Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Noor Taleb

[Closed/Review]Don’t judge me

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Simon the Canaanite said:

In Mustādrak Sāfinat ʿal-Biḥār, volume 1, page 315, in the subject (word) of philosophy, by ʿal-Shāyḵḫ Ali ʿal-Nāmazi ʿal-Shāroūdi.

He said: “The contemporary philosopher, ʿal-Ṭābaṭabāʾī, the promoter (1) of philosophy, the author of Tāfsīr ʿal-Mīzān which he made a lot of mistakes in: such as believing in the belief of mājūs, in the ‘marriage’ between brothers and sisters from the children of Adam - see (for it) the beginning of Sūrāt An-Nisāʼ, and check to investigate in what the truth is [in this matter], Ġhāwaṣ Biḥār Anwār Kālimat ʿal-Anwār ʿal-ilāhiyah in ʿal-Biḥār (2), the chapter of the marriage of the children of Adam, and how the offspring began.”

(1) promoter: as in, the advocate - person that promotes something.
(2) He meant, Biḥār ʿal-Anwār, and the aforementioned chapter can be found in volume 11, page 218.

TQwYV2V.jpg

Tāfsīr ʿal-Mīzān, volume 4, page 137 (and volume 7, page 199 in the English version), by Mūḥāmad Ḥusāyn ʿal-Ṭābaṭabāʾī.

He said: “Second: Marriage of the first generation after Adam and his wife (I.e., of their immediate children), was done between brothers and sisters (I.e., Adam’s sons married his daughters), because they were the only human males and females at that time. There was no harm in this; because it is a legislative matter and it depends on the discretion of Allāh; He may allow it one day and disallow it another day.”

9SUeq3A.jpg

YBXhoga.jpg

And this belief is very wrong, because it goes to say that all humans (including the holy, such as: Prophets) were born out of zinā and incest. Nāūḏhubillah.

And Ahlul Bāyt opposed it, as mentioned before in Biḥār ʿal-Anwār.

May Allah guide us all.

We already familiar with all of what you are saying.  Regarding Ibn Arabi, Tabattabai, and Mulla Sadra.

Nothing new. 

It s the Irfani way that helps some of us here,  And if it doesn't help you then that is fine, just leave us alone.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Simon the Canaanite said:

In Mustādrak Sāfinat ʿal-Biḥār, volume 1, page 315, in the subject (word) of philosophy, by ʿal-Shāyḵḫ Ali ʿal-Nāmazi ʿal-Shāroūdi.

He said: “The contemporary philosopher, ʿal-Ṭābaṭabāʾī, the promoter (1) of philosophy, the author of Tāfsīr ʿal-Mīzān which he made a lot of mistakes in: such as believing in the belief of mājūs, in the ‘marriage’ between brothers and sisters from the children of Adam - see (for it) the beginning of Sūrāt An-Nisāʼ, and check to investigate in what the truth is [in this matter], Ġhāwaṣ Biḥār Anwār Kālimat ʿal-Anwār ʿal-ilāhiyah in ʿal-Biḥār (2), the chapter of the marriage of the children of Adam, and how the offspring began.”

(1) promoter: as in, the advocate - person that promotes something.
(2) He meant, Biḥār ʿal-Anwār, and the aforementioned chapter can be found in volume 11, page 218.

TQwYV2V.jpg

Tāfsīr ʿal-Mīzān, volume 4, page 137 (and volume 7, page 199 in the English version), by Mūḥāmad Ḥusāyn ʿal-Ṭābaṭabāʾī.

He said: “Second: Marriage of the first generation after Adam and his wife (I.e., of their immediate children), was done between brothers and sisters (I.e., Adam’s sons married his daughters), because they were the only human males and females at that time. There was no harm in this; because it is a legislative matter and it depends on the discretion of Allāh; He may allow it one day and disallow it another day.”

9SUeq3A.jpg

YBXhoga.jpg

And this belief is very wrong, because it goes to say that all humans (including the holy, such as: Prophets) were born out of zinā and incest. Nāūḏhubillah.

And Ahlul Bāyt opposed it, as mentioned before in Biḥār ʿal-Anwār.

May Allah guide us all.

I don't know what that have to do with the statement I quoted? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Abu Nur said:

I don't know what that have to do with the statement I quoted? 

Just to show you that not everything in Tāfsīr ʿal-Mīzān is correct, and that Ṭābaṭabāʾī makes mistakes too.

Also, what do you think of ʿal-Allāmah ʿal-Mājlesi?

