What, in your belief, is the nature of God?

[313_Waiter]

Salaam / Hi,

What, in your belief, is the nature of God? Please also explain why you believe this is so. 

Do you believe in (note: they may not be mutually exclusive):

• Pantheism: everything is part of God who encompasses all things. 
• Panentheism: God is everywhere, but at the same time transcends all things. The universe could be seen as a manifestation of God (like the sun and its rays, or the ocean and the waves of the ocean or like clothing and individual threads...). Other forms of panentheism may assert that the universe is contained within God. 
• Personal God: personal in the sense one could have a relationship with Him, characterised with "personal" attributes (mercy, love, anger...).
• Nondualism: where the multiplicity of the universe reflects One transcendent Reality that is God
• Dualism: there existing a dualism between God and creation. Could be seen as affirming two realities, one of God and the other of creation or individual souls.
• Monism: everything being derived from the One
• Transtheism: a philosophy that is beyond both theism and atheism!
• Other: (e.g. henotheism, polytheism, ietsism etc.) please detail, and also explain why you believe this is so (does not have to make sense to us, as long as you put something into words).

 

Thanks and God bless.

[layman]

Salam,

God created Holy Names with Holy Attributes to interface with His other creations.

The "God" is beyond description and beyond imagination. 

It is good enough for His creations to interface with His Holy Names. God allowed his creations to call or communicate to Him through His Holy Names.

We can describe God using His Holy Names, because that is the level that we can achieve.

But His Holy Names are still not GOD, because Holy Names are created by God.

Our understanding cannot and unable to go beyond the level of His Holy Names.

That my understanding...

Correct me if I missed something.

Wallahualam.

[313_Waiter]

4 hours ago, layman said:

Salam,

God created Holy Names with Holy Attributes to interface with His other creations.

The "God" is beyond description and beyond imagination. 

It is good enough for His creations to interface with His Holy Names. God allowed his creations to call or communicate to Him through His Holy Names.

We can describe God using His Holy Names, because that is the level that we can achieve.

But His Holy Names are still not GOD, because Holy Names are created by God.

Our understanding cannot and unable to go beyond the level of His Holy Names.

That my understanding...

Correct me if I missed something.

Wallahualam.

Walaikum Salaam wrb,

so which one would it be out of the above (e.g. dualism) or will it be a separate category?

[layman]

30 minutes ago, 313_Waiter said:

Walaikum Salaam wrb,

so which one would it be out of the above (e.g. dualism) or will it be a separate category?

Bro, i only know a little bit on this end and the interface to the other End.  Nothing that i know on the nature of the "End".  I am not able to put a category on the nature of God.

I can only say, He is the Rabb and i just a slave.  The belief is more toward Tauheed.  I believe that Only God can make us understand Him at very much individual level.  I believe only Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) understand God at the highest level.  Level of understanding God is not the same for all humans.

Maybe others can have better explanation. 

[Guest Psychological Warfare]

"O He Whom none knows what He is, nor how He is, nor where He is, nor in what respect He is, but He!.."

Imam Ali(عليه السلام)

http://duas.org/mashlool-desktop.htm

[notme]

I am not a knowledgeable person on this subject - most of my philosophical interest is more toward ethics - but my "gut feeling" is that the relationship between The Creator and The Creation is something between Panentheism and Monism, based on the descriptions used above. 

[hasanhh]

Ayat 6:103

[MexicanVato]

as-salaamu alaikum,

 

Are there any good articles or books that refute non-dualism? What I mean are paths such as Advaita or Kashmir Shaivism. I do know some Sufis and Shia mystics regard Wahdat al-wujud as non-dual, but the 'mainstream' view is not that creation is One with Allah, but that the whole world is an Act or the Action of Allah.

[313_Waiter]

6 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

as-salaamu alaikum,

 

Are there any good articles or books that refute non-dualism? What I mean are paths such as Advaita or Kashmir Shaivism. I do know some Sufis and Shia mystics regard Wahdat al-wujud as non-dual, but the 'mainstream' view is not that creation is One with Allah, but that the whole world is an Act or the Action of Allah.

Alaikum Salaam wrb,

I am not sure of any books refuting this, and I have indeed heard Wahdat al Wujud being described as panentheism or even pantheism. If true, wouldn’t this be nondualism based on the above definitions? Further, I also know that Wahdat al Wujood asserts only God really exists, so again wouldn’t this be non dualism?

In contrast, I don’t think it must be panentheism or pantheism as Ibn Arabi used the phrase Huwa, la Huwa (He, not He). Everything is 'He' (Huwa) and everything is 'not He' (la Huwa).

He spoke of divine transcendence (tanzih- “there is nothing like unto Him”) and divine immanence (“And He is the Hearer, the Seer”, “wherever you turn, there is the face of Allah”...). 

I have heard he used the 99 attributes/names of Allah. For example, Allah transcends creations since He is "The Sustainer", but since He is "The Compassionate", we can attain nearness to Him through becoming more compassionate. 
Here is an excerpt from Stanford encyclopedia:

"The divine names designate the universal qualities that suffuse existence, such as life, knowledge, desire, power, speech, generosity, and justice (these often being called “the seven leaders” among the names). These qualities are found in everything, because they pertain to the very Essence of the Real and accompany its self-disclosure. They remain largely nonmanifest, however, because each thing has its own preparedness (isti‘dâd) or receptivity (qâbiliyya), and none can display the Real per se. Although each thing is a face, each is also a veil; He/not He."

God says, “The giving of your Lord can never be walled up” (Quran 17:20). In other words, it can never be withheld. God is saying that He gives constantly, while the loci receive in the measure of the realities of their preparedness. In the same way, you say that the sun spreads its rays over the existent things. It is not miserly with its light toward anything. The loci receive the light in the measure of their preparedness.” (Ibn ‘Arabî, al-Futûhât, 1911 edition, 1:287.10)

Source: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ibn-arabi/

Here is something I wrote a while back:

On 1/16/2021 at 8:36 PM, 313_Waiter said:

Now, if we want to hold onto or accept what Ibn Arabi has been saying, then God is the only Existence (which some have criticised as being pantheism) and there is no reality, no-thing but God. So that has some implications. Our true self, is God (as blasphemous as that sounds to some people). I will attach some slides from the brother who made the above lecture ^^ on the YouTube channel called “Let’s Talk Religion”.

