Jump to content
Mansur Bakhtiari

Why do so many admire Ibn Arabi

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Ibn Al-Shahid said:

Salam,

I did not call you stupid. I said you don't have enough knowledge in this section.

As for your quote, that is about Sufism. Please provide evidence of how 'Irfan and Sufism is one and the same. If you would like to create a dialogue then please let us begin with the history of Sufism and the history of 'Irfan. Provide sources from books on the origination of both and when each term came about. If you cannot do this, then you are not ready to argue about this topic.

Sahib Al-Mizan, Al-Alama Al-Tabatabai was a 'Aarif, so are you claiming he's a Sufi? What about Sayyid Ali Al-Qadhi? Sheikh Bahjat? Sayyid Hashim Al-Haddad? Sayyid Al-Khumaini? Sayyid Abd Al-Alaa Sabzawari? Sayyid Al-Kashmiri? Ismail Dulabi? Ali Rajab? Al Muqadas Al-Ardabili?

Are all these Sufis? Please understand that you will be held accountable for the words you speak. If you are claiming these great scholars have anything to do with Sufism then you need to back it up or ask Allah for forgiveness.

If they are followers of the metaphysics of Ibn Arabi they are undoubtedly sufis. You can see what the other brother said regarding Bahjat. Sayyed Haydar Amuli believed "Every true Sufi is a Shi'ite, and every true Shi'ite is a Sufi." Honestly if you are trying to deny those scholars are sufis especially someone like Bahjat well you are showing your ignorance on the issue. I don't reject anything that is termed "sufism/irfan" because many of those things are found in the teachings of the imams such as inner struggle against the nafs. You can watch the video of shaykh fayyadh that was linked. He called ibn arabi a zindiq. 
https://books.google.com/books?id=BMNQNOHXKOMC&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115&dq=true+sufism+is+"shi+ism"&source=web&ots=imGXm6A0oO&sig=x1yNGzuhCVr-f642lUuF24mpRaY&hl=en#v=onepage&q=true sufism is "shi ism"&f=false
took that from another shiachat thread.

Edited by Shi3i_jadeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Why don't our Ulema gather together in a conference, discuss these issues, and then present us with a statement ? If they don't take any legitimate steps in trying to help layman like myself understand why heavy weights clash on Ibn Arabi, what is a layman like myself to think?

This isn't an issue like Tatbir, when things are clear and explicit and anyone can make their mind up by brute sense. This is complex philosophy, muddy waters.

According to arifs the ibne Arabi was great scholar and arifs. And his books are taught in advanced stages of spirituality. We find in writings of Imam khomine ra praising ibne Arabi extraordinarily. So some ordinary persons criticising on ibne Arabi carry no weight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Shi3i_jadeed said:

If they are followers of the metaphysics of Ibn Arabi they are undoubtedly sufis. You can see what the other brother said regarding Bahjat. Sayyed Haydar Amuli believed "Every true Sufi is a Shi'ite, and every true Shi'ite is a Sufi." Honestly if you are trying to deny those scholars are sufis especially someone like Bahjat well you are showing your ignorance on the issue. I don't reject anything that is termed "sufism/irfan" because many of those things are found in the teachings of the imams such as inner struggle against the nafs. You can watch the video of shaykh fayyadh that was linked. He called ibn arabi a zindiq. 
https://books.google.com/books?id=BMNQNOHXKOMC&pg=PA115&lpg=PA115&dq=true+sufism+is+"shi+ism"&source=web&ots=imGXm6A0oO&sig=x1yNGzuhCVr-f642lUuF24mpRaY&hl=en#v=onepage&q=true sufism is "shi ism"&f=false
took that from another shiachat thread.

Salam. 

I have gone through some of works on sofism and Irfan. Undoubtedly sofism and Irfan is real understanding of Islam. 

And definitely it seems irfan and sofism is same.

But in unfortunately  common masses sofism is liked to sunni sect and Irfan to shia sect. 

But in reality  both sofism and Irfan are one in its teachings principles and and goal. 

