Hazrat Sarmad Shaheed: The Naked Sufi Martyr
Asif Naqshbandi July 13, 2005
#55 Posted by sattar2 on July 14, 2005 1:35:34 pm
Naqshbandi,
Ahmadi-Muslims believe that Allah Almighty operates the universe within the laws He Himself created. If Allah ends up violating His own laws, it would indicate lack of farsightedness on His part.
In my view, miracles, as you describe them, are not supported by Quran … they are a figment of overactive imagination and misinterpretation of its verses. We believe that power and authority Allah supersedes science … no question about it. However, Allah has the power to bring about the desired results while operating within the confines of the laws He created.
For example, if you think that Allah could only rescue Jesus (pbuh) from crucifixion ... by violating laws He Himself created ... that`s a limitation you place on Him. I believe that Allah saved Jesus (pbuh) from crucifixion without having to violate any of His laws. This view complements Allah`s farsightedness, wisdom, and power ... and is consistent with teachings of Quran.
Furthermore, in Quran (towards end of Surah-e-Israel) Allah commands Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) ... that if disbelievers demand physical miracles from you, tell them ... ``I am but a human, sent as a messenger``. If your view is correct, Quran would have instructed the dear Prophet (pbuh) to tell disbelievers ... to ask for physical miracles from Allah as a sign.
Got it, little genius???
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#54 Posted by khamkhwa. on July 14, 2005 1:32:26 pm
Re: # 51
..so when this particular prophet comes down to earth the khatimun nabi theory would be like the TNT post bangladesh...;)
vaise naqshbandi saheb very conviniently forgot to tackle surah 12 verses 23-29 about zulekha seeing allah in yusuf...:(
..so when this particular prophet comes down to earth the khatimun nabi theory would be like the TNT post bangladesh...;)
vaise naqshbandi saheb very conviniently forgot to tackle surah 12 verses 23-29 about zulekha seeing allah in yusuf...:(
#53 Posted by Naqshbandi on July 14, 2005 1:31:07 pm
sufism and sainthood [wilaya] ARE NOT INVENTED
33 - The la-madhhabi author does not accept believing in tasawwuf. He says,
``There were no madhhabs during the time of as-Sahaba. They were made up later. And tasawwuf was introduced into Islam by Jews.``
These slanderous lies are refuted best by the following passage from the Persian book Irshad at-talibin by Muhammad Thana`ullah al-`Osmani ad-Dahlawi, a great alim from India [of the past]:
33 - The la-madhhabi author does not accept believing in tasawwuf. He says,
``There were no madhhabs during the time of as-Sahaba. They were made up later. And tasawwuf was introduced into Islam by Jews.``
These slanderous lies are refuted best by the following passage from the Persian book Irshad at-talibin by Muhammad Thana`ullah al-`Osmani ad-Dahlawi, a great alim from India [of the past]:
#52 Posted by Naqshbandi on July 14, 2005 1:18:37 pm
Islam came to teach people good character – about anger
Islam came to teach people good character. It fights against bad characters, and the worst character is to be angry! Whoever is angry has all bad character. He who cannot stop his anger cannot keep his Iman, nor his good works. Anger destroys all good things; nothing can stay when anger is present. Therefore, our Prophet (peace be upon him) ordered his nation to keep away from anger when he said, “`The most powerful wrestler is he who can stop his anger!”
Whoever is conquered by his anger, he is a useless person and cannot be a servant of Allah Almighty. This is because when he is angry, he will leave all things for his anger. It means that his ego is ordering him. He is under the command of his ego, and he cannot obey his Lord.
We must always practice leaving anger. Once, we were sitting with our Grandshaykh and his servant, who was an old man. While we were sitting, a fly came up and bit the servant. Quickly he became angry and killed the fly. Our Grandshaykh looked at him and told me, “Tell him, Nazim Effendi, that he must get up and renew his wudu. His wudu is no good – it went away with his anger.``
To kill a flea in anger is a criminal action, a sin! Anger is the worst character. All governments are fighting for anger, and all people also. Anger grows: it is like an ocean for all bad characters. If you can dry up that ocean, no more bad characters can live in it – finished. This is a very, very good manner. You must use this, for it is the order of Allah, His Prophet (peace be upon him), and all Awliya.