 

 

So all of this sounds similar to Pantheism and Hinduism (God being Brahman for them), or even blasphemy (thus some people calling him a heretic). This may also be linked to Buddhism where one can reach their True Self through meditation (but the True Self is not really our thoughts, emotions, feelings etc). But Ibn Arabi understood that whilst our True Self is God, our “self” is  nothingness:

So in this sense an analogy was drawn in the video. The projector is God and He (Hu) is shining His light onto the screen, which is nothing. (The video explained it better). Thus Ibn Arabi’s understanding of God professed both divine transcendence (Tanzih) and Divine Immanence (Tashbih).

 

 

 

 

[MexicanVato]

Yes, I believe it depends on the interpretation. There are some that do accept wahdat al-wujud as non-duality. However, some other arifin maintain that Allah is not within his creation. If there is real non-duality then there would be no reason to embrace Islam for we could study advaita vedanta, kashmir shaivism or even perhaps Gnostic Christianity. I think it was Abu Yazid who said Glory be to me in intoxication, but later when he came down from his intoxication he repented. Even ibn taymiyya said he is still a believer because he only uttered such in a state of ecstasy. 

The quote in my signature is the so called correct view of Wahdat al-wujud:

  "So Wahdat al-Wujud or Oneness of Being entails that nothing exists except Allah, His attributes, His actions, and His rulings, while created being, as manifest to us, cannot be identified with His entity or attributes but only with His actions and rulings: the world, as it were, is pure act, while Allah is pure being. In short, our metaphysics is not pantheism, because the world is not Allah." (Nuh Keller in 'Sea Without a Shore: A Manual of the Sufi Path')

I contemplated this and still do contemplate it. Because I used to practice forms of non-duality. Nuh Keller (I don't follow him and I am no sunni) mentioned in a lecture about non-muslims attaining states and experiencing visions and other experiences: that he has no doubt about them having experiences because when you cut yourself off from the dunya and the body, you are left alone with the Ruh and experiences occur. He said many of times they only have few experiences and when they come out of their experiences they get it wrong by attributing it to the trinity or some other blasphemy. He said the true arif upon the path of Islam attain loftier states. 

When it comes to non-dualism I think a sufficient retort is that Allah does not change. He is as he was before creation. If he created the universe/universes then that is something new and is not Allah. I think the only way to get around such non-dual thinking is what some advaita folks talk about it being maya or an illusion. They say this world is not real (similar to some sufis) and that it is a phantasm on the screen of God. Again those phantasm or not this would indicate a creation no? If so then are we to say Allah is different now than he was before creation? 

Edited April 4, 2021 by MexicanVato
mistake in wording

[313_Waiter]

3 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

If there is real non-duality then there would be no reason to embrace Islam for we could study advaita vedanta, kashmir shaivism or even perhaps Gnostic Christianity.

Thanks for response brother. If we are to accept non-duality, I think the counter argument to the above question would be that whilst these philosophies have elements of truth, Islam is the most updated version of this truth where Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) inherited the knowledge of all of the Prophets (عليه السلام) before him (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). Thus, Islam takes you to the Divine at a much faster speed than other religions like a highway compared to other long-winded roads. Further, other religions may have changed and may have corruptions like the trinity:

”Woe, then, to those who write the book with their hands and then say: This is from Allah, so that they may take for it a small price; therefore woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn.” (Quran 2:79)

3 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

The quote in my signature is the so called correct view of Wahdat al-wujud:

  "So Wahdat al-Wujud or Oneness of Being entails that nothing exists except Allah, His attributes, His actions, and His rulings, while created being, as manifest to us, cannot be identified with His entity or attributes but only with His actions and rulings: the world, as it were, is pure act, while Allah is pure being. In short, our metaphysics is not pantheism, because the world is not Allah." (Nuh Keller in 'Sea Without a Shore: A Manual of the Sufi Path')

What I don’t understand is that if only Allah exists (see bold), isn’t this in and of itself indicative of non-duality? If we (creation) are the act or attributes of Allah, we know in Shi’a philosophy His attributes are not separate from His essence, so again we arrive at non-duality. I have heard that Sufis even consider it a form of shirk to affirm one’s own existence! Also, wouldn’t duality be affirming two realities, the reality of God and the reality of God’s act à la creation? But reality has no boundary, concept, limitation etc. Please do correct me if I’m wrong dear brother as my knowledge is poor.

3 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

When it comes to non-dualism I think a sufficient retort is that Allah does not change. He is as he was before creation. If he created the universe/universes then that is something new and is not Allah. I think the only way to get around such non-dual thinking is what some advaita folks talk about it being maya or an illusion. They say this world is not real (similar to some sufis) and that it is a phantasm on the screen of God. Again those phantasm or not this would indicate a creation no? 

Yes they use the example of the snake and the rope:

Quote

The analogy of the serpent and the rope brings to light the kind of deception that arises from mistaken identity. When a rope is thought to be a snake, the accompanying fear is a natural outcome, and this goes away when it is shown to us that in reality, it is not a snake but a mere rope.

https://www.thehindu.com/features/friday-review/religion/the-illusory-world/article4696183.ece

Sheikh Sekaleshfar described it as such (in a lecture called la Ilaha illallah): someone goes to a clothing shop, he sees hats, pants, shirts, jumpers, sweaters. All the Sufi sees is one thing — thread. Thus creation is something measured- with shape size and other things we ascribe etc. It does NOT come from no-thing (nothing is not, does not exist!). All of these these creations / “existents” are a defined manifestation of a limitless reality - pure existence / existence qua existence / Allah / Hu/ Brahman / Necessary Being ... 

3 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

If so then are we to say Allah is different now than he was before creation? 