3 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

It s the Irfani way that helps some of us here,

What ʿIrfān? Believing that the Pharaoh is a purified believer is an ʿirfān to you?

Edited by Simon the Canaanite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2019 at 2:55 PM, Simon the Canaanite said:
On 7/25/2019 at 5:49 AM, Guest Handel said:

But what you are saying, is that we have a reality separate from Allah and that Allah has a reality separate from our own - which is a definition of Shirk.

These were words I quoted from Ahlul Bayt, and you said that it’s a definition of shirk.

I think people use the word Shirk far to much. I believe that Islam is at the core of every religion, only people, including Muslims, are at different levels of enlightenment. I wouldn't write anybody of because what they believe might be true at their limited level of enlightenment.
To me it makes sense that if God is separate from creation, then God is not without limitation. Then you are limiting Allah. If God was limited he would not be God. Creation does not hold God, but God holds creation. Without God creation would cease to exist. If God was separate from creation, then creation could exist even after God had abandoned it.

Edited by Revert1963

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Revert1963 said:

I think people use the word Shirk far to much. I think that Islam is at the core of every religion, only people, including Muslims, are at different levels of enlightenment. I wouldn't write anybody of because what they believe might be true at their limited level of enlightenment.
To me it makes sense that if God is separate from creation, then God is not without limitation. Then you are limiting Allah. If God was limited he would not be God. Creation does not hold God, but God holds creation. Without God creation would cease to exist. If God was separate from creation, then creation could exist even after God had abandoned it.

Thank you for taking the time to write this. But, does that mean that you agree with what I said?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Simon the Canaanite said:

Thank you for taking the time to write this. But, does that mean that you agree with what I said?

Not quite, but I guess that you could read my comment and ask your self if you agree with it. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Revert1963 said:

Without God creation would cease to exist. If God was separate from creation, then creation could exist even after God had abandoned it.

Why is everyone speaking with this accuracy? When someone says that God is separate from the creation, he doesn’t mean that they are independent... God is our Creator.

He is our Creator, and the Creator of this existence. Is that hard to fathom? There’s no need to philosophize things this much.

We only go by what the Prophet and his Holy Family said.

Follow the Qurʾan and sunnāh, not Fuṣūṣ ʿal-Ḥikām or Masnavi...

The uṣūl of our beliefs is the Qurʾan.

Say, “He is Allah, [who is] One, (1) Allah, the Eternal Refuge. (2) He neither begets nor is born, (3) Nor is there to Him any equivalent (4).” [112]

I’bn ʿArābī, - which those same individuals that are saying I am committing shirk follow, - says in “Fuṣūṣ ʿal-Ḥikām,” page 83 (or 28 in the English version) about Allah:

“He praises me, and I praise Him.
He serves me and I serve Him.

In one state I draw near to Him,
and in sources I deny Him.
So He knows me and I do not know Him,
and I know Him and I witness Him.
Where is independence
when I help Him and assist Him?
This is why the Real brought me into existence.
Then I knew Him and manifested his existence.
Hadith (4) brought us that,
and in me He achieved His goal.”

In the footnotes of the book, it says: (4) “I created existence so that I might be known,” as an indication the word “Hadith,” which means that I’bn ʿArābī believes that he’s a God! Duotheism!

jT2gkzd.jpg

1d8Fcoi.jpg

In the Arabic version it says:

“He worships me, and I worship Him.
He thanks me, and I thank Him.”

“fa yāḥmadunī wā ā’ḥmāduhu, wā y’ābudunī wā ā’buduhu
fāfī ḥālīn uqīru bihī, wā fī l-a’yānī ā’jḥaduhu.”

He also says the following in “Fuṣūṣ ʿal-Ḥikām,” page 90 (or 33 in the English version):

bToF834.jpg

Edited by Simon the Canaanite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Simon the Canaanite said:

Why is everyone speaking with this accuracy? When someone says that God is separate from the creation, he doesn’t mean that they are independent... God is our Creator.

He is our Creator, and the Creator of this existence. Is that hard to fathom? There’s no need to philosophize things this much.

We only go by what the Prophet and his Holy Family said.

Follow the Qurʾan and sunnāh, not Fuṣūṣ ʿal-Ḥikām or Masnavi...

The uṣūl of our beliefs is the Qurʾan.

Say, “He is Allah, [who is] One, (1) Allah, the Eternal Refuge. (2) He neither begets nor is born, (3) Nor is there to Him any equivalent (4).” [112]

I’bn ʿArābī, - which those same individuals that are saying I am committing shirk follow, - says in “Fuṣūṣ ʿal-Ḥikām,” page 83 (or 28 in the English version) about Allah:

“He praises me, and I praise Him.
He serves me and I serve Him.