Our Grandshaykh is a great doctor for the illnesses of the ego. Here is his prescription for us when we are angry: If you are angry, go and make wudu. This is because anger is fire, and fire goes away with water. Therefore, do wudu. Anger is permitted only for our egos. If you must be angry, be angry at your nafs, leading you away from your Lord! I shall tell you a story, also from our Grandshaykh, on that point:
A `majdhub` is a man who is crazy, but not in the usual sense of the word. He is a man who is `crazy` for Allah. He is above ordinary people, on a different level from them. (Conversely, a `majnun` is a crazy person, in the usual sense of the word; he is on a lower level than ordinary people.) At any rate, there was a majdhub living in a certain town. One day he was walking along when he came upon a group of children playing. Now, children know when a man is on an extraordinary level. They like to run after them and make trouble for them. And so it happened that a boy threw a stone at the majdhub, and hit him on the head. As soon as the stone hit him, the majdhub began to slap himself, saying, “Go to your homeland! Go to your home!” As the startled children watched, the majdhub continued down the street in that way, striking himself and saying, over an over, “Go to your home! Go to your home!``
What is the meaning of that story? Our Grandshaykh says that the majdhub was teaching us about our egos. When he said “Go to your home, go to your home!``, what he meant by that was: ``O, my ego! If you were all right, then these children wouldn`t be throwing stones at you. You must return to your home, to the promise that you made to your Lord. On the Day of Promise, before you came into this world, your Lord asked, `Am I your Lord?` and you answered, `Yes, you are my Lord!` When you return to that promise, nothing gives you trouble. When that boy hit you with that stone, O, my ego, it was to call attention to the fact that you must be careful with your promise to your Lord. You must, therefore, go to you homeland, return to your Lord!”
This story means that you have no right to be angry with another person. You must turn your anger to your own egos! You must think, ``If I am all right, then all things will be all right with me. If I am not all right, then people will not be all right with me.`` So, we will be angry and fighting our egos only.
“Anger is of two kinds,” says our Grandshaykh. “The first kind is the anger of ordinary people. Ordinary people are angry on behalf of their egos, not for Allah Almighty:
``You may say, `How? If a man sees a wrong thing, mustn`t he get angry?` Yes, I agree with you. But first, I would say to you, why are you not angry with yourself, your nafs? If you are seeing wrong things and getting angry, you should look first to yourself, to your ego! Be angry with it! Punish it for your wrongdoings! For bad speaking, for looking to haram; why are you not punishing yourself? It is easy to punish another, too easy. It is easy to kill others; kill, instead, your ego!
``When you are angry make a new wudu, and say three times `Shahada,` and seventy times` Astaghfirullah.` This is your punishment!``
Here, the murids, anxious to punish their egos, asked Shaykh Nazim these questions:
„Is it all right to fast on the light days of the week?``
``No,`` replied the Shaykh, ``no need. It is enough.``
„But we`ve been fasting, already. Every Monday and Thursday since Ramadan,`` a disciple insisted.
``No need,`` replied the Shaykh. ``You may fast from haram looking. You may fast from anger. You may fast from bad words! Not eating or drinking - that fast I don`t want. It is too easy to go without eating. I don`t want that. No bad speaking, no bad looking, no anger; that is difficult. So many people fasting, yet they are angry seventy times until maghrib! They say, `We are fasting!` How can you be fasting if you are angry!``
„I’d say that that describes most of my fasts!``
``Ah?`` smiled the Shaykh. ``It is clear, plain?” He turned to the other murids, and joked, ``Now he is afraid I shall put him three days without eating!”
Maulana continued: ``The second kind of anger is for Allah Almighty. This is only for those who have killed their egos.``
„I don’t think that we have to worry about that, yet,`` said one of the ikhwan.