This was a difficulty I had. If I remember correctly Sheikh Sekaleshfar alluded to God existentiating existents from pre-eternity. Brother @eThErEaL (former member) explained that the period before and after creation is in and of itself a duality created in our mind! I have heard some (I think Alan Watts) even say that time is an illusion! This Q&A between the Imam al Ridha (عليه السلام) and Imran may shed some light:

Quote

Imran said: "Master, which thing is He?"	قال عمران: يا سيدي فأي شيء هو؟
The Imam said: "He is light, namely He guides His creatures from among the people of the heaven and the earth. You have no right against me than my professing His oneness."	قال عليه السلام: هو نور بمعنى أنه هادِ خلقه من أهل السماء و أهل الأرض و ليس لك على أكثر من توحيدي إياه.
Imran said: "Master, was He not silent before (creating) the creatures and then He spoke?"	قال عمران: يا سيدي أليس قد كان ساكتاً قبل الخلق لا ينطق ثم نطق؟
The Imam said: "Silence is not except out of utterance before it. An example of that it is not said that the lamp is silent and does not utter; nor is it said that the lamp shines, so what does it want to do toward us, for light is from the lamp, not out of an act or make from it; it is not a thing other than it. When it shines for us, we say: ‘It has shined for us, so that we may seek light through it.’ In this manner you can understand your affair."	قال الرضا عليه السلام: لا يكون السكوت إلا عن نطق قبله و المثل في ذلك أنه لا يقال للسراج: هو ساكت لا ينطق، و لا يقال: إن السراج ليضيء، فيما يريد أن يفعل بنا؛ لأنّ الضوء من السراج ليس بفعل منه، و لا كون، و إنّما هو ليس شيء غيره، فلما استضاء لنا قلنا: قد أضاء لنا حتى استضاءنا به، فبهذا تستبصر أمرك.
He said: "Master, the knowledge I have says that the Being is changed in His essence by His action of creating."	قال عمران : يا سيدي، فإن الذي كان عندي أن الكائن قد تغير في فعله عن حاله بخلقه الخلق .
The Imam said: "Imran, does your statement mean that the being does not in any way change its essence except when it affects its own essence in a way which changes it? Can you say that the fire changes its own nature, or that the heat burns itself, or have you seen anyone seeing his own vision?"	قال الرضا عليه السلام : أحلت ـ يا عمران ـ في قولك: إن الكائن يتغير في وجه من الوجوه حتى يصيب الذات منه ما يغيره ـ يا عمران ـ هل تجد النار تغيرها تغير نفسها؟ و هل تجد الحرارة تحرق نفسها؟ أو هل رأيت بصيرا قط رأى بصره؟
Imran said: ... Is He in the creatures or are the creatures in Him?"	قال عمران: لم أر هذا إلا أن تخبرني يا سيدي أهو في الخلق؟ أم الخلق فيه؟
The Imam said: "He is above all that, Imran. He is not in thecreatures; nor are the creatures in Him; He is exalted above that. I will teach you what you do not know, and there is no strength except in Allah. Tell me about the mirror: are you in it or is it in you? If neither one of you is in the other, then how did you come to see your own reflection in it, Imran?"	قال الرضا عليه السلام : أجل ـ يا عمران ـ عن ذلك ليس هو في الخلق و لا الخلق فيه تعالى عن ذلك، و ساء علمك، ما تعرفه و لا قوة إلا بالله. أخبرني عن المرآة أنت فيها أم هي فيك؟ فإن كان ليس واحد منكما في صاحبه فبأي شيء استدللت بها على نفسك ـ يا عمران ـ .
He said: "Through the light between myself and it?"	قال: بضوء بيني و بينها.
The Imam said: "Can you see of that light more than what you can see with your own eyes?"	قال الرضا عليه السلام: هل ترى من ذلك الضوء في المرآة أكثر مما تراه في عينك؟
He said: Yes.	قال: نعم.
The Imam said: "Then show it to us,"	قال الرضا عليه السلام: فأرناه.
Imran kept silent.	فلم يحر جوابا.
The Imam said: "I do not see the light except leading you and the mirror to come to know each other without being in either one of you. There are many such examples which the ignorant simply cannot observe, and the greatest example belongs to Allah."	قال عليه السلام: فلا أرى النور إلا و قد دلك و دل المرآة على أنفسكما من غير أن يكون في واحد منكما، ولهذا أمثال كثيرة غير هذا لا يجد الجاهل فيها مقالاً، ﴿وَلِلَّهِ الْمَثَلُ الأعْلَى﴾.
The he turned to al-Ma'mun and said to him: "(The time of) the prayer has just come."	ثم التفت إلى المأمون فقال: الصلاة قد حضرت.
Imran said: "Master, do not interrupt my questions, for my heart has sympathized (with you)."	فقال عمران: يا سيدي، لا تقطع علي مسألتي فقد رق قلبي.
The Imam said: We say prayer and return.	قال الرضا عليه السلام: نُصلي و نعود.
... The Imam said: "Imran, question me."	فنهض عليه السلام و نهض المأمون، فصلّى الرضاعليه السلام داخلاً... فعاد الرضا عليه السلام إلى مجلسه و دعا بعمران، فقال: سل يا عمران.
He said: ...	قال: يا سيدي، ألا تخبرني عن الله عزوجل هل يوحّد بحقيقه أو يوحّد بوصف؟
The Imam said: Verily, Allah is the Originator, the One, the First Being. He has always been One. There is nothing with Him. He is single without a second with Him. He is neither known (i.e. in His reality) nor unknown nor clear nor ambiguous nor remembered nor forgotten nor a thing to which the title of a thing is applied nor from a time He was nor to a time He will be nor on a thing He stood nor on a thing He stands nor on a thing He depends nor in a thing He is hidden. All that was before the creation. As for the whole you have applied to Him, it was attributes which appeared later, and translation through which understands he who understands.	قال الرضا عليه السلام: إن الله المبدئ، الواحد، الكائن، الأول لم يزل واحدا لا شيء معه، فرداً لا ثاني معه، لا معلوماً و لا مجهولاً و لا محكماً و لا متشابهاً، و لا مذكورا و لا منسياً، و لا شيئاً يقع عليه اسم شيء من الأشياء غيره، ولا من وقت كان و لا إلى وقت يكون، و لا بشيء قام و لا إلى شيء يقوم، و لا إلى شيء استند، و لا في شيء استكن، و ذلك كله قبل الخلق إذ لا شيء غيره، و ما أوقعت عليه من الكل فهي صفات محدثة، و ترجمة يفهم بها منفهم

Full debate can be found here: https://en.wikishia.net/view/Text:Imam_al-Rida's_(a)_Debate_with_Imran_al-Sabi (Special thanks to Br. @Ashvazdanghe.

 

Wallahu A’lam

Edited April 4, 2021 by 313_Waiter

[layman]

Salam,

Keep writing Brothers... i really enjoy reading it and learning too.

When Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) decided to create us, He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) said that "we are from Him and we are returning to Him" (Inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi rajiuun).

Because we have been created, there exist duality.  It is up to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) on how long the process of returning to Him will take place.  Even if are in heaven and enjoying His Blessings, the process of returning doesn't end there yet.  As long as the process of return is on going, duality exist.

