclusive" by definition, takes care of the logic of that statement. But let's assume you loose with words. What you might mean is that, while monotheism and polytheism may seem mutually exclusive, they actually can both be accomodated in the same theology. Your argument, as stated above, instantly brings to mind the "Names of Allah" which satisfy the conditions of your hypothesis, yet we know by Allah's own words that He is One. 
 
>> If these belief systems are not equally right then all but one are
>> flawed and simply lead away from the absolute truth since the word
>> flawed and the word absolute are themselves mutually exclusive.

>this is logic which depends upon Aristotlean dualism and what is
>called 'the excluded middle'. it has a limited application and may
>well not apply to the divine.
 
I think n'sync, 98 degrees and the backstreet boys are absolutely flawed!

>> Why one? Because there has to be a way of knowing that absolute truth
>> God.

>this appears to be merely a statement of faith on your part. why should
>we consider it necessary or self-evident?
There is a logic to it. How many absolutes can there be? Just one. How many correct ways can there be to seek that absolute? Well, I am not willing to fight to the death on this one. the logic is clear but does it pass the common sense filter? We know (I do) there are Hindu and Buddhist and Christian and Muslim and Shaman "Friends of God." Who can say which is greater or less and what would that mean in attaining the absolute anyway? Perhaps different, divergent paths, when advanced to higher stages (mystical) converge and become one.
>> When we talk of benefiting  from contradictory belief systems, we are
>> not talking Sufism, we are not talking religion; we are not talking
>> about God in himself as He really is. We are talking about 'our god',
>> the figment of our imagination; we are talking the god of our nafs, hawa.

>it is possible that discussion about any kind of dualism is hip-deep
>in nafs, and that what both you and I may have claimed *also* proceeds
>from incomplete understanding and futile selections amongst faulty
>choices.
 
This is the relativism Muhammad objects to. Sufism suggests that the Unity of Existence is an experience that you can have without mistake or personal coloring, you ascend to the absolute and experience the absolute as the Absolute, incha'Allah.
 
> On the other hand if the absolute truth exists, this absolute truth
> should lead those who believe in it to a spiritual supremacy of some

> kind, or for that matter infinite kinds, over others; hence the
> questions about the spirit.   

>of what character is any 'absolute truth'? is it rational (mental)?
>is it ontological (existential)? is it somatic (bodily)? is it
>fictional (imaginary)? is it transcendental (metaphysical)? there
>are very many options here available,
 
You are, again, making the case for relativism. "There is no absolute truth. It's all just a point of view."
  
>and what you seem to be
>considering only concerns some kind of rational certainty amongst
>a number of ideal options. it seems to proceed from a presupposition
>that the universe is hierarchical, dominated by your God, and that
>this God has dictated a clear rational formula of truth to all. if
>this is accurate, then how can you show this to others without just
>attempting to dominate them into submission to your (and your God's)
>truth?

>note that I am not suggesting you are wrong, only that your choice
>seems limited and you are not telling us WHY you have made it, just
>that you have done so and that it seems to you an exclusive choice.

I don't see any limited choice in "infinite kinds."
 
>> When it comes to the spirit it seems that metaphor is the preferred
>> mode of discussion, for a lot of people seem to be talking about
>> something they know nothing or little about.

>are these two descriptions related? does metaphoric speech equate to
>ignorant speech?

When metaphor is used to describe something eternal by things that are not (as prophets
have done for their followers) the answer is no. When that same metaphor (or a similar one freshly thought up) is used by someone who has no experience like that of which the prophet speaks, yes, that is ignorance.
 
>> What is the spirit? What do you know about it, if you lay any claim
>> to develop spiritually: 'Say, bring forth thy evidence if thou be
>> truthful.' 

>the spirit is a subjective experience of the real, changing cosmos.
>it is not eternal, it is not identifiable, it is not consistent in
>form or substance, but a facet of sensate consciousness.
That is not as easy a question as you make it out to be and I don't find your explanation convincing.

>> Do not invent a god of your own liking; seek God on his own terms.

>you seem to believe that these are mutually exclusive. why? perhaps
>a God would wish us to invent Hir and enjoy Hir character rather
>than to accept the scraps from the table of the priests and imams.
>how are we to know this except to explore, consider carefully the
>instructions of the wise, and test our best guesses in earnest and
>forthright experience?
Maybe he should have said, "Do not invent a idol of your own liking, seek God on ....
But this is becoming repetitive. You don't appear to believe in absolutes, you are suggesting relativism. Whatever works for you buddy, I'm with Muhammad.

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 05:52:53 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 05:52:53 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #170 - 7 msgs In-Reply-To: <3B1C3E90.56CA31DC@pd.jaring.my> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010605064009.01e74440@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >Dear Blake, > >Oh yes I love to mix and match. >One of my favourite outfits is a shalwar kameez . A taste I acquired >when I went to India.I still wear my baju kurung occasionally but >sometimes I also put on a jubah like the Arabs.. >I also like full and falafel , besides the dosai and even though I still >like satay very much , I also enjoy a steak every now and then. >Oh yes, I m certainly a mixer and a matcher! >Guess what I even practise Reiki as well as sufi healing..funny >though.... they both work well together! Some of my friends are into Qi >Gong..even though I m dead certain they never miss a prayer! I even call >Allah God sometimes...and I sometimes call God Tuhan..I m sure its a >Pagan term..although it is in Malay..funny how if you turn the words >over it read Hantu which means a devil in Malay... >We need purists to make sure we don t go astray. You go ahead >Blake...Thank you Blake for being there and being pure because I m >certainly unable to keep myself pure.. > >salam >Suriya Dear Sister Suriyah, I have heard that all Moslems and even Pagans are good people awaiting the opportunity. I certainly would like to have all creatures in His Circle. Oh . . . they are . . . Purely Lobster Hantu From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 13:24:10 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 08:24:10 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Take a stand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > the logic is clear but does it pass the common sense filter? He who tastes, Knows. Farishtah From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 13:36:30 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ismail Abushams) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 05:36:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Take a stand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20010606123630.43058.qmail@web9008.mail.yahoo.com> --0-43267093-991830990=:42759 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As Salaam Aleikum i took a stand years ago La illaha il Allah, Mohamadan Rasul Illah i wonder if you would concider me Kafir because i give a broader interpertation to the oneness of Allah than you do ? Does that maybe count also for all the Sufis that don't follow Persian Sufisic Patterns ?, Or also for Persian Sufics that do not follow your order,? Or Members of your order that do not follow your Sheik?, Or followers of your Sheik that do not think the same as you ? Or followers of your Sheik that think like you but like in-sync ?Or your brain when it does not think exactly the way you want ? . Who actally is it that stands there all alone in absolute realization of how Allah wants to be worshipped ? ismail Blake Ross wrote: Peace be upon us I agree with Muhammad Nassar on most of his points, I guess that's why I defend his posts, he says the same kinds of things I would. (you must be Persian, studied under Persian Sufis or both???) This reminds me of the Ghazzali sufi text "Refutation of the Refutation." >> The relativist idea goes directly against the existence of God. >only by a certain idea of what or who "God" is. They don't know what God is. In fact there is no God proper, "it just depends..". >> If God exists, then there is an absolute truth. >this does not follow logically. God could be more powerful that our philosophy allows, Horatio. As a matter of doctrine and definition, the statement is symmetrical and completely logicalIf A=B then B=A, yes?Let's define our termsA:What is God? God is that which is unchanging and eternal. Everything we know of is subject to the ravages of time. Except God which is Infinite and Eternal.B: What is absolute truth. That which is not relative. That which exists now and will remain unchanged. Not subject to time or place.You do the math. >> If God exists [for] us, then there is a way we can know about that >> absolute truth. >that does not follow strictly by logic. it is possible, for example, >that any God could be unknowable. many mystics claim that absolute >truth cannot be known, especially by mere religious means (usually >a particular form of mysticism is advised). some (Nihilists) believe >that knowledge of anything is itself impossible. Actually, it does. If we admit the existence of God, a Creator and a Source, is it possible that we can think of things or develop desires that "It" hasn't taken into consideration. God can subsume our field of possibilities. I don't think the opposite is true. (This is a intricate, yet perfectly logical argument, it requires perspective and an open mind about "God" (as not something outside of us)) >> If different creeds and Gnostic systems have different ideas about God, >> and if god is the absolute existing truth, mutually exclusive creeds >> cannot just be equally right. >again not logically necessary. any deity (especially an omnipotent one) >could ordain it a facet of Hir character that composites of opposite >qualities could be Hir true nature, that intellectual truth is the >foolish playset of those doomed to fail in Hir apprehension. Sorry Charlie, 0-4 in my book. The "mutually exclusive" by definition, takes care of the logic of that statement. But let's assume you loose with words. What you might mean is that, while monotheism and polytheism may seem mutually exclusive, they actually can both be accomodated in the same theology. Your argument, as stated above, instantly brings to mind the "Names of Allah" which satisfy the conditions of your hypothesis, yet we kno! w by Allah's own words that He is One. >> If these belief systems are not equally right then all but one are >> flawed and simply lead away from the absolute truth since the word >> flawed and the word absolute are themselves mutually exclusive. >this is logic which depends upon Aristotlean dualism and what is >called 'the excluded middle'. it has a limited application and may >well not apply to the divine. I think n'sync, 98 degrees and the backstreet boys are absolutely flawed! >> Why one? Because there has to be a way of knowing that absolute truth >> God. >this appears to be merely a statement of faith on your part. why should >we consider it necessary or self-evident? There is a logic to it. How many absolutes can there be? Just one. How many correct ways can there be to seek that absolute? Well, I am not willing to fight to the death on this one. the logic is clear but does it pass the common sense filter? We know (I do) there are Hindu and Buddhist and Christian and Muslim and Shaman "Friends of God." Who can say which is greater or less and what would that mean in attaining the absolute anyway? Perhaps different, divergent paths, when advanced to higher stages (mystical) converge and become one. >> When we talk of benefiting from contradictory belief systems, we are >> not talking Sufism, we are not talking religion; we are not talking >> about God in himself as He really is. We are talking about 'our god', >> the figment of our imagination; we are talking the god of our nafs, hawa. >it is possible that discussion about any kind of dualism is hip-deep >in nafs, and that what both you and I may have claimed *also* proceeds >from incomplete understanding and futile selections amongst faulty >choices. This is the relativism Muhammad objects to. Sufism suggests that the Unity of Existence is an experience that you can have without mistake or personal coloring, you ascend to the absolute and experience the absolute as the Absolute, incha'Allah. > On the other hand if the absolute truth exists, this absolute truth > should lead those who believe in it to a spiritual supremacy of some > kind, or for that matter infinite kinds, over others; hence the > questions about the spirit. >of what character is any 'absolute truth'? is it rational (mental)? >is it ontological (existential)? is it somatic (bodily)? is it >fictional (imaginary)? is it transcendental (metaphysical)? there >are very many options here available, You are, again, making the case for relativism. "There is no absolute truth. It's all just a point of view." >and what you seem to be >considering only concerns some kind of rational certainty amongst >a number of ideal options. it seems to proceed from a presupposition >that the universe is hierarchical, dominated by your God, and that >this God has dictated a clear rational formula of truth to all. if >this is accurate, then how can you show this to others without just >attempting to dominate them into submission to your (and your God's) >truth? >note that I am not suggesting you are wrong, only that your choice >seems limited and you are not telling us WHY you have made it, just >that you have done so and that it seems to you an exclusive choice. I don't see any limited choice in "infinite kinds." >> When it comes to the spirit it seems that metaphor is the preferred >> mode of discussion, for a lot of people seem to be talking about >> something they know nothing or little about. >are these two descriptions related? does metaphoric speech equate to >ignorant speech? When metaphor is used to describe something eternal by things that are not (as prophetshave done for their followers) the answer is no. When that same metaphor (or a similar one freshly thought up) is used by someone who has no experience like that of which the prophet speaks, yes, that is ignorance. >> What is the spirit? What do you know about it, if you lay any claim >> to develop spiritually: 'Say, bring forth thy evidence if thou be >> truthful.' >the spirit is a subjective experience of the real, changing cosmos. >it is not eternal, it is not identifiable, it is not consistent in >form or substance, but a facet of sensate consciousness. That is not as easy a question as you make it out to be and I don't find your explanation convincing. >> Do not invent a god of your own liking; seek God on his own terms. >you seem to believe that these are mutually exclusive. why? perhaps >a God would wish us to invent Hir and enjoy Hir character rather >than to accept the scraps from the table of the priests and imams. >how are we to know this except to explore, consider carefully the >instructions of the wise, and test our best guesses in earnest and >forthright experience? Maybe he should have said, "Do not invent a idol of your own liking, seek God on .... But this is becoming repetitive. You don't appear to believe in absolutes, you are suggesting relativism. Whatever works for you buddy, I'm with Muhammad. --------------------------------- Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-43267093-991830990=:42759 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

As Salaam Aleikum

i took a stand years ago

La illaha il Allah, Mohamadan Rasul Illah

i wonder if you would concider me Kafir because i give a broader interpertation to the oneness of Allah than you do ? Does that maybe count also for all the Sufis that don't follow Persian Sufisic Patterns ?, Or also for Persian Sufics that do not follow your order,? Or Members of your order that do not follow your Sheik?, Or followers of your Sheik that do not think the same as you ? Or followers of your Sheik that think like you but like in-sync ?Or your  brain when it does not think exactly the way you want ?  . Who actally is it that stands there all alone in absolute realization of how Allah wants to be worshipped ?

ismail

Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com> wrote:

Peace be upon us
 
I agree with Muhammad Nassar on most of his points, I guess that's why I defend his posts, he says the same kinds of things I would. (you must be Persian, studied under Persian Sufis or both???) This reminds me of the Ghazzali sufi text "Refutation of the Refutation."
 
>> The relativist idea goes directly against the existence of God.

>only by a certain idea of what or who "God" is.
They don't know what God is. In fact there is no God proper, "it just depends..".
>> If God exists, then there is an absolute truth.

>this does not follow logically. God could be more powerful that our
philosophy allows, Horatio.
 
As a matter of doctrine and definition, the statement is symmetrical and completely logical
If A=B then B=A, yes?
Let's define our terms
A:What is God? God is that which is unchanging and eternal. Everything we know of is subject to the ravages of time. Except God which is Infinite and Eternal.
B: What is absolute truth. That which is not relative. That which exists now and will remain unchanged. Not subject to time or place.
You do the math.

>> If God exists [for] us, then there is a way we can know about that
>> absolute truth.

>that does not follow strictly by logic. it is possible, for example,
>that any God could be unknowable. many mystics claim that absolute
>truth cannot be known, especially by mere religious means (usually
>a particular form of mysticism is advised). some (Nihilists) believe
>that knowledge of anything is itself impossible.
Actually, it does. If we admit the existence of God, a Creator and a Source, is it possible that we can think of things or develop desires that "It" hasn't taken into consideration. God can subsume our field of possibilities. I don't think the opposite is true. (This is a intricate, yet perfectly logical argument, it requires perspective and an open mind about "God" (as not something outside of us))
 


>> If different creeds and Gnostic systems have different ideas about God,
>> and if god is the absolute existing truth, mutually exclusive creeds
>> cannot just be equally right.

>again not logically necessary. any deity (especially an omnipotent one)
>could ordain it a facet of Hir character that composites of opposite
>qualities could be Hir true nature, that intellectual truth is the
>foolish playset of those doomed to fail in Hir apprehension.

Sorry Charlie, 0-4 in my book. The "mutually exclusive" by definition, takes care of the logic of that statement. But let's assume you loose with words. What you might mean is that, while monotheism and polytheism may seem mutually exclusive, they actually can both be accomodated in the same theology. Your argument, as stated above, instantly brings to mind the "Names of Allah" which satisfy the conditions of your hypothesis, yet we kno! w by Allah's own words that He is One. 
 
>> If these belief systems are not equally right then all but one are
>> flawed and simply lead away from the absolute truth since the word
>> flawed and the word absolute are themselves mutually exclusive.

>this is logic which depends upon Aristotlean dualism and what is
>called 'the excluded middle'. it has a limited application and may
>well not apply to the divine.
 
I think n'sync, 98 degrees and the backstreet boys are absolutely flawed!

>> Why one? Because there has to be a way of knowing that absolute truth
>> God.

>this appears to be merely a statement of faith on your part. why should
>we consider it necessary or self-evident?
There is a logic to it. How many absolutes can there be? Just one. How many correct ways can there be to seek that absolute? Well, I am not willing to fight to the death on this one. the logic is clear but does it pass the common sense filter? We know (I do) there are Hindu and Buddhist and Christian and Muslim and Shaman "Friends of God." Who can say which is greater or less and what would that mean in attaining the absolute anyway? Perhaps different, divergent paths, when advanced to higher stages (mystical) converge and become one.
>> When we talk of benefiting  from contradictory belief systems, we are
>> not talking Sufism, we are not talking religion; we are not talking
>> about God in himself as He really is. We are talking about 'our god',
>> the figment of our imagination; we are talking the god of our nafs, hawa.

>it is possible that discussion about any kind of dualism is hip-deep
>in nafs, and that what both you and I may have claimed *also* proceeds
>from incomplete understanding and futile selections amongst faulty
>choices.
 
This is the relativism Muhammad objects to. Sufism suggests that the Unity of Existence is an experience that you can have without mistake or personal coloring, you ascend to the absolute and experience the absolute as the Absolute, incha'Allah.
 
> On the other hand if the absolute truth exists, this absolute truth
> should lead those who believe in it to a spiritual supremacy of some

> kind, or for that matter infinite kinds, over others; hence the
> questions about the spirit.   

>of what character is any 'absolute truth'? is it rational (mental)?
>is it ontological (existential)? is it somatic (bodily)? is it
>fictional (imaginary)? is it transcendental (metaphysical)? there
>are very many options here available,
 
You are, again, making the case for relativism. "There is no absolute truth. It's all just a point of view."
  
>and what you seem to be
>considering only concerns some kind of rational certainty amongst
>a number of ideal options. it seems to proceed from a presupposition
>that the universe is hierarchical, dominated by your God, and that
>this God has dictated a clear rational formula of truth to all. if
>this is accurate, then how can you show this to others without just
>attempting to dominate them into submission to your (and your God's)
>truth?

>note that I am not suggesting you are wrong, only that your choice
>seems limited and you are not telling us WHY you have made it, just
>that you have done so and that it seems to you an exclusive choice.

I don't see any limited choice in "infinite kinds."
 
>> When it comes to the spirit it seems that metaphor is the preferred
>> mode of discussion, for a lot of people seem to be talking about
>> something they know nothing or little about.

>are these two descriptions related? does metaphoric speech equate to
>ignorant speech?

When metaphor is used to describe something eternal by things that are not (as prophets
have done for their followers) the answer is no. When that same metaphor (or a similar one freshly thought up) is used by someone who has no experience like that of which the prophet speaks, yes, that is ignorance.
 
>> What is the spirit? What do you know about it, if you lay any claim
>> to develop spiritually: 'Say, bring forth thy evidence if thou be
>> truthful.' 

>the spirit is a subjective experience of the real, changing cosmos.
>it is not eternal, it is not identifiable, it is not consistent in
>form or substance, but a facet of sensate consciousness.
That is not as easy a question as you make it out to be and I don't find your explanation convincing.

>> Do not invent a god of your own liking; seek God on his own terms.

>you seem to believe that these are mutually exclusive. why? perhaps
>a God would wish us to invent Hir and enjoy Hir character rather
>than to accept the scraps from the table of the priests and imams.
>how are we to know this except to explore, consider carefully the
>instructions of the wise, and test our best guesses in earnest and
>forthright experience?
Maybe he should have said, "Do not invent a idol of your own liking, seek God on ....
But this is becoming repetitive. You don't appear to believe in absolutes, you are suggesting relativism. Whatever works for you buddy, I'm with Muhammad.

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

_______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-43267093-991830990=:42759-- From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 13:56:47 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Suriya Osman) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 20:56:47 +0800 Subject: [Tariqas] Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #170 - 7 msgs References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010605064009.01e74440@pop3.britishlibrary.net> Message-ID: <3B1E288F.508CDA3@pd.jaring.my> Lobster wrote: > > > > > Dear Sister Suriyah, > > I have heard that all Moslems > and even Pagans are good people > awaiting the opportunity. > I certainly would like to have > all creatures in His Circle. > > Oh . . . > > they are . . . > > Purely Lobster Hantu > Salam Another meaning for Hantu is ghost.....woooooohooooo hoooooo hooooooooooo heeee heeeee heeeeeee Salam Suriya no H....... From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 15:42:22 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Anna Ghonim) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 17:42:22 +0300 Subject: [Tariqas] Your ibn arabi posts this a.m. Message-ID: <9611C97335C9D411BF4B00508BD6962305DE3D@CAIRO2> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0EE96.E537FA50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Salam Sukru Can you explain the disjointed posts regarding Muslims in Italy that happened this a.m.? I lack background. i assume that someone in Italy said that Ibn Arabi was a Kafir and this was a response? I was confused. Are these the same italian muslims that say that Muslims should give isreal all of jerusalem because there is no Muslim reason to keep it? (Believe the name is Palazzi) Anna ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0EE96.E537FA50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Your ibn arabi posts this a.m.

Salam Sukru

Can you explain the disjointed posts regarding = Muslims in Italy that happened this a.m.?  I lack = background.  i assume that someone in Italy said that Ibn Arabi = was a Kafir and this was a response?  I was confused. Are these = the same italian muslims that say that Muslims should give isreal all = of jerusalem because there is no Muslim reason to keep it?  = (Believe the name is Palazzi)

Anna

------_=_NextPart_001_01C0EE96.E537FA50-- From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 15:08:04 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Simon Bryquer) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 10:08:04 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Truth, Relativism, and the Real (was Relativism) References: <200106052251.f55MpKU25699@sonic.net> <001001bbf7a1$8f0b5320$0d01010a@serdar> Message-ID: <006701c0ee92$73ae1bc0$ad8f1d18@nyc.rr.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sukru Kaya" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 1997 1:06 AM Subject: Ynt: [Tariqas] Truth, Relativism, and the Real (was Relativism) > Salaams to one and and to you Sukru Kaya --------------- What exactly offends you about this passage: > offering love to all who enter into one's sphere of influence and attention to the thoughts > and considerations of one's struggling kindred, is what I identify > as abiding the Real, resting in the arms of the Most Compassionate, > and wielding the weapons of the Most Powerful. I can only assume that you have read this hastily, with a closed mind or that you don't understand English. And by the way you are demonstrating in your posts that what you object to is at once also the way you behave - do you not see this? Salaams to all Simon > > From: haramullah > > > it is for this reason that I presume it is not knowledge so much as > > CERTAINTY which is an indicator of arrogance and a lack of spiritual > > development, regardless of what 'spirit' and 'spiritual' might mean > > to any individual. the ability to suspend knowledge, to dwell in the > > present and presence of one's kindred without the prop of correctness > > and the fiction of right mental frameworks, offering love to all who > > enter into one's sphere of influence and attention to the thoughts > > and considerations of one's struggling kindred, is what I identify > > as abiding the Real, resting in the arms of the Most Compassionate, > > and wielding the weapons of the Most Powerful. > > > > everyone is welcome to feel offended by this: > > so please tell me where you put revealation and prophets in your sphere? > with what you tell it seems you dont need them. > btw, what you tell us is not out of knowledge. it is imagination. real > knowledge comes only with ayn al yaqeen. you are making a tasteless salad of > words in a realm only knowable by means ayn al yaqeen. obsess with something > more meaningful in our limited realm: smile to your friends, send weapons to > chechenya for His Love. > > wassalam, > Sukru > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tariqas mailing list > Tariqas@stderr.org > http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas > From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 17:15:05 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 16:15:05 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: take a stand Message-ID:

Aleikuma Asalaam


 As Salaam Aleikum
i took a stand years ago
La illaha il Allah, Mohamadan Rasul Illah
i wonder if you would concider me Kafir because i give a broader interpertation
to the oneness of Allah than you do ?
 
It's not about judging you, it is about judging the truth. Judging you is between you and the All-Mighty. (I'll continue to say this no matter how many times I'm mistakenly accused)
 
Does that maybe count also for all the
Sufis that don't follow Persian Sufisic Patterns ?, Or also for Persian Sufics
that do not follow your order,? Or Members of your order that do not follow your
Sheik?, Or followers of your Sheik that do not think the same as you ? Or
followers of your Sheik that think like you but like in-sync ?Or your  brain
when it does not think exactly the way you want ?  .
 