``Yes,`` replied the Shaykh, ``we are too far from that!``
Another brother asked, ``What do you do about children who misbehave? Sometimes they can make you get very angry.``
Shaykh Nazim said, ``You may give them `tarbiya,` which is to educate them with good manners. Also, `taqlib`; to make them fear your speaking. It is like acting; a fierce voice, but inside you are not getting angry. You may also spank them, but never in anger. Anger is prohibited!``
Another question: ``If you are in Jihad, if you are at war, is it also better to fight without anger?``
The Shaykh answered, ``Without anger.`` This brought him back to his original topic: ``Anger is for Allah. It must be in Jihad, in war, but that anger is not for yourself: It is for Allah. Our Grandshaykh told the story of Sayyidina Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), which may educate us on that point:
``Once, during the Holy war in the time of Rasul-ullah (peace be upon him), Sayyidina Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was fighting with an enemy soldier during a fierce battle. This soldier was a huge man, a powerful wrestler, and it was a difficult fight. Suddenly, Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) managed to disarm his opponent. He flung him to the ground and raised his sword to kill the man. Just at that moment, as the sword was about to strike, the fallen soldier spat into Sayyidina Ali`s face! Sayyidina Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) lowered his sword, and looked at his enemy. `Get up!` he said. `Get up! I cannot kill you!` The enemy soldier was dumbfounded. `Why are you not killing me, Ali?` he asked. `Why are you leaving me like this? Am I not your enemy?` Sayyidina Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) spoke: `It is because I became filled with my ego`s anger that I cannot kill you! Before you spat in my face, I was fighting with you for the sake of Allah. But, when you spat on me, I became angry for the sake of my ego! Therefore, I cannot kill you! You may go.`
These words reached the fallen man`s heart. `O, Ali!` he cried, `You are on the right way! Please take me to your Prophet (peace be upon him)!` Then, the soldier was taken to Rasul-ullah (peace be upon him), and, at the Prophet`s hand, he entered Islam.``
``Therefore,`` said Shaykh Nazim, ``if your anger is like this, if you are like Sayyidina Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), then you, too, may be angry. If your character is not like that, you must keep it to yourself!``
Mercy Oceans
© by Sheikh Nazim Al-Qubrusi Al-Haqqani
= =
Islam came to teach people good character. It fights against bad characters, and the worst character is to be angry! Whoever is angry has all bad character. He who cannot stop his anger cannot keep his Iman, nor his good works. Anger destroys all good things; nothing can stay when anger is present. Therefore, our Prophet (peace be upon him) ordered his nation to keep away from anger when he said, “`The most powerful wrestler is he who can stop his anger!”
Whoever is conquered by his anger, he is a useless person and cannot be a servant of Allah Almighty. This is because when he is angry, he will leave all things for his anger. It means that his ego is ordering him. He is under the command of his ego, and he cannot obey his Lord.
We must always practice leaving anger. Once, we were sitting with our Grandshaykh and his servant, who was an old man. While we were sitting, a fly came up and bit the servant. Quickly he became angry and killed the fly. Our Grandshaykh looked at him and told me, “Tell him, Nazim Effendi, that he must get up and renew his wudu. His wudu is no good – it went away with his anger.``
To kill a flea in anger is a criminal action, a sin! Anger is the worst character. All governments are fighting for anger, and all people also. Anger grows: it is like an ocean for all bad characters. If you can dry up that ocean, no more bad characters can live in it – finished. This is a very, very good manner. You must use this, for it is the order of Allah, His Prophet (peace be upon him), and all Awliya.