When we were created, humans are given 3 things: The Ruh, Nafs and physical body.  Nafs is a type of "ruh" with free will to use some functions of the physical body".

We can't control many things of our body such growth of cells, body system, pain, aging..and so on.  These are controlled automatically by the Ruh (something that from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) that we will not  understand).  If the Ruh is taken from the body, we are declared physically dead.  

The Nafs can intertwine with the Ruh very well. Therefore, certain functions on to use the physical body by the Nafs is allowed.

The Nafs is the entity that undergoing the process of returning to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).  The Nafs must submit his free wills into the Will of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).  This will make the Nafs as a slave of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

The mission of the Nafs is to acknowledge La illaha illallah.   Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is given the task to set examples, rules and procedures on how to guide the Nafs toward La illaha illallah as a slave.  The process of acknowledging Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) as the Rabb (Pure Existence or...) is called worshipping.

The worshipping is the voluntary effort by Nafs as part of returning process to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).  The level of worshipping will be higher and higher ..... ( I have no ideal the limit at liqaullah).  The Nafs will be forever slave as long as Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) wants us to be.

There is a saying..."the person who knows his Nafs  know the  Rabb".  Within the human, if the person knows how the Ruh controlling the body and intertwines with the Nafs, he will know the real Lord.

Wahdatul Wujud for me is to make Nafs and Ruh to intertwine so the Ruh is in control of the Nafs and the Holy Names of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) that exist in the Ruh will be realized in the Nafs to a certain level.

Our Prophet Nafs is fully controlled by Holy Names of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)... therefore we can say that the essence of the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) are Holy Names of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).  So are the essense of Ahlulbayts (Imams).

If we struggle hard enough so that our Nafs is controlled by Holy Names of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), spiritually we are connected to Ahlulbayt.  This is how to hold on to Ahlulbayt especially to Imam Mahdi (ajtfs) and not going astray.  Basically be a slave of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in a real sense.

And we can forever be slave of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and worshipping Him (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

I believe that is what Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) want out of us.

Wallahualam..  correct me if I am wrong.

[Shahrukh K]

On 4/3/2021 at 7:22 AM, 313_Waiter said:

Salaam / Hi,

What, in your belief, is the nature of God? Please also explain why you believe this is so. 

Do you believe in (note: they may not be mutually exclusive):

• Pantheism: everything is part of God who encompasses all things. 
• Panentheism: God is everywhere, but at the same time transcends all things. The universe could be seen as a manifestation of God (like the sun and its rays, or the ocean and the waves of the ocean or like clothing and individual threads...). Other forms of panentheism may assert that the universe is contained within God. 
• Personal God: personal in the sense one could have a relationship with Him, characterised with "personal" attributes (mercy, love, anger...).
• Nondualism: where the multiplicity of the universe reflects One transcendent Reality that is God
• Dualism: there existing a dualism between God and creation. Could be seen as affirming two realities, one of God and the other of creation or individual souls.
• Monism: everything being derived from the One
• Transtheism: a philosophy that is beyond both theism and atheism!
• Other: (e.g. henotheism, polytheism, ietsism etc.) please detail, and also explain why you believe this is so (does not have to make sense to us, as long as you put something into words).

 

Thanks and God bless.

Assalamalaikum,

I believe in the oneness. (Non dual nature)
I believe that the meaning of La Ilaha Illa Allah is : there is nothing but Allah.
The story of Adam Angles and Iblees tells me the reason of my illusory existence and why i continue to exist.
The reason is Satan (or maya) which is the part of essence of Adam (or me) induced desires.
I believe that i am the central character of my world and everything is happening only to me.
My world created when I became conscious of my body and my mind (by succumbing to satan).
My desire created mind and what is going on is a projection of my own mind.
Everything is me. My world is my own.

Everything in my world is brought about by my Self. Everything everything everything is me.
My consciousness is the only consciousness. I take all else as illusion.
(La ilaha illa Allah)
There is only the Self, from which all phenomena and experience arise. There is no cause outside of Self. There is no effect outside of Self.
Realizing Self, the reason for my world comes to completion.

Only means by which i can realize Self is Quran. The Quran, revealing the Path, is the Path. There is only one problem and only one solution. My mind is the problem and the ceasing of my mind is the solution. However, my mind does not want to cease, for it believes itself to be alive and everything that is alive does not want to die. And so my ego keeps reading the book, feeding my mind and keeping it alive. The Quran keeps telling me the same thing: "stop feeding the mind and let it pass, for it is only in the death of the ego you will find completion."

[313_Waiter]

5 hours ago, Shahrukh K said:

Only means by which i can realize Self is Quran. The Quran, revealing the Path, is the Path. There is only one problem and only one solution. My mind is the problem and the ceasing of my mind is the solution. However, my mind does not want to cease, for it believes itself to be alive and everything that is alive does not want to die. And so my ego keeps reading the book, feeding my mind and keeping it alive

Salaam how can I read the Quran like you? Can you please detail which chapter(s) helped you most? I think surah Takathur is one surah.

5 hours ago, Shahrukh K said:

The Quran keeps telling me the same thing: "stop feeding the mind and let it pass, for it is only in the death of the ego you will find completion."

Which verse(s)?

[MexicanVato]

On 4/4/2021 at 1:30 AM, 313_Waiter said:

Thanks for response brother. If we are to accept non-duality, I think the counter argument to the above question would be that whilst these philosophies have elements of truth, Islam is the most updated version of this truth where Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) inherited the knowledge of all of the Prophets (عليه السلام) before him (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). Thus, Islam takes you to the Divine at a much faster speed than other religions like a highway compared to other long-winded roads. Further, other religions may have changed and may have corruptions like the trinity:

”Woe, then, to those who write the book with their hands and then say: This is from Allah, so that they may take for it a small price; therefore woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn.” (Quran 2:79)

Well said. Could be then acknowledge that someone among the advaitist (specifically those that do not do idol bhakti worship) could arrive at the same truth or haqq of al-islam? Would you say that dawah still needs to be preached to these folks?

On another note the pitfalls of this ideology is you have many fools who may have an experience or two and claim that they are one with deity or are self realized. If I am not mistaken in Kashmir Shaivism even tho its a non-dual philosophy they also maintain a transcendents of the creator whom they regard as Shiva but in the deepest sense I can say they are not idol worshipers because the learned among them do not worship the bohemian anthropomorphic shiva. 