As you mentioned  Hyder Amoli  rightly said that "every

true sofi is shiate and every true shiate is sofi "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Dhulfikar said:

And rest is not real understanding of Islam?

It is real understanding because it is what Imams of Ahlulbayt as taught. 

If you something more real then let us know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, islam25 said:

It is real understanding because it is what Imams of Ahlulbayt as taught. 

If you something more real then let us know. 

What about what is for you not real understanding of Islam?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, islam25 said:

It is gradually achieving Taqwa and progressing through stages of 

Tasleem, Raza, Itminaan ,Shahood and Fana.

 

What I mean is that what does it mean to you not real understanding of Islam. Is Islam understood by stages of process that Sufi's defines? Or is it not actually very simplistic even the layman person who read Qur'an can real understand and practice Islam, without knowing anything about Tasleem, Raza, Itminaan, Shahood and Fana?

 

Edited by Dhulfikar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Dhulfikar said:

What I mean is that what does it mean to you not real understanding of Islam. Is Islam understood by stages of process that Sufi's defines? Or is it not actually very simplistic even the layman person who read Qur'an can real understand and practice Islam, without knowing anything about Tasleem, Raza, Itminaan, Shahood and Fana?

 

Definitely every one can who try by following Quran  .

But sofis and Arifs did it and  they achieved the goal. And they conveyed information in simpler and mother tongue. 

So why shoud I talk bad or criticise them. You and me too have potential to achieve Taqwa and purify ourself from all sins and achieve heart which contain nothing but love for Allah. 

But we still love worldly things and passions of nafs and not Allah despite reading Quran and life history of Ahlulbayt as. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:salam:

If anyone ِis interested in learning the arguments of Wahdat al-Wujud (which has various interpretations to begin with), they have no choice but to start from the very basic question of Asalat al-Wujud (fundamentality or primacy of existence). If you accept this premise, you are most likely going to end up agreeing with Wahdat al-Wujud (even if you differ in some details of it or in the way you present your opinion regarding it), but if you reject it, then I'm not sure how you could accept Wahdat al-Wujud (unless you mean something completely else by it).

The rational arguments for Asalat al-Wujud are not weak by any sense of the word, and post-Sadra this has now become the mainstream understanding amongst Shi'i philosophers, and many non-Muslims agree with it too (although once again, their understanding may slightly different and thus results in different practical implications. A decent paper to read is this: Sadra and Existentialism). If a sound argument is brought for you, your intellect will have no choice but to accept it, unless you begin questioning your own intellect, in which case you have no basis to even be a Muslim or believe in a God.

Instead of wasting time over Ibn 'Arabi and getting into highly polemical discussions about what someone meant or didn't mean (something this very specific topic on this forum has seen for a well over a decade), time will be better spent discussing these premises and that way members can actually learn a new thing or two as well.

Wasalam

Edited by Ibn al-Hussain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/30/2018 at 7:36 AM, Ibn al-Hussain said:

:salam:

If anyone ِis interested in learning the arguments of Wahdat al-Wujud (which has various interpretations to begin with), they have no choice but to start from the very basic question of Asalat al-Wujud (fundamentality or primacy of existence). If you accept this premise, you are most likely going to end up agreeing with Wahdat al-Wujud (even if you differ in some details of it or in the way you present your opinion regarding it), but if you reject it, then I'm not sure how you could accept Wahdat al-Wujud (unless you mean something completely else by it).

The rational arguments for Asalat al-Wujud are not weak by any sense of the word, and post-Sadra this has now become the mainstream understanding amongst Shi'i philosophers, and many non-Muslims agree with it too (although once again, their understanding may slightly different and thus results in different practical implications. A decent paper to read is this: Sadra and Existentialism). If a sound argument is brought for you, your intellect will have no choice but to accept it, unless you begin questioning your own intellect, in which case you have no basis to even be a Muslim or believe in a God.

Instead of wasting time over Ibn 'Arabi and getting into highly polemical discussions about what someone meant or didn't mean (something this very specific topic on this forum has seen for a well over a decade), time will be better spent discussing these premises and that way members can actually learn a new thing or two as well.

