Bullhe Shah and His Veil of “Meem”

Re: # 114 tahir wrote:

["... 1) SUPPORTING CHEEMA?!?!?!

... 2) How men seldom live up to the qualities of their names ..."]

Tahir ji, what can I say? You read more into the words then you should.

1) I do not support Cheema. I do not know him from Adam. For all I know he could be a real Prince or he could be an asshole. But that does not matter. I was simply supporting the idea he was projecting. That had a ring of truth for me.

2) What's in a name? Suppose my parents had named me "Prince".. What would that have mattered? I'd still be the ordinary paupper that I am. Or if they'd named me "Asshole"... what would that have mattered?

You speak in riddles. What did you really want to say?

...SR

Tahir, the tendency, the urge to abuse, curse, dismiss, put down, defame individuals - those who disagree with us - is a major hurdle to understanding things/ideas as they really are. Unfortunately, we fall into that error so often :(

-----------
Contradictory ideas cannot 'respect' each other. And those contradictions must be highlighted. Yet, as much as possible, it seems better to leave the conflict of ideas within the realm of ideas.

I myself find it hard to follow that advice. Personalizing issues is often too powerful, seductively powerful an alternative - quick and easy.

Re: # 127

tahir ji,

"Are these your original thoughts? "

These are thoughts based upon my person experiences and sadhanas. I have met so many ascetics, sadhus, scholars of religious texts (shastras) that I know for sure when I see a "path bhrasht" sadhaka.
What Mohammad experienced in his sadhana days is nothing new but can be experienced by sadhakas even today.
I know may sadhakas who turned opposite of what they were practicing- their sadhana was annihilating their ego gradually and that is actually the scariest of all the prospects in sadhana.
When Mohammad just reached the stage of complete annihilation he abandoned his sadhana.
He became path-brahsht and became veiled by the "meem" - one of the stages of veiling in Jain thought is called "tirthankar-gotra-bandh" - the desire to be a prophet. And he fell down the path and became the monster that he became later.
Mohammad was the fallen sadhaka- there is no doubt about it!!

laddu,

..... you can be my friend ..... i am not very picky

I left because I have work related committments; also, there seems to be a lot of "circular reasoning" going on. This way the ideas can't progress but remain static with the illusion of progression; that has been the hallmark of muslim culture throughout history, even during the so-called "golden age". There was clear camps of those trying to justify ancient Greek philosophies and amalgamating it with Quranic thought (Ghazzali vs Ibn-e-Rush - Incoherence of philosophers vs incoherence of incoherence, respectively - is only one prominent example).

The expanse and rapidity of expansion of an empire does not imply any truth, if there happens to be a message behind it. The Roman Empire was pretty huge but I don't condone some of the barbarity associated with it. However, there has been a lot of good that came out of it as well. Same goes for the rapidity of expansion of the British Empire; it covered a major part of the planet at one point and the areas it didn't directly control, it had a great influence on indirectly. The "imperialistic" ambitions have changed in recent times and the current "Americanism" is no different, but in this empire the influences are exerted indirectly via proxies. What does it actually mean; should we all succumb that an "empire/message" is so rapidly expanding so it must be true; doesn't mean a thing! We can dissect out individual elements of this "early muslim empire" region by region, but I am sure you have an analytical enough mind to read independently.

I have tried to stay out of personal attacks as it generates a reaction and distorts the individual's response somewhat; you can say it has the capacity to radicalise views at times. Eklavya, surely Laddu wasn't there with Mohammed so he can't be "absolutely certain" what was going through his mind with regards to his "ascetic" experiences; with all due respect, nor were you, so why are you so confident about its verasity. Just based on what Mohammed and his immediate followers wrote? How does that make it reliable? We are back to "circular reasoning" again!

Laddu, I agree with your concept of asceticism in the sense that it is something achievable, BUT, it has been biologically shown that a person, through meditation/concentration etc., can release , subconsciously of course, chemicals in one's brain that allows one to have "out-of-the-world" experiences. However, these are generated by the organism itself and are not, I repeat not, an indication of an outer "persona", be it god/allah/brahma etc. The very essence of true Sufis was this "clarity"; god lives in the heart is exactly that, I am sorry to disappoint anyone! It is nothing but a "figment" of one's own mind. I am also impressed with your knowledge base on these matters, especially the distinction between the "darbari" sufis and "true" ascetics. The very fact that these experiences have been across the board, well represented amongst people from Hindu (Sadhu), Muslim (Sufi-the"true variety"!), Christian (Eastern Mysticism), Jews (Kabbala), Buddhists (Gautam himself - who was an atheist by definition!) and many others, is a testament to their universality; and that is where we sould leave it.