No man, you see, it's like all relative....
 
Who actally is it that
stands there all alone in absolute realization of how Allah wants to be
worshipped ?
Only one stands there all alone. The Rastafarians have a succinct way of  putting it; " i & I"
I would say, "only Allah."
 

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 17:23:47 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 16:23:47 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #177 - 6 msgs Message-ID:
Salaam, Sukru
Peace be upon you
I hope you know my response was entirely tongue-in-cheek (farse)
and that I popped-off only because I couldn't figure out its mysterious
purpose. Same with the Bio Cell question. Yes, I have heard of them.
???????
Please elucidate

  >=20
  >From: Majlis al-Ulema of the Italian Muslim Association=20
  >islam@spqr.net=20
  I can think of  317 hadith maudu' that forbid the reposting of =
messages originally sent on teh first of January, 1997. I curse the =
filthy finger that pushed the send button on this bida'at email. =20

  -----

  btw, Blake, i didn't send that post just as an example refuting wahabi =
claims, but also to identify some misinterpretations on =DDbn Arabi's =
rhetoric.=20

  wassalam,=20
  Sukru


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 17:52:44 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ismail Abushams) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 09:52:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Re: take a stand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20010606165244.77877.qmail@web9007.mail.yahoo.com> --0-227884818-991846364=:77852 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As Salaam Aleikum i am glad to hear that you are not judging me , i must have misinterperted your posting . There is a difference between moral relativism and a broad ,sometimes sweeping interpretation of Tawhid . It is fully within the Indian Chistya tradition (but also within the Mevlevi and the old Andalusian orders ) to accept other "lovers of Allah " into our circle . it seems to be standard in countries with a mix of religions , which makes it logical that it does not happen in countries like Iran which only have very small non Muslim minorities . Inayat Khan stated (this is not known by many of his followers of the moment )that it is important to follow a Sharia ,if this is Moslim or Christian , Jewish or Hindu is not extremely important as long as one has a set of divine inspired rules to avoid moral relativism . Satu only Satu ismail ( most possibly the worst student of pencak silat ever , i only got the "silly movements down , but then i was living with Rastafarians in that time and most of the time way to Irie (;-)> Blake Ross wrote: Aleikuma Asalaam As Salaam Aleikum i took a stand years ago La illaha il Allah, Mohamadan Rasul Illah i wonder if you would concider me Kafir because i give a broader interpertation to the oneness of Allah than you do ? It's not about judging you, it is about judging the truth. Judging you is between you and the All-Mighty. (I'll continue to say this no matter how many times I'm mistakenly accused) Does that maybe count also for all the Sufis that don't follow Persian Sufisic Patterns ?, Or also for Persian Sufics that do not follow your order,? Or Members of your order that do not follow your Sheik?, Or followers of your Sheik that do not think the same as you ? Or followers of your Sheik that think like you but like in-sync ?Or your brain when it does not think exactly the way you want ? . No man, you see, it's like all relative.... Who actally is it that stands there all alone in absolute realization of how Allah wants to be worshipped ? Only one stands there all alone. The Rastafarians have a succinct way of putting it; " i & I" I would say, "only Allah." --------------------------------- Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-227884818-991846364=:77852 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

As Salaam Aleikum

i am glad to hear that you are not judging me , i must have misinterperted your posting . There is a difference between moral relativism and a broad ,sometimes sweeping interpretation of Tawhid . It is fully within the Indian Chistya tradition (but also within the Mevlevi and the old Andalusian orders ) to accept other "lovers of Allah " into our circle . it seems to be standard in countries with a mix of religions , which makes it logical that it does not happen in countries like Iran which only have very small non Muslim minorities . Inayat Khan stated (this is not known by many of his followers of the moment )that it is important to follow a Sharia ,if this is Moslim or Christian , Jewish or Hindu is not extremely important as long as one has a set of divine inspired rules to avoid moral relativism .

Satu  only Satu

ismail  ( most possibly the worst student of pencak silat ever , i only got the "silly movements down , but then i was living with Rastafarians in that time and most of the time way to Irie (;-)>

 

  Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com> wrote:

Aleikuma Asalaam


 As Salaam Aleikum
i took a stand years ago
La illaha il Allah, Mohamadan Rasul Illah
i wonder if you would concider me Kafir because i give a broader interpertation
to the oneness of Allah than you do ?
 
It's not about judging you, it is about judging the truth. Judging you is between you and the All-Mighty. (I'll continue to say this no matter how many times I'm mistakenly accused)
 
Does that maybe count also for all the
Sufis that don't follow Persian Sufisic Patterns ?, Or also for Persian Sufics
that do not follow your order,? Or Members of your order that do not follow your
Sheik?, Or followers of your Sheik that do not think the same as you ? Or
followers of your Sheik that think like you but like in-sync ?Or your  brain
when it does not think exactly the way you want ?  .
 
No man, you see, it's like all relative....
 
Who actally is it that
stands there all alone in absolute realization of how Allah wants to be
worshipped ?
Only one stands there all alone. The Rastafarians have a succinct way of  putting it; " i & I"
I would say, "only Allah."
 

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

_______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-227884818-991846364=:77852-- From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 19:20:53 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 18:20:53 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] cultural / personal relativism Message-ID:
Aleikum a Salaam Ismail (natty dread mon)
I am glad to hear about another silat player. Maybe you can kick my rear sometime.
I find silat fascinating and I have a good instructor that I am inviting to Sufism.
Don't know whether he'll follow or not but he is a spiritually inspired person.
 
Regarding the rest of your post, Muhammad, Sukru and I seem to be coming from a similar point of view that are somewhat out of sync with the rest of the posts. Your words indicate another example of what I am not saying. 
 
Sufism, for me, is largely a personal pursuit consumed completely within namaz, salat, zekr (meditation, prayer, remembrance). In the depths of meditation there is no room for judgement about others, they cannot enter into that space. This space is reserved for Allah, my teacher and that layer of myself released from mental, base nafs. (This is a layer or two inwards from every day consciousness) For me, the way into that space is very straight and narrow. I protect it and I defend it from any intrusion. I'll even discuss the philosophy that sort of describes it. But all of this is about me and my experience. It says nothing of anybody else. No one can see into my heart and the same is true for me and other's hearts. It is impossible for me to judge without knowing the conditions of their heart and so I don't try. Plus I have no interest and I respect people's privacy.  All this is primary to my secular concerns regarding the Sufi group I belong to and the needs that the organization and the individuals there. So, regarding Chistiyya, Mevleviyya, Kubraviyya, etc. It makes no difference and I would not really know whether I am in the company of saints or sinners.
 
So we speak about everything in the abstract as it applies to our lives and not how it applies to others. Speaking of which, I agree with Hazrat Inayat Khan on choosing a particular sharia (set of spiritual and moral codes). It is a good example for what I am saying. If I tell you that I have chosen to follow an Islamic path and alcohol is not permitted, someone is bound to pipe in "Oh really, well I'm spiritual and I have a glass of wine now and then. Do you think I'm going to hell or something and why do you treat your women that way and about Usama Bin Laden...my friend has a sister on an army base in Yemen and she says...blah..blah...blah" To which I would respond, "Oh Allah, protect me from pursuing the things I should not think, say or do." 
 
So I don't think its Iran's fault that I am insular and unconcerned with others this or that. I blame the One who created me. But you are correct that those societies are different and, of course, Iran which, like China with their felangong (sp?) and any other largely homogenous culture is going to be less tolerant of extremist or divergents.
 

 As Salaam Aleikum
i am glad to hear that you are not judging me , i must have misinterperted your posting . There is a difference between moral relativism and a broad ,sometimes sweeping interpretation of Tawhid . It is fully within the Indian Chistya tradition (but also within the Mevlevi and the old Andalusian orders ) to accept other "lovers of Allah " into our circle . it seems to be standard in countries with a mix of religions , which makes it logical that it does not happen in countries like Iran which only have very small non Muslim minorities . Inayat Khan stated (this is not known by many of his followers of the moment )that it is important to follow a Sharia ,if this is Moslim or Christian , Jewish or Hindu is not extremely important as long as one has a set of divine inspired rules to avoid moral relativism .
Satu  only Satu
ismail  ( most possibly the worst student of pencak silat ever , i only got the "silly movements down , but then i was living with Rastafarians in that time and most of the time way to Irie (;-)>
 
 

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 19:35:46 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 11:35:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Ibn Arabi In-Reply-To: from "muhammad nassar" at Jun 04, 2001 12:45:55 AM Message-ID: <200106061835.f56IZkg09741@sonic.net> 50010606 Vom assalam alaykum, my kin. "muhammad nassar" : > In what way can we compare other sufisms to the true sufism of Islam. actually how can they compare? there is only one Ibn Arabi in this world. ibn Arabi is the greatest sufi writer of all time. the very existence of the Meccan Revelations is itself a miracle that points upward to the greatest miracle, that of the Qur'an. the fact that the Qur'an is the supereme book that humanity has in hand should mean that texts resulting from the initial text will be proportionately miraculous, that is, inimitable. the Meccan Revelations is simply an inimitable book. the whole sufi phenomenon in Islam, greater in size and quality from any other mystic system with a claim to originality attests to the dwarfishness of any attempt at getting in on the act. how many hundreds of names of great, original writers should we cite? what variety attesting to the infinite originality of the prototext, the Qur'an! Anything comprable does anybody know of? thank you for making it clear upon what you are basing your notions of Sufism. I have always heard that Ibn Arabi was a Sufi and presented some of the most important essentials of Sufism. I'll address the issues of logic in another post concerning relativism et al. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@luckymojo.com ------------------------- PS incidentally, I cannot easily read the HTML-format sendings of some of the contributors to this email list. you may wish to consider this when sending your mail. thanks. From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 19:40:03 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Joseph Zammit (DE)) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 20:40:03 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] (no subject) Message-ID: <90347F889C18D511B5B300A0D218484A3A0C54@MLTSV02> Assalaam alaykum. Kindly cut me off from the list (unsubscribe me) . joseph From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 19:53:27 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 14:53:27 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] thank you In-Reply-To: <200106061835.f56IZkg09741@sonic.net> Message-ID: As Salaam Aleikum Thank You, all. This discussion is becoming far less subjective, much more objective and, as a consequence, a lot more engaging to read, consider and think about. Be in peace, Farishtah From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 20:48:17 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 19:48:17 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Sufism Islamic Message-ID:


Sukru wrote:


  as to why i posted the message...there are attempts to extract sufism
from Islam and present it as a seperate belief system, which also have
advocates on this list. Sufism is nothing without Islam. Mystics can
pursue their own ways, i wish them a prosperous life. But Sufism is
meaningful only with Islam. (btw, i accept Sufism as an Islamic term. I
call mytics what people call non-muslim sufis)

  mystics have their own view of Unity. They try to seperate Ibn Arabi
and other great Sufis from their Islamic character and portray them as
mere humanitarian and mystical figures. Everyone may benefit from their
works but  the problem is that they show them witness to their own
un-Islamic views. Ibn Arabi, Rumi, Yunus Emre and others are meaningful
only within Islam.

  Islam is haqiqat and tariqat is marifat. A real Sufi is one who best
follows the example of the Prophet s.a.w, in all aspects of life. I'm
not after monks who meditate by day and night but sufis who study, work,
fight in the day for Allah and pray in the night for Allah. A muslim, if
anyone wishes to be nominated as, should be aware that they are not just
beholders of a belief system but builders of a civilization, which seeks
goodness of all mankind. And most of the time a civilization is built on
ink, sweat and blood, along with a high spirit.

  Wassalam,
  Sukru
Thanks for the explanation Sukru and I agree with your passionate and clear ideas (although I am not sure I agree with everything Ibn Arabi said, but leave that for later). But they are noted in short-hand.  To avoid the knee-jerk reactions, perhaps we should qualify the statements and spend some time openning up the subject. When one says "Sufism is only Islamic and you have to be Muslim to follow Sufism" this means something logical and scientific, really, to one person and something totally political and based solely on intolerance from another's point of view. We have to mention what words like "Muslim" "Sufism" "Islam" "Haqiqat" "Tariqat" "Marifat" all mean. There is a very serious discussion missing which invloves getting some agreement on what these terms mean and the conditions for approaching them. It could all start with Ayn al yaghin.

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 20:44:52 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 20:44:52 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Mystical growth In-Reply-To: <001201bbf7cb$6c98de00$0d01010a@serdar> References: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010606202949.01fa21b0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >>as to why i posted the message...there are attempts to extract sufism >>from Islam and present it as a seperate belief system, which also have >>advocates on this list. Sufism is nothing without Islam. Mystics can >>pursue their own ways, i wish them a prosperous life. But Sufism is >>meaningful only with Islam. (btw, i accept Sufism as an Islamic term. I >>call mytics what people call non-muslim sufis) Dear Suckur, Assylum Lurkum, As we are beginning to appreciate Islam is not actually a religion. It is in fact a fashion faction. I am sorry to say that Islam is no longer able to provide a suitable environment to encourage spiritual development. Mystical growth occurs despite not because of Islam. It is comparable (at the present time) to the excesses of Christian controlled Middle Age (CE) excesses. Good people still do good work but then they always do. What can be done? Well for Moslems I suggest following their religion. For the rest of us we must find a non frenzied expression. Sukur as a caring person going to paradise, what religion other than your own would you recommend? You say, 'Sufism is nothing' - what kind of a religion is it? Lobster From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 21:29:16 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 20:29:16 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Pooh Pooh Lobster Message-ID:
Just when I thought we were making some headway
 
Dear Suckur,
Assylum Lurkum,

As we are beginning to appreciate Islam is not actually a religion. It is
in fact a fashion faction. I am sorry to say that Islam is no longer able
to provide a suitable environment to encourage spiritual development.
Mystical growth occurs despite not because of Islam.
It is comparable (at the present time) to the excesses of Christian
controlled Middle Age (CE) excesses. Good people still do good work but
then they always do.
What can be done?
Well for Moslems I suggest following their religion.
For the rest of us we must find a non frenzied expression.
Sukur as a caring person going to paradise, what religion other than your
own would you recommend? You say, 'Sufism is nothing' - what kind of a
religion is it?

Lobster
I know you get a little crabby now and then, but I didn't know you could be such a "bottom-feeder."
I suppose you blame religion for Israel-Palestine situation. Or Bosnian-Serb strife. I think we have to stop looking at the message of the Prophets as something calling for political strife. "If philosophers were kings," we wouldn't be in the terrible mess we're in. But you can hardly blame Jesus for Jim and Tammy Fay Baker.
 
"If Jesus Christ knew what they were doing in his name, he would never stop throwing up." -W.Allen  
 
Ooops, I just realized you got me in a pinch. OK, so you are just sending up incendiaries to see who'll bite? A little lobster bisque but for what reason, stirring up what? Surely, there's a nice person trying to claw his way out of that "Islam-in-a-nut" shell. Nothing is THAT simple, is it?

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 21:57:32 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 13:57:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Muslim Sufi Doctrines (was Take a stand) In-Reply-To: from "Blake Ross" at Jun 06, 2001 12:25:15 AM Message-ID: <200106062057.f56KvWw12320@sonic.net> 50010606 Vom Muhammad Nassar: >>> The relativist idea goes directly against the existence of God. haramullah: >> only by a certain idea of what or who "God" is. Blake Ross: > They don't know what God is. what convinces you that relativists do not know what your God is? surely you must understand that there are many definitions for the term "God" and that many different conceptions of this (as well as 'absolute truth') are possible given a statement about each. if not, welcome to the world of philosophy of religion. ;> > In fact there is no God proper, "it just depends..". I can't be sure what you mean here. >>> If God exists, then there is an absolute truth. >> >> this does not follow logically. God could be more powerful that our >> philosophy allows, Horatio. > > As a matter of doctrine and definition.... this is why I said that it doesn't follow logically. doctrine and definition were not offered to us as precursors to the statement. if you wanted to make something that follows logically then you would be better to state it like this: GIVEN God = Absolute Truth, IF there is God, THEN there is Absolute Truth. this would be logically necessary. however, it would not be evidence that that either God or absolute truth exists. it would simply be a statement that they do. thanks for offering it for our consideration. if you could explain what historical Sufis have taught this, perhaps providing us with some of their text, I'd be grateful. >>> If God exists [for] us, then there is a way we can know about that >>> absolute truth. >> >> that does not follow strictly by logic. it is possible, for example, >> that any God could be unknowable. many mystics claim that absolute >> truth cannot be known, especially by mere religious means (usually >> a particular form of mysticism is advised). some (Nihilists) believe >> that knowledge of anything is itself impossible. > > Actually, it does. If we admit the existence of God, a Creator and a > Source, is it possible that we can think of things or develop desires that > "It" hasn't taken into consideration. I don't understand the logical necessity of the argument or the definitions. that you and Muhammad may have the same definitions is not too surprising (people share these all the time). that neither of you offers support for them beyond repeating them is important in a consideration of your assertions. as I have said, there is no logical necessity in the statements which you and Muhammad are (apparently) repeating, especially not from a broad (open-minded) perspective in which the terms may mean many different things. you have not demonstrated to the contrary, only specified the limitations within which the statement would become true. I do appreciate that you have provided a greater context within which I may now understand you. thank you for making your meaning more clear. > God can subsume our field of possibilities. I don't think the > opposite is true. (This is a intricate, yet perfectly logical > argument, it requires perspective and an open mind about "God" > (as not something outside of us)) it requires one accept a *limited* definition of what 'God' means. thus in order to accept the statement above one must *stop* being open-minded and accept a belief which you and Muhammad seem to be asserting. I must repeat that I am NOT asserting here some kind of knowledge or perspective, I am merely responding logically as I understand it to what appear to me to be vague statements made categorically. if now that you are clarifying them, I am very pleased. you are, however, not doing anything to offer evidence of the logical necessity of the original contentions except within a limited perspective or support for the truth of the claims (one which I am now beginning to understand thanks to your greater elaboration). >>> If different creeds and Gnostic systems have different ideas about God, >>> and if god is the absolute existing truth, mutually exclusive creeds >>> cannot just be equally right. >> >> again not logically necessary. any deity (especially an omnipotent one) >> could ordain it a facet of Hir character that composites of opposite >> qualities could be Hir true nature, that intellectual truth is the >> foolish playset of those doomed to fail in Hir apprehension. > > ...The "mutually exclusive" by definition, takes care of the logic of > that statement. I'll try to break it down further. here was Muhammad's claim: IF A -- if different systems have different creeds about God AND B -- if God is absolute (existent) truth THEN C -- mutually exclusive creeds cannot be equally correct my refutation of the logical necessity of this theorem revolved around the real possibilities that 1 ALL creeds could be faulty (due to the intellectual nature of them and their inability to apprehend the divine) as well as that 2 ALL creeds might describe aspects of the divine without completely encompassing or defining this divinity (and thus could be considered all equally and incompletely true insofar as they go) the 'mutually exclusive' makes #2 less probable because of their limitations (and I would argue that some expressions may not, as part of their creed, have to exclude the truth of others, thereby making the more inclusive, which you and Muhammad are calling 'relative', *more* true), but it doesn't eliminate the possibility that #1 is true, nor does it support the original contention to the exclusion of those which I have offered. from what you have said you believe #1 to be false because you have Allah's words as disproof. I appreciate this clarification on your position and need no further elaboration as to the necessity of the claim given this belief of yours. > What you might mean is that, while monotheism and polytheism may > seem mutually exclusive, they actually can both be accomodated in > the same theology. taking this as it stands, it is accurate, because one might find or posit that the various deities taken to be 'many' in polytheism are actually forms of the same transcendental being understood by a variety of cultures and people. > Your argument, as stated above, instantly brings to mind the > "Names of Allah" which satisfy the conditions of your hypothesis, > yet we know by Allah's own words that He is One. GIVEN: a God called Allah exists AND: Allah provided words to human beings AND: within these words there is a statement 'He is One' AND: by 'He is One' Allah meant that He doesn't appear in a variety of forms THEN: polytheistic theology is false. I agree that what I have restated for you above is accurate. the problem is that the GIVENS (4 of them) were not agreed (or even specified!). >>> If these belief systems are not equally right then all but one are >>> flawed and simply lead away from the absolute truth since the word >>> flawed and the word absolute are themselves mutually exclusive. >> >> this is logic which depends upon Aristotlean dualism and what is >> called 'the excluded middle'. it has a limited application and may >> well not apply to the divine. > > I think n'sync, 98 degrees and the backstreet boys are absolutely > flawed! I'm not sure of the meaning of this. I gather that you are talking about musical groups here (my niece likes some of them), but I do not understand their relevance except as a distraction or humour. >>> Why one? Because there has to be a way of knowing that absolute truth >>> God. >> >> this appears to be merely a statement of faith on your part. why should >> we consider it necessary or self-evident? > > There is a logic to it. How many absolutes can there be? Just one. there might be none. not only this, there may be differing things which are described as absolute, or a God could be called absolute and by this it may be meant differently in each case. > How many correct ways can there be to seek that absolute? there is no way to tell outside additional information. it could be none (because there was no way for a human to find it or it is incapable of BEING 'found') and it could be a multitude. you see you are asking a general question about possibility, rather than about what has been instructed in your Sufi teachings. I gather at this point that your guides have provided you with a system of doctrines and logic which make One Correct Way the Answer, and I accept this. > ...the logic is clear but does it pass the common sense filter? common sense is the death of philosophy and the closedness of mind. however well it may work for repairing vehicles or harvesting corn, it will not serve as a measure of logical necessity. > ...We know (I do) there are Hindu and Buddhist and Christian and > Muslim and Shaman "Friends of God." given this.... > Who can say which is greater or less and what would that mean in > attaining the absolute anyway? is the absolute something which may be attained? something sought? something known? something seen? something smelled? how have you determined any of these things? how are they not articles of faith provided to you by your religious doctrines? if they are, why try to argue them as if they are logically necessary? > Perhaps different, divergent paths, when advanced to higher stages > (mystical) converge and become one. this is an important consideration, yes, and the selection of which of them is 'more advanced' becomes the ground of dispute. >>> When we talk of benefiting from contradictory belief systems, we are >>> not talking Sufism, we are not talking religion; we are not talking >>> about God in himself as He really is. We are talking about 'our god', >>> the figment of our imagination; we are talking the god of our nafs, hawa. >> >> it is possible that discussion about any kind of dualism is hip-deep >> in nafs, and that what both you and I may have claimed *also* proceeds >> from incomplete understanding and futile selections amongst faulty >> choices. > > This is the relativism Muhammad objects to. and I am only saying that Muhammad did nothing to eliminate the possibility of it through his assertions. I am hearing from you and he that these things are part of your doctrines and I would not wish to contest with you about them further because of the differences of the grounds of argument (what you accept as axiomatic you have neither made clear nor demonstrated as necessary). > Sufism suggests that the Unity of Existence is an experience that you > can have without mistake or personal coloring, you ascend to the > absolute and experience the absolute as the Absolute, incha'Allah. thank you for making it clear what you believe that traditional Sufis instruct. it is helpful if you merely state this and cite your sources (like Ibn Arabi, or Gazzali or someone else) for the authority. to try to logically argue against relativism will not gain you converts because there is nothing logical which excludes relativism, only some kind of doctrinal and faith-based system which your Sufism includes (and with which I have no problems). >> On the other hand if the absolute truth exists, this absolute truth >> should lead those who believe in it to a spiritual supremacy of some >> kind, or for that matter infinite kinds, over others; hence the >> questions about the spirit. >> >> of what character is any 'absolute truth'? is it rational (mental)? >> is it ontological (existential)? is it somatic (bodily)? is it >> fictional (imaginary)? is it transcendental (metaphysical)? there >> are very many options here available, > > You are, again, making the case for relativism. in much of what I am writing I am merely ASKING CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. that you presume I'm making a case for anything other than pointing out the logial weaknesses you and Muhammad are bringing to the discussion is your limitation. if you were to merely take all of my questions and answer them, then you would be instructing everyone on the email list of the nature of your Sufism and we could all be very happy about it. as it is, the issues are lost in bad logic and religious hyperbole. > "There is no absolute truth. It's all just a point of view." there is no reason that this is false from what I can see. that is NO reason to presume that it is a part of Sufism (which you and Muhammad claim is false and which I think is quite interesting). >> and what you seem to be >> considering only concerns some kind of rational certainty amongst >> a number of ideal options. it seems to proceed from a presupposition >> that the universe is hierarchical, dominated by your God, and that >> this God has dictated a clear rational formula of truth to all. if >> this is accurate, then how can you show this to others without just >> attempting to dominate them into submission to your (and your God's) >> truth? >> >> note that I am not suggesting you are wrong, only that your choice >> seems limited and you are not telling us WHY you have made it, just >> that you have done so and that it seems to you an exclusive choice. > > I don't see any limited choice in "infinite kinds." I don't understand how this is a reasonable response to what I have asked. the limitations you have made are many. you are saying that your God has very specific qualities, one of which is something you are vaguely referring to as 'absolute truth'. you do not tell us any of the details about what this truth is, what qualities it has, how people know it or come to know it, etc., and yet you would also wish to refer to 'what Allah has said' as if this is commonly assumed by your readers. >>> When it comes to the spirit it seems that metaphor is the preferred >>> mode of discussion, for a lot of people seem to be talking about >>> something they know nothing or little about. >> >> are these two descriptions related? does metaphoric speech equate to >> ignorant speech? > > When metaphor is used to describe something eternal by things that are not > (as prophets have done for their followers) the answer is no. When that same > metaphor (or a similar one freshly thought up) is used by someone who has > no experience like that of which the prophet speaks, yes, that is > ignorance. this is the first statement of yours which I can understand and see value in continuing to discuss. it sets the standard (religious) for the following discussion and allows me to understand what you are saying much more easily. thank you for that. >>> What is the spirit? What do you know about it, if you lay any claim >>> to develop spiritually: 'Say, bring forth thy evidence if thou be >>> truthful.' >> >> the spirit is a subjective experience of the real, changing cosmos. >> it is not eternal, it is not identifiable, it is not consistent in >> form or substance, but a facet of sensate consciousness. > > That is not as easy a question as you make it out to be and I don't find > your explanation convincing. you asked. :> I am not claiming that my responses must be believed or that they are accurate. sometimes I mistake rhetorical questions for those which you are asking philosophically. I now see that you and Muhammad wish to engage an instructional rather than philosphic exchange and I am content with this. >>> Do not invent a god of your own liking; seek God on his own terms. >> >> you seem to believe that these are mutually exclusive. why? perhaps >> a God would wish us to invent Hir and enjoy Hir character rather >> than to accept the scraps from the table of the priests and imams. >> how are we to know this except to explore, consider carefully the >> instructions of the wise, and test our best guesses in earnest and >> forthright experience? > > Maybe he should have said, "Do not invent a idol of your own liking, > seek God on .... I'm not sure there is much of a difference between these, though I can understand 'of your own liking' could be poor English for 'of your own likeNESS' and would mean something somewhat different. > ...You don't appear to believe in absolutes, you are suggesting > relativism. when you ask my opinion I'll provide it. you will find that I try to keep what I believe (which is very little) OUT of discussions with those who I am attempting to understand. this is why I am asking very many questions and merely sharing what seems to me logical alternatives to what you and Muhammad are suggesting. I now understand that you are trying to share your perspectives in contrast to relativism rather than truly argue philosophy or logic and am content to withdraw, hoping that you will expound upon your doctrines. I must stress that I have NO difficulties in accepting what are given as doctrinal axioms of your belief and trying to understand them further. if you could see your way to considering the language I have suggested in my previous posts about the universalist vs Muslim sufi discussion (a language which requires *no presuppositions, either absolute or relative*), then I would appreciate an attempt on your part to support your contentions on the matter. otherwise I will, as usual, avoid offering what few opinions I have and occasonally ask questions of those who bring foward extreme positions one way OR another. as it is I try to avoid religious posts to this email list because I do not find they hold to the topic of sufism for very long, even if those who are posting are Muslim Sufis. thank you for any time you'd care to spend illuminating me concerning Sufism. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 22:13:48 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 21:13:48 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] was Take a stand Message-ID:
You know, I thought I would find hard-liners here, Christians, Jews, even agnostics but I am surprised to suspect atheists attend as well. Man, you could be doing so much more with your time than chiming in to poke dull sticks at the believers. Who are you trying to convince? Me or your self? You of all people should know that life is short.
 