Wasalam

Late reply but you are right I got carried away. I just don't like when people act like all shia ulama were basically followers of irfan historically and those who were against 'irfan were basically just idiots. Anyway, do you know about view of shaykh ahmad ahsa'i on this issue (asalat al-wujud and wahdatul wujud)? 

Edited by Shi3i_jadeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/30/2018 at 10:36 AM, Ibn al-Hussain said:

:salam:

If anyone ِis interested in learning the arguments of Wahdat al-Wujud (which has various interpretations to begin with), they have no choice but to start from the very basic question of Asalat al-Wujud (fundamentality or primacy of existence). If you accept this premise, you are most likely going to end up agreeing with Wahdat al-Wujud (even if you differ in some details of it or in the way you present your opinion regarding it), but if you reject it, then I'm not sure how you could accept Wahdat al-Wujud (unless you mean something completely else by it).

The rational arguments for Asalat al-Wujud are not weak by any sense of the word, and post-Sadra this has now become the mainstream understanding amongst Shi'i philosophers, and many non-Muslims agree with it too (although once again, their understanding may slightly different and thus results in different practical implications. A decent paper to read is this: Sadra and Existentialism). If a sound argument is brought for you, your intellect will have no choice but to accept it, unless you begin questioning your own intellect, in which case you have no basis to even be a Muslim or believe in a God.

Instead of wasting time over Ibn 'Arabi and getting into highly polemical discussions about what someone meant or didn't mean (something this very specific topic on this forum has seen for a well over a decade), time will be better spent discussing these premises and that way members can actually learn a new thing or two as well.

Wasalam

Salaam Alaikum 

Yes sir, I'm interested in learning the arguments of wahdat al-wujud also asalat al-wujud. Thinking it will help in the understanding of the West today in much of the "grass root" learning.

Thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/30/2018 at 10:36 AM, Ibn al-Hussain said:

:salam:

If anyone ِis interested in learning the arguments of Wahdat al-Wujud (which has various interpretations to begin with), they have no choice but to start from the very basic question of Asalat al-Wujud (fundamentality or primacy of existence). If you accept this premise, you are most likely going to end up agreeing with Wahdat al-Wujud (even if you differ in some details of it or in the way you present your opinion regarding it), but if you reject it, then I'm not sure how you could accept Wahdat al-Wujud (unless you mean something completely else by it).

The rational arguments for Asalat al-Wujud are not weak by any sense of the word, and post-Sadra this has now become the mainstream understanding amongst Shi'i philosophers, and many non-Muslims agree with it too (although once again, their understanding may slightly different and thus results in different practical implications. A decent paper to read is this: Sadra and Existentialism). If a sound argument is brought for you, your intellect will have no choice but to accept it, unless you begin questioning your own intellect, in which case you have no basis to even be a Muslim or believe in a God.

Instead of wasting time over Ibn 'Arabi and getting into highly polemical discussions about what someone meant or didn't mean (something this very specific topic on this forum has seen for a well over a decade), time will be better spent discussing these premises and that way members can actually learn a new thing or two as well.

Wasalam

Salaam Alaikum 

Are you aware of any Pholosophical or Theological barometer, atmosphere or climate, positive or negative, surrounding Mulla Sadra (1572 - 1640) change in Pholosophical theory from (primacy of essence) to (primacy of existence)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe because he had a massive impact on the Ottoman Caliphate which in turn influenced Muslim thought and gave him popularity. Dawud Qaysari for example was the first Shayk Ul Islam of the ottoman caliphate and wrote the most famous 'Muqadimah' to Fusus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2018 at 10:43 PM, Maki D Cabarete said:

It's said that Ibn Arabi and Shahab Suhrawardi was together once and their meeting was held in complete silence. After the meeting, both was asked separately, what they thought about each other. Do anyone here know what each of them said about the other?

Both Shahab Suhrawardi and Ibn Arabi were great *Illuminationist in Islam.

We should be asking ourselves, what is that.*

the true story is about meeting of ibn sin  & abulsaeid  that at the end ibn sina said he sees what we know & Abu saeid said he knows what we see.

its a famous story in persian literature.

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×