As far as contradictions are concerned, there are plenty in Koranic/Hadith literature, otherwise there won't be all these "interpretaions" and "sects" etc; like I said in my very first entry (#49), they can't all be true! Question is, is any one of them true!? There is an ingrown, through millions of years of evolution, sense of right and wrong in all of us. This existed before Mohammed (just to quote an example, feel free to substitute Buddha, Jesus or someone else), and it has existed since. When early muslims came across the thoughts of ancient Greeks, they were as perplexed as everyone now seems to be. There were debates, writings, philosophical discussions, incorporations of it into Islam or outright rejections. This is what made this "golden age" possible. It was about nurturing the "anlytical" faculties of the human mind - it wasn't all plain sailing for the scholars of the time, as sometimes is implied by a lot of Muslims! It had nothing to do with the "expanse of the empire"; however, having the upper hand provided some security for this as "new (?) ideas" often don't just occur if one is starving bloody hungry!!

Coming back to contradictions; contradictions are there in every single human mind that exists and functions at an average human level. It is a fact of life! It is what distinguishes humans from other great apes, and the rest of the animal kingdom at large. Otherwise, why would one think about anything?! We would just nurture our basic "animal" needs and muddle through life like any other organism. As for the "originality" of any thought, thoughts "evolve" are don't just "occur" on the spot! To quote an example, when we have the next generation of computers, the next generation is built upon the blueprint of the former; they don't start from scratch everytime.

I know I have gone on for a bit but before anyone writes impulsive responses, just read it all first; nothing worse than repetition I am afraid. I would like to, intermittently, participate if I can. I tend to be very busy at work, like I mentioned before, so please pardon my periodic absences, especially if there happens to be a question addressed directly towards what I said.

Re: # 111

tahir,

I am not just chasing aussie dollar but also have time to look at my religion more closely and critically...something not allowed or cannot be afforded in pakiland.... how would you justify the verses that call for "beating" wives if they do not obey... and why is the Quran so misogynist... with the visualisation of heaven more as an Arab fantasy with "flowing rivers of honey" and houris.!!! now this is something i did not realise earlier.... some non muslim friends pointed these things out and frankly i am not satisfied with the replies to these issues given by muslim ulema.....

#134 TK: Here is how you look at it. Everything is relative. The Quranic message is relative to 7th century AD. So relative to things in the 7th century AD where does the Quran stand?

1. on women rights - pushes for their property rights. rights not received by women in the west until the 19th century (per Karen Armstrong). Conclusion: muslims should follow the Quran and push for equal rights for women, not just better rights than 7th century.

2. on individual rights - the Quran makes the individual personally responsible to God on matters of religion. Not to other individuals. Thus, it rejected priesthoods of the 7th century. Conclusion - if individuals were not considered to need priests for er.."guidance"..in the 7th century, they certainly dont need them today!!

and so on.

hmmm....this seems to have become a society of self congratulators.

It seems the debate is between "islam sucks" and "islam and sufism suck" and "sufism sucks".

Fantastic.

Why don't you all give each other a hand ;)

Re: # 132

yes, I am indeed indebted to have you as a friend.

Re: # 133

"Laddu, I agree with your concept of asceticism in the sense that it is something achievable, BUT, it has been biologically shown that a person, through meditation/concentration etc., can release , subconsciously of course, chemicals in one's brain that allows one to have "out-of-the-world" experiences."

Yes, there is a physical and verifiable aspect to it. Mohammad did sadhana that altered his physical self - his sweat became sweet smelling and his face had a glow - these are all normal consequences of sadhana done by ascetics which he gained in his 40 days sadhana - but he immediately fell down from the path of annihilation. In fact sufis reached that path of fanaa /annihilation that Mohammad could not reach.

That is why sufis are spiritually superior in every aspect. The sufi's mullah-arse-licking was basically to avoid getting lynched publically and avoid getting into un-necessary conflict with the powerful ulemas who define political Islam. The non-darbari Sufis avoided political Islam and merely paid lip service to Sunnat and all that is there in political Islam and wrote subtly veiled verses that actually belittled Mohammad but praised Allah.

The veiling of "meem" with respect to Mohammad is that piece of subtle kufr regarding Mohammad that sufis indulged in - almost a reverse taquiyya. It was this apostatic kufr poetry that also aimed at diluting the agenda of political Islam and take Islam towards spirituality. Pakistanis are now re-looking into sufi version of Islam to reclaim their "Islamic" identity. But for that they would have to accept the fact that sufis were superior to Mohammad and the path to Allah can only be achieved by jettisoning Mohammad and his political path.