On 4/4/2021 at 1:30 AM, 313_Waiter said:

Sheikh Sekaleshfar described it as such (in a lecture called la Ilaha illallah): someone goes to a clothing shop, he sees hats, pants, shirts, jumpers, sweaters. All the Sufi sees is one thing — thread. Thus creation is something measured- with shape size and other things we ascribe etc. It does NOT come from no-thing (nothing is not, does not exist!). All of these these creations / “existents” are a defined manifestation of a limitless reality - pure existence / existence qua existence / Allah / Hu/ Brahman / Necessary Being ..

Yes and here are where boundaries are drawn within the two schools of Sufism and Shiaism. Within both are some who believes this as reality and others still believe there is separation. So to respond to the quote in my signature:

On 4/4/2021 at 1:30 AM, 313_Waiter said:

What I don’t understand is that if only Allah exists (see bold), isn’t this in and of itself indicative of non-duality? If we (creation) are the act or attributes of Allah, we know in Shi’a philosophy His attributes are not separate from His essence, so again we arrive at non-duality.

Good question. My understanding is that when it comes to only Allah exists it means as as-Samad where as we are dependent on Him. Therefore our reality is relative or can be thought of as unreal. This is my understandings of Nuh's writings on the subject. Again this is open to interpretation from other sufis and arifin of the Shia. 

On 4/4/2021 at 1:30 AM, 313_Waiter said:

This was a difficulty I had. If I remember correctly Sheikh Sekaleshfar alluded to God existentiating existents from pre-eternity. Brother @eThErEaL (former member) explained that the period before and after creation is in and of itself a duality created in our mind! I have heard some (I think Alan Watts) even say that time is an illusion! This Q&A between the Imam al Ridha (عليه السلام) and Imran may shed some light:

Without a doubt I think there is ample proof that time does not exist. The concept that before and after creation is a duality created in our mind is intriguing. This also makes me think of a scientific theory a brother introduced me to. He actually wrote a paper on it being permissible to believe in with regards to Allah. He is a Mutazili/Zaidi leaning brother with a sharp rational intellect. The scientific theory is called 'Conformal Cyclic Cosmology'. Its as the title suggests a cyclical cosmology but some posit that Allah always existed and the universe has existed form his creation beyond time so to speak. 

Anyways some doubts arise however if we take a non-dual position on Islamic teachings. Would the belief not render heaven and hell as illusions and therefore not reality. We then slip into baatiniyin ways of interpreting the Qur'an. What are your thoughts?

[313_Waiter]

2 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

Well said. Could be then acknowledge that someone among the advaitist (specifically those that do not do idol bhakti worship) could arrive at the same truth or haqq of al-islam? Would you say that dawah still needs to be preached to these folks?

I personally believe that there are elements of truth within the major religions. I am unsure on the degree to which this truth exists. I think Da’wah is still necessary since Islam is closer to the truth (in my belief). Its shari’ah is most updated since Nabi Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was Khātimun Nabi’een (the seal of Prophethood).
There is a Shia / Sufi scholar Seyyed Hossein Nasr who has written on the philosophia perennis. I read his chapter “The Traditionalist Approach to Religion” in his book “The Essential Seyyed Hossein Nasr” where he expresses:

Quote

The school of the philosophia perennis speaks of tradition and traditions. It believes that there is a Primordial Tradition which constituted original or archetypal man’s primal spiritual and intellectual heritage received through direct revelation when Heaven and earth were still “united.” This Primordial Tradition is reflected in all later traditions, but the later traditions are not simply its historical and horizontal continuation. Each tradition is marked by a fresh vertical descent from the Origin, a revelation which bestows upon each religion lying at the center of the tradition in question its spiritual genius, fresh vitality, uniqueness, and the “grace” that makes its rites and practices operative, not to speak of the paradisal vision which constitutes the origin of its sacred art, or of the sapience which lies at the heart of its message. But because the Origin is One and also because of the profound unity of the human recipient, despite important existing racial, ethnic, and cultural differences, the fact that there is both the Primordial Tradition and traditions does not destroy the perennity and universality of the philosophia perennis. The anonymous tradition reflects a remarkable unanimity of views concerning the meaning of human life and the fundamental dimensions of human thought in worlds as far apart as those of the Eskimos and the Australian Aborigines, the Taoists and the Muslims

I am not sure I agree with a lot of what he says or even understand it properly but it gives us something to start with.

2 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

Therefore our reality is relative or can be thought of as unreal.

This is interesting, barkallah feek. Another thing I don’t understand is what do Sufis mean when they say unreal? Wouldn’t non-existence entail ‘no-thing’ which by definition does not exist and thus we arrive at non-duality again?

William Chittick writes I; his book “The Self-Disclosure of God Principles of Ibn Al-'Arabi's Cosmology“:

Quote

 

“The fact that God is with all things helps explain why He brings them from nonexistence in knowledge to existence in the cosmos. Sufis typically understand love as God's motive for creating the cosmos. Like others, Ibn al Arabi often refers to the famous Hadith Qudsi [a narration attributed to the Prophet Muhammad in which God is speaking] that speaks of God as a Hidden Treasure. The version he usually cites reads, “I was a Treasure but was not known, so I loved to be known; I created the creatures and made Myself known to them, so they came to know Me." But the Shaykh often reminds us that the object of love remains nonexistent, whether the love be human or divine.21 Of course, objections quickly arise when it is said that the object of love does not exist.

You may object and say: We loved sitting with a person, or kissing, or embracing, or intimacy, or conversation. Then we saw that it was achieved, but love did not disappear, even though there was embracing and mutual arrival. Hence, the object of love does not have to be nonexistent.

We would reply: You are mistaken. When you embrace the person, and when the object of your love had been embracing, or sitting together, or intimacy, you have not achieved the object of your love through this situation. For the object is now the continuance and permanence of what you have achieved. This continuance is nonexistent. It has not entered into wujiid, and its period has no end. Hence, in the state of arrival, love attaches itself only to a nonexistent thing, and that is its permanence.

How beautifully the Koran has expressed this with His words, He will love them and they will love Him [5:54]. For it employs pronouns of absence [Le., third person] and future tense verbs. Hence it ascribes love's connection only to that which is absent and nonexistent. And every absent thing is a nonexistent thing in a relative sense. (IT 327.8)”

 

In other words, Ayatollah Hasanzadeh writes:

Quote

That which is perceived is existence. We exist and other than us whatever is exists. We are nothing but existence. Have nothing but existence. Perceive nothing but existence. And see nothing but existence. The opposite of existence is non-existence which is nothingness. Does not exist. It is not any thing and so cannot be perceived in the first place in the external realm of reality. Even discussing or conceiving it, i.e. mentally, can only be done under the umbrella of existence. Existence is the source of and the origin to infinite vast array of emanations, actualizations and manifestations. Whatever emanates, actualizes, or manifests in reality must have done so through existence, not non-existence. This principal is the most self-evident of principals. In short, other than existence, there is nothing. All is and all manifestations arise through existence. Existence runs the order of the universe. It is rather the universe per se.”