Enjoy your life (while you can).
 
 

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 22:31:44 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 21:31:44 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Muslim Sufi Doctrine Message-ID:
Haramullah said,

Muhammad Nassar:
>>> The relativist idea goes directly against the existence of God.

haramullah:
>> only by a certain idea of what or who "God" is.

Blake Ross:
> They don't know what God is.

what convinces you that relativists do not know what your God is?
surely you must understand that there are many definitions for the
term "God" and that many different conceptions of this (as well as
'absolute truth') are possible given a statement about each. if not,
welcome to the world of philosophy of religion. ;>
 
etc. etc. etc.
________________________________________________
 
Haramullah, peace of mind to you friend
Everyone is sick and tired of this (not so) Merry-Go-Round with the whole absolute vs. relative thing. From a strict logic point of view, I would consider the (most likely pointless) process of diagraming and justifying my position. I wold enjoy the challenge.
I would even consider using your terms, which would probably put me at some disadvantage.
Just to be "gamey." Maybe I'll find time. Of course you know there is a lot of time required to play your game and what enticement do you offer to pique my interest?
 
"> God can subsume our field of possibilities. I don't think the
> opposite is true. (This is a intricate, yet perfectly logical
> argument, it requires perspective and an open mind about "God" > (as not something outside of us))

it requires one accept a *limited* definition of what 'God' means.
thus in order to accept the statement above one must *stop* being
open-minded and accept a belief which you and Muhammad seem to be
asserting."
You have no interest in understanding monotheism. You want to argue the shape camel and offer the reduction of God from the absolute to the limited as a valid argument rather than admit what it is: contentiouness.
 
At some point, you become convinced of the truth or you deny it. The Qur'an calls them believers and unbelievers. I have no interest or stake in making one out of the other. PERIOD. Sufism is a very enlightened school. I have a pretty good intelligence and a critical demeanor. I have taken a pass on a whole bunch of religion. This or that struck me as being far-fetched or out of place. Sufism, as I know it, is probably the most advanced and perfect systems ever created. It is defensible from any attack. Unless you diminish it and I have no intention of that either.  
 
No Haramullah, I regret to say that I will not play with you. You are not really interested in the game (in my humble opinion).
Sorry.....

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 22:47:10 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 23:47:10 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Truth and the Relative Message-ID: "The spirit is a subjective experience of the real, changing cosmos. It is not eternal, it is not identifiable, and it is not consistent in Form or substance, but a facet of sensate consciousness." So now the spirit is a facet of sensate consciousness and since sensate consciousness is a good deal subjective, in other words solipsistic, we might as well suspend all our judgments as to what spiritual development really means. Your answer sir amounts to little more than “ well I don’t know. Who cares any way since we accept anything that just drops along the way?” it follows logically from the assumption that the spirit is a subjective (this word used so guilelessly in particular makes your point interestingly vulnerable) experience of the real (how can you tell it is real?) changing cosmos. Now this enormous amount of fussing has been about an ‘experience’ by something un-eternal (where did you get this? Maybe because it is nothing but an experience) of something transient. It is not identifiable.(according to what system of love of all?) Is this according to somebody’s spiritual station in life or is this the spirit as in itself it really is? And if the spirit is unidenti fiable, why the heck bother about it? Does not This also bring us to the conclusion that what a lot of people are saying about the spirit is metaphorical. (Roman Jacobson thought that metaphor was analogical to some kind of aphasic disturbance). Now if someone just ventures to open his mouth saying “ I have reached…” we might as well think of the word reach as metaphorical and aphasic. What right does he have to say “reached” if all he says about the spirit is that it is unidentifiable. Now nihilists are summoned to support the idea that no truth can be known. But as I understand no one comes to this forum with nihilism except perhaps for Mr. sea fruit. You don’t logically refute a point by saying that a Mr. X does not believe in it, let alone the fact that this x is a nihilist. The argument based on the assumption that God possesses apparently contradictory qualities is pathetic. The fact that God can be vengeful and compassionate at the same time does not mean that mutually exclusive creeds have an equal claim to the truth. In the very vengefulness there is mercy because god, only for example, can put someone back on the right track by putting them through adverse circumstances. In that case these qualities are not mutually exclusive nor contradictory but simply complimentary. The fact that someone is meek and can take a harder turn at certain moments does not mean that this person is actually two. “you seem to believe that these are mutually exclusive. why? perhaps a God would wish us to invent Hir and enjoy Hir character rather than to accept the scraps from the table of the priests and imams. how are we to know this except to explore, consider carefully the instructions of the wise, and test our best guesses in earnest and forthright experience?” No He wouldn’t sir for the simple reason that we are never going to reach the same conclusions about Him. What might happen next is with differences between creeds ever getting larger and after the initial phase of consideration that you are suggesting, these meditations about the deity will turn into dogmas, contradictory ones. Now God wants us to know him in himself as he really is at least to avoid the possibility of these creeds going into religious wars. You might say then that this is why you are calling for tolerance. So now tolerance comes to justify a process which was flawed and ill-conceived right from the start. Are you really interested in reaching any truth about anything sir. “ego can select anything to support itself, and knowledge about the world, about a God, or about a religion are all prime candidates for the selection of ego in social one-upsmanship, preserving the position of 'correctness' as a lever to justify one's authority, one's purity, or one's special status with respect to a presumed spiritual cosmogenitor.” But I am not calling for a choice by your ego. We are calling for the elimination of the ego. “it is possible that discussion about any kind of dualism is hip-deep in nafs, and that what both you and I may have claimed *also* proceeds from incomplete understanding and futile selections amongst faulty choices.” In that case we would try to see which of our ideas leads, as it often has, to a perverted logic. In that case I would also ask you about the spirit and you will probably give an answer that does not even pass for inadequate. “it is for this reason that I presume it is not knowledge so much as CERTAINTY which is an indicator of arrogance and a lack of spiritual development, regardless of what 'spirit' and 'spiritual' might mean to any individual. the ability to suspend knowledge, to dwell in the present and presence of one's kindred without the prop of correctness and the fiction of right mental frameworks, offering love to all who enter into one's sphere of influence and attention to the thoughts and considerations of one's struggling kindred, is what I identify as abiding the Real, resting in the arms of the Most Compassionate, and wielding the weapons of the Most Powerful.” In that case I would maintain that white cannot mix with black and possibly remain the same colour. If the problem is now with certainty we might as well stop being certain about anything even against the existence of decisive evidence. This does not have to apply only for spirit or god, it also applies to the physical world. That is not only relativism. That is nihilism. Finally if God is love, how can you offer that love in the correct sense when you fog up the divine idea by saying it is relative. An absolutist, Sheikh ‘Abdul Wahhab al-Sha’rani once looked at a jew with contempt when he was still a seeker, so Allah, he recounts took away Islam from and infused Judaism into him for a while. He sought Allah’s forgiveness for forgetting that his Iman was only a gift from Allah. Muslim Sufis do not need relativism in order to know how to deal with others. Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 23:32:47 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 00:32:47 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Thank you Blake Message-ID: This is just to say thank you brother Blake for your great contributions and your support. Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 23:53:43 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 22:53:43 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Brothers Message-ID:


No thanks necessary

Birds of a feather flock together


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 02:14:04 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Muslim Sufi Doctrines (was Take a stand) In-Reply-To: <200106062057.f56KvWw12320@sonic.net> from "haramullah" at Jun 06, 2001 01:57:32 PM Message-ID: <200106070114.f571E4p10611@sonic.net> 50010606 Vom assalam alaykum, my kin. Muhammad Nassar: >>>>> The relativist idea goes directly against the existence of God. haramullah: >>>> only by a certain idea of what or who "God" is. Blake Ross: >>> They don't know what God is. haramullah: >> what convinces you that relativists do not know what your God is? >> surely you must understand that there are many definitions for the >> term "God" and that many different conceptions of this (as well as >> 'absolute truth') are possible given a statement about each. if not, >> welcome to the world of philosophy of religion. ;> Blake Ross: > Everyone is sick and tired of this (not so) Merry-Go-Round with the > whole absolute vs. relative thing. don't I know it. I try not to engage religious debates in Tariqas for this exact reason. once in a while I test out the waters to see whether either of the two sides who come to this email list will take the time to incorporate a more accepting terminology and mindframe in order to find possible common ground and more clearly delineate the differences between the universalists (whom you call 'relativists') and Muslims. usually the universalists are quite amiable and yet short of knowledge of traditional Sufism and its content. there have been exceptions. usually the Muslim Sufis are too concerned about Right Thought to even begin a discussion about the subject other than to restate their beliefs. so be it. occasionally I'll try to pound my head against the wall again. it is the least I can do for the prospect of love in the Way of the Most Compassionate. > From a strict logic point of > view, I would consider the (most likely pointless) process of diagraming > and justifying my position. I wold enjoy the challenge.I would even > consider using your terms, which would probably put me at some > disadvantage. Just to be "gamey." Maybe I'll find time. it might assist others to understand your position more clearly. I don't consider it to be a 'game', for what it's worth. when one begins a philosophical conversation (esp. if the questions one is asking are not rhetorical) you're likely to wind up with all kinds of perspectives coming to the table. if these perspectives are not welcome and cannot easily be put down except by virtue of argument from authority, then portraying your approach as 'open-minded' is at worst deceptive and at best a waste of all our time. it is to my sorrow that I may have wasted your time. instead I would recommend what you have neglected in my longer post: answering questions put to you from the perspective you favour and identifying it clearly as such. if you can also do this while citing sources important to your Sufi tradition all the better for those of us who are reading your text. it will give us an education on your Sufism and inform us from where you hail. > Of course you know there is a lot of time required to play your > game and what enticement do you offer to pique my interest? what incentive do you have to make more clear the content of your Sufism? I am not here to convince you of *anything*, though I gather you have placed me in some kind of game-playing category which you have dismissed because you think I'm taking a side in this debate (and I have been at pains to make clear to you that I am NOT). my point is that I have been a subscriber to Tariqas email list (with but a few month exception period) since its inception. I am one of those who facilitated its creation and have been very dedicated to coming to a more thorough understanding of Sufism from a variety of perspectives, ESPECIALLY inclusive of the Muslim (which I think has an arguably more concrete history and character). if you wish to pretend that I am arguing for relativism/universalism, then you may do so, but not with my cooperation. I hope that you see your error and begin to merely respond to direct queries rather than attempt to argue the logic of some contention you and your order may hold to be true. ultimately it is of greater value to all concerned within Tariqas that you do NOT become converted from your perspective, that you explain clearly what your order considers to be true, and that the readers of this email list come to understand it, even if they do not see fit to agree. it has been MY intent to make this possible, and throughout the history of the email list Muslim Sufis have come in peace and departed in outrage because they were questioned, those with whom they spoke held different opinions, and there was not some attempt to limit or moderate alternative perspectives from posting. I hope that this does not occur with you and Muhammad, regardless of whether you see fit to dismiss me, an attempted facilitator, rather than accept what I have offered as a bridge to clearer and more succinct communications. >>> God can subsume our field of possibilities. I don't think the >>> opposite is true. (This is a intricate, yet perfectly logical >>> argument, it requires perspective and an open mind about "God" >>> (as not something outside of us)) >> >> it requires one accept a *limited* definition of what 'God' means. >> thus in order to accept the statement above one must *stop* being >> open-minded and accept a belief which you and Muhammad seem to be >> asserting." > > You have no interest in understanding monotheism. You want to argue the > shape camel and offer the reduction of God from the absolute to the limited > as a valid argument rather than admit what it is: contentiouness. how sad I am that I have not made my position more clear to you: I HAVE NO POSITION! I welcome your learned references and instruction on what you have learned about Sufism and hope that you will not see that I am some kind of obstacle. > At some point, you become convinced of the truth or you deny it. The > Qur'an calls them believers and unbelievers. I have no interest or > stake in making one out of the other. PERIOD. this is very reassuring. it means that you are not concerned with trying to convert me or others here, only to explain. and that is what I would have also. > Sufism is a very enlightened school.... this is why I would like to see more expressions from Sufi schools here in the email list. I think it would be beneficial to explain what school maintains what perspective, so that we can identify with greater facility those which are universalists and those which adhere to Muslim norms. > Sufism, as I know it, is probably the most advanced and perfect > systems ever created. It is defensible from any attack. Unless > you diminish it and I have no intention of that either. it sounds like you believe that Sufism is a coherent doctrine of ideas, rather than a group of ideas which may be perpetuated by a variety of schools. that is very interesting to me and I'd like to know what kind of exposure you may have to the writings and expressions of other Muslim Sufis, whether you believe that your shaykhs agree with everything other Muslim Sufi shaykhs say, etc. > ...I will not play with you. You are not really interested in the > game (in my humble opinion).Sorry..... I hear you withdrawing from our conversation. I am very sorry if I have said anything to offend you or over-responded such that your participation must become tedious in order to make yourself clear. there is no "game" I would like you to play. I take all of this quite seriously, and hope that you will see fit to explain in some greater detail the limitations of relativism/universalism as well as the strong points of Islam in comparison. honestly, kindred, I would like to *help you to make your points in contrast to universalists*! I am not here to be your detractor, but was merely posing difficult questions which relativists would of course answer differently than yourself so that all could see what kind of ideas you hold to be true and what your Sufism includes. to this end I will only try to understand you and will either be more quiet or ask elaborating questions. my sincere apologies for any time of yours that I have wasted. I am very sorry if this is so. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Wed Jun 6 22:39:40 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 22:39:40 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Nothing is THAT simple, is it? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010606223205.01f9fdd0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >Ooops, I just realized you got me in a pinch. OK, so you are just sending >up incendiaries to see who'll bite? A little lobster bisque but for what >reason, stirring up what? Surely, there's a nice person trying to claw his >way out of that "Islam-in-a-nut" shell. Nothing is THAT simple, is it? I have nothing against Islam but a lot of Moslems seem to have more than their fill of anti-[insert something or other] However Sufism has always been very pro-[Allah++] Personally I would rather be a pro than someones Aunti If the pros [we have the Truth and you better believe it] wish to include Sufism in their Islam then I will have to throw out that baby with its water and say (as has been) Islam is a religion without a meaning and Sufism is a meaning without a home. And I mean what I say whether mean or not. Lobster :-) From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 03:40:45 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 22:40:45 EDT Subject: [Tariqas] Nothing is THAT simple, is it? Message-ID: <103.4671898.285043ad@aol.com> From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 03:42:06 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 19:42:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Muslim Sufi Doctrines (was Take a stand) In-Reply-To: <200106070114.f571E4p10611@sonic.net> from "haramullah" at Jun 06, 2001 06:14:04 PM Message-ID: <200106070242.f572g6I30847@sonic.net> 50010606 Vom assalam alaykum, my kin, thank you for your patience! here I hope to shift to a consideration more clear of Muslim Sufi doctrines in *contrast* to universalism and, perhaps in some cases, to my own ideas. where I am asked what I think I will answer truthfully but where I am able I wish to begin to ask Muhammad what *Sufis* believe and to understand what he and his shaykh instruct. I hope that this will not be seen as any kind of 'game' and instead that I am trying to encourage sharing of our knowledge and a discussion of Sufism from all points on the circle. haramullah responds to a question about what the spirit is: >> The spirit is a subjective experience of the real, changing cosmos. >> It is not eternal, it is not identifiable, and it is not consistent in >> Form or substance, but a facet of sensate consciousness. "muhammad nassar" : > So now the spirit is a facet of sensate consciousness and since sensate > consciousness is a good deal subjective, in other words solipsistic, > we might as well suspend all our judgments as to what spiritual development > really means. here we are venturing (apparently) very far from conventional Sufi ideas, because you are asking me about my ideas, and I have not claimed that I am a Sufi or a sufi (I have been told numerous times by those who identified as Sufis that I am not one!). this email list is about Sufism, and so I would prefer it if we try to get back to what you think (since you are a Sufi, it seems) rather than to dwell on what I think (because I am outside any Sufi order). I will answer your queries here in my defense at least initially but hope that you will continue to contrast what you understand as a Sufi and that you will answer what questions I have for your elaboration as an example of traditional Sufi doctrines. I will attempt to curtail my own ideas at present because I would prefer in this thread to focus on Muslim Sufism (of which I am not part and which you seem to be representing quite well). in response to your query, I think the subjective and limited quality of the spirit does in no way preclude spiritual development, which, like the improvement of many other finite and temporal things, can also become more than just an imagined figment of the mind. in order to more clearly understand you and to facilitate discussion, let me ask: what process of spiritual development have you been taught about in your Sufi order? what have you personally found valuable in terms of practice? > Your answer sir amounts to little more than "well I don't know. Who > cares any way since we accept anything that just drops along the way?" > it follows logically from the assumption that the spirit is a subjective > (this word used so guilelessly in particular makes your point > interestingly vulnerable) experience of the real (how can you tell it > is real?) changing cosmos. I would identify that which is real as that which persists before the aggregate assessment of myself and my kin in repeated perception. that is, I don't think what is real need be changeless, nor do I think what is real be somehow outside time, it just seems to maintain its overall existence in a variety of characters and qualities (perhaps within certain principles of interaction such as the Laws of Nature) despite the obvious appearance and disappearance of intelligent sensate forms such as myself. now in comparison I would like to know how you think Sufis discover the Real, what mechanisms or principles of perception should be used, according to your school, to discern the Real from the temporary, and whether there is some way to mistake one for the other despite one's best intentions. > Now this enormous amount of fussing has been about an 'experience' by > something un-eternal (where did you get this? Maybe because it is > nothing but an experience) of something transient. you ask again about my ideas. I have arrived at my favoured ideas based on introspection, serious consideration of philosophy and logic, and a reflective comparison between my experience and assertions about the world from many different religious and philosophic schools. I do not assert that they are true except to my sensibility and welcome contrasting and comparative viewpoints, especially those which you have found compare favourably with your experience of the world or which you have learned from shaykhs are an important part of Sufi tradition. in contrast (since you seem to hold different views to be true, and I respect this), have you talked with your shaykh about these ideas about God, the spirit, and spiritual development? did your ideas and those of your shaykh agree 100% or did you have to adjust your thoughts and your knowledge in order to comprehend the wisdom of your guide? > It is not identifiable.(according to what system of love of all?) I claim no affiliation with anybody's system. I have imagined and made up what I assert, finding that it works for me and that I am benefitting from considering it (tentatively) true. the love of all is something I have identified (because of my background and context I'm sure) as a Christian facet, something I can offer to others in an attempt (foolish though it may seem to my detractors) to become humble, to withdraw from contention in forums dedicated to a comprehension of traditional mysticism from a perspective which I am told I cannot or do not represent. do you have some kind of system of love of all? if so, could you describe it somewhat for us? is it associated with some particular Sufi poet or mystic? is the concept of The Beloved important to it? > Is this according to somebody's spiritual station in life or is this > the spirit as in itself it really is? I'm sorry but I'm not sure what this means, exactly. I'll try to respond anyway so as not to waste your time. my perception is that the cosmos as a whole is completely impermanent (one might say that I am Buddhist because of this idea I favour -- compare the 'sunyata' of Nagarjuna, my conventional namesake). therefore I do not find the truth of some mystics who claim that mystical development ensures the duration of the spirit beyond the dissolution of bodily integrity. do you think that one's spiritual station enables one to do more or unusual things? is it part of Sufi tradition that saints, for example, are able to do more, after their deaths, for the benefit of others? or is the destination of all eternal souls a kind of Judgement which leads one to a heaven or hell? > And if the spirit is unidentifiable, why the heck bother about it? the quality of subjective experience has proven to be of immense importance primarily to mystics (who often identify the spirit as incapable of change and ascribe it very interesting qualities) and to artists, whose aesthetic processes seem to incorporate a refinement of sense and expression. the reason to bother with it, therefore, is for the benefit of overall and sustained enjoyment of one's life. and from the perspective of a Muslim Sufi, what is the benefit of engaging mystical disciplines and attempting spiritual development? is it for the pleasing of the divine, for personal gain, or for the purpose of passing a moral test set out by this divinity? > Does not this also bring us to the conclusion that what a lot of > people are saying about the spirit is metaphorical...? I don't think that this is the necessary conclusion where I am concerned, no. I'm not convinced of the value of conceiving of the spirit as a metaphor either, so here we seem to agree. > The argument based on the assumption that God possesses apparently > contradictory qualities is pathetic. The fact that God can be > vengeful and compassionate at the same time does not mean that > mutually exclusive creeds have an equal claim to the truth. In the > very vengefulness there is mercy because god, only for example, can > put someone back on the right track by putting them through adverse > circumstances. In that case these qualities are not mutually > exclusive nor contradictory but simply complimentary. this makes a great deal of sense to me and I appreciate your clarification of the point for me. what kind of things do you see as 'mutually exclusive'? does the contention about whether someone must become Muslim to walk the Sufi Path partake of this mutual exclusivity? i.e. do you see that universalism (which you are calling relativism) is mutually exclusive from Sufism as you have learned it because it transcends this central instruction of your Sufi order (a belief in the Qur'an, Allah, and in Muslim Sufi doctrines)? >> you seem to believe that these are mutually exclusive. why? perhaps >> a God would wish us to invent Hir and enjoy Hir character rather >> than to accept the scraps from the table of the priests and imams. >> how are we to know this except to explore, consider carefully the >> instructions of the wise, and test our best guesses in earnest and >> forthright experience? > > No He wouldn't sir for the simple reason that we are never going to > reach the same conclusions about Him. and you believe it is important we reach the same conclusions about God because as absolute truth, God must be described and understood correctly in order to be discovered? I hope I have not mistaken what you have said. it is my intent here merely to understand. > What might happen next is with differences between creeds ever getting > larger and after the initial phase of consideration that you are > suggesting, these meditations about the deity will turn into dogmas, > contradictory ones. and it is your belief that only one intellectual assertion set is correct about the God and therefore it is important that we come to agree with the correct one, true? > Now God wants us to know him in himself as he really is at least > to avoid the possibility of these creeds going into religious wars. and you believe that religious wars are something God does not want? the reason I ask is that some religious scripture describes the desires of the divine as sometimes including a desire for warfare (in the defense of the faithful, for example, or for greater glory of the God). > ...Are you really interested in reaching any truth about anything sir. I am VERY happy for the tone of your response here, and I hope that you see that I am indeed interested in reaching some kind of truth about what Sufis instruct. I do not wish to find some kind of resolution of the ideas which *I* would study of Sufis and my own within this forum, and I am very sorry if I gave this impression. I want to see Sufism discussed here! ;> >> ego can select anything to support itself, and knowledge about the >> world, about a God, or about a religion are all prime candidates >> for the selection of ego in social one-upsmanship, preserving the >> position of 'correctness' as a lever to justify one's authority, >> one's purity, or one's special status with respect to a presumed >> spiritual cosmogenitor. > > But I am not calling for a choice by your ego. We are calling for > the elimination of the ego. so you believe, as does your order, that the ego is something valuable to eliminate? what is this ego which you think is eliminated? is it a facade or mask? what do you think is left after the ego is gone? what have you found is the best way your ego might be eliminated? >> it is for this reason that I presume it is not knowledge so much as >> CERTAINTY which is an indicator of arrogance and a lack of spiritual >> development, regardless of what 'spirit' and 'spiritual' might mean >> to any individual. the ability to suspend knowledge, to dwell in the >> present and presence of one's kindred without the prop of correctness >> and the fiction of right mental frameworks, offering love to all who >> enter into one's sphere of influence and attention to the thoughts >> and considerations of one's struggling kindred, is what I identify >> as abiding the Real, resting in the arms of the Most Compassionate, >> and wielding the weapons of the Most Powerful. > > In that case I would maintain that white cannot mix with black and > possibly remain the same colour. I understand and agree with regard to white and black and staying the same. > If the problem is now with certainty we might as well stop being > certain about anything even against the existence of decisive evidence. I think moreso the problem I was mentioning was the required presentation of certitude. i.e. inasmuch as I may be attached to having what I know to be the truth presented within my presence, so am I being intolerant. I do NOT say that this is the "wrong way to teach" or the "worst way to be", only that requiring such presentation in my presence is NOT how I approach the world and people in it or how I prefer to be treated. in contrast, how does your shaykh interact with those who have very different ideas about the world? how much is your shaykh interested in entertaining, for example, what your order would consider 'wrong ideas'? how much time and attention are they worth? just enough to understand them and their flaws and then show them up as unworthy of further consideration so that the truth may be compared and known? > Finally if God is love, how can you offer that love in the correct > sense when you fog up the divine idea by saying it is relative. it has not been my experience that 'the divine idea' is monolithic, but as I say I am not Muslim and do not conform to conventions of belief which very many religious, with whom I have spent time and energy, prefer. in contrast, what do you think is the purest offering of love you can bring to a discussion in which there are those with whom you disagree? that you call me 'sir' and continue to discuss with me these important ideas respectfully is what I call love of a sort and I GREATLY appreciate it. it gives me hope that I may come to understand you a bit better and help to convey to the universalists the character and content of Muslim Sufism of which you are functioning here as a kind of representative. > An absolutist, Sheikh 'Abdul Wahhab al-Sha’rani once looked at a > jew with contempt when he was still a seeker, so Allah, he recounts > took away Islam from and infused Judaism into him for a while. He > sought Allah's forgiveness for forgetting that his Iman was only a > gift from Allah. Muslim Sufis do not need relativism in order to > know how to deal with others. I am supremely grateful for the time and attention you have lavished upon one so ignorant of Sufism as I. it is yet my intention to come, within the context of this forum, to learn but a small bit more about it through discussion such as I hope to exemplify and inspire. what do you think is the prime quality which Muslim Sufis *do* need in order to deal with others respectfully and properly? I agree that relativism and an adherence to it is not required. this much even I, in my ignorance, have understood. I would never wish to attempt to convince you of the truth of relativism and hope you see this before you abandon an expression of your heart to this email list. thank you very much. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 03:52:42 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 22:52:42 EDT Subject: [Tariqas] Nothing is THAT simple, is it? Message-ID: <27.169da114.2850467a@aol.com> --part1_27.169da114.2850467a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit bismillah.. shaykh Zarruq said in his Qawaid, "Different pathss do not remain different goals. In spite of the different methods, like worship, asceticism and gnosis, the unifier persues the way which lead to nearness to Allah on the Path of Nobility. All of them interpenetrate. So the gnostic must have worship or there is no point to his gnosis since he does not worship the One he recognises. He must have asceticism or there is no reality to him if he does not turn from what is other than Him. The worshipper must have both since there is no worship with out recognition and there is no devotion to worship except with asceticism. Otherwise the blessings are fruitless. the one who is dominated by action is a worshipper, the one dominated by abandonment is an ascetic, and the one who dominated by looking at how Allah disposes of things is a gnostic. All is sufism and Allah knows best." lobster your meaness needs to be harnessed if you are any of the above.... :-) amr --part1_27.169da114.2850467a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit bismillah..