Re: # 133

akcheema mian,

.... you are a darn good writer, you have clarity of thought and purpose, you obviously have a meaningful and well paying job (and probably use utensils to eat your dinner)and you seem to be a decent person .... so what the heck are you doing here wasting your time with ne'erdowells like us ? ...... you are welcome to stay, but i suggest you move on before we drag you down to our level ......

#133 Posted by akcheema,

Abey tu phir aa gaya?

Listen wise guy, the only reason why you can't sleep with your sister or mother is because religion says so. No other reason. Got it?

If you want to argue about this, ask the chief-apostate of Chowk named Dr. Sohail who's ass is still smarting from the thrashing he got.

Now if you really want to prove your credentials, do either (or both) of the above and let us know the logic derived from the experience(s). If you don't, you're just a hypocrite upstart like dozens on these pages.

Re: # 140

Zeemax

.....Listen wise guy, the only reason why you can't sleep with your sister or mother is because religion says so. No other reason. Got it?.....

-----------------------------------------
I admire your "shock treatment" to all at Chowk!!

Now that adds a good kick (literally!!) to the arguments on religion..

How about pondering over the possibility that we are "instinctively programmed" not to indulge in incest?? what would you say to that?.... I have not come across any news or research pointing to the rise of incest in communist countries, especially Russia. Have you?

Now please dont think that i am an apostate... not yet..... but I am doing some "free thinking" and reading..... putting to test the things which were hitherto "given" and taken for granted...

laddu,
i'm afraid your postfactum analyses are completely wrong!
The Messenger IS the fount of spirituality from which the Sufis derive their own elevated states. He was drowned in the Ocean of Divine Oneness. All other Messengers and Saints recieve their portions of spirituality from Sayyidina Muhammad who alone is the one who is totally Fana Fillah: Anniihilated in Allah. His position in the spiritual heirarchy is unique, only below Allah Himself.

That is why he said: "He who has seen me has seen al-Haqq".
sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam!

Re: # 142

MECCA Versus MEDINA Verses- How Mohammad fell from the PAth

"He was drowned in the Ocean of Divine Oneness."

For an enlightened one drowned in the ocean of divine oneness - hatred towards idolators,kafirs or any one not agreeing with you would automatically disappear and "samata" or "oneness of thought" would automatically set in.

Mohammad's "Bhrasta Sadhana" (falleness from the path) is clearly evident from his actions when he migrated from medina because nobody was ready to accept his "superiority" as a prophet.
That ego defining moment of Mohammad led him to his falleness from the path. Now , no revelations were coming because his ego had made him think that he is the chosen one and the prophet and all human beings must follow him.

His ego turned him into a narcissist and there when no revelations came to him he became angry - HE CONTRIVED ALL OF THE "MECCA VERSES" IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY HIS EGO MANIACAL SATANIC VIOLENT ACTIONS OF RAPE, LOOT, BANDITRY AND MURDER.
That is the truth about that fallen man. He was just a man who for a brief moment connected to the devine only to re-ify his ego as the divine later when he strayed from the path.

That is why sufis say - take away the "Meem"/maya from mohammad - i.e. take away the later verses- and you get the path to Allah.

Re No: 140

The reason is in evolution and genetics. Look around you matey! I take it you are from Pakistan; so am I. I am sure either you yourself or someone close to you is married and has had kids with a first cousin! How much of a difference is there exactly? Studies from Birmingham, England have indicated a 12 times rise of ceratin genetic disorders amongst people from Pakistani heritage; the reason is "commonality" of genetic pool with the same variations and mutations propagated through generations. By the way, more than 90% of the population in question practices con-sanguinity; for you that means first cousin marriages.

The reason these things are not obvious in Pakistan is that such offsprings either die at birth or, through "natural selection" get taken care of during early childhood. How many times do we see people, including young/newborn children and stillbirths etc that get put down to "allah di marzi" and swept under the carpet!

This is the reason we are "programmed" not to commit incest. Clear enough!

By the way, I also don't rape, kill, mame, steal, commit fraud and intentionally hurt someone else's feelings. This is what my conscience tells me; the same conscience that has developed and perfected over millions of years of evolution through natural selection. In olden, tribalistic, early human living (probably even in the times of Austrelopithicus), if you were to do something injurious to someone else, surely the repurcussions were severe. So the early humans learnt very quickly what was "right" and "wrong". This is where the "Golden Rule" comes from: "DONOT DO TO SOMEONE YOU WOULDN'T WANT DONE TO YOURSELF".

Surprisingly, this lynch mob mentality has had a resurgence within the Islamic world - right from the early days I might add!

Now if you have something productive to contribute, I'd be happy to listen. I don't like wasting my time otherwise.