Our Grandshaykh is a great doctor for the illnesses of the ego. Here is his prescription for us when we are angry: If you are angry, go and make wudu. This is because anger is fire, and fire goes away with water. Therefore, do wudu. Anger is permitted only for our egos. If you must be angry, be angry at your nafs, leading you away from your Lord! I shall tell you a story, also from our Grandshaykh, on that point:
A `majdhub` is a man who is crazy, but not in the usual sense of the word. He is a man who is `crazy` for Allah. He is above ordinary people, on a different level from them. (Conversely, a `majnun` is a crazy person, in the usual sense of the word; he is on a lower level than ordinary people.) At any rate, there was a majdhub living in a certain town. One day he was walking along when he came upon a group of children playing. Now, children know when a man is on an extraordinary level. They like to run after them and make trouble for them. And so it happened that a boy threw a stone at the majdhub, and hit him on the head. As soon as the stone hit him, the majdhub began to slap himself, saying, “Go to your homeland! Go to your home!” As the startled children watched, the majdhub continued down the street in that way, striking himself and saying, over an over, “Go to your home! Go to your home!``
What is the meaning of that story? Our Grandshaykh says that the majdhub was teaching us about our egos. When he said “Go to your home, go to your home!``, what he meant by that was: ``O, my ego! If you were all right, then these children wouldn`t be throwing stones at you. You must return to your home, to the promise that you made to your Lord. On the Day of Promise, before you came into this world, your Lord asked, `Am I your Lord?` and you answered, `Yes, you are my Lord!` When you return to that promise, nothing gives you trouble. When that boy hit you with that stone, O, my ego, it was to call attention to the fact that you must be careful with your promise to your Lord. You must, therefore, go to you homeland, return to your Lord!”
This story means that you have no right to be angry with another person. You must turn your anger to your own egos! You must think, ``If I am all right, then all things will be all right with me. If I am not all right, then people will not be all right with me.`` So, we will be angry and fighting our egos only.
“Anger is of two kinds,” says our Grandshaykh. “The first kind is the anger of ordinary people. Ordinary people are angry on behalf of their egos, not for Allah Almighty:
``You may say, `How? If a man sees a wrong thing, mustn`t he get angry?` Yes, I agree with you. But first, I would say to you, why are you not angry with yourself, your nafs? If you are seeing wrong things and getting angry, you should look first to yourself, to your ego! Be angry with it! Punish it for your wrongdoings! For bad speaking, for looking to haram; why are you not punishing yourself? It is easy to punish another, too easy. It is easy to kill others; kill, instead, your ego!
``When you are angry make a new wudu, and say three times `Shahada,` and seventy times` Astaghfirullah.` This is your punishment!``
Here, the murids, anxious to punish their egos, asked Shaykh Nazim these questions:
„Is it all right to fast on the light days of the week?``
``No,`` replied the Shaykh, ``no need. It is enough.``
„But we`ve been fasting, already. Every Monday and Thursday since Ramadan,`` a disciple insisted.
``No need,`` replied the Shaykh. ``You may fast from haram looking. You may fast from anger. You may fast from bad words! Not eating or drinking - that fast I don`t want. It is too easy to go without eating. I don`t want that. No bad speaking, no bad looking, no anger; that is difficult. So many people fasting, yet they are angry seventy times until maghrib! They say, `We are fasting!` How can you be fasting if you are angry!``
„I’d say that that describes most of my fasts!``
``Ah?`` smiled the Shaykh. ``It is clear, plain?” He turned to the other murids, and joked, ``Now he is afraid I shall put him three days without eating!”
Maulana continued: ``The second kind of anger is for Allah Almighty. This is only for those who have killed their egos.``
„I don’t think that we have to worry about that, yet,`` said one of the ikhwan.