shaykh Zarruq said in his Qawaid, "Different pathss do not remain different
goals. In spite of the different methods, like worship, asceticism and
gnosis, the unifier persues the way which lead to nearness to Allah on the
Path of Nobility.  All of them interpenetrate. So the gnostic must have
worship or there is no point to his gnosis since he does not worship the One
he recognises.  He must have asceticism or there is no reality to him if he
does not turn from what is other than Him. The worshipper must have both
since there is no worship with out recognition and there is no devotion to
worship except with asceticism. Otherwise the blessings are fruitless.  the
one who is dominated by action is a worshipper, the one dominated by
abandonment is an ascetic, and the one who dominated by looking at how Allah
disposes of things is a gnostic.  All is sufism and Allah knows best."

lobster your meaness needs to be harnessed if you are any of the above....

:-)
amr --part1_27.169da114.2850467a_boundary-- From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 09:39:03 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 09:39:03 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Muslim Sufi Doctrines In-Reply-To: <200106070242.f572g6I30847@sonic.net> References: <200106070114.f571E4p10611@sonic.net> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010607091248.00a55bb0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >what he and his shaykh instruct. I hope that this will not be seen as any >kind of 'game' and instead that I am trying to encourage sharing of our >knowledge and a discussion of Sufism from all points on the circle. Dear Friends, Nice to observe a circle where the wisdom of non game players and mature Muslims instructs us so well. Thank you both. >and you believe it is important we reach the same conclusions about >God because as absolute truth, God must be described and understood >correctly in order to be discovered? I hope I have not mistaken >what you have said. it is my intent here merely to understand. I am sure our Friend will give a better answer but I would comment: Part of any maturity is moving towards an Absolute - an Ideal based on leaving behind what does not partake of 'truth' thus far. Any spirituality presents ideas, experiences and possibilities that allow deepening of understanding and abandoning of error. Any genuine mysticism presents and refines this process through the lineage and heritage of its foundations. It is therefore a system of evolution that offers correction and alignment that in time any person will arrive at, without the necessity of travelling every alley. Some discoveries have been made. Partial, religion dependent and assumption based 'discoveries' for example the Muslim assumption of the existence of Allah can not be questioned without a relative detachment. It depends how you wish to travel and in whose company. Personally I would be pleased to travel with either approach, neither or even another way if available . . . It is not one way for all but for All there is one way . . . Many thanks Lobster From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 12:22:43 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 12:22:43 +0100 Subject: Ynt: [Tariqas] Muslim Sufi Doctrines In-Reply-To: <006e01bbf782$ad5ec920$0d01010a@serdar> References: <200106070114.f571E4p10611@sonic.net> <5.0.2.1.2.20010607091248.00a55bb0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010607121551.01fc0ec0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >Lopister, > >oh sorry for the imitation without giving any reference. remember it was >your strategy, monk of the list: creating tension...didnt you like it? Peace Dear Friend, LOL I am content with all content. >you utter many words but in fact say nothing. i leave you alone in your >mess. continue to follow satan whispering to you from the right. > >Sukru Thank you but you are unable to leave me alone until I have finished with you. Tonight I will come visit you in your dreams as a virtuous person - you are virtuous I take it - you will be safe from all whisperings of the night . . . Remember say your prayers and know Satan can not enter. Then dream well of all the good things you will do in this life. Sleep well. :-) Lobster Dream From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 12:12:39 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 12:12:39 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Nothing is THAT simple, is it? Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010607115745.01fc4210@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >bismillah.. > >shaykh Zarruq said in his Qawaid, "Different pathss do not remain different >goals. In spite of the different methods, like worship, asceticism and >gnosis, the unifier persues the way which lead to nearness to Allah on the >Path of Nobility. All of them interpenetrate. So the gnostic must have >worship or there is no point to his gnosis since he does not worship the One >he recognises. He must have asceticism or there is no reality to him if he >does not turn from what is other than Him. The worshipper must have both >since there is no worship with out recognition and there is no devotion to >worship except with asceticism. Otherwise the blessings are fruitless. the >one who is dominated by action is a worshipper, the one dominated by >abandonment is an ascetic, and the one who dominated by looking at how Allah >disposes of things is a gnostic. All is sufism and Allah knows best." > >lobster your meaness needs to be harnessed if you are any of the above.... Peace Dear Amr, Dear Friends, Thank you for concerning yourself with my needs :-) Most kind. However when handling snakes I prefer to bite first. There are other and better ways and you have quoted a reputable source :-) I appreciate your kindness and good intent. :-) We Lobsters have a long history of snake skinning and consumption. I consider religious fanatics of all persuasions some of the most insidious, venomous creatures ever created (and that is just the good ones) Take away the facade of their 'holy words' and they will imitate any base behaviour for the protection of God as an act of devotion or some other perverse justification. I on the other hand must remain true to the philosophy of rejection. You may pray for me as I am a lost cause :-) Satan Knows Best Lobster eXXo-subscribe@yahoogroups.com (send blank email to above address to join) http://pages.britishlibrary.net/lobster/exxo/ From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 17:20:58 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (elijah wright) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 12:20:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Ynt: [Tariqas] Re: humor In-Reply-To: <001901bbf7a2$0af4d240$0d01010a@serdar> Message-ID: On Wed, 1 Jan 1997, Sukru Kaya wrote: > Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 07:10:01 +0200 > From: Sukru Kaya could you please adjust the clock on your computer? it plays games both with people's e-mail inboxes and also with the list archives... posts from you with this incorrect date will be mis-filed as having been sent to the list in January of 1997. elijah From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 19:03:36 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 11:03:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Truth, Relativism, and the Real In-Reply-To: <001001bbf7a1$8f0b5320$0d01010a@serdar> from "Sukru Kaya" at Jan 01, 1997 07:06:33 AM Message-ID: <200106071803.f57I3aW01020@sonic.net> 50010607 VI! om assalam alaykum, my kin. haramullah: >> it is for this reason that I presume it is not knowledge so much as >> CERTAINTY which is an indicator of arrogance and a lack of spiritual >> development, regardless of what 'spirit' and 'spiritual' might mean >> to any individual. the ability to suspend knowledge, to dwell in the >> present and presence of one's kindred without the prop of correctness >> and the fiction of right mental frameworks, offering love to all who >> enter into one's sphere of influence and attention to the thoughts >> and considerations of one's struggling kindred, is what I identify >> as abiding the Real, resting in the arms of the Most Compassionate, >> and wielding the weapons of the Most Powerful. "Sukru Kaya" : > everyone is welcome to feel offended by this: good trick, Sukru! I never saw your posts until elijah mentioned that your clock was off, then I found them at the top of my mailbox! sorry for the delay. if you persist with a bad clock I may have to filter you out. ;> now to your offensive questions (are they?): > so please tell me where you put revealation and prophets > in your sphere? inductive precognition, typically through religious or mystical disciplines and states of consciousness. prophets are those who are able to perceive the present and/or envision the future correctly, usually without apparent technical formulae (compared with, for example, weather forecasting or stock predictions). > with what you tell it seems you dont need them. oh no! visionaries are very important! they make possible the communication of deep insights to conventional people! expression from mystics concerning *all* aspects of life are of value, especially to the Believer. > btw, what you tell us is not out of knowledge. it is imagination. I guess this is the offensive part where you dismiss me as a bearer of useless reflections. thank you for your feedback. > real knowledge comes only with ayn al yaqeen. you are making > a tasteless salad of words in a realm only knowable by means > ayn al yaqeen. does making word salad include mixing languages occasionally? you have me at a disadvantage because I do not know Arabic, though I would like to understand. what does "ayn al yaqueen" mean to you? > obsess with something more meaningful in our limited realm: > smile to your friends, send weapons to chechenya for His Love. I will send no physical weapons to any person. I have no idea why you would wish me to do this. more later. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 19:47:52 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 14:47:52 EDT Subject: [Tariqas] Nothing is THAT simple, is it? Message-ID: <96.155ad183.28512658@aol.com> From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 20:01:18 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 15:01:18 EDT Subject: [Tariqas] Nothing is THAT simple, is it? Message-ID: <6b.15780bfb.2851297e@aol.com> --part1_6b.15780bfb.2851297e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bismillah... Dear Lobster.... below is a brief description of your kind.... your family i= s=20 something.. unusual... i didn't read in it tho that lobsters are venom=20 suckers...=20 ... :-) i cannot deny you write good verse... wonderful gift....share some spiritual= =20 verse for a change.. thanks love amr =20 Arthropod =ABAHR thruh pod=BB, is any animal that belongs to the major divis= ion,=20 or phylum, of the animal kingdom called the Arthropoda. This term is formed=20 from two Greek words, and means jointed feet. Actually, the legs, rather tha= n=20 the feet, are jointed. All the Arthropoda, or arthropods, have jointed legs.= =20 Among the most important groups of arthropods are the following: (1) insects= ,=20 including cockroaches, beetles, bees, butterflies, and many others; (2)=20 crustaceans, including such well-known animals as crabs, lobsters, shrimps,=20 and barnacles; (3) arachnids, including mites, ticks, spiders, and scorpions= ;=20 (4) chilopods, or centipedes; and (5) diplo-pods, or millipedes. The=20 arthropod phylum contains more than three-fourths of all the different kinds= =20 of animals. Insects make up the largest class of arthropods in terms of the=20 number of species.=20 The bodies of arthropods, as well as their legs, are made up of sections.=20 Among some primitive arthropods, each section of the body has its own pair o= f=20 legs. Most of these legs are used for swimming or walking. In some types of=20 arthropods, certain legs have developed special shapes and uses. Some serve=20 as sucking organs, some are jaws, some serve as weapons of offense and=20 defense, and some are sense organs. Insects lack most of the pairs of legs=20 found in other arthropods. They have only three pair. One pair is attached t= o=20 each segment of an insect's chest or thorax. Insects also may have one or tw= o=20 pairs of wings.=20 Arthropods have an outside shell, or exoskeleton, that contains a stiff,=20 horny material called chitin. Certain arthropods, such as flies and moths,=20 have only thin, weak shells. Others, including crabs and lobsters, have=20 thick, strong shells. Nearly all arthropods have a kind of heart and blood=20 system and usually a well-organized nervous system. Some arthropods have=20 simple eyes, some have compound eyes, and some (including many insects) have= =20 eyes of both types.=20 How to cite this article: To cite this article in a footnote, World Book recommends the following=20 format: Sandra J. Glover, "Arthropod," World Book Online Americas Edition ,http://www.aolsvc.worldbook.aol.com/wbol/wbPage/na/ar/co/032220, June 7,=20 2001. =20 --part1_6b.15780bfb.2851297e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bismillah...

Dear Lobster.... below is a brief description of your kind.... your fami= ly is=20
something.. unusual... i didn't read in it tho that lobsters are venom=20
suckers...=20

 ...  :-)

i cannot deny you write good verse... wonderful gift....share some spiri= tual=20
verse for a change.. thanks

love
amr
=20
Arthropod =ABAHR thruh pod=BB, is any animal that belongs to the major=20= division,=20
or phylum, of the animal kingdom called the Arthropoda. Th= is term is formed=20
from two Greek words, and means jointed feet. Actually, the legs,= rather than=20
the feet, are jointed. All the Arthropoda, or arthropods, have jointed l= egs.=20
Among the most important groups of arthropods are the following: (1) ins= ects,=20
including cockroaches, beetles, bees, butterflies, and many others; (2)=20
crustaceans, including such well-known animals as crabs, lobsters, shrim= ps,=20
and barnacles; (3) arachnids, including mites, ticks, spiders, and scorp= ions;=20
(4) chilopods, or centipedes; and (5) diplo-pods, or millipedes. The=20
arthropod phylum contains more than three-fourths of all the different k= inds=20
of animals. Insects make up the largest class of arthropods in terms of=20= the=20
number of species.=20

The bodies of arthropods, as well as their legs, are made up of sections= .=20
Among some primitive arthropods, each section of the body has its own pa= ir of=20
legs. Most of these legs are used for swimming or walking. In some types= of=20
arthropods, certain legs have developed special shapes and uses. Some se= rve=20
as sucking organs, some are jaws, some serve as weapons of offense and=20
defense, and some are sense organs. Insects lack most of the pairs of le= gs=20
found in other arthropods. They have only three pair. One pair is attach= ed to=20
each segment of an insect's chest or thorax. Insects also may have one o= r two=20
pairs of wings.=20

Arthropods have an outside shell, or exoskeleton, that contains a= stiff,=20
horny material called chitin. Certain arthropods, such as flies a= nd moths,=20
have only thin, weak shells. Others, including crabs and lobsters, have=20
thick, strong shells. Nearly all arthropods have a kind of heart and blo= od=20
system and usually a well-organized nervous system. Some arthropods have= =20
simple eyes, some have compound eyes, and some (including many insects)=20= have=20
eyes of both types.=20

How to cite this article:
To cite this article in a footnote, World Book recommends the following=20
format: Sandra J. Glover, "Arthropod," World Book Online Americas Edi= tion
,http://www.aolsvc.worldbook.aol.com/wbol/wbPage/na/ar/co/032220, June 7= ,=20
2001. =20
--part1_6b.15780bfb.2851297e_boundary-- From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 20:43:50 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 19:43:50 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Build Consensus or Bust Message-ID:

Peace be upon you all,

We continue to struggle with misunderstanding on both sides of the "is Sufism Islamic" question. People from both sides of the house are jumping to unwarrented conclusions totally shrowded by preconception and, sorry, prejudice. People are asking, just tell me what your belief is and then pidgeon holing that belief before the person has a chance to clarify.

These are not simple issues. Islam has terminology that gets thrown around by a whole spectrum of folks, some are uneducated, some moderately, some are finatics, some totally doctrinaire and some other Muslims have used, more or less, those same terms to describe a very experiencial and practical school of gnosis (which they called Sufism or Tasawouf.)

Whether the word "Sufism" is valid outside of its Islamic context is not really very interesting. A rose by any other name ...It seems ridiculous and sometimes rude that people with no inclination for Islam want to hijack the term. Why not come up with a different term? If Bennet and Gurdjief and Ouspensky and Crowley (for those of you who coddle Satan) can come up with their own terms, why can't you. I don't thing any of those guys called themselves "Sufis." But they refer to it all the time. I think that is fine. I appreciate their purity of thought and their audacious attempt to "go it alone" and scale a kind of personal spiritual archeology based on their own judgement weighed against various masters of the past. (If ANY of you can come up with a souce for Sufism that referred to gnostics as Sufis BEFORE Muslims did, bring forth your reference to be weighed for validity. Short of that, what in the world do we have to talk about? Sufism is Islamic. It makes no statement that there is no other valid gnostic path or that it invalidates them. It simply states that it is the best. And why shouldn't Sufis (who are Muslims) be elitist. Our Prophet (pbuh) is the last and the greatest. He stood on the shoulders of every monotheistic message and placed the Seal at the very peak of its spiritual and intellectual archetecture. The Qur'an does not deny Abraham, Moses, Jesus and so many other Prophets of God. It celebrates them in terms of glory and praise. Contrary to all the mud slung at Islam for its narrowness, it is the first (in its lineage) to guarentee the rights of others: different races, different creeds, different genders. If you argue this, you argue out of ignorance.

 Almost all the arguing is out of reaction and unwillingness to probe for the meanings of the words or concepts you disagree with. And when you do probe, you probe from a totally preset point of view and refuse to venture into the discussion without your own set of tools. "Why does God have to unlimited, monotheistic, absolute? Why can't it be a 3 - headed hydra?" How does one respond to such questions. The only response is, if you have any interest, you have to try to see my position. You have to work to see my position. Doesn't mean you have to agree..but you might learn something...which I assume is the point of this whole thing. The level of the Muslim posts here, in my opinion, is very high. It takes more than 10 years to reach that level. A person from a different point of view can't just come here and post: "sum it up for me." The level of miscommunication here belies the fact that we have not all done our homework on ANY spiritual path, never mind Sufism. There is enough common ground for a serious Christian monk, a serious Zen monk and A serious Sufi ascetic to be able to have a very amiable discussion with very few points of contention (Christ is not God's son and no reincarnation would be the Sufis only problems from what I can tell). Those are philosophical differences that don't amount to a hill of beans for the day-in, day-out, night-in, night-out mystical aspirant. These three agree on almost everything at the beginning to the middle.

And why should I use some bogus, half-baked framework to explain Sufism when Sufism has its own perfect framework. Do you want to know what I know of this framework, fine. Do you want me to break off a fragment and cram it into a place of your limited choosing. Forget about it.The only reason I'm not going it alone and cerating my own spiritual path (which was my initial intention) was because I lacked the ability to find my own way. So I turned to experts like a sick man goes to a doctor when he can't heal himself. If you can already heal yourself, why are you asking me for explanations?

Bottom line is, you have some very smart Muslims on this list that can't begin to explain anything without being attacked, diverted or ignored. That's a waste. If I had NO INTENTION OF EVER BEING A MUSLIM, I would still want to know what the had to say on their own terms. You never press to see if they really know something and patiently pursue a line of questioning according to their system, you either immediately react with your prejudice venom for Islam or you immediately change the discussion to your own point of view. This is very sad and its a big waste of time.   