In one state I draw near to Him,
and in sources I deny Him.
So He knows me and I do not know Him,
and I know Him and I witness Him.
Where is independence
when I help Him and assist Him?
This is why the Real brought me into existence.
Then I knew Him and manifested his existence.
Hadith (4) brought us that,
and in me He achieved His goal.”

jT2gkzd.jpg

1d8Fcoi.jpg

In the Arabic version it says:

“He worships me, and I worship Him.
He thanks me, and I thank Him.”

“fa yāḥmadunī wā ā’ḥmāduhu, wā y’ābudunī wā ā’buduhu
fāfī ḥālīn uqīru bihī, wā fī l-a’yānī ā’jḥaduhu.”

He also says the following in “Fuṣūṣ ʿal-Ḥikām,” page 90 (or 33 in the English version):

bToF834.jpg

We know what is in those books and we agree with it entirely.  Not only do we agree with it entirely, we love it! 

Why do you take so much trouble copy and pasting?  Save your time and leave us alone.

 :)

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

We know what is in those books and we agree with it entirely.  Not only do we agree with it entirely, we love it! So just leave us alone.

Alhamdullillah. Now, it’s proven that you and Handel believe that Allah is dependent of His creation, because I’bn ʿArābī said: “Where is independence, when I help Him and assist Him?” and believe in Duotheism, because he said: “He worships me, and I worship Him. And He thanks me, and I thank Him,” thank you for proving my points.

Alhamdullillah that made me believe in the Holy Qurʾan, and in the beliefs of the Holy Prophet and his Purified Family.

Maʿa ʿāl Sālama.

Edited by Simon the Canaanite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Simon the Canaanite said:

Alhamdullillah. Now, it’s proven that you and Handel believe that Allah is dependent of His creation, because I’bn ʿArābī said: “Where is independence, when I help Him and assist Him?” and believe in Duotheism, because he said: “He worships me, and I worship Him. And He thanks me, and I thank Him,” thank you for proving my points.

Alhamdullillah that made me believe in the Holy Qurʾan, and in the beliefs of the Holy Prophet and his Purified Family.

Maʿa ʿāl Sālama.

 

Thanks for leaving us alone.

 

Masalama

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Handel
5 hours ago, Simon the Canaanite said:

Why is everyone speaking with this accuracy? When someone says that God is separate from the creation, he doesn’t mean that they are independent... God is our Creator.

He is our Creator, and the Creator of this existence. Is that hard to fathom?

I do wonder why you have an issue with this when you are merely repeating what Sufis are saying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Guest Handel said:

I do wonder why you have an issue with this when you are merely repeating what Sufis are saying. 

Because they don’t? They believe that the existence is God.

In Iqāḍh ʿal-Nāʾimin, page 13, by Mullā Ṣadrā.

He said: “The urāfʾa, from the great Ṣūfis, agreed that the wujūd is a one reality, which is God, and that there is not for the other essences a real existence (wujūd).”

sJPRDYk.jpg

Edited by Simon the Canaanite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before this gets closed, I want to take the chance to say that...

In the book of ʿal-Shams ʿal-Ṣāṭiʾā, page 265 (or 395).

Ṭābaṭabaʾī (the author of Tāfsīr ʿal-Mizān) said: “Indeed, the existence is nothing but, an imagination in an imagination in an imagination!”

xbPzkPT.jpg

Edited by Simon the Canaanite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Simon the Canaanite said:

Before this gets closed, I want to take the chance to say that...

In the book of ʿal-Shams ʿal-Ṣāṭiʾā, page 265 (or 395).

Ṭābaṭabaʾī (the author of Tāfsīr ʿal-Mizān) said: “Indeed, the existence is nothing but, an imagination in an imagination in an imagination!”

xbPzkPT.jpg

btw its not closing bcz of you :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Noor Taleb said:

@Hameedeh plz close this topic :)

@Noor Taleb Mods will take your request into consideration.

@everyone Some off-topic posts have been removed. Please stay on topic. If name calling continues, Mods will be forced to give warnings. On the third warning, your account will be temporarily suspended, so just don't do it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Simon the Canaanite said:

Because they don’t? They believe that the existence is God.

In Iqāḍh ʿal-Nāʾimin, page 13, by Mullā Ṣadrā.

He said: “The urāfʾa, from the great Ṣūfis, agreed that the wujūd is a one reality, which is God, and that there is not for the other essences a real existence (wujūd).”