``Yes,`` replied the Shaykh, ``we are too far from that!``
Another brother asked, ``What do you do about children who misbehave? Sometimes they can make you get very angry.``
Shaykh Nazim said, ``You may give them `tarbiya,` which is to educate them with good manners. Also, `taqlib`; to make them fear your speaking. It is like acting; a fierce voice, but inside you are not getting angry. You may also spank them, but never in anger. Anger is prohibited!``
Another question: ``If you are in Jihad, if you are at war, is it also better to fight without anger?``
The Shaykh answered, ``Without anger.`` This brought him back to his original topic: ``Anger is for Allah. It must be in Jihad, in war, but that anger is not for yourself: It is for Allah. Our Grandshaykh told the story of Sayyidina Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), which may educate us on that point:
``Once, during the Holy war in the time of Rasul-ullah (peace be upon him), Sayyidina Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was fighting with an enemy soldier during a fierce battle. This soldier was a huge man, a powerful wrestler, and it was a difficult fight. Suddenly, Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) managed to disarm his opponent. He flung him to the ground and raised his sword to kill the man. Just at that moment, as the sword was about to strike, the fallen soldier spat into Sayyidina Ali`s face! Sayyidina Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) lowered his sword, and looked at his enemy. `Get up!` he said. `Get up! I cannot kill you!` The enemy soldier was dumbfounded. `Why are you not killing me, Ali?` he asked. `Why are you leaving me like this? Am I not your enemy?` Sayyidina Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) spoke: `It is because I became filled with my ego`s anger that I cannot kill you! Before you spat in my face, I was fighting with you for the sake of Allah. But, when you spat on me, I became angry for the sake of my ego! Therefore, I cannot kill you! You may go.`
These words reached the fallen man`s heart. `O, Ali!` he cried, `You are on the right way! Please take me to your Prophet (peace be upon him)!` Then, the soldier was taken to Rasul-ullah (peace be upon him), and, at the Prophet`s hand, he entered Islam.``
``Therefore,`` said Shaykh Nazim, ``if your anger is like this, if you are like Sayyidina Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), then you, too, may be angry. If your character is not like that, you must keep it to yourself!``
Mercy Oceans
© by Sheikh Nazim Al-Qubrusi Al-Haqqani
= =
#51 Posted by sattar2 on July 14, 2005 1:13:46 pm
Urstruly,
Words of the Prophet (pbuh) should be translated correctly … before you interpret them. Otherwise you’ll also continue to wait for a dead prophet to reappear from above the clouds. Which reminds me … if this prophet does appear from above the clouds, will he continue to receive revelation from God, or would he be a prophet without more revelation???
On this issue, the hadith you partially quoted to support your views, proved the exact opposite when fully quoted. What does this tell you …?
Finally, Quran fully supports continuation of prophethood and revelation. I alluded to it in post #45 … but if you ignore Quran also, whose fault is it …??
#50 Posted by Naqshbandi on July 14, 2005 1:03:34 pm
Re: # 46
What has science got to do with it?! Science`s limit is the physical world and that`s it; as a former scientist i can say that with some personal authority. With science you cannot prove that God exists or that angels or jinn exist or that dead men can be raised again; yet the Qur`an tells us all these things happened and exist and are real! Belief means to believe in Allah`s Word and His Habib`s even *if* it goes against our daily experiences. After all that is what a miracle is by definition. (Then again kafirs like the Qadianis limit Allah to only what other kafir scientists deem possible or impossible!)
*****
Urstruly: sadly you have misunderstood what bida`h means. NOT every new thing in the religion is a bad bida`h. The traditional Sunni ulama have divided bida`h into different categories: haram, makruh, mandub, wajib. For example, having the Qur`an in book form with the `irab is a bida` as it was not existant in this form in the time of Our Beloved Habib sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam yet it is now considered necessary [wajib] to enable people =even Arabs=to read the Qur`an correctly. Similarly many things existed in the time of the Prophet and the Sahaba but which didn`t have the names which we have given them e.g. fiqh, usul al fiqh, bayan, mantaq, etc. all these islamic ulum weren`t known then. Will you get rid of them all?!
Similarly some Sahaba experienced spiritual states which correspond to the names given by Sufis afterwards. A prominent example is Hazrat Owais Qarni, a Tabi`, who pulled out his teeth one by one when he heard that one of the Prophet`s blessed teeth had been martyred in Uhud. What is such an act except extreme love, annihilation in the Prophet?! Majzub! The Prophet also explicitly mentioned people who would have torn clothes and be covered in dust and the wordly people would despise them but they would be the Saints of Allah....