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 21:00:52 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 13:00:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Sufis and Other Religious Message-ID: <200106072000.f57K0qI11210@sonic.net> 50010607 VI! om assalam alaykum, my kin. I am tired of waiting for Muslim Sufis to defend themselves against the universalists, and so I will instead take it upon myself to try to find support for their positions in my library (meager, admittedly) and present this to you. if I find things which seem to contradict their contentions then I will also offer these. in this way perhaps we will learn something about true Muslim Sufism. when I lived nearer to the city I had a chance or two to visit with Naqshibandi Sufis in California, to speak with murids there, and to sit and speak with their sheikh, Sheikh Hisham Muhammad Hisham Al-Kabbani, who inspired me and in whose presence I felt respect and deep reflection. the Haqqani Center made gift to me of a number of copies of the work of Sheikh Hisham, knowing that I am involved with this list, that I network information about Sufism and many other types of spirituality, and that I might make use of it for the purposes of learning about Sufism as it truly exists. below I shall quote from some of this material which I trust derives from a traditional Sufi source and thus reflects actual Sufi instruction to murids (complete with citations!): [Imam Shafi'i] said: "[In order to see your Lord through a process of discernment] you have to believe in Allah and you have to believe in all his prophets -- Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ and Muhammad, peace be on them all. If you believe in these five messengers and in all other prophets, at that time you are going to see your Lord. At that time, your heart is going to be an enlightened heart, a heart full of light, not full of hatred and enmity. You have to believe in His prophets and in His messengers. If you don't believe, then it is very difficult for you to know your Lord.["] This Lord has made everyone equal, everyone the same, by saying in Qur'an: [Arabic] "Inna akramakum atqakum" -- "The best among you are the most God-wary or righteous" (Al-Hujurat 13), and the Prophet (s) said in his last speech: [Arabic] "Ala la fadia li'arabiyyin 'ala 'ajamiyyin illa bi-t-taqwa." -- "Truly there is no preeminence of Arab over non-Arab" -- It means believers and non-believers, or between colored and non-colored -- "except in God-wariness or righteousness" (Ibn Hanbal). Whoever is God-wary or righteous, that one is going to be the leader. Whoever is a corrupt person is going to be left behind. If you want to be in the forefront, you have to be good people. What is the meaning of good people? Good people must not have in their heart hatred, enmity or inequity towards anyone of God's servants. Everyone must be equal in their eyes -- Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu: this is up to God, it is not your judgement. You cannot judge this. [Arabic] "Man kaffara ahla la ilaha illa-l-lah fa huwa ilal kufri aqrab" -- "If someone calls a believer in God 'unbeliever,' then he (the speaker) is the unbeliever" (Tabarani). This is a saying of the Prophet (s), and this is what we believe. As soon as one believes in God[,] the matter is finished. The matter is between a person and his Lord. One cannot interfere. Whether he prays or doesn't pray, fasts or doesn't fast, it is up to God, not up to you. You don't have any right against him. Once he says, "There is no god except our Lord in heavens." the case is closed! It is not our duty to fight him, to kill him, or say bad things about him. That is why it is a very grave sin to call anyone "mushrik" [idolator] or "kafir" [unbeliever].... Judgement belongs only to God not to us! We have to keep this in our heart and to know this fact. We must not do as other people who are calling and classifying everyone unbelievers. It is not our duty. You cannot sit in God's Throne. God is God, servant is servant[,] slave is slave! There is One Lord, and everyone else are slaves. We are all the same. He created, why are you interfering with Him? He sent messengers. You have no right to fight them because of their religion. You have no right to utter any bad word against them because of their religion. All of them are equal. This must be our belief. ---------------------------------------------------- "Mercy Oceans: Shore of Safety", by Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Al-Kabbani; Delivered by Permission of His Master Mawlana Sheikh Muhammad Nazim Al-Haqqani, Grandsheikh of the Most Distinguished Naqshibandi Sufi Order (May Allah Sanctify His Blessed Soul!), printed by Haqqani Islamic Trust, 1993; pp. 25-7. ---------------------------------------------------- while this does not solve the matter between universalists and Muslim sufis, it does tell us something about Sufi instruction concerning respect of others and how Sufis should behave toward others, according to Muslim Sufis. judgment is left to the Lord of Heaven (apparently whether that be a Buddhist Lord or a Muslim Lord or whatever (Satanist?)). my time has run out this morning for investigation, so I will leave you with this and hope it inspires some discussion amongst those gathered here. thank you for your kind attentions, my kin. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 22:02:50 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ismail Abushams) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 14:02:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Sufis and Other Religious In-Reply-To: <200106072000.f57K0qI11210@sonic.net> Message-ID: <20010607210250.49396.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> --0-669754334-991947770=:49150 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As Salaam Aleikum as Muslim mureed within a Universalist order i have defended myself more than enough !!!. i Refuse to defend myself any longer for either being a Muslim or an Inyati Chisty .i also do not wish to be defended by either Universalists or Muslim . State your own views and let Allah be the Judge ismail haramullah wrote: 50010607 VI! om assalam alaykum, my kin. I am tired of waiting for Muslim Sufis to defend themselves against the universalists, and so I will instead take it upon myself to try to find support for their positions in my library (meager, admittedly) and present this to you. if I find things which seem to contradict their contentions then I will also offer these. in this way perhaps we will learn something about true Muslim Sufism. when I lived nearer to the city I had a chance or two to visit with Naqshibandi Sufis in California, to speak with murids there, and to sit and speak with their sheikh, Sheikh Hisham Muhammad Hisham Al-Kabbani, who inspired me and in whose presence I felt respect and deep reflection. the Haqqani Center made gift to me of a number of copies of the work of Sheikh Hisham, knowing that I am involved with this list, that I network information about Sufism and many other types of spirituality, and that I might make use of it for the purposes of learning about Sufism as it truly exists. below I shall quote from some of this material which I trust derives from a traditional Sufi source and thus reflects actual Sufi instruction to murids (complete with citations!): [Imam Shafi'i] said: "[In order to see your Lord through a process of discernment] you have to believe in Allah and you have to believe in all his prophets -- Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ and Muhammad, peace be on them all. If you believe in these five messengers and in all other prophets, at that time you are going to see your Lord. At that time, your heart is going to be an enlightened heart, a heart full of light, not full of hatred and enmity. You have to believe in His prophets and in His messengers. If you don't believe, then it is very difficult for you to know your Lord.["] This Lord has made everyone equal, everyone the same, by saying in Qur'an: [Arabic] "Inna akramakum atqakum" -- "The best among you are the most God-wary or righteous" (Al-Hujurat 13), and the Prophet (s) said in his last speech: [Arabic] "Ala la fadia li'arabiyyin 'ala 'ajamiyyin illa bi-t-taqwa." -- "Truly there is no preeminence of Arab over non-Arab" -- It means believers and non-believers, or between colored and non-colored -- "except in God-wariness or righteousness" (Ibn Hanbal). Whoever is God-wary or righteous, that one is going to be the leader. Whoever is a corrupt person is going to be left behind. If you want to be in the forefront, you have to be good people. What is the meaning of good people? Good people must not have in their heart hatred, enmity or inequity towards anyone of God's servants. Everyone must be equal in their eyes -- Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu: this is up to God, it is not your judgement. You cannot judge this. [Arabic] "Man kaffara ahla la ilaha illa-l-lah fa huwa ilal kufri aqrab" -- "If someone calls a believer in God 'unbeliever,' then he (the speaker) is the unbeliever" (Tabarani). This is a saying of the Prophet (s), and this is what we believe. As soon as one believes in God[,] the matter is finished. The matter is between a person and his Lord. One cannot interfere. Whether he prays or doesn't pray, fasts or doesn't fast, it is up to God, not up to you. You don't have any right against him. Once he says, "There is no god except our Lord in heavens." the case is closed! It is not our duty to fight him, to kill him, or say bad things about him. That is why it is a very grave sin to call anyone "mushrik" [idolator] or "kafir" [unbeliever].... Judgement belongs only to God not to us! We have to keep this in our heart and to know this fact. We must not do as other people who are calling and classifying everyone unbelievers. It is not our duty. You cannot sit in God's Throne. God is God, servant is servant[,] slave is slave! There is One Lord, and everyone else are slaves. We are all the same. He created, why are you interfering with Him? He sent messengers. You have no right to fight them because of their religion. You have no right to utter any bad word against them because of their religion. All of them are equal. This must be our belief. ---------------------------------------------------- "Mercy Oceans: Shore of Safety", by Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Al-Kabbani; Delivered by Permission of His Master Mawlana Sheikh Muhammad Nazim Al-Haqqani, Grandsheikh of the Most Distinguished Naqshibandi Sufi Order (May Allah Sanctify His Blessed Soul!), printed by Haqqani Islamic Trust, 1993; pp. 25-7. ---------------------------------------------------- while this does not solve the matter between universalists and Muslim sufis, it does tell us something about Sufi instruction concerning respect of others and how Sufis should behave toward others, according to Muslim Sufis. judgment is left to the Lord of Heaven (apparently whether that be a Buddhist Lord or a Muslim Lord or whatever (Satanist?)). my time has run out this morning for investigation, so I will leave you with this and hope it inspires some discussion amongst those gathered here. thank you for your kind attentions, my kin. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@luckymojo.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-669754334-991947770=:49150 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

As Salaam Aleikum

as Muslim  mureed within a Universalist order i have defended myself more than enough !!!. i Refuse to defend myself any longer for either being a Muslim or an Inyati Chisty .i also do not wish to be defended by either Universalists or Muslim . State your own views and let Allah be the Judge

ismail

  haramullah <nagasiva@luckymojo.com> wrote:



50010607 VI! om

assalam alaykum, my kin.

I am tired of waiting for Muslim Sufis to defend themselves
against the universalists, and so I will instead take it
upon myself to try to find support for their positions in
my library (meager, admittedly) and present this to you.
if I find things which seem to contradict their contentions
then I will also offer these. in this way perhaps we will
learn something about true Muslim Sufism.

when I lived nearer to the city I had a chance or two to
visit with Naqshibandi Sufis in California, to speak with
murids there, and to sit and speak with their sheikh,
Sheikh Hisham Muhammad Hisham Al-Kabbani, who inspired me
and in whose presence I felt respect and deep reflection.

the Haqqani Center made gift to me of a number of copies
of the work of Sheikh Hisham, knowing that I am involved
with this list, that I network information about Sufism
and many other types of spirituality, and that I might
make use of it for the purposes of learning about Sufism
as it truly exists. below I shall quote from some of this
material which I trust derives from a traditional Sufi
source and thus reflects actual Sufi instruction to murids
(complete with citations!):

[Imam Shafi'i] said: "[In order to see your Lord
through a process of discernment] you have to
believe in Allah and you have to believe in all
his prophets -- Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ
and Muhammad, peace be on them all. If you believe
in these five messengers and in all other prophets,
at that time you are going to see your Lord. At
that time, your heart is going to be an enlightened
heart, a heart full of light, not full of hatred
and enmity. You have to believe in His prophets and
in His messengers. If you don't believe, then it is
very difficult for you to know your Lord.["]

This Lord has made everyone equal, everyone the same,
by saying in Qur'an: [Arabic] "Inna akramakum atqakum"
-- "The best among you are the most God-wary or
righteous" (Al-Hujurat 13), and the Prophet (s) said
in his last speech: [Arabic] "Ala la fadia li'arabiyyin
'ala 'ajamiyyin illa bi-t-taqwa." -- "Truly there is
no preeminence of Arab over non-Arab" -- It means
believers and non-believers, or between colored and
non-colored -- "except in God-wariness or righteousness"
(Ibn Hanbal). Whoever is God-wary or righteous, that one
is going to be the leader. Whoever is a corrupt person
is going to be left behind. If you want to be in the
forefront, you have to be good people.

What is the meaning of good people? Good people must
not have in their heart hatred, enmity or inequity
towards anyone of God's servants. Everyone must be
equal in their eyes -- Muslim, Jewish, Christian,
Buddhist, Hindu: this is up to God, it is not your
judgement. You cannot judge this.

[Arabic] "Man kaffara ahla la ilaha illa-l-lah fa
huwa ilal kufri aqrab" -- "If someone calls a believer
in God 'unbeliever,' then he (the speaker) is the
unbeliever" (Tabarani). This is a saying of the
Prophet (s), and this is what we believe. As soon as
one believes in God[,] the matter is finished. The
matter is between a person and his Lord. One cannot
interfere. Whether he prays or doesn't pray, fasts
or doesn't fast, it is up to God, not up to you. You
don't have any right against him. Once he says,
"There is no god except our Lord in heavens." the
case is closed! It is not our duty to fight him, to
kill him, or say bad things about him. That is why
it is a very grave sin to call anyone "mushrik"
[idolator] or "kafir" [unbeliever].... Judgement
belongs only to God not to us!

We have to keep this in our heart and to know this
fact. We must not do as other people who are
calling and classifying everyone unbelievers. It is
not our duty. You cannot sit in God's Throne. God is
God, servant is servant[,] slave is slave! There is
One Lord, and everyone else are slaves. We are all
the same. He created, why are you interfering with
Him? He sent messengers. You have no right to fight
them because of their religion. You have no right
to utter any bad word against them because of their
religion. All of them are equal. This must be our
belief.
----------------------------------------------------
"Mercy Oceans: Shore of Safety", by Sheikh Muhammad
Hisham Al-Kabbani; Delivered by Permission of His
Master Mawlana Sheikh Muhammad Nazim Al-Haqqani,
Grandsheikh of the Most Distinguished Naqshibandi
Sufi Order (May Allah Sanctify His Blessed Soul!),
printed by Haqqani Islamic Trust, 1993; pp. 25-7.
----------------------------------------------------

while this does not solve the matter between universalists
and Muslim sufis, it does tell us something about Sufi
instruction concerning respect of others and how Sufis should
behave toward others, according to Muslim Sufis. judgment
is left to the Lord of Heaven (apparently whether that be
a Buddhist Lord or a Muslim Lord or whatever (Satanist?)).

my time has run out this morning for investigation, so I
will leave you with this and hope it inspires some
discussion amongst those gathered here. thank you for your
kind attentions, my kin.

peace be with you,

haramullah
nagasiva@luckymojo.com
_______________________________________________
Tariqas mailing list
Tariqas@stderr.org
http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-669754334-991947770=:49150-- From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 23:12:59 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (tariqas@stderr.org) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 18:12:59 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] Sufis and Other Religious In-Reply-To: <20010607210250.49396.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --MS_Mac_OE_3074782379_5967395_MIME_Part Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit As Salaam Akeikum I am fortunate to spend my days living on a farm where I am able to contemplate the wonders of Allah in so many ways. I try to fill my mind with this and not analyze the whats and whys and wherefores of why I feel as I do, because I believe that logic and so-called rationality (often called such but actually rationalization for pre-existing biases) are the irrelevant wanderings to which our inherently flawed human minds can so easily fall prey, allowing us to be distracted from the Reality of His love, presence and guidance. As Hazrat Inayat Khan so beautifully stated, "Since to analyze God means to dethrone God, the less said on the subject, the better. But at the same time, the seekers for truth who want to tread the spiritual path with open eyes and whose intellect is hungering for knowledge, should know something about it. "There is a Hebrew story that once Moses was walking near the bank of a river. And he saw a shepherd boy speaking to himself. Moses was interested and halted there to listen to what he was saying. The shepherd boy was saying, 'O God, I have heard so much of You. You are so beautiful. You are so lovely. You are so kind that if You ever came to me, I would clothe You with my mantle, and I would guard You night and day. I would protect you from the cruel animals of the forest. and bathe You in this river, and bring You all good things, milk and buttermilk. I would bring You a special bread. I love You so much. I would never let anyone cast his glance upon You. I would be all the time near you. If only I could see you once, God, I would give all I have.' Moses said, 'What are you saying!' The boy looked at Moses and trembled and was afraid. 'Did I say anything wrong?' he asked. Moses said, 'God is the Protector of all beings, you think of protecting Him, of giving Him bread? He gives bread to the whole universe. You say you would bathe Him in the river. He is the purest of all pure things. And how can you say you will guard Him against all beings?' And the boy trembled. He thought, what a terrible thing I have done! He seemed to be lost. But as Moses went a few steps further, there came a voice. 'Moses, what did you do! We sent you to bring our friends to Us, and now you have separated one. No matter how he thought of Us, he thought of Us just the same. You should have let him think the way he was thinking about Us. You should not have interfered with him!' Evenyone has his own imagination of God. It is best if everyone is left to his own imagination." I must agree with Ismail. I subscribe to 12 different sufi-related elists and egroups, including this one. I have subscribed to this one for only 11 days. In that time, I have seen more contentiousness and closed-mindedness here than in all of the others combined that I have subscribed to for far, far longer (and none of them are immune to this problem as mere humans are the subscribers). I had hoped to learn something. Instead, I hear little more than shouting. Sorry, I just don't get it -- at least from people who purport to be sufi in attitude if not in practice. Hair-splitting about who is a real sufi is about as productive and enlightening as Medieval Christian Cardinals debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. So please forgive me for speaking my mind before I hit the unsubscribe button, about 10 seconds from now. I can only ask that some of you please stop looking down at your feet and, instead, breathe, stop thinking so much, look up at the sky, and orient your minds toward loving each other for the unique and loved creations of God that all of You are. With Love, Farishtah on 6/7/01 5:02 PM, majnoonullah@yahoo.com wrote: As Salaam Aleikum as Muslim mureed within a Universalist order i have defended myself more than enough !!!. i Refuse to defend myself any longer for either being a Muslim or an Inyati Chisty .i also do not wish to be defended by either Universalists or Muslim . State your own views and let Allah be the Judge ismail --MS_Mac_OE_3074782379_5967395_MIME_Part Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: [Tariqas] Sufis and Other Religious As Salaam Akeikum

I am fortunate to spend my days living on a farm where I am able to contemp= late the wonders of Allah in so many ways. I try to fill my mind with this a= nd not analyze the whats and whys and wherefores of why I feel as I do, beca= use I believe that logic and so-called rationality (often called such but ac= tually rationalization for pre-existing biases) are the irrelevant wandering= s to which our inherently flawed human minds can so easily fall prey, allowi= ng us to be distracted from the Reality of His love, presence and guidance. = As Hazrat Inayat Khan so beautifully stated, "Since to analyze God mean= s to dethrone God, the less said on the subject, the better. But at the same= time, the seekers for truth who want to tread the spiritual path with open = eyes and whose intellect is hungering for knowledge, should know something a= bout it.

"There is a Hebrew story that once Moses was walking near the bank of = a river. And he saw a shepherd boy speaking to himself. Moses was interested= and halted there to listen to what he was saying. The shepherd boy was sayi= ng, 'O God, I have heard so much of You. You are so beautiful. You are so lo= vely. You are so kind that if You ever came to me, I would clothe You with m= y mantle, and I would guard You night and day. I would protect you from the = cruel animals of the forest. and bathe You in this river, and bring You all = good things, milk and buttermilk. I would bring You a special bread. I love = You so much. I would never let anyone cast his glance upon You. I would be a= ll the time near you. If only I could see you once, God, I would give all I = have.' Moses said, 'What are you saying!' The boy looked at Moses and trembl= ed and was afraid. 'Did I say anything wrong?' he asked. Moses said, 'God is= the Protector of all beings, you think of protecting Him, of giving Him bre= ad? He gives bread to the whole universe. You say you would bathe Him in the= river. He is the purest of all pure things. And how can you say you will gu= ard Him against all beings?' And the boy trembled. He thought, what a terrib= le thing I have done! He seemed to be lost. But as Moses went a few steps fu= rther, there came a voice. 'Moses, what did you do! We sent you to bring our= friends to Us, and now you have separated one. No matter how he thought of = Us, he thought of Us just the same. You should have let him think the way he= was thinking about Us. You should not have interfered with him!' Evenyone h= as his own imagination of God. It is best if everyone is left to his own ima= gination."   

I must agree with Ismail. I subscribe to 12 different sufi-related elists a= nd egroups, including this one. I have subscribed to this one for only 11 da= ys. In that time, I have seen more contentiousness and closed-mindedness her= e than in all of the others combined that I have subscribed to for far, far = longer (and none of them are immune to this problem as mere humans are the s= ubscribers). I had hoped to learn something. Instead, I hear little more tha= n shouting. Sorry, I just don't get it -- at least from people who purport t= o be sufi in attitude if not in practice. Hair-splitting about who is a real= sufi is about as productive and enlightening as Medieval Christian Cardinal= s debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. So please forgive= me for speaking my mind before I hit the unsubscribe button, about 10 secon= ds from now. I can only ask that some of you please stop looking down at you= r feet and, instead, breathe, stop thinking so much, look up at the sky, and= orient your minds toward loving each other for the unique and loved creatio= ns of God that all of You are.

With Love,
Farishtah


on 6/7/01 5:02 PM, majnoonullah@yahoo.com wrote:


As Salaam Aleikum

as Muslim  mureed within a Universalist order i have defended myself m= ore than enough !!!. i Refuse to defend myself any longer for either = being a Muslim or an Inyati Chisty .i also do not wish to be defended by eit= her Universalists or Muslim . State your own views and let Allah be the Judg= e

ismail

--MS_Mac_OE_3074782379_5967395_MIME_Part-- From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 23:14:31 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 00:14:31 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Reason Message-ID: Dear Blake Haramullah is not interested in what you can say about the strength of our path. He just wants to say what he likes us to say which is nobody has the right to judge others and that stuff. The man is totally immersed in human beings. He just can't bring himself to a state where he can think objectively about God. With all his erudition the man cannot understand that when you at least feel that you have some adequate knowledge about the truth you still have to believe that accepting others is more important than telling the truth. Who told the man that we are after their lives? But from his semi-agnostic point of view our interest is not justified since he must be telling himself " what are these foolish Muslims thinking? Do they think themselves so blessed as to be salvaged while others are doomed." his interest is again not with God but with amnesty international. Yet amnesty is not a religious or a Sufi organization. Why should he want us to believe otherwise? Yet if what he says about his willingness about us making the case for our Sufism we should try to do that. The result may not be what he expects but who wants to give him what he expects since what he expects is not the concern of monks, sheikhs, rabbis or whatever but the interest of human rights activists. But for some help out of this why don't we just discuss our spiritual pedigrees and affiliations allowing him to get what he wants but on our own terms. Charity begins at home. I am a naqshbandi. I am affiliated with sheikh khaled Baghdadi through four other sheikhs famous among whom are sheikh, muhaddith Ahmed Gumushanevi. We can now discuss these affiliations and then move on to what our sheikhs have taught us. Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 23:15:57 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 22:15:57 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Tariqas digest, Vol 1 #182 - 9 msgs Message-ID:


The Sheikh is a very strong Muslim and also a very wise mystic. I am not his follower but I respect him very much. He is unique in that his particular tariqat ( a branch of Naqshbandi) are very traditional in their dress and manner but they also speak to the spiritual and intellectual aspects of Islam in contemporary style suitable to a western audience.

He is a good teacher to ask the kind of questions that have been raised. I would be very interested to know his answers. 

I noticed that this quote reemphasized most of what has been said already.  

Communication with the departed is difficult. When you have the words of a living Sufi, it is best that you ask him about his words. Who else should speak in his place?


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 23:38:01 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 22:38:01 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] (no subject) Message-ID:



Contention is not out of place here. I would be very bored if all these variety of people agreed. It would be phony. I don't agree with everyone here. I say so. If that disturbs you and you take offense.....Well...
 
Personal attacks? Hmmm. Excuse my thick skin.
 
Let everyone have their imagination? Sufis? I don't think so.

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 23:41:46 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 22:41:46 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Origins Message-ID:


Juma'a Jihani ye Tasawouf took my hand.

Many orders involved in the project. The founders

are Oveyssi and Shah Maghsoudi 


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 00:16:28 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 23:16:28 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] (No Subject)detraction Message-ID:


Peace

This following statement can be misconstrued,

"Let everyone have their imagination? Sufis? I don't think so"

Please, don't call me an ogre for something I didn't intend.

Allow me to rephrase:

"Sufis are not the people of imagination."

That is what I wanted to say.