What existence do you believe in, other than Allah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2019 at 5:00 PM, Simon the Canaanite said:

Alhamdullillah. Now, it’s proven that you and Handel believe that Allah is dependent of His creation, because I’bn ʿArābī said: “Where is independence, when I help Him and assist Him?” and believe in Duotheism, because he said: “He worships me, and I worship Him. And He thanks me, and I thank Him,” thank you for proving my points.

Alhamdullillah that made me believe in the Holy Qurʾan, and in the beliefs of the Holy Prophet and his Purified Family.

Maʿa ʿāl Sālama.

Salams,

Perhaps a word of advice after observing posts like this one for pages now. While Ethereal might believe in everything the scholars you've quoted (Mulla Sadra, Allama Tabatabai, and Ibn Arabi) it isn't the case that everyone else will, even if they agree with them on some points that doesn't necessitate that they must agree with them on everything because they take the argument or point on its own merit. Sh. al-Saduq as it seems erred in the eyes of his student, Sh. al-Mufid, that the latter presented emendations and corrections. Even if we say that Sh. al-Saduq did, in fact, err (and it isn't necessarily the case that he did), it doesn't mean that he is not worthy of his title and that he is not a scholar anymore. And even if and just because Allama Tabatabai erred and you agree that it was an error, it doesn't mean you are now forced to accept that everything he ever said was erroneous. We don't believe these scholars ma'sum -- though some might try to defend everything ever said and written --, it's fine if they erred. The Imams are rasikhuuna fii l-ilmi a priori, so their knowledge of God and his religion is perfect naturally -- albeit we have not received it perfectly --, everyone else can err but it doesn't mean that they did err necessarily by virtue of their capacity for error. The verities of theology are not only contained within the perhaps 400 pages of hadith, many repetitious, which we've received. How could it be when so many more important works of theology have been lost, such as Madiinat al-Ilm. And how could it be that the aql which seems perfect enough to allow us to reach the conclusion that God exists and gave us a divine religion through Muhammad and guarded by his progeny become suddenly rendered imperfect and useless afterwards? You might think this sickle only useful for cutting down a few stalks of wheat but I think sharp enough to cut me the whole wheat field, though I might cut myself during my work. 

Trying to discredit the Sufis and those mystically inclined with some ahadith appended to a late work of contested authorship after the initial authoring of the book didn't work, and pointing out that philosophers might be wrong about some things therefore are wrong about this doesn't work either. Funnily enough, you accused philosophers of practicing sophistry or being sophists (or at least I think you did) in your first post but you don't realize practicing fallacious reasoning here. You need to show why they are wrong for arguing wahdatu l-wujud, show a fault in the premises, show why the ahadith and verses you bring clearly say this is untrue, etc. But to do that would require you to seriously read philosophy and see where their arguments are coming from, and that isn't as easily done as copying pictures from Arab forums or after being directed to them from YouTube (the internet has been around for decades now, all these discussions are rather old as @eThErEaL pointed out). I really recommend you actually formulate why you disagree with this properly, not commit ad hominems or non sequiturs and other instances of bad reasoning. To paraphrase what a good friend said once regarding the same discussion of wahdatu l-wujud, "I might not like Democritus but he turned out to be spot on with his atomic theory." As annoying and obnoxious as the way you've behaved and have come across in this thread and indeed in many, many others as well as elsewhere, I really say this with the utmost sincerity to you as a coreligionist and I pray you take a moment for self reflection and have a care. When religion becomes an abode for self congratulation, comfort, and stunted thought, when you've convinced yourself you're seated in Eden while you're really in a pig sty smelling waste not flowers, it has become the death of anything good in you.

خذوا الحق من أهل الباطل ولا تأخذوا الباطل من أهل الحق

لا تنظر إلى من قال وانظر إلى ما قال

wassalam

Edited by Ibn Al-Ja'abi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[Note from Mod: This topic has been temporarily closed for review by a moderator pending one of the following actions:

1) Cleanup: Topic will be reviewed, inappropriate posts will be deleted followed by warnings/bans being implemented and then reopened.

2) Topic will be permanently deleted or sent to the lounge.

3) Topic will remain permanently closed.

Please allow up to 48 hours for one of the above actions to take place. Contact the appropriate moderator for any further explanations

The ShiaChat.com rules can be found at: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/12120-faq-shiachatcom-rules-and-policy/ [Auto]

[Mod Note: This topic is permanently locked.]

Edited by Hameedeh
Mod Note

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...