What has science got to do with it?! Science`s limit is the physical world and that`s it; as a former scientist i can say that with some personal authority. With science you cannot prove that God exists or that angels or jinn exist or that dead men can be raised again; yet the Qur`an tells us all these things happened and exist and are real! Belief means to believe in Allah`s Word and His Habib`s even *if* it goes against our daily experiences. After all that is what a miracle is by definition. (Then again kafirs like the Qadianis limit Allah to only what other kafir scientists deem possible or impossible!)
*****
Urstruly: sadly you have misunderstood what bida`h means. NOT every new thing in the religion is a bad bida`h. The traditional Sunni ulama have divided bida`h into different categories: haram, makruh, mandub, wajib. For example, having the Qur`an in book form with the `irab is a bida` as it was not existant in this form in the time of Our Beloved Habib sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam yet it is now considered necessary [wajib] to enable people =even Arabs=to read the Qur`an correctly. Similarly many things existed in the time of the Prophet and the Sahaba but which didn`t have the names which we have given them e.g. fiqh, usul al fiqh, bayan, mantaq, etc. all these islamic ulum weren`t known then. Will you get rid of them all?!
Similarly some Sahaba experienced spiritual states which correspond to the names given by Sufis afterwards. A prominent example is Hazrat Owais Qarni, a Tabi`, who pulled out his teeth one by one when he heard that one of the Prophet`s blessed teeth had been martyred in Uhud. What is such an act except extreme love, annihilation in the Prophet?! Majzub! The Prophet also explicitly mentioned people who would have torn clothes and be covered in dust and the wordly people would despise them but they would be the Saints of Allah....
#49 Posted by Urstruly on July 14, 2005 12:48:44 pm
Re: # 43 t
The word of prophet (pbuh) has precedence over the word of any sir, iqbal, or mirza; I don`t care what one says in this regard; as long as it is contradictory to Qura`nic verses on this issue and 450+ ahadiths, that explain the issue of the finalty of revelations in every which way possible, it is meaningless.
The word of prophet (pbuh) has precedence over the word of any sir, iqbal, or mirza; I don`t care what one says in this regard; as long as it is contradictory to Qura`nic verses on this issue and 450+ ahadiths, that explain the issue of the finalty of revelations in every which way possible, it is meaningless.
#48 Posted by cayenne on July 14, 2005 12:38:55 pm
Well, this bizarre man got domiciled in India and he`s one of us now.May he continue to rest in peace.Is that a photo of his resting place?.I will visit next time i travel to Delhi.The Jama Masjid area has some of the best mughlai food restaurants and eating places in the subcontinent.When i get tired or work, family, watching porn, chat and other deviations i travel, sometimes physically, sometimes through this medium.I offer you glimpses of India.......
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=232766
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=219896
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=228441
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=212621
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=4754408#post4754408
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=228887
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=232766
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=219896
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=228441
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=212621
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=4754408#post4754408
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=228887
#47 Posted by sattar2 on July 14, 2005 12:32:17 pm
temporal … you raised a telling point about Iqbal’s views on revelation ...
From what I know, Iqbal did accept that a person may reach prophethood … but only at a personal level, that is, without the mission of reformation of others. It is not surprising that he accepted continuation of revelation … even if only at a personal level.
Try explaining this to Urstruly ... who seems to have slammed shut this door for good. But then again, who is Iqbal but a crazy poet, who was declared a kaffir by ullema for writing ``shikwah`` ... go figure ...
Every abdul, tauheed, naqshbandi, urstruly has a different take on this issue … as he goes on, with supreme confidence, to declare those in disagreement as non-Muslims. That’s part of ummah`s travesty ... all are too busy passing fatwas of kuffr against everyone else. Naked fakirs at times make more sense than these goons … which explains why ullema are all too anxious to do them in … at times in a king’s court … (some parallels alluded to are intentional, I admit … ).
… but the stories of dead men talking is a whole another issue ...
#46 Posted by khamkhwa. on July 14, 2005 11:46:53 am
naqshbandi...
the fact that he recited it fully after his execution is a charismatic miracle which proves he was a true muslim.