Thanks


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 03:08:55 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 19:08:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Muslim Sufi Doctrines? (was Reason) In-Reply-To: from "muhammad nassar" at Jun 08, 2001 12:14:31 AM Message-ID: <200106080208.f5828uc18822@sonic.net> 50010607 VI! om Hail Satan! assalam alaykum, my kin. my brother "muhammad nassar" speaks falsely about me: > Haramullah is not interested in what you can say about the > strength of our path. to the contrary, I am attempting to do it FOR you because I would like it to be so. I hope that you will assist me, since you know so much more about your order, practices and doctrines than I can ever hope to know! > He just wants to say what he likes us to say which is nobody > has the right to judge others and that stuff. Sheikh Hisham's text addresses Islam and other religions in that quote. I am still looking for something else which says that Sufis are Muslim or that many faiths can be Sufis. I'll let you know when I find something, or something about God or Qur'an which is pertinent. thank you for your patience. > The man is totally immersed in human beings. He just can't > bring himself to a state where he can think objectively > about God. With all his erudition the man cannot understand > that when you at least feel that you have some adequate > knowledge about the truth you still have to believe that > accepting others is more important than telling the truth. is this all you have obtained from my posts? so sorry. very well, I shall attempt also to heal the adversary. > Who told the man that we are after their lives? But from his > semi-agnostic point of view .... I have not really begun to fully share with you my point of view because it varies too much and those stabilities are truly not part of what I understand to be Sufism. why do you care? > our interest is not justified since he must be telling himself > "what are these foolish Muslims thinking? Do they think > themselves so blessed as to be salvaged while others are > doomed." such a tortured interior is your mind that you project this into mine? I assure you that I know of no doom and no salvation, nor do I know who is a foolish Muslim and who is an insightful agnostic. only the divine can know such things. perhaps you will witness my composure in the face of your ferocious onslaught. :> > his interest is again not with God but with amnesty international. I almost joined that organization once. :> Peter Gabriel was doing a concert benefit and many of my friends suggested that I would like to become involved. I am more interested in nonhuman justice, and did not become part of it. Greenpeace or Earth First! are more my speed, but I am too much a mystic and magician to have joined the ranks even of these, some of whom are my friends. at least you see that I am caring. thank you. > Yet amnesty is not a religious or a Sufi organization. very true! > Why should he want us to believe otherwise? why should you believe that I want this? have I not said that I think it more beneficial to all that we hold our opinions, do not try to convert one another, and share what we know in kinship? I hope you will throw down your arms and agree with me. > Yet if what he says about his willingness about us making the > case for our Sufism we should try to do that. THANK YOU, brother! > The result may not be what he expects but who wants to give > him what he expects since what he expects is not the concern > of monks, sheikhs, rabbis or whatever I'm wandering through my Sufi texts here. maybe I'll find a thing or two online also. I hope that you will find it is of concern to at least sheikhs, being the expressions thereof. > but the interest of human rights activists. I am not the one speaking of Wahhabis and women's suffering at the hands of Muslims. I refrain from such discussion here. where do you *get* such ideas about me? even my political activities are NOT concerned with human rights, but the rights of wild animals! how little you know of me and how little have I brought to this forum of that for you to see. throw the paint balls and get out your aggression on me, kin! I'll laugh at the irony of it and come back for more. sticks and stone, wot? where I come from this is clearly identified as "ad hominem argumentation" (directing the discussion at the person of the individual with whom one is arguing rather than seriously addressing the points which he may have raised). it is a means of avoiding having to respond to serious issues. I hope that it lets up soon! my person only enflames the conversative! > But for some help out of this why don't we just discuss our > spiritual pedigrees and affiliations allowing him to get what > he wants but on our own terms. THANK YOU, brother! then maybe we can talk about Sufism! > Charity begins at home. I am a naqshbandi. I am affiliated with > sheikh khaled Baghdadi through four other sheikhs famous among > whom are sheikh, muhaddith Ahmed Gumushanevi. then perhaps you enjoyed the snippet from Sheikh Hisham. I know that I did. I try to honor and respect you even in the face of your hostility and misunderstanding of me. I cast myself before you as an ignorant interloper ("not a Sufi!" they said) and hope that you can find within your heart the patience and compassion to inform me of the truth of your path. > We can now discuss these affiliations and then move on to > what our sheikhs have taught us. wonderful! I look forward to it. peace be with you, haramullah (forbidden by god) nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 04:09:44 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 20:09:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Build Consensus or Bust In-Reply-To: from "Blake Ross" at Jun 07, 2001 07:43:50 PM Message-ID: <200106080309.f5839iF32223@sonic.net> 50010607 VI! om Hail Satan! my brother "Blake Ross" blesses us by trying to build consensus!: > Peace be upon you all, and upon you be peace also. what admirable perserverance have you. > We continue to struggle with misunderstanding on both sides of > the "is Sufism Islamic" question. People from both sides of the > house are jumping to unwarrented conclusions totally shrowded by > preconception and, sorry, prejudice. People are asking, just tell > me what your belief is and then pidgeon holing that belief before > the person has a chance to clarify. well said, kin. > These are not simple issues. Islam has terminology that gets > thrown around by a whole spectrum of folks, some are uneducated, > some moderately, some are finatics, some totally doctrinaire and > some other Muslims have used, more or less, those same terms to > describe a very experiencial and practical school of gnosis > (which they called Sufism or Tasawouf.) beautiful. > Whether the word "Sufism" is valid outside of its Islamic context > is not really very interesting. A rose by any other name ...It > seems ridiculous and sometimes rude that people with no > inclination for Islam want to hijack the term. and yet they don't even understand it as such a hijacking. to them it is an essential truth of their path that it is universal, accepting, and, even eclectic. at least this is what I have heard quite often here in Tariqas. I find the contrast between these two poles to be very compelling and strange. thank you for weathering it so well. hey, I found some of your text in one of my "Sufism" magazines recently. I had no idea of your role in the Sufi community (as author). no wonder you are so well-spoken here and elsewhere. well done! > Why not come up > with a different term? If Bennet and Gurdjief and Ouspensky and > Crowley (for those of you who coddle Satan) hey! I resemble that remark! well almost. I just want justice, not some kind of weak coddling. :> > can come up with > their own terms, why can't you. I don't thing any of those guys > called themselves "Sufis." Bennett -- Yoga/Buddhism Gurdjieff -- the Gurdjieff Work Ourspensky -- something similar? Crowley -- Magick not sure about Bennett and his names. the more controversial if you wanted it would be Inayat Khan, Idries Shah, of course Rajneesh-Osho (and his "Journey Toward the Heart: Discourses on the Sufi Way"), and probably the Urban Dervish (whose text Habibullah kindly lent me so long ago near the beginnings of Tariqas!). the recent slam on P.L. Wilson's characterization of Ibn Arabi was very welcome also. I've been wondering how his text is seen by Muslim Sufi scholars. > But they refer to it all the time. I > think that is fine. I appreciate their purity of thought and > their audacious attempt to "go it alone" and scale a kind of > personal spiritual archeology based on their own judgement > weighed against various masters of the past. nicely said. > (If ANY of you can > come up with a souce for Sufism that referred to gnostics as > Sufis BEFORE Muslims did, bring forth your reference to be > weighed for validity. Short of that, what in the world do we have > to talk about? Sufism is Islamic. It makes no statement that > there is no other valid gnostic path or that it invalidates them. > It simply states that it is the best. And why shouldn't Sufis > (who are Muslims) be elitist. Our Prophet (pbuh) is the last and > the greatest. He stood on the shoulders of every > monotheistic message and placed the Seal at the very peak of > its spiritual and intellectual archetecture. The Qur'an does not > deny Abraham, Moses, Jesus and so many other Prophets of God. It > celebrates them in terms of glory and praise. Contrary to all the > mud slung at Islam for its narrowness, it is the first (in its > lineage) to guarentee the rights of others: different races, > different creeds, different genders. If you argue this, you argue > out of ignorance. hmm, I have often claimed to be ignorant, but am not presently arguing with you. :> I have at times provided text quotes from sources such as those mentioned above that seemed to indicate precursors to Islamic Sufism, but it is not my interest right now to do more than learn about the instruction of your order and sheikh. I hope that you will indulge us. > ...if you > have any interest, you have to try to see my position. You have > to work to see my position. Doesn't mean you have to agree..but > you might learn something...which I assume is the point of this > whole thing. fabulous. let's begin, then. > And why should I use some bogus, unproven. you have not even bothered to review its character. > half-baked framework I apologize if I didn't bake it long enough. I'm trying! give me feedback on how I can improve it! > to explain Sufism oh that must be it. my framework wasn't intended to help to explain Sufism, only to make the lines of the battlefield more clear so that the rockets and machine guns lobbed between you all can at least hit something solid. ;> as it is, the confusion from the varying points of view loses its appeal rather quickly and drives away pure and impressionable souls like Farishtah. > when Sufism has its own perfect framework. Do you want to > know what I know of this framework, fine. THANK YOU, brother! > ...If you can already heal yourself, why are you asking me > for explanations? am I wounded or sick that I need healing? I'm asking you to share of your Sufism because that is what Tariqas Email List is FOR! welcome to a discussion about Sufism! have at it! > Bottom line is, you have some very smart Muslims on this list > that can't begin to explain anything without being attacked, > diverted or ignored. attacked : let me be the first to apologize for any attacks. I hope you see that these are just words. such strong and advanced Muslims must be able to handle some verbs. diverted : what is meditation for except to strengthen the attention to the matter at hand? ignore the diversions! show us your pure and perfect remembrance of your God! ignored : now this is unfair. most of my sincere questions have gone unanswered, ignored by you advanced Muslims. I was not complaining, instead applying MORE attention to your complaints! I am grovelling before you hoping that you will share small fragments of the insight and experience you have obviously worked hard to obtain. come now, do not mock me. toss me a bisquit! > That's a waste. If I had NO INTENTION OF EVER BEING A MUSLIM, > I would still want to know what the had to say on their own terms. to a certain extent I would agree. however, I did not join Tariqas in order to learn *just* about Islam, which I have also studied slightly. I wish to talk about Sufism! to hear about it! to steep ourselves in it even if it means being paint-balled by imaginative religious who have nothing better to do than create a demon of me. > You never press to see if they really > know something and patiently pursue a line of questioning > according to their system, you either immediately react with your > prejudice venom for Islam or you immediately change the > discussion to your own point of view. This is very sad and its a > big waste of time. heinous lies! must I recount for you the multitude of lines I have presented before you asking for pittances of agreement about what I am *sure* is Muslim doctrine! with NO RESPONSE. done with it am I, instead letting some books converse with me from the sheikhs of public expression and traditional perspective without attempting to convert, cajole, berate, mischaracterize, and generally argue unpersuasively when all we wanted was some clear respectful description on the topic of our convergence (some words of wisdom from your dearest teachers supporting your extreme claims, please! I beg of you!). I still have hope that you will do more than continue to pay attention to our persons and instead return to a consideration of Sufism, God, Qur'an, and how these three intersect. thank you. peace be with you, haramullah (woman of god) nagasiva@luckymojo.com -------------------------------------- ps I am the long-winded crustacean From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 05:23:28 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 21:23:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] More Muslim Sufi Doctrines Message-ID: <200106080423.f584NSS15773@sonic.net> 50010608 VI om Hail Satan! assalam alaykum, my kin. concerning relation between Sufism, guidance, and humility, and the three levels of the master: Sayyidna Ahmad al-Badawi, a very famous saint known in all Sufi teachings -- may God bless his secret -- did not accept a guide [sheikh], and said, "No need for a guide; my guide is Qur'an" -- as the Wahhabis say today -- "and the Sunna of the Prophet (s)," and he was trying to approach his Lord as the Prophet (s) said in one of his Divine sayings, [Arabic] "Ma yazalu 'abdi yataqarrabu ilayya bi-n-nawafil hatta uhibbuhu, fa idha ahbabtuhu kuntu sam'ahu-l-ladhi yasma'u bihi wa basarahu-l-ladhi yabsuru bihi wa yadahul lati yabtishu biha wa rijlahu-l-lati yamhsi biha, hatta yakuna rabbaniyyan fa yaqulu li shay'in kun fayakun." (The Wahhabis usually cut off the end of that hadith but we will recite it to the end.) The Prophet (s) said on his Lord's behalf: "As long as my servant or slave approaches me through voluntary worship -- not obligatory, but through remembering, through reciting, through good manners -- I will be, at that time, the ears that he can hear with, the eyes that he can see with, the hand that he can feel with, the feet that he can walk with. I will be him, and he can say to something, 'Be,' and it will be (Bukhari, Ibn Hanbal). ------------------------------------------------------- "Mercy Oceans:...", Sheikh Hisham, 1993; pp. 76-8. ------------------------------------------------------- from the foregoing quotation (which I am sorry I did not have time this morning to comment upon) it is obvious that the instruction of the sheikh is that the Sufi should regard all religious with love and consider them to be of one people, letting God alone do the judging regarding their fate. it is an instruction in humility. the quotation above is but the beginning of a very long story which I would like to somewhat paraphrase here, because it is so helpful in understanding the Sufi attitude toward the value of a guide in comparison to the pursuit of scholarly studies and also about the importance of humility on the path. the saint al-Badawi is subsequently met by someone whom his ego refuses to accept as guide but whom God instructs him to regard as someone who has the key to God's divine presence. accepting this person as his guide, his knowledge from books became as nothing as a result of meeting eyes in dedication to this guide. his guide subsequently left him to the mockery of the people, who contended he was insane to behave in such a way. and yet he was subjected to a test because of his initial egotistic rejection of the right teacher. as Sheikh Hisham says: if he had accepted from the beginning, when that one came to him by God's will, he would not have passed through this test at that time. Why make yourself pass through a test? When you find the truth, the correct guide, accept him immediately! Don't play games with your ego. --------------------------------------------------- Ibid., p. 80. -------------- later, al-Badawi searched for months for the same guide who had left him to himself. his guide returned six months later, and then looked into his eyes and transferred from his heart to Ahmad al-Badawi's heart, through the eyes, internal knowledge -- the knowledge of the Book, the secrets -- giving, giving, giving until light was coming from Ahmad al-Badawi's eyes and anyone who looked into his eyes would die. He began to wear a veil. At that time he was able to enter into the Divine Presence, and he got that key. Without a guide, you can never reach by yourself. It is impossible to reach the divine presence without a true guide that will open the door for you to show you where you are going. Ahmad al-Badawi was a big scholar who knew many things. He was proud of his knowledge and did not want to accept taking directly from someone else. Because of his pride, he wanted to take directly from the highest position. He was not seeing anyone higher than him except Allah. How, then, to take from another person? That means that there was no humbleness in his heart. At that time, he was missing one of the three steps necessary for God's servants. He had respect, he had love for human beings, but he was not keeping that humility in his heart to accept advice from someone else. And because he had left out one step, it was as if he had stopped progressing. A saint, a master, must have the three levels: respect, love, and humility. If you find one of them missing, then he is not a true guide. He will take you only a certain distance. Just as we see with Ahmad al-Badawi who was able to draw nigh to a certain extent, to reach the door of Divine Presence. He was unable, however, to open it. For he was in need of someone who had the key. He would not accept this need because he was proud of himself, proud of his knowledge. He thought himself to be something. Later, he accepted. But he accepted then because he heard it from his Lord. That is why he passed through a test. If he had accepted without self-pride, immediately that door would have opened for him, without need for two years of tests. -------------------------------------------------------- Ibid., pp. 80-1. --------------------- so here we learn of the three levels of the saint, and how imperative it is to take the guidance of another, at least for the purposes of developing humility. peace be with you, haramullah (forbidden except to god) nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Thu Jun 7 23:56:13 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 23:56:13 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Nothing is THAT simple, is it? In-Reply-To: <6b.15780bfb.2851297e@aol.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010607232838.01fbedd0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >Bismillah... > >Dear Lobster.... below is a brief description of your kind.... your family is >something.. unusual... i didn't read in it tho that lobsters are venom >suckers... > > ... :-) > >i cannot deny you write good verse... wonderful gift....share some spiritual >verse for a change.. thanks > >love >amr Dear Friends, Dear Amr, Peace :-) Thank you for the info about anthropods being in the process of creating this: http://birdsandbutterflies.cjb.net/ I was interested to hear that Lobsters are related to butterflies . . . :-) As you have been kind enough to ask for verse . . . O Beloved One Beyond all Beyondness who will expose all enemies as Hymn and make them Friends Your gentle whisper sent every Scented Saint Your Moment come one Death and Still. a question to your Answer a silent word of Recitation O One Beyond Beloved From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 06:26:23 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 05:26:23 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Consensus Message-ID:

Does one need to be a Muslim to be a Sufi?

In my opinion, No.

Is Sufism the mystical path of Islam?

In my opinion, clearly.

I haven't addressed anyone in particular in my recent posts. For anyone to take those posts as addressed directly to them. Mistaken.

 

Haramullah

regarding


> That's a waste. If I had NO INTENTION OF EVER BEING A MUSLIM,
> I would still want to know what the had to say on their own terms.

to a certain extent I would agree. however, I did not join Tariqas
in order to learn *just* about Islam,

I did. Tariqa is an Arab and more particularly, an Islamic word. My problem, not yours.

If anyone has general questions about Sufism as it pertains to Islam: Ask.

Questions about a general Sufism outside of Islam: Ask others.

 


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 06:34:19 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 06:34:19 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] Sufis and Other Religious In-Reply-To: References: <20010607210250.49396.qmail@web9010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010608062622.01e9f490@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >sufi in attitude if not in practice. Hair-splitting about who is a real >sufi is about as productive and enlightening as Medieval Christian >Cardinals debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. So >please forgive Dear Friend and gentle soul, An excellent question. These dancing angels and pin heads might also consider how many pins it takes to burst an angel or how many combs to cut a beard that needs trimming. As I always say to Allah No need to reply. Lobster Voodoo Production From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 13:48:56 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Sukru Kaya) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 15:48:56 +0300 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Truth, Relativism, and the Real References: <200106071803.f57I3aW01020@sonic.net> Message-ID: <00b801c0f019$6ae4c4c0$0d01010a@serdar> > assalam alaykum, my kin. > > haramullah: > >> it is for this reason that I presume it is not knowledge so much as > >> CERTAINTY which is an indicator of arrogance and a lack of spiritual > >> development, regardless of what 'spirit' and 'spiritual' might mean > >> to any individual. the ability to suspend knowledge, to dwell in the > >> present and presence of one's kindred without the prop of correctness > >> and the fiction of right mental frameworks, offering love to all who > >> enter into one's sphere of influence and attention to the thoughts > >> and considerations of one's struggling kindred, is what I identify > >> as abiding the Real, resting in the arms of the Most Compassionate, > >> and wielding the weapons of the Most Powerful. > > "Sukru Kaya" : > > everyone is welcome to feel offended by this: > > good trick, Sukru! I never saw your posts until elijah mentioned > that your clock was off, then I found them at the top of my mailbox! > sorry for the delay. if you persist with a bad clock I may have to > filter you out. ;> now to your offensive questions (are they?): i adjust the clock temporarily until i get battery changed. > > so please tell me where you put revealation and prophets > > in your sphere? > > inductive precognition, typically through religious or > mystical disciplines and states of consciousness. prophets > are those who are able to perceive the present and/or > envision the future correctly, usually without apparent > technical formulae (compared with, for example, weather > forecasting or stock predictions). is this the definition of nubuvva or prophecy? anyway, what you explain is FALSE and TRUE. False because noone can tell the future unless Allah reveals (Prophet s.a.w. is the last example), but make guesses. but then anyone can do that....believing in prophecy endangers one's iman. Because knowledge of future belongs to Allah. I mean noone can derive a capability of telling the future. True because this is a dictionary explanation of the word prophecy. For a moment let me accept prophecy as true too. Are you a prophet (hakk al yaqeen), or have you seen a real prophet making a true prediction (ayn al yaqeen)? or what you know about the issue is what you learn from books or what you hear. (ilm am yaqeen)? i guess the third option is true. Now think about a e-list named "prophecy", where wanna-be prophets (of the third option above) discuss prophecy. They also make bold attempts of prophecy. For example, some say Saddam will invade Kuwait again. Some others say a third world war break out. bla bla bla...But actually they are tresspassing a border where only real prophets can pass. Such is what happens in this list. In a realm where only hakk al yaqeen (not in this world i believe) and ayn al yaqeen applies, people make bold statements and conclusions by ilm al yaqeen. (as a matter of fact, most of the time they bound to fail) Now, if you are not experiencing Unity, what is the point in making it a subject of idle talks. Isnt that disrespect to Secret. Actually, those who experience it, will remain loyal to the secret gifts given to them. (May Allah bless their secrets). But, what people do here is like trying to fly without developing wings. Another thing is that a sufi is a man of balance, between fear and hope, shadow and light, this world and the other, jamal and jalal and etc. Universe is built on this balance. But people mostly look at one side of the issue. wassalam, Sukru From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 17:02:56 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 16:02:56 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Re: Truth, Relativism, and the Real Message-ID:

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Finally some clarity. It explains everything right and wrong with this (larger) discussion. For the record, I include my own posts in the wrong category plenty.

> > so please tell me where you put revealation and prophets
> > in your sphere?
>
> inductive precognition, typically through religious or
> mystical disciplines and states of consciousness. prophets
> are those who are able to perceive the present and/or
> envision the future correctly, usually without apparent
> technical formulae (compared with, for example, weather
> forecasting or stock predictions).

is this the definition of nubuvva or prophecy?

anyway, what you explain is FALSE and TRUE.

False because noone can tell the future unless Allah reveals (Prophet s.a.w.
is the last example), but make guesses. but then anyone can do
that....believing in prophecy endangers one's iman. Because knowledge of
future belongs to Allah. I mean noone can derive a capability of telling the
future.

True because this is a dictionary explanation of the word prophecy.

For a moment let me accept prophecy as true too.

Are you a prophet (hakk al yaqeen), or have you seen a real prophet making a
true prediction (ayn al yaqeen)? or what you know about the issue is what
you learn from books or what you hear. (ilm am yaqeen)? i guess the third
option is true.

Now think about a e-list named "prophecy", where wanna-be prophets (of the
third option above) discuss prophecy. They also make bold attempts of
prophecy. For example, some say Saddam will invade Kuwait again. Some others
say a third world war break out. bla bla bla...But actually they are
tresspassing a border where only real prophets can pass.

Such is what happens in this list. In a realm where only hakk al yaqeen (not
in this world i believe) and ayn al yaqeen applies, people make bold
statements and conclusions by ilm al yaqeen. (as a matter of fact, most of
the time they bound to fail)

Now, if you are not experiencing Unity, what is the point in making it a
subject of idle talks. Isnt that disrespect to Secret. Actually, those who
experience it, will remain loyal to the secret gifts given to them. (May
Allah bless their secrets). But, what people do here is like trying to fly
without developing wings.

Another thing is that a sufi is a man of balance, between fear and hope,
shadow and light, this world and the other, jamal and jalal and etc.
Universe is built on this balance.  But people mostly look at one side of
the issue.

wassalam,
Sukru


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 18:20:03 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ismail Abushams) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 10:20:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Consensus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20010608172003.90404.qmail@web9007.mail.yahoo.com> --0-758922588-992020803=:89526 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As Salaam Aleikum At the danger of estranging my Inayaty brethren and sisthern, i can fully agree with these two statements . ismail Blake Ross wrote: Does one need to be a Muslim to be a Sufi? In my opinion, No. Is Sufism the mystical path of Islam? In my opinion, clearly. I haven't addressed anyone in particular in my recent posts. For anyone to take those posts as addressed directly to them. Mistaken. Haramullah regarding > That's a waste. If I had NO INTENTION OF EVER BEING A MUSLIM, > I would still want to know what the had to say on their own terms. to a certain extent I would agree. however, I did not join Tariqas in order to learn *just* about Islam, I did. Tariqa is an Arab and more particularly, an Islamic word. My problem, not yours. If anyone has general questions about Sufism as it pertains to Islam: Ask. Questions about a general Sufism outside of Islam: Ask others. --------------------------------- Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-758922588-992020803=:89526 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

As Salaam Aleikum

At the danger of estranging my Inayaty brethren and sisthern, i can fully agree with these two statements .

ismail

  Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com> wrote:

Does one need to be a Muslim to be a Sufi?

In my opinion, No.

Is Sufism the mystical path of Islam?

In my opinion, clearly.

I haven't addressed anyone in particular in my recent posts. For anyone to take those posts as addressed directly to them. Mistaken.

 

Haramullah

regarding


> That's a waste. If I had NO INTENTION OF EVER BEING A MUSLIM,
> I would still want to know what the had to say on their own terms.

to a certain extent I would agree. however, I did not join Tariqas
in order to learn *just* about Islam,

I did. Tariqa is an Arab and more particularly, an Islamic word. My problem, not yours.

If anyone has general questions about Sufism as it pertains to Islam: Ask.

Questions about a general Sufism outside of Islam: Ask others.

 


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

_______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-758922588-992020803=:89526-- From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 18:52:20 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 17:52:20 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] re: Consensus Message-ID:
Aleikum As Salaam
 
Well, the stars have finally un-crossed a little and we're starting to agree on things. I am encouraged! I'm sure nobody's faith was challenged in the process. That was certainly never the point. If we can agree on terms, then we can continue a more meaningful and less contentious discussion.
 