Ayatullah Hasanzadeh, in his book Marefate Nafs Lesson 1

I don’t understand what non-reality or non-existence would mean in light of what Ayatollah Hasanzadeh wrote. Perhaps you could enlighten me InshaAllah (JazakAllah Khayr).

 

2 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

Without a doubt I think there is ample proof that time does not exist. The concept that before and after creation is a duality created in our mind is intriguing. This also makes me think of a scientific theory a brother introduced me to. He actually wrote a paper on it being permissible to believe in with regards to Allah. He is a Mutazili/Zaidi leaning brother with a sharp rational intellect. The scientific theory is called 'Conformal Cyclic Cosmology'. Its as the title suggests a cyclical cosmology but some posit that Allah always existed and the universe has existed form his creation beyond time so to speak. 

 

Thanks for this. Perhaps God's “noise” (kun faya koon —which continues right “now”) and “sacred silence” pattern is cyclical, or like Torus knots. This reminded me of this beautiful and spectacular hadith (all credits to al-Qa’im aka Bilal Muhammad)- it shows there is no end to God’s Kalimah aka logos (see also, Quran 18:109):

Quote

Imam al-Baqir [a] said,

"When Allah annihilates this creation and destroys this universe;
and settles the folks of Paradise in Paradise 
and sends the people of Hell to Hell; 
He will change this universe into a new universe, 
and will bring about fresh creation without male and female; 
who will worship Him and His oneness. 
He will create for them another Earth, 
which they will inhabit, 
and create another sky, 
which will shade them. 

Do you think that Allah has created only this Earth, and He has not created any other creation? On the contrary, by God, Allah has created one million worlds and one million Adams and you are from the last worlds and the last Adams."

التوحيد والخصال : عن أبيه ، عن سعد بن عبدالله ، عن محمد بن عيسى عن الحسن بن محبوب ، عن عمرو بن شمر ، عن جابر بن يزيد ، قال : سألت أبا جعفر عليه السلام عن قول الله عزوجل ( أفعيينا بالخلق الاول بل هم في لبس من خلق جديد ) فقال : يا جابر ، تأويل ذلك أن الله عزوجل إذا أفنى هذا الخلق وهذا العالم وسكن أهل الجنة الجنة ، وأهل النار النار ، جدد الله عزوجل عالما غير هذا العالم ، وجدد عالما من غير فحولة ولا إناث يعبدونه ويوحدونه ويخلق لهم أرضا غير هذه الارض تحملهم ، وسماء غير هذه السماء تظلهم ، لعلك ترى أن الله عزوجل إنما خلق هذا العالم الواحد ! أو ترى أن الله عزوجل لم يخلق بشرا غيركم ؟ ! بلى والله ، لقد خلق الله تبارك وتعالى ألف ألف عالم ، وألف ألف آدم ، وأنت في آخر تلك العوالم واولئك الآدميين

(al-Khisal)

The “Big Bang” which scientists talk about could be one instance of such noise. Though it’s important to not take science as one’s ilah given it changes every decade or so.
I opened a topic on this a while back:

 

2 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

Anyways some doubts arise however if we take a non-dual position on Islamic teachings. Would the belief not render heaven and hell as illusions and therefore not reality. We then slip into baatiniyin ways of interpreting the Qur'an. What are your thoughts?

 

In the words of Seyyed Hossein Nasr (see min 9), “ultimately only the Real is real”:

In the great Dua Kumayl, Hazrat Ali (عليه السلام) says that even if he is to endure Allah’s chastisement in hellfire, how can he endure separation from Allah (azwj), or to not gaze upon His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) generosity?

Quote

يَا إِلَهِي وَرَبِّي وَسَيِّدِي وَمَوْلاي

ya ilahi wa rab-bi wa say-yidi wa maw-lay

My God! My Lord! My Master! My Protector!

لأَيِّ الأُمُورِ إِلَيْكَ أَشْكُو

li-ay-yil-umuri ilayka ash-ku

For which things would I complain to You?

وَلِمَا مِنْهَا أَضِجُّ وَأَبْكِي

wa lima minha adij-ju wa ab-ki

And for which of them would I lament and weep?

لأَلِيمِ الْعَذَابِ وَشِدَّتِهِ!

li-alimil-`adhabi wa shid-datih

For the pain and severity of chastisement?

أَمْ لِطُولِ الْبَلاءِ وَمُدَّتِهِ!

am litulil-bala-i wa mud-datih

Or for the length and period of tribulation?

فَلَئِن صَيَّرْتَنِي لِلْعُقُوبَاتِ مَعَ أَعْدَائِكَ

fa-la-in say-yar-tani lil-u'qubati ma' a`da-ik

So if You takest me to the punishments with Your enemies,

وَجَمَعْتَ بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَ أَهْلِ بَلائِكَ

wa jama`ta bayni wa bayna ahli bala-ik

And gatherest me with the people of Your tribulation

وَفَرَّقْتَ بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَ أَحِبَّائِكَ وَأَوْلِيَائِكَ

wa far-raq-ta bay-ni wa bay-na ahib-ba-ika wa aw-li-ya-ik

And separatest me from Your friends and saints,

فَهَبْنِي يَا إِلَهِي وَسَيِّدِي وَمَوْلاي وَرَبِّي صَبَرْتُ عَلَى عَذَابِكَ،

fa-hab-ni ya ilahi wasay-yidi wa mawlaya wa rab-bi sabar-tu `ala `adhabika

Then suppose, My God, my Master, my Protector and my Lord that I am able to endure Your chastisement,

فَكَيْفَ أَصْبِرُ عَلَى فِرَاقِكَ

fakayfa as-biru `ala firaqika

How can I endure separation from You?

وَهَبْنِي صَبَرْتُ عَلَى حَرِّ نَارِكَ،

wa hab-ni sabar-tu `ala har-ri narika

And suppose that I am able to endure the heat of Your fire,

فَكَيْفَ أَصْبِرُ عَنِ النَّظَرِ إِلَى كَرَامَتِكَ

fakayfa as-biru `an-nazari ila karamatik

How can I endure not gazing upon Your generosity?