... scientifically dead men do not talk...any proof to the contrary would be welcome.
ishq e majaazi is often a bridge towards ishq i haqiqi
....majazi and haqiqi is nothing but poetic nonsense...and that too with the same sex...la hawla wala
like Zuleykha saw God manifested in Yusuf alayhisalam
...zulekha saws God in Yusuf?? if this aint shirk, don`t know what is... refer surah 12 verses 23 to 29 and you will see your fatal error in above statement.
the fact that he recited it fully after his execution is a charismatic miracle which proves he was a true muslim.
... scientifically dead men do not talk...any proof to the contrary would be welcome.
ishq e majaazi is often a bridge towards ishq i haqiqi
....majazi and haqiqi is nothing but poetic nonsense...and that too with the same sex...la hawla wala
like Zuleykha saw God manifested in Yusuf alayhisalam
...zulekha saws God in Yusuf?? if this aint shirk, don`t know what is... refer surah 12 verses 23 to 29 and you will see your fatal error in above statement.
#45 Posted by sattar2 on July 14, 2005 11:10:12 am
t … I guess I have become way too predictable …
Urstruly (#41), not correct!
“Core Islamic belief” that chain of revelation has ended is baseless and incorrect. In the very beginning of chapter 2 (Surah-e-Baqraa), Quran makes it clear that revelation for believers is to continue. Do read the first few verses and feel free to inquire as needed. I’d be happy to oblige.
And your reference to end of revelation as “simplification of relationship between man and God” … suggests that this relationship is so very cumbersome, that the only way to handle it for God is to end it. Sorry, I am not buying it.
Furthermore, Quran tells us that Allah sends revelation to even a honey bee (in Surah-e-Nahl). One wonders, that if a tiny insect is worthy of divine revelation, why not man - the highest form of God’s creation???
Philosophically you are not making any sense. Although, you do have a point that Naqshbandi is viewing the naked fakir with lenses of blind, questionable faith. Not that I have any particular problem with it … however, it does highlight some inconsistencies in his views, which he remains blind to, while adopting somewhat of a disturbing attitude towards those who view things differently.
And after all is said and done, consistency and sincerity is one’s reasoning are virtues worth striving for. If one loses this, how can he tell God from Satan???
#44 Posted by cayenne on July 14, 2005 11:00:21 am
Re: # 35
I would like to visit.We have our share of the bizarre.The difference being, we bare it all.Our bizarre coexists with the prim, the proper and the accountant.In Pak i see a desperate attempt to be proper, but a secret desire to be bizarre!!.
I would like to visit.We have our share of the bizarre.The difference being, we bare it all.Our bizarre coexists with the prim, the proper and the accountant.In Pak i see a desperate attempt to be proper, but a secret desire to be bizarre!!.
#43 Posted by temporal on July 14, 2005 10:48:56 am
Urstruly 42:
I was too busy to interact at the appropriate boards... since Anglo-American terrorists and others disgust me equally.
this is why your sudden emergence and vehemence surprised me!
#41 is a good post except this:This issue is core to the Islamic belief system of which the integral part is the belief that the chain of ``revelations`` has ended with the Holy Prophet (pbuh), so after him if any `holy man` claims to have a direct contact with God is a either a charlatan or have some sort of mental disorder.
you must be aware of sir iqbal`s reply to his mentor and teacher nicholson to the query re: revelations?
rgds
t
ps: have a hunch very shortly sattar2 would come here and educate you on the different modes God employs in communicating with us temporals, mortals, poets and prophets
I was too busy to interact at the appropriate boards... since Anglo-American terrorists and others disgust me equally.
this is why your sudden emergence and vehemence surprised me!
#41 is a good post except this:This issue is core to the Islamic belief system of which the integral part is the belief that the chain of ``revelations`` has ended with the Holy Prophet (pbuh), so after him if any `holy man` claims to have a direct contact with God is a either a charlatan or have some sort of mental disorder.
you must be aware of sir iqbal`s reply to his mentor and teacher nicholson to the query re: revelations?
rgds
t
ps: have a hunch very shortly sattar2 would come here and educate you on the different modes God employs in communicating with us temporals, mortals, poets and prophets
#42 Posted by Urstruly on July 14, 2005 10:06:16 am
temporal
I was too busy to interact at the appropriate boards. Probably I am too bored now, since Anglo-American terrorists and others disgust me equally.