Whether Sufism has been influenced by Neoplatonism, Buddhism, what-have-you, is one thing. It is likely that Sufism was influenced by many great ideas that preceded it. This is inevitable. But to doubt that Sufism is even Islamic in origin creates a chasm in the discussion that I doubt can be bridged. No foreseeable progress.
 
And likewise, it should be said that the ranks of Sufis are known only to God. If they are Muslim, Christian, Jewish, or other...and call themselves "Sufi," so long as they seek Al-Haqq, we must respect them.
 
I'm glad you chimed-in Ismael. Thanks. 

 As Salaam Aleikum
At the danger of estranging my Inayaty brethren and sisthern, i can fully agree with these two statements .
ismail
  Blake Ross <blake_ross@hotmail.com> wrote:
Does one need to be a Muslim to be a Sufi?

In my opinion, No.

Is Sufism the mystical path of Islam?

In my opinion, clearly.


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 20:19:50 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (haramullah) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 12:19:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Truth, Relativism, and the Real In-Reply-To: <00b801c0f019$6ae4c4c0$0d01010a@serdar> from "Sukru Kaya" at Jun 08, 2001 03:48:56 PM Message-ID: <200106081919.f58JJoZ17767@sonic.net> 50010608 VI! om Hail Satan! assalam alaykum, my kin. I'm unsure what my thoughts have to do with Sufism, but I respond. haramullah: >>>> it is for this reason that I presume it is not knowledge so much as >>>> CERTAINTY which is an indicator of arrogance and a lack of spiritual >>>> development, regardless of what 'spirit' and 'spiritual' might mean >>>> to any individual. the ability to suspend knowledge, to dwell in the >>>> present and presence of one's kindred without the prop of correctness >>>> and the fiction of right mental frameworks, offering love to all who >>>> enter into one's sphere of influence and attention to the thoughts >>>> and considerations of one's struggling kindred, is what I identify >>>> as abiding the Real, resting in the arms of the Most Compassionate, >>>> and wielding the weapons of the Most Powerful. "Sukru Kaya" : >>> so please tell me where you put revealation and prophets >>> in your sphere? haramullah: >> inductive precognition, typically through religious or >> mystical disciplines and states of consciousness. prophets >> are those who are able to perceive the present and/or >> envision the future correctly, usually without apparent >> technical formulae (compared with, for example, weather >> forecasting or stock predictions). "Sukru Kaya" > is this the definition of nubuvva or prophecy? it is how I would describe revelation in particular, and possibly prophecy. I don't know what "nubuvva" means. > anyway, what you explain is FALSE and TRUE. > False because noone can tell the future unless Allah reveals.... well said. > True because this is a dictionary explanation of the > word prophecy.... perhaps. I didn't get it from my dictionary, which was far more simplistic and dwelt on common interpretations. I did like its mention of 'divine will', however, which you also wished to point out. very important, thanks. > Are you a prophet (hakk al yaqeen), or have you seen a real > prophet making a true prediction (ayn al yaqeen)? or what > you know about the issue is what you learn from books or > what you hear. (ilm am yaqeen)? i guess the third option > is true. difficult question. I have received communications from my God which turned out to be accurate descriptions of future and present events and situations. I have received insight from the same source which had immense value and, at times, constituted revelation. on the whole I do not spend my time predicting things or speaking with my God about what will happen in the future, though I am told that some do this. > ...they are tresspassing a border where only real prophets can pass. > Such is what happens in this list. In a realm where only hakk al > yaqeen (not in this world i believe) and ayn al yaqeen applies, > people make bold statements and conclusions by ilm al yaqeen. > (as a matter of fact, most of the time they bound to fail) > > Now, if you are not experiencing Unity, what is the point in > making it a subject of idle talks. Isnt that disrespect to > Secret. Actually, those who experience it, will remain loyal > to the secret gifts given to them. (May Allah bless their > secrets). But, what people do here is like trying to fly > without developing wings. thank you for your reflections. > Another thing is that a sufi is a man of balance, between fear > and hope, shadow and light, this world and the other, jamal and > jalal and etc. Universe is built on this balance. But people > mostly look at one side of the issue. with this I most strongly agree. thank you again, my kin. peace be with you, haramullah nagasiva@luckymojo.com From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 20:58:05 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 19:58:05 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re:, Truth, Relativism... Message-ID:
haramullah:
>> inductive precognition, typically through religious or
>> mystical disciplines and states of consciousness. prophets
>> are those who are able to perceive the present and/or
>> envision the future correctly, usually without apparent
>> technical formulae (compared with, for example, weather
>> forecasting or stock predictions).

"Sukru Kaya" <sukrukaya@musiad.org.tr>
> is this the definition of nubuvva or prophecy?

Prophets bring knowledge from God. It is not necessarily clairvoyance or precognition. Those, as you have defined, involve seeing the future. Well, a Sufi can transcend the borders of time and space, but how. The word "pre-cognition" is interesting because it suggests before thought or before thinking. Thinking is a process of the brain or collective nervous system / nafs integration we might call "mind."

Heart is the place of knowing for a Sufi and this knowing is direct and not based on induction or deduction. These terms suggest contrast and comparison and are products of the mind. Heart knowledge is direct and absolute. Heart doesn't require knowledge of one think to understand and contrast the nature of another.  Heart is a real term in Sufism (qalb) and it is much more serious than the sentimental "heart" that gets thrown around on greeting cards. Almost everyone has had some experience with receiving knowledge from heart. They just rarely stop to ask themselves, "How did I arrive at this knowledge? There were no precursors. 

it is how I would describe revelation in particular, and
possibly prophecy. I don't know what "nubuvva" means.

> anyway, what you explain is FALSE and TRUE.
> False because noone can tell the future unless Allah reveals....

well said.

> True because this is a dictionary explanation of the
> word prophecy....

perhaps. I didn't get it from my dictionary, which was far
more simplistic and dwelt on common interpretations. I did
like its mention of 'divine will', however, which you also
wished to point out. very important, thanks.


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 21:26:03 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ismail Abushams) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 13:26:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Tariqas] More Muslim Sufi Doctrines In-Reply-To: <200106080423.f584NSS15773@sonic.net> Message-ID: <20010608202603.77294.qmail@web9008.mail.yahoo.com> --0-627829398-992031963=:77224 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii as Salaam Aleikum Is the stuff you put at the beginning of your mails really nessacery ?, more than just giving in to a need to provoke ?, yet another follower of the path of blame? . i found out years ago (when i was still young and relatively unspoiled (:-)> that offending people is not a good way to start a dialogue ,only a great way to have your parents hair go gray ! All that pseudo-satanic window-dressing is that to test the true Sufi-ness of the people on this list ? after all a real Sufi can not get irritated !?! well Reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaal Sufis don't need to convers on websites either ,non of us are there yet , it will purely be by the grace of Allah if any one of us will ever get there ismail Ps. Lobster has fed us enough of that stuff, been there , done that , blocked his mail . haramullah wrote: 50010608 VI om Hail Satan! assalam alaykum, my kin. concerning relation between Sufism, guidance, and humility, and the three levels of the master: Sayyidna Ahmad al-Badawi, a very famous saint known in all Sufi teachings -- may God bless his secret -- did not accept a guide [sheikh], and said, "No need for a guide; my guide is Qur'an" -- as the Wahhabis say today -- "and the Sunna of the Prophet (s)," and he was trying to approach his Lord as the Prophet (s) said in one of his Divine sayings, [Arabic] "Ma yazalu 'abdi yataqarrabu ilayya bi-n-nawafil hatta uhibbuhu, fa idha ahbabtuhu kuntu sam'ahu-l-ladhi yasma'u bihi wa basarahu-l-ladhi yabsuru bihi wa yadahul lati yabtishu biha wa rijlahu-l-lati yamhsi biha, hatta yakuna rabbaniyyan fa yaqulu li shay'in kun fayakun." (The Wahhabis usually cut off the end of that hadith but we will recite it to the end.) The Prophet (s) said on his Lord's behalf: "As long as my servant or slave approaches me through voluntary worship -- not obligatory, but through remembering, through reciting, through good manners -- I will be, at that time, the ears that he can hear with, the eyes that he can see with, the hand that he can feel with, the feet that he can walk with. I will be him, and he can say to something, 'Be,' and it will be (Bukhari, Ibn Hanbal). ------------------------------------------------------- "Mercy Oceans:...", Sheikh Hisham, 1993; pp. 76-8. ------------------------------------------------------- from the foregoing quotation (which I am sorry I did not have time this morning to comment upon) it is obvious that the instruction of the sheikh is that the Sufi should regard all religious with love and consider them to be of one people, letting God alone do the judging regarding their fate. it is an instruction in humility. the quotation above is but the beginning of a very long story which I would like to somewhat paraphrase here, because it is so helpful in understanding the Sufi attitude toward the value of a guide in comparison to the pursuit of scholarly studies and also about the importance of humility on the path. the saint al-Badawi is subsequently met by someone whom his ego refuses to accept as guide but whom God instructs him to regard as someone who has the key to God's divine presence. accepting this person as his guide, his knowledge from books became as nothing as a result of meeting eyes in dedication to this guide. his guide subsequently left him to the mockery of the people, who contended he was insane to behave in such a way. and yet he was subjected to a test because of his initial egotistic rejection of the right teacher. as Sheikh Hisham says: if he had accepted from the beginning, when that one came to him by God's will, he would not have passed through this test at that time. Why make yourself pass through a test? When you find the truth, the correct guide, accept him immediately! Don't play games with your ego. --------------------------------------------------- Ibid., p. 80. -------------- later, al-Badawi searched for months for the same guide who had left him to himself. his guide returned six months later, and then looked into his eyes and transferred from his heart to Ahmad al-Badawi's heart, through the eyes, internal knowledge -- the knowledge of the Book, the secrets -- giving, giving, giving until light was coming from Ahmad al-Badawi's eyes and anyone who looked into his eyes would die. He began to wear a veil. At that time he was able to enter into the Divine Presence, and he got that key. Without a guide, you can never reach by yourself. It is impossible to reach the divine presence without a true guide that will open the door for you to show you where you are going. Ahmad al-Badawi was a big scholar who knew many things. He was proud of his knowledge and did not want to accept taking directly from someone else. Because of his pride, he wanted to take directly from the highest position. He was not seeing anyone higher than him except Allah. How, then, to take from another person? That means that there was no humbleness in his heart. At that time, he was missing one of the three steps necessary for God's servants. He had respect, he had love for human beings, but he was not keeping that humility in his heart to accept advice from someone else. And because he had left out one step, it was as if he had stopped progressing. A saint, a master, must have the three levels: respect, love, and humility. If you find one of them missing, then he is not a true guide. He will take you only a certain distance. Just as we see with Ahmad al-Badawi who was able to draw nigh to a certain extent, to reach the door of Divine Presence. He was unable, however, to open it. For he was in need of someone who had the key. He would not accept this need because he was proud of himself, proud of his knowledge. He thought himself to be something. Later, he accepted. But he accepted then because he heard it from his Lord. That is why he passed through a test. If he had accepted without self-pride, immediately that door would have opened for him, without need for two years of tests. -------------------------------------------------------- Ibid., pp. 80-1. --------------------- so here we learn of the three levels of the saint, and how imperative it is to take the guidance of another, at least for the purposes of developing humility. peace be with you, haramullah (forbidden except to god) nagasiva@luckymojo.com _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-627829398-992031963=:77224 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

as Salaam Aleikum

Is the stuff you put at the beginning of your mails really nessacery ?, more than just giving in to a need to provoke ?, yet another follower of the path of blame? . i found out years ago (when i was still young and relatively unspoiled (:-)> that offending people is not a good way to start a dialogue ,only a great way to have your parents hair go gray ! All that pseudo-satanic window-dressing is that to test the true Sufi-ness of the people on this list ? after all a real Sufi can not get irritated !?! well Reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaal Sufis don't need to convers on websites either ,non of us are there yet , it will purely be by the grace of Allah if any one of us will ever get there

ismail

Ps. Lobster has fed us enough of that stuff, been there , done that , blocked his mail .

  haramullah <nagasiva@luckymojo.com> wrote:



50010608 VI om Hail Satan!

assalam alaykum, my kin.

concerning relation between Sufism, guidance, and humility,
and the three levels of the master:

Sayyidna Ahmad al-Badawi, a very famous saint known
in all Sufi teachings -- may God bless his secret --
did not accept a guide [sheikh], and said, "No need
for a guide; my guide is Qur'an" -- as the Wahhabis
say today -- "and the Sunna of the Prophet (s)," and
he was trying to approach his Lord as the Prophet (s)
said in one of his Divine sayings, [Arabic] "Ma yazalu
'abdi yataqarrabu ilayya bi-n-nawafil hatta uhibbuhu,
fa idha ahbabtuhu kuntu sam'ahu-l-ladhi yasma'u bihi
wa basarahu-l-ladhi yabsuru bihi wa yadahul lati yabtishu
biha wa rijlahu-l-lati yamhsi biha, hatta yakuna rabbaniyyan
fa yaqulu li shay'in kun fayakun." (The Wahhabis usually
cut off the end of that hadith but we will recite it to
the end.) The Prophet (s) said on his Lord's behalf:
"As long as my servant or slave approaches me through
voluntary worship -- not obligatory, but through
remembering, through reciting, through good manners --
I will be, at that time, the ears that he can hear with,
the eyes that he can see with, the hand that he can feel
with, the feet that he can walk with. I will be him, and
he can say to something, 'Be,' and it will be (Bukhari,
Ibn Hanbal).
-------------------------------------------------------
"Mercy Oceans:...", Sheikh Hisham, 1993; pp. 76-8.
-------------------------------------------------------

from the foregoing quotation (which I am sorry I did not have
time this morning to comment upon) it is obvious that the
instruction of the sheikh is that the Sufi should regard all
religious with love and consider them to be of one people,
letting God alone do the judging regarding their fate. it is
an instruction in humility.

the quotation above is but the beginning of a very long story
which I would like to somewhat paraphrase here, because it is
so helpful in understanding the Sufi attitude toward the value
of a guide in comparison to the pursuit of scholarly studies
and also about the importance of humility on the path.

the saint al-Badawi is subsequently met by someone whom his
ego refuses to accept as guide but whom God instructs him
to regard as someone who has the key to God's divine presence.
accepting this person as his guide, his knowledge from books
became as nothing as a result of meeting eyes in dedication
to this guide. his guide subsequently left him to the mockery
of the people, who contended he was insane to behave in such a
way. and yet he was subjected to a test because of his initial
egotistic rejection of the right teacher. as Sheikh Hisham says:

if he had accepted from the beginning, when that one
came to him by God's will, he would not have passed
through this test at that time. Why make yourself
pass through a test? When you find the truth, the
correct guide, accept him immediately! Don't play
games with your ego.
---------------------------------------------------
Ibid., p. 80.
--------------

later, al-Badawi searched for months for the same guide who
had left him to himself. his guide returned six months later,
and then

looked into his eyes and transferred from
his heart to Ahmad al-Badawi's heart, through the
eyes, internal knowledge -- the knowledge of the
Book, the secrets -- giving, giving, giving until
light was coming from Ahmad al-Badawi's eyes and
anyone who looked into his eyes would die. He began
to wear a veil. At that time he was able to enter
into the Divine Presence, and he got that key.

Without a guide, you can never reach by yourself.
It is impossible to reach the divine presence without
a true guide that will open the door for you to show
you where you are going. Ahmad al-Badawi was a big
scholar who knew many things. He was proud of his
knowledge and did not want to accept taking directly
from someone else. Because of his pride, he wanted
to take directly from the highest position. He was
not seeing anyone higher than him except Allah. How,
then, to take from another person? That means that
there was no humbleness in his heart. At that time,
he was missing one of the three steps necessary for
God's servants. He had respect, he had love for human
beings, but he was not keeping that humility in his
heart to accept advice from someone else. And because
he had left out one step, it was as if he had stopped
progressing.

A saint, a master, must have the three levels: respect,
love, and humility. If you find one of them missing,
then he is not a true guide. He will take you only a
certain distance. Just as we see with Ahmad al-Badawi
who was able to draw nigh to a certain extent, to reach
the door of Divine Presence. He was unable, however, to
open it. For he was in need of someone who had the key.
He would not accept this need because he was proud of
himself, proud of his knowledge. He thought himself to
be something. Later, he accepted. But he accepted then
because he heard it from his Lord. That is why he passed
through a test. If he had accepted without self-pride,
immediately that door would have opened for him, without
need for two years of tests.
--------------------------------------------------------
Ibid., pp. 80-1.
---------------------

so here we learn of the three levels of the saint, and how
imperative it is to take the guidance of another, at least
for the purposes of developing humility.

peace be with you,

haramullah (forbidden except to god)
nagasiva@luckymojo.com
_______________________________________________
Tariqas mailing list
Tariqas@stderr.org
http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-627829398-992031963=:77224-- From tariqas@stderr.org Fri Jun 8 21:38:30 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Blake Ross) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 20:38:30 -0000 Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Duel Personality Message-ID:

Lobster and Haramullah are just two different programs of the same "Provoke-Bot" technology that the people at stderr.org installed to keep discussion groups posting vigorously.

 
 as Salaam Aleikum
Is the stuff you put at the beginning of your mails really nessacery ?, more
than just giving in to a need to provoke ?, yet another follower of the path of
blame? . i found out years ago (when i was still young and relatively unspoiled
(:-)> that offending people is not a good way to start a dialogue ,only a great
way to have your parents hair go gray ! All that pseudo-satanic window-dressing
is that to test the true Sufi-ness of the people on this list ? after all a real
Sufi can not get irritated !?! well Reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaal Sufis don't need to
convers on websites either ,non of us are there yet , it will purely be by the
grace of Allah if any one of us will ever get there
ismail
Ps. Lobster has fed us enough of that stuff, been there , done that , blocked
his mail .
  haramullah <nagasiva@luckymojo.com> wrote:


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 9 01:49:36 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Simon Bryquer-RR) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 20:49:36 -0400 Subject: [Tariqas] A few questions for haramullah. Message-ID: <044201c0f07e$a6396a20$ad8f1d18@nyc.rr.com> haramullah my kin, greetings --- In a way this is not central to the current discussion flying all over the place and in an other way it might be pivotal. First of all I assume you named yourself haramullah (at least with some kind of sense not capitalize) And I also assume that you are aware that it means 'forbidden by/of Allah. Or even not permitted. So having chosen this name it is also your designation and the way you see yourself. In league with the forbidden of God , thus the reason your hailing Satan with such theatrical gusto. That is of course the surface of it all. It is definitely a means of getting attention and this lead us to the original situation of Satan in Islam (notice here I say in Islam - for I'm sure you have endless other beliefs and theories about the meaning and essence of Satan) being a fallen, fallen for a having committed the sin of arrogance and above all Pride, pride in the sense of seeing oneself and ones place as the highest in the hierarchy of angels and all things divine. In fact believing that one is an equal to God. Now having listened to you explore your various conceits, my kin, in your personal designation, in your style of discourse which approximates objective intellectual inquiry and striving for the so to speak rational and logical, though not my style of these matters, can you please demonstrate and put all these facets into action and serve 'to thine own self be true' or 'whomever knoweth himself knoweth his Lord' in a quick down and dirty way. Having said this - let me ask you some questions and I'm sure you won't mind for you've been asking quite a few questions yourself. Though you have a tendency to be long winded, please be brief and succinct, for after all this time I'm sure you have the CERTAINTY of your beliefs and the personal dogma of your - theological/theocratic --systems. What is it you believe? Here I don't necessarily imply that you must believe in God or anything Divine ( please don't answer with a question as is your habit). We just want a sense of haramullah without the social uniform, you know the one that sits around in his spiritual underwear with the hair down, guzzling some magickal intoxicating satanic nectar, watching some mystical football game. You know the one I mean - the real you. Now - to what purpose are you questioning the belief and practice of others in relation of Islamic Sufism vs Universalism - whatever the answer, how is this going to help what you already believe. By your own admission you have no intention of following the Islamic Sufi path. And if your interest is purely 'academic' - why bother. Why bother yourself with something that you won't use. Rather a waste of your immense spiritual and intellectual gifts, wouldn't you say? Or are you on some kind of mission - let's see now, could it be ( and allow me to flatter you for a moment) a ipso facto Kant who spends his life proving that God does not exist only tot say at the end 'Because God does not exist therefore I believe in him.' In view of the above what are you practices. By this I mean, give us a typical day of yours in term of how your beliefs and practices are manifested in your daily life - or do you just talk and ask questions about the idea of the ideas of practice and belief of others. Kinda of a couch potato mystic seeker. Now don't answer these question by referencing systems that you have alluded to such as Gurdjieff, Crowley et all. Inquiring minds want to know what haramullah stands for or does not stand for - the naked truth so to speak if your capable of it without trying to impress anyone by referred book reading knowledge - no academia. And again do not give me any 'my kin' language, give the street talk that you can do the walk in. I and I'm sure a few others await your answers with baited mystic breath. Speak haramullah and be not afraid of the consequences, but rest assure consequences there will be . . . Greetings my kin Simon From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 9 04:42:06 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (elijah wright) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 23:42:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Tariqas] A few questions for haramullah. In-Reply-To: <044201c0f07e$a6396a20$ad8f1d18@nyc.rr.com> Message-ID: oh come on, simon, this is a bullsh*t post (from a detached perspective) and we all know it. one could attack any individual along these same lines with little trouble. where is your ego? i think you're giving a little too much credence to the naming and all the associations it implies - which is think is precisely part of why haramullah goes by the name he does. elijah On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Simon Bryquer-RR wrote: > Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 20:49:36 -0400 > From: Simon Bryquer-RR > Reply-To: tariqas@stderr.org > To: Tariqas -p > Subject: [Tariqas] A few questions for haramullah. > > > > > haramullah my kin, greetings --- > > In a way this is not central to the current discussion flying all over the > place and in an other way it might be pivotal. > > First of all I assume you named yourself haramullah (at least with some kind > of sense not capitalize) And I also assume that you are aware that it means > 'forbidden by/of Allah. Or even not permitted. So having chosen this name it > is also your designation and the way you see yourself. In league with the > forbidden of God , thus the reason your hailing Satan > with such theatrical gusto. That is of course the surface of it all. It > is definitely a means of getting attention and this lead us to the original > situation of Satan in Islam (notice here I say in Islam - for I'm sure you > have endless other beliefs and theories about the meaning and essence of > Satan) being a fallen, fallen for a having committed the sin of arrogance > and above all Pride, pride in the sense of seeing oneself and ones place as > the highest in > the hierarchy of angels and all things divine. In fact believing that one > is an equal to God. > > Now having listened to you explore your various conceits, my kin, in your > personal designation, in your style of discourse which approximates > objective > intellectual inquiry and striving for the so to speak rational and logical, > though not my style of these matters, can you please demonstrate and put > all these facets into action and serve 'to thine own self be true' or > 'whomever knoweth himself knoweth his Lord' in a quick down and dirty way. > > Having said this - let me ask you some questions and I'm sure you won't mind > for you've been asking quite a few questions yourself. Though you have a > tendency to be long winded, please be brief and succinct, for after all this > time I'm sure you have the CERTAINTY of your beliefs and the personal dogma > of your - theological/theocratic --systems. > > > What is it you believe? Here I don't necessarily imply that you must > believe in God or anything Divine ( please don't answer with a question as > is your habit). We just want a sense of haramullah without the social > uniform, you know the one that sits around in his spiritual underwear with > the > hair down, guzzling some magickal intoxicating satanic nectar, watching > some mystical football game. You know the one I mean - the real you. > > Now - to what purpose are you questioning the belief and practice of others > in relation of Islamic Sufism vs Universalism - whatever the answer, how is > this going to help what you already believe. By your own admission you have > no intention of following the Islamic Sufi path. And if your interest is > purely 'academic' - why bother. Why bother yourself with something that you > won't use. Rather a waste of your immense spiritual and intellectual gifts, > wouldn't you say? Or are you on some kind of mission - let's see now, could > it be ( and allow me to flatter you for a moment) a ipso facto Kant who > spends his life proving that God does not exist only tot say at the end > 'Because God does not exist therefore I believe in him.' > > In view of the above what are you practices. By this I mean, give us a > typical day of yours in term of how your beliefs and practices are > manifested in your daily life - or do you just talk and ask questions about > the idea of the ideas of practice and belief of others. Kinda of a couch > potato mystic seeker. > > Now don't answer these question by referencing systems that you have > alluded to such as Gurdjieff, Crowley et all. Inquiring minds want to > know what > haramullah stands for or does not stand for - the naked truth so to speak > if your capable of it without trying to impress anyone by referred book > reading knowledge - no academia. > > And again do not give me any 'my kin' language, give the street talk that > you can do the walk in. > > I and I'm sure a few others await your answers with baited mystic breath. > > Speak haramullah and be not afraid of the consequences, but rest assure > consequences there will be . . . > > > Greetings my kin > > Simon > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tariqas mailing list > Tariqas@stderr.org > http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas > -- -- $ chown us:us yourbase -R From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 9 03:43:26 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 03:43:26 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] More Muslim Sufi Doctrines In-Reply-To: <20010608202603.77294.qmail@web9008.mail.yahoo.com> References: <200106080423.f584NSS15773@sonic.net> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010609032744.01ea9170@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >Ps. Lobster has fed us enough of that stuff, been there , done that , >blocked his mail . Dear Friends, People of the Block, An excellent example of heedlessness. We should after all be heedless of the futile provoker, the infantile egotist and the trivial and blasphemous. So here is the solution for all you good people. "For he who partakes of evil, shares in the roasting and he who shares in the goodness - well goodness is it's own reward" In this way we are able to focus on the worthwhile. Which is of course to find the harmonious resonance and amplification of any worthwhile attributes. Nobody is being stopped I hope in this worthwhile pursuit? I await an exemplar . . . Me? Provide? Nah! I await. A crustacean has to know His Limitations. Even in this circus circle . . . Usual juggling Lobster feed All prayers gratefully received http://birdsandbutterflies.cjb.net/ "Everyone hears according to his own understanding, None has searched for the secrets within me. My secret is found in my lament - But an eye or ear without light cannot know it . . ." Rumi From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 9 21:46:14 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Sukru Kaya) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 23:46:14 +0300 Subject: Ynt: [Tariqas] Re: Truth, Relativism, and the Real References: <200106081919.f58JJoZ17767@sonic.net> Message-ID: <001801c0f125$3bac3780$0d01010a@serdar> haramullah: > "Sukru Kaya" > > > Are you a prophet (hakk al yaqeen), or have you seen a real > > prophet making a true prediction (ayn al yaqeen)? or what > > you know about the issue is what you learn from books or > > what you hear. (ilm am yaqeen)? i guess the third option > > is true. > > difficult question. I have received communications from my > God which turned out to be accurate descriptions of future > and present events and situations. I have received insight > from the same source which had immense value and, at times, > constituted revelation. on the whole I do not spend my time > predicting things or speaking with my God about what will > happen in the future, though I am told that some do this. this is the most interesting part in your msg imo. first of all your God is mine too. being a wicked person, i felt a thousand times that Allah created reasons that will prevent me go astray. another thousand times i felt Allah's favour on me. thats a strong feeling kneaded with my belief in Him. when i or my family asked about our plans to Him through istihare (dream) we got answers. Allah-u alim. but the way you state it makes me feel that i'm listening a fragment of a science fiction film.."eagle, we receive communications from the third kind." or maybe you have more to say on this.. > > > Another thing is that a sufi is a man of balance, between fear > > and hope, shadow and light, this world and the other, jamal and > > jalal and etc. Universe is built on this balance. But people > > mostly look at one side of the issue. > > with this I most strongly agree. thank you again, my kin. thank you. and moreover, when i hear people saying "all is He, including me" i find it irritating, if not deragatory....a word's value depends on the mouth it comes out of...througout history, i recognise just one man who deserved to say that..(but again that was a misconception i believe..) it is funny how easily people skyrocket from being servants of Him to ....... they forget one thing...satan is very clever and sometimes approach us in the form of goodness...(here i state that i do not question anyone's sincerity on the path) wassalam, Sukru From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 9 13:08:30 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Ismail Abushams) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 05:08:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ynt: [Tariqas] Re: Truth, Relativism, and the Real In-Reply-To: <001801c0f125$3bac3780$0d01010a@serdar> Message-ID: <20010609120830.19494.qmail@web9008.mail.yahoo.com> --0-773089637-992088510=:18882 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii As Salaam Aleikum About the All is him , including me line (i hear it to often). I always ask people if they mean it as much as Al Hallaj did , and are they willing to take the same cosequences . It has no use to state this among other """"Sufis"""" .The central Masjid in Kabul would be place. ismail Sukru Kaya wrote: haramullah: > "Sukru Kaya" > > > Are you a prophet (hakk al yaqeen), or have you seen a real > > prophet making a true prediction (ayn al yaqeen)? or what > > you know about the issue is what you learn from books or > > what you hear. (ilm am yaqeen)? i guess the third option > > is true. > > difficult question. I have received communications from my > God which turned out to be accurate descriptions of future > and present events and situations. I have received insight > from the same source which had immense value and, at times, > constituted revelation. on the whole I do not spend my time > predicting things or speaking with my God about what will > happen in the future, though I am told that some do this. this is the most interesting part in your msg imo. first of all your God is mine too. being a wicked person, i felt a thousand times that Allah created reasons that will prevent me go astray. another thousand times i felt Allah's favour on me. thats a strong feeling kneaded with my belief in Him. when i or my family asked about our plans to Him through istihare (dream) we got answers. Allah-u alim. but the way you state it makes me feel that i'm listening a fragment of a science fiction film.."eagle, we receive communications from the third kind." or maybe you have more to say on this.. > > > Another thing is that a sufi is a man of balance, between fear > > and hope, shadow and light, this world and the other, jamal and > > jalal and etc. Universe is built on this balance. But people > > mostly look at one side of the issue. > > with this I most strongly agree. thank you again, my kin. thank you. and moreover, when i hear people saying "all is He, including me" i find it irritating, if not deragatory....a word's value depends on the mouth it comes out of...througout history, i recognise just one man who deserved to say that..(but again that was a misconception i believe..) it is funny how easily people skyrocket from being servants of Him to ....... they forget one thing...satan is very clever and sometimes approach us in the form of goodness...(here i state that i do not question anyone's sincerity on the path) wassalam, Sukru _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-773089637-992088510=:18882 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