أَمْ كَيْفَ أَسْكُنُ فِي النَّارِ وَرَجَائِي عَفْوُكَ

am kayfa as-kunu fin-nari wa raja-i `af-wuk

Or how can I dwell in the Fire while my hope is Your pardon?

فَبِعِزَّتِكَ يَا سَيِّدِي وَمَوْلاي أُقْسِمُ صَادِقاً، لَئِن تَرَكْتَنِي نَاطِقاً

fabi-i'z-zatika ya say-yidi wa mawlaya uq-simu sadiqal-la-in tarak-tani natiqan

So by Your might, my Master and my protector, I swear sincerely, if You leavest me with speech,

لأَضِجَّنَّ إِلَيْكَ بَيْنَ أَهْلِهَا ضَجِيجَ الآمِلِينَ

ladij-jan-na ilayka bayna ah-liha dajijal-amilin

I will lament to You from the midst of the Fire's inhabitants with lamentation of the hopeful;

وَلأَصْرُخَنَّ إِلَيكَ صُرَاخَ المُسْتَصْرِخِينَ

wa lasrukhan-na ilayka surakhal-mus-tas-rikhin

I will cry to You with the cry of those crying for help;

وَلأَبْكِيَنَّ عَلَيْكَ بُكَاءَ الفَاقِدِينَ

wa-la-ab-ki-yan-na `ailayka buka-al-faqidin

I will weep to You with the weeping of the bereft;

وَلأُنَادِيَنَّكَ أَيْنَ كُنتَ يَا وَلِيَّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ

wa la-unadi-yan-naka ay-na kun-ta ya wali-yal-mu-minin

And I will call to You, Where art You, O Sponsor of the believers,

يَا غَايَةَ آمَاِل العَارِفِينَ

ya ghayata a-malil-`arifin

O Goal of the hopes of Your knowers,

يَا غِيَاثَ المُسْتَغِيثِينَ

ya ghiyathal-mus-taghithin

O Aid of those who seek assistance,

يَا حَبِيبَ قُلُوبِ الصَّادِقِينَ

ya habiba qulubis-sadiqin

O Friend of the hearts of the sincere

وَيَا إِلَهَ العَالَمِينَ

wa ya ilhal-`alamin

And O God of all the world's inhabitants!

Based on the below hadith, I think the afterlife is more real than this world. So the pains and the comforts of hell and heaven respectively will be much intensified. Or at least we reach a level of realisation greater than we do in this world:

Quote

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) is reported to have said “People are asleep, when they die, they wake up”

Sources: Tabaqatush Shafi’iyyah, vol. 6 pg. 357, Al Mughni ‘An Hamlil Asfar, Hadith: 3611, Al Maqasidul Hasanah, Hadith: 1240 and Al Asrarul Marfu’ah, Hadith: 555 

(Not sure about authenticity but Br Khalil Jaffer quoted it in his lecture series).

In min 3:30 of the below video, Seyyed Hossein Nasr says that hell is spoken of symbolically in all religions. Our imaginations cannot grasp hellfire. I don’t know if there are any hadiths to back this.

 

All that is wrong is from myself, all that is right is from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

 

Wallahu A’lam

[Dave follower of The Way]

On 4/3/2021 at 2:52 AM, 313_Waiter said:

Salaam / Hi,

What, in your belief, is the nature of God? Please also explain why you believe this is so. 

Do you believe in (note: they may not be mutually exclusive):

• Pantheism: everything is part of God who encompasses all things. 
• Panentheism: God is everywhere, but at the same time transcends all things. The universe could be seen as a manifestation of God (like the sun and its rays, or the ocean and the waves of the ocean or like clothing and individual threads...). Other forms of panentheism may assert that the universe is contained within God. 
• Personal God: personal in the sense one could have a relationship with Him, characterised with "personal" attributes (mercy, love, anger...).
• Nondualism: where the multiplicity of the universe reflects One transcendent Reality that is God
• Dualism: there existing a dualism between God and creation. Could be seen as affirming two realities, one of God and the other of creation or individual souls.
• Monism: everything being derived from the One
• Transtheism: a philosophy that is beyond both theism and atheism!
• Other: (e.g. henotheism, polytheism, ietsism etc.) please detail, and also explain why you believe this is so (does not have to make sense to us, as long as you put something into words).

 

Thanks and God bless.

Hi I'm a bit late joining this

I find all the long words confusing!

I go for a personal God who we can have a relationship with and who has attributes which we can relate to.  Humans were mad in God's immage so we reflect (all be it partially) his attributes.

Imalso go for a transendet reality who made an amazingly complex and varriety filled universe.

I'm not sure I undersatnd what you have writen by dualism, but I believe God is seperate from his creation.  The creator and the created can not be the same.

[313_Waiter]

2 hours ago, Dave follower of The Way said:

I'm not sure I undersatnd what you have writen by dualism, but I believe God is seperate from his creation.  The creator and the created can not be the same.

Hi, thanks for your contribution, I love hearing from different faiths and traditions.

By dualism I mean that two separate things exist I.e. God and creation. By nondualism I mean only God really exists. Creation could be seen as illusory, or a “manifestation” or a wave of existence etc. This is how I define it but I could very well be wrong as I have read very briefly. 

 

The mystics of of various traditions tend to have nondual philosophy, like Meister Eckhart in Christianity and Sufism in Islam. It is also prevalent in Dharmic traditions like Advaita Vedanta in Hinduism.

[MexicanVato]

@313_Waiter as salaamu alaikum brother,

Give me a day or two to digest what you have typed and I'll respond. My mind has not been in the best state to talk about this beautiful subject. I also want to skim through a book I have called 'The Divine Guide In Early Shi'ism The Sources of Esotericism in Islam' by Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi. 

[313_Waiter]

2 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

@313_Waiter as salaamu alaikum brother,

Give me a day or two to digest what you have typed and I'll respond. My mind has not been in the best state to talk about this beautiful subject. 

Wa alaikum salaam wrb,

No worries brother, take your time inshaAllah. I also should get off shiachat and get to studying as I have a number of tests coming up haha.
 

2 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

I have called 'The Divine Guide In Early Shi'ism The Sources of Esotericism in Islam' by Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi. 

I have heard of that book it sounds pretty cool. Would you recommend reading it?