#41 Posted by Urstruly on July 14, 2005 10:03:51 am
Re: # 40
Naqshbandi
It is fair to admit that in midievil times people had tendency to attribute Autistic, Schizophrenics, Obssessive Compulsives, and people with various forms of Dissosiative Disorders the status of ``men of God``, but in subcontinent this practice is rampant even today.I don`t think that in the past it was a bad idea, since it helped those people save themselves from abuse in general. But now the scientific knowledge has brought our understanding to this level that we can understand the working of human mind a bit better.
This issue is core to the Islamic belief system of which the integral part is the belief that the chain of ``revelations`` has ended with the Holy Prophet (pbuh), so after him if any `holy man` claims to have a direct contact with God is a either a charlatan or have some sort of mental disorder. What could be more injustice to God and his Prophet if we attibute these characteristics to such men. Islam came to end these superstitions, simplified the relation between God and man and between man and man. Who are we to attribute someone as man of God? Does God tell usto do so? Did Prophet tell us to do so? If not then who are we to decide that. I consider ``majzoobiat`` as a form of Dissociative Disorder. If ``majzoob` are men of God then should Qura`n or Hadith tell us so. Innovations in the matter of faith are haram and forbidden - Allah has perfected and completed this faith for us;; who are we to say that it ain`t so.
Naqshbandi
It is fair to admit that in midievil times people had tendency to attribute Autistic, Schizophrenics, Obssessive Compulsives, and people with various forms of Dissosiative Disorders the status of ``men of God``, but in subcontinent this practice is rampant even today.I don`t think that in the past it was a bad idea, since it helped those people save themselves from abuse in general. But now the scientific knowledge has brought our understanding to this level that we can understand the working of human mind a bit better.
This issue is core to the Islamic belief system of which the integral part is the belief that the chain of ``revelations`` has ended with the Holy Prophet (pbuh), so after him if any `holy man` claims to have a direct contact with God is a either a charlatan or have some sort of mental disorder. What could be more injustice to God and his Prophet if we attibute these characteristics to such men. Islam came to end these superstitions, simplified the relation between God and man and between man and man. Who are we to attribute someone as man of God? Does God tell usto do so? Did Prophet tell us to do so? If not then who are we to decide that. I consider ``majzoobiat`` as a form of Dissociative Disorder. If ``majzoob` are men of God then should Qura`n or Hadith tell us so. Innovations in the matter of faith are haram and forbidden - Allah has perfected and completed this faith for us;; who are we to say that it ain`t so.
#40 Posted by Naqshbandi on July 14, 2005 8:29:10 am
Urstruly: just as in the case of al Hallaj Hazrat Sarmad was indeed shaheed; shahadat is for all those who die in the path of Allah and not just restricted to the physical jihad. Indeed, the ulama have detailed those who can be martyrs and one of these categories is all those Muslims who die from heartache, due to love, as long as their love is pure and not tainted by sin (i.e. zina)--i.e. those who die pining for their beloved can also be shaheed; what then of those whose Beloved is Allah Himself!
And the greater jihad [jihad al akbar] is the struggle against one`s nafs (ego) as the Beloved Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam has said...
And the greater jihad [jihad al akbar] is the struggle against one`s nafs (ego) as the Beloved Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam has said...
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- quin: Asif, I am glad... Translation of a (Love)
- Naqshbandi: quin: thanks for your... Translation of a (Love)
- quin: I don't know why... Translation of a (Love)
- Naqshbandi: I wrote 'love' in... Translation of a (Love)
- Naqshbandi: Tahir, I apologise for calling... Translation of a (Love)
- chaltahai: masadi, how would you... Translation of a (Love)
- mullah_toofani: Masadi baitay, You seem like... Translation of a (Love)
- masadi: g'night... Translation of a (Love)