As Salaam Aleikum

About the All is him , including me line (i hear it to often). I always ask people if they mean it as much as Al Hallaj did , and are they willing to take the same cosequences . It has no use to state this among other """"Sufis"""" .The central  Masjid in Kabul would be place.

ismail 

  Sukru Kaya <sukrukaya@musiad.org.tr> wrote:

haramullah:

> "Sukru Kaya"
>
> > Are you a prophet (hakk al yaqeen), or have you seen a real
> > prophet making a true prediction (ayn al yaqeen)? or what
> > you know about the issue is what you learn from books or
> > what you hear. (ilm am yaqeen)? i guess the third option
> > is true.
>
> difficult question. I have received communications from my
> God which turned out to be accurate descriptions of future
> and present events and situations. I have received insight
> from the same source which had immense value and, at times,
> constituted revelation. on the whole I do not spend my time
> predicting things or speaking with my God about what will
> happen in the future, though I am told that some do this.

this is the most interesting part in your msg imo. first of all your God is
mine too. being a wicked person, i felt a thousand times that Allah created
reasons that will prevent me go astray. another thousand times i felt
Allah's favour on me. thats a strong feeling kneaded with my belief in Him.
when i or my family asked about our plans to Him through istihare (dream) we
got answers. Allah-u alim.

but the way you state it makes me feel that i'm listening a fragment of a
science fiction film.."eagle, we receive communications from the third
kind."

or maybe you have more to say on this..

>
> > Another thing is that a sufi is a man of balance, between fear
> > and hope, shadow and light, this world and the other, jamal and
> > jalal and etc. Universe is built on this balance. But people
> > mostly look at one side of the issue.
>
> with this I most strongly agree. thank you again, my kin.

thank you.

and moreover, when i hear people saying "all is He, including me" i find it
irritating, if not deragatory....a word's value depends on the mouth it
comes out of...througout history, i recognise just one man who deserved to
say that..(but again that was a misconception i believe..)

it is funny how easily people skyrocket from being servants of Him to
.......

they forget one thing...satan is very clever and sometimes approach us in
the form of goodness...(here i state that i do not question anyone's
sincerity on the path)

wassalam,
Sukru


_______________________________________________
Tariqas mailing list
Tariqas@stderr.org
http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. --0-773089637-992088510=:18882-- From tariqas@stderr.org Sun Jun 10 13:37:13 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Sukru Kaya) Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 15:37:13 +0300 Subject: Ynt: Ynt: [Tariqas] Re: Truth, Relativism, and the Real References: <20010609120830.19494.qmail@web9008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008101c0f1aa$16279100$0d01010a@serdar> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_007E_01C0F1C3.38690FA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable wa alaikum assalam... :))) ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Ismail Abushams=20 To: tariqas@dns1.stderr.org=20 Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 3:08 PM Subject: Re: Ynt: [Tariqas] Re: Truth, Relativism, and the Real As Salaam Aleikum=20 About the All is him , including me line (i hear it to often). I = always ask people if they mean it as much as Al Hallaj did , and are = they willing to take the same cosequences . It has no use to state this = among other """"Sufis"""" .The central Masjid in Kabul would be place.=20 ismail =20 Sukru Kaya wrote:=20 haramullah: > "Sukru Kaya"=20 > > > Are you a prophet (hakk al yaqeen), or have you seen a real > > prophet making a true prediction (ayn al yaqeen)? or what > > you know about the issue is what you learn from books or > > what you hear. (ilm am yaqeen)? i guess the third option > > is true. > > difficult question. I have received communications from my > God which turned out to be accurate descriptions of future > and present events and situations. I have received insight > from the same source which had immense value and, at times, > constituted revelation. on the whole I do not spend my time > predicting things or speaking with my God about what will > happen in the future, though I am told that some do this. this is the most interesting part in you! r msg imo. first of all = your God is mine too. being a wicked person, i felt a thousand times that Allah = created reasons that will prevent me go astray. another thousand times i = felt Allah's favour on me. thats a strong feeling kneaded with my belief = in Him. when i or my family asked about our plans to Him through istihare = (dream) we got answers. Allah-u alim. but the way you state it makes me feel that i'm listening a fragment = of a science fiction film.."eagle, we receive communications from the = third kind." or maybe you have more to say on this.. > > > Another thing is that a sufi is a man of balance, between fear > > and hope, shadow and light, this world and the other, jamal and > > jalal and etc. Universe is built on this balance. But people > > mostly look at one side of the issue. > > with this I most strongly agree. thank you again, my kin. thank you. and moreove! r, when i hear people saying "all is He, including me" = i find it irritating, if not deragatory....a word's value depends on the mouth = it comes out of...througout history, i recognise just one man who = deserved to say that..(but again that was a misconception i believe..) it is funny how easily people skyrocket from being servants of Him = to ....... they forget one thing...satan is very clever and sometimes approach = us in the form of goodness...(here i state that i do not question anyone's sincerity on the path) wassalam, Sukru _______________________________________________ Tariqas mailing list Tariqas@stderr.org http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with = Yahoo! Mail. ------=_NextPart_000_007E_01C0F1C3.38690FA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
wa alaikum assalam...
 
:)))
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Ismail=20 Abushams
To: tariqas@dns1.stderr.org
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 = 3:08=20 PM
Subject: Re: Ynt: [Tariqas] Re: = Truth,=20 Relativism, and the Real

As Salaam Aleikum=20

About the All is him , including me line (i hear it to often). I = always ask=20 people if they mean it as much as Al Hallaj did , and are they willing = to take=20 the same cosequences . It has no use to state this among other=20 """"Sufis"""" .The central  Masjid in Kabul would be place.=20

ismail =20

  Sukru Kaya <sukrukaya@musiad.org.tr>=20 wrote:=20 haramullah:

>=20 "Sukru Kaya"
>
> > Are you = a=20 prophet (hakk al yaqeen), or have you seen a real
> > = prophet=20 making a true prediction (ayn al yaqeen)? or what
> > you = know=20 about the issue is what you learn from books or
> > what = you hear.=20 (ilm am yaqeen)? i guess the third option
> > is=20 true.
>
> difficult question. I have received = communications=20 from my
> God which turned out to be accurate descriptions of=20 future
> and present events and situations. I have received=20 insight
> from the same source which had immense value and, at = times,
> constituted revelation. on the whole I do not spend = my=20 time
> predicting things or speaking with my God about what=20 will
> happen in the future, though I am told that some do=20 this.

this is the most interesting part in you! r msg imo. = first of=20 all your God is
mine too. being a wicked person, i felt a = thousand times=20 that Allah created
reasons that will prevent me go astray. = another=20 thousand times i felt
Allah's favour on me. thats a strong = feeling=20 kneaded with my belief in Him.
when i or my family asked about = our plans=20 to Him through istihare (dream) we
got answers. Allah-u = alim.

but=20 the way you state it makes me feel that i'm listening a fragment of=20 a
science fiction film.."eagle, we receive communications from = the=20 third
kind."

or maybe you have more to say on=20 this..

>
> > Another thing is that a sufi is a = man of=20 balance, between fear
> > and hope, shadow and light, this = world=20 and the other, jamal and
> > jalal and etc. Universe is = built on=20 this balance. But people
> > mostly look at one side of the = issue.
>
> with this I most strongly agree. thank you = again, my=20 kin.

thank you.

and moreove! r, when i hear people = saying "all=20 is He, including me" i find it
irritating, if not deragatory....a = word's=20 value depends on the mouth it
comes out of...througout history, i = recognise just one man who deserved to
say that..(but again that = was a=20 misconception i believe..)

it is funny how easily people = skyrocket=20 from being servants of Him to
.......

they forget one=20 thing...satan is very clever and sometimes approach us in
the = form of=20 goodness...(here i state that i do not question = anyone's
sincerity on the=20 = path)

wassalam,
Sukru


______________________________= _________________
Tariqas=20 mailing=20 = list
Tariqas@stderr.org
http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/= tariqas


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! = Mail Personal=20 Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo!=20 Mail. ------=_NextPart_000_007E_01C0F1C3.38690FA0-- From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 9 15:54:57 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (Lobster) Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 15:54:57 +0100 Subject: [Tariqas] All is hypocrisy In-Reply-To: <20010609120830.19494.qmail@web9008.mail.yahoo.com> References: <001801c0f125$3bac3780$0d01010a@serdar> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20010609153753.00a4dec0@pop3.britishlibrary.net> >About the All is him , including me line (i hear it to often). I always >ask people if they mean it as much as Al Hallaj did , and are they willing >to take the same cosequences . It has no use to state this among other >""""Sufis"""" .The central Masjid in Kabul would be place. > >ismail Al Hallaj made no statement contrary to Islam and was willing to pay the price of His Heedlessness It is not our place to do what there is no requirement for. Just as Buddhists do not need reminding 'There is a God - don't ya know' or telling Hindus 'What ya need all those statues for broth?' No we can contain Allah (and Cecil (c) 2001 Lobster Alternative Deities) in a little box call it the only way and expect others to appreciate our sincerity. One day we will be called on to explain Our Heart and all we will say is 'There is the hypocrite' and the finger will point at Lobster All is hypocrisy including Him Lobster Off to preach Allah to Buddhists and cut down on Heathen Deities http://pages.britishlibrary.net/lobster/exxo/ http://birdsandbutterflies.cjb.net/ For the birds that cannot soar, God has provided low branches. -- Turkish Proverb From tariqas@stderr.org Sat Jun 9 22:59:13 2001 From: tariqas@stderr.org (muhammad nassar) Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 23:59:13 +0200 Subject: [Tariqas] Where is it going? Message-ID: This is the smallest number of incoming messages since I subscribed to the list. Is it grinding to a halt? What s the reason for that? It seems that from the beginning it only went on as a forum for ranting about Sufism and so-called non-Muslim Sufism, without any real engagement between the people on the list. Is it with the contentiousness’ of the last weeks (I know I have been instrumental in bringing about that situation), the list has run its course with no real knowledge of where to move next? Probably there was something wrong from the beginning, Haramullah insisting on making it a forum where we stood on equal footing, regardless of what agnosticism creeps into our beliefs as result of some being relatively sure about what they believe in, and where Muslims in particular would sacrifice there staunch belief in the Qur’an being the last and authoritative word of Allah. We might not be spiritually advanced people ( Blake has pointed this out) but some of us have come a cross people who are and their spiritual experience is nothing like the amateurishness of the definition (sorry Haramullah but there must be some outright statement of the facts) as a facet of sense perception. I do not really intend this as an insult to anybody. Now there must an argument for the kind of thing that Blake, Sukru and my humble person have tried to do ( again I do know that my statements have been more irritating than my fellow Muslim Sufis). So the framework within which the discussion was meant to take place is just not realistic enough though I do know there might have been good intentions behind it. Trusting these good intentions should help me try to contribute something to the discussion as I see would push it forward. But I am away from my sources at the moment. Now I join hands with Simon in asking Haramullah to think what he can do so sustain this list. I also insist that Haramullah tried to fog up the disussion by replying very sophistically to my message about the absolute truth and relativism. Blake has been kind to show where H’s argument is faulty and I could have said more. Now these words are more thoughts going over in my mind than well-formulated points and I would be pleased to see what people think about them -- On Sat, 9 Jun 2001 07:47:03 tariqas-request wrote: >Send Tariqas mailing list submissions to > tariqas@stderr.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tariqas >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > tariqas-request@stderr.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > tariqas-admin@stderr.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of Tariqas digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Duel Personality (Blake Ross) > 2. A few questions for haramullah. (Simon Bryquer-RR) > 3. Re: A few questions for haramullah. (elijah wright) > 4. Re: More Muslim Sufi Doctrines (Lobster) > 5. Ynt: [Tariqas] Re: Truth, Relativism, and the Real (Sukru Kaya) > >--__--__-- > >Message: 1 >From: "Blake Ross" >To: tariqas@eckhart.stderr.org >Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 20:38:30 -0000 >Subject: [Tariqas] Re: Duel Personality >Reply-To: tariqas@stderr.org > > >

Lobster and Haramullah are just two different programs of the same "Provoke-Bot" technology that the people at stderr.org installed to keep discussion groups posting vigorously.

>

 
 as Salaam Aleikum
Is the stuff you put at the beginning of your mails really nessacery ?, more
than just giving in to a need to provoke ?, yet another follower of the path of
blame? . i found out years ago (when i was still young and relatively unspoiled
(:-)> that offending people is not a good way to start a dialogue ,only a great
way to have your parents hair go gray ! All that pseudo-satanic window-dressing
is that to test the true Sufi-ness of the people on this list ? after all a real
Sufi can not get irritated !?! well Reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaal Sufis don't need to
convers on websites either ,non of us are there yet , it will purely be by the
grace of Allah if any one of us will ever get there
ismail
Ps. Lobster has fed us enough of that stuff, been there , done that , blocked
his mail .
  haramullah <nagasiva@luckymojo.com> wrote:


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

> >--__--__-- > >Message: 2 >From: "Simon Bryquer-RR" >To: "Tariqas -p" >Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 20:49:36 -0400 >Subject: [Tariqas] A few questions for haramullah. >Reply-To: tariqas@stderr.org > > > >haramullah my kin, greetings --- > >In a way this is not central to the current discussion flying all over the >place and in an other way it might be pivotal. > >First of all I assume you named yourself haramullah (at least with some kind >of sense not capitalize) And I also assume that you are aware that it means >'forbidden by/of Allah. Or even not permitted. So having chosen this name it >is also your designation and the way you see yourself. In league with the >forbidden of God , thus the reason your hailing Satan >with such theatrical gusto. That is of course the surface of it all. It >is definitely a means of getting attention and this lead us to the original >situation of Satan in Islam (notice here I say in Islam - for I'm sure you >have endless other beliefs and theories about the meaning and essence of >Satan) being a fallen, fallen for a having committed the sin of arrogance >and above all Pride, pride in the sense of seeing oneself and ones place as >the highest in >the hierarchy of angels and all things divine. In fact believing that one >is an equal to God. > >Now having listened to you explore your various conceits, my kin, in your >personal designation, in your style of discourse which approximates >objective >intellectual inquiry and striving for the so to speak rational and logical, >though not my style of these matters, can you please demonstrate and put >all these facets into action and serve 'to thine own self be true' or >'whomever knoweth himself knoweth his Lord' in a quick down and dirty way. > >Having said this - let me ask you some questions and I'm sure you won't mind >for you've been asking quite a few questions yourself. Though you have a >tendency to be long winded, please be brief and succinct, for after all this >time I'm sure you have the CERTAINTY of your beliefs and the personal dogma >of your - theological/theocratic --systems. > > >What is it you believe? Here I don't necessarily imply that you must >believe in God or anything Divine ( please don't answer with a question as >is your habit). We just want a sense of haramullah without the social >uniform, you know the one that sits around in his spiritual underwear with >the >hair down, guzzling some magickal intoxicating satanic nectar, watching >some mystical football game. You know the one I mean - the real you. > >Now - to what purpose are you questioning the belief and practice of others >in relation of Islamic Sufism vs Universalism - whatever the answer, how is >this going to help what you already believe. By your own admission you have >no intention of following the Islamic Sufi path. And if your interest is >purely 'academic' - why bother. Why bother yourself with something that you >won't use. Rather a waste of your immense spiritual and intellectual gifts, >wouldn't you say? Or are you on some kind of mission - let's see now, could >it be ( and allow me to flatter you for a moment) a ipso facto Kant who >spends his life proving that God does not exist only tot say at the end >'Because God does not exist therefore I believe in him.' > >In view of the above what are you practices. By this I mean, give us a >typical day of yours in term of how your beliefs and practices are >manifested in your daily life - or do you just talk and ask questions about >the idea of the ideas of practice and belief of others. Kinda of a couch >potato mystic seeker. > >Now don't answer these question by referencing systems that you have >alluded to such as Gurdjieff, Crowley et all. Inquiring minds want to >know what >haramullah stands for or does not stand for - the naked truth so to speak >if your capable of it without trying to impress anyone by referred book >reading knowledge - no academia. > >And again do not give me any 'my kin' language, give the street talk that >you can do the walk in. > >I and I'm sure a few others await your answers with baited mystic breath. > >Speak haramullah and be not afraid of the consequences, but rest assure >consequences there will be . . . > > >Greetings my kin > >Simon > > > > > > > > > >--__--__-- > >Message: 3 >Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 23:42:06 -0400 (EDT) >From: elijah wright >To: tariqas@eckhart.stderr.org >Subject: Re: [Tariqas] A few questions for haramullah. >Reply-To: tariqas@stderr.org > > >oh come on, simon, this is a bullsh*t post (from a detached perspective) >and we all know it. one could attack any individual along these same >lines with little trouble. > >where is your ego? > >i think you're giving a little too much credence to the naming and all the >associations it implies - which is think is precisely part of why >haramullah goes by the name he does. > >elijah > >On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Simon Bryquer-RR wrote: > >> Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 20:49:36 -0400 >> From: Simon Bryquer-RR >> Reply-To: tariqas@stderr.org >> To: Tariqas -p >> Subject: [Tariqas] A few questions for haramullah. >> >> >> >> >> haramullah my kin, greetings --- >> >> In a way this is not central to the current discussion flying all over the >> place and in an other way it might be pivotal. >> >> First of all I assume you named yourself haramullah (at least with some kind >> of sense not capitalize) And I also assume that you are aware that it means >> 'forbidden by/of Allah. Or even not permitted. So having chosen this name it >> is also your designation and the way you see yourself. In league with the >> forbidden of God , thus the reason your hailing Satan >> with such theatrical gusto. That is of course the surface of it all. It >> is definitely a means of getting attention and this lead us to the original >> situation of Satan in Islam (notice here I say in Islam - for I'm sure you >> have endless other beliefs and theories about the meaning and essence of >> Satan) being a fallen, fallen for a having committed the sin of arrogance >> and above all Pride, pride in the sense of seeing oneself and ones place as >> the highest in >> the hierarchy of angels and all things divine. In fact believing that one >> is an equal to God. >> >> Now having listened to you explore your various conceits, my kin, in your >> personal designation, in your style of discourse which approximates >> objective >> intellectual inquiry and striving for the so to speak rational and logical, >> though not my style of these matters, can you please demonstrate and put >> all these facets into action and serve