 

Keep me in your prayers,

Wsalaam

[Dave follower of The Way]

On 4/5/2021 at 7:17 AM, 313_Waiter said:

"When Allah annihilates this creation and destroys this universe;
and settles the folks of Paradise in Paradise 
and sends the people of Hell to Hell; 
He will change this universe into a new universe, 
and will bring about fresh creation without male and female; 
who will worship Him and His oneness. 
He will create for them another Earth, 
which they will inhabit, 
and create another sky, 
which will shade them. 

This reminds me of a passage in John's Revelation chapter 21

Then I saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. ² I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. ³ And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Look! God’s dwelling-place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. ⁴ “He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death” or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.’

⁵ He who was seated on the throne said, ‘I am making everything new!’ Then he said, ‘Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.’

The passage follows by an offer to give the "Thirsty" water from the spring of the water of life.

I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the thirsty I will give water without cost from the spring of the water of life. ⁷ Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children. ⁸ But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practise magic arts, the idolaters and all liars – they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulphur. This is the second death.’

The contrast between being with God in the new heaven and earth and away from God by experiencing the 'second death'  is quite stark.

I am thirsty for that living water.  I seek to drink from it every day as I encounter the source and the spring. Jesus The Messiah said John chapter 7

³⁷ ‘Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. ³⁸ Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.’

[MexicanVato]

22 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

I have heard of that book it sounds pretty cool. Would you recommend reading it?

Yes akhi. For people like you and I that like these sorts of topics, it is a great read. It basically emphasizes that early Imami beliefs were esoteric. The imams (peace be upon them all) are initiators into the greater science of the din. 

[313_Waiter]

Does anyone know he difference between true absolute perfection (reached by a Muslim) and perfection (reached by all existents)? I am referring to the terminology of Sheikh sekaleshfar.

Also does anyone know if najis things are bad given that God is good and only creates good things? 

I think you are knowledgeable on this sister:

@PureExistence1

[PureExistence1]

Assalamualaikum,

Thanks for the tag.. what I know, I only know from something I learned a long time ago, and I can't give you an exact source for it. I know this is a very poor answer!

Anyway, what I had learned at some point either from a lecture, or conversation with my mentor sister, cant remember which, is that these things that are "najis" for us, are of no consequence to Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), as He is above and beyond these kind of things, but for the health and spiritual advancement and whatnot of humans, Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has made these things najis for us. For Him, it's neither here nor there, if you get what I'm saying. In regards to Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), its not relevant. 

Its kind of like how ingesting excrement is forbidden for us, but it has been made the method of nourishment for plants and even for some animals. Its not relevant or najis or forbidden for them, but for us it is.

(Not sure how good of an example that is:/ )

Sorry, I'm in a big hurry right now. I'm very pressed for time, but I didn't want to let this tag slip by me like I have in the past with some other tags.

[Shahrukh K]

On 4/5/2021 at 9:28 AM, MexicanVato said:

Would the belief not render heaven and hell as illusions and therefore not reality.

Real is heaven unreal is hell.

[Shahrukh K]

On 4/6/2021 at 2:59 AM, Dave follower of The Way said:

I believe God is seperate from his creation

How ?

From where he brought all the material to create this universe ?

[layman]

9 hours ago, Shahrukh K said:

How ?

From where he brought all the material to create this universe ?

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is the creator of everything. 

Whatever He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) created are inferior to Him (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)...that include the universe, us and everything that we can see or not.

Since "inferior than Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) " is the nature of all creations, then there exist inferior world that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) made for them.  In addition, inferiority cannot be equal to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

 

[Dave follower of The Way]

On 4/10/2021 at 6:10 AM, Shahrukh K said:

How ?

From where he brought all the material to create this universe ?

God is all powerful and created the universe from nothing by his powerful word.  His word brought everything into existance and gives life to living beings.

The first verse of the Torah (Genisis  1:1) says

In the begining God created the heavens and the earth.

So God was there before the begining when nothing had been created and he brought it into existance.

It is interesting that the Injil John 1:1-5 reflects this creation narrative with the words

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² He was with God in the beginning. ³ Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. ⁴ In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. ⁵ The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

[MexicanVato]

Check at 20:30. Very interesting lecture.

 

 

[MexicanVato]

On 4/5/2021 at 1:17 AM, 313_Waiter said:

I personally believe that there are elements of truth within the major religions. I am unsure on the degree to which this truth exists. I think Da’wah is still necessary since Islam is closer to the truth (in my belief). Its shari’ah is most updated since Nabi Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was Khātimun Nabi’een (the seal of Prophethood).

I agree. I stand by the statements of Sheikh Nuh Ha Mim Keller (again to reiterate I am not his follower nor sunni, but thought his answer to the question about non-muslims having mystical experiences to make sense). I still struggle with absolute non-duality that is similar to the Advaitists. However, I take Sheikh Shomali's (hafidullah) position that takfir should not be made on those that believe only Allah exists because some arifin among the ulama have also adopted the view. I still see it as mystical experiences or unveiling which reveal the ego to be false (made up of thoughts and beliefs) and thus has no real independent existence.

On 4/5/2021 at 1:17 AM, 313_Waiter said:

There is a Shia / Sufi scholar Seyyed Hossein Nasr who has written on the philosophia perennis. I read his chapter “The Traditionalist Approach to Religion” in his book “The Essential Seyyed Hossein Nasr” where he expresses:

This reminds me of tawba being interpreted as returning to the original state or one's original state. What I mean is when we were all Souls without a body bearing witness to the Oneness of Allah Ta'ala before the creation of the worlds. This of course as you know has a lot to do with the Perfect Man or the Muhammadan Light. Speaking of which I am reading a book by the Sufi Sunni Gibril Fouad Haddad called 'The Muhammadan Light in the Qur'an, Sunna, and Companion-Reports'. Even though the ahadith are quotes from Sunni books, I none-the-less am enjoying the book as Shia and Sunnis alike believe such a concept.

On 4/5/2021 at 1:17 AM, 313_Waiter said:

This is interesting, barkallah feek. Another thing I don’t understand is what do Sufis mean when they say unreal? Wouldn’t non-existence entail ‘no-thing’ which by definition does not exist and thus we arrive at non-duality again?

Good question. This is a question that again will depend on the 'arif. Some believing literally so to speak in non-duality and those that believe relativity is unreal where as the Absolute (Allah As-Samad) is the only real. The Maliki Mufti Abu Layth (popular on Youtube) views ibn Arabi's Wahdat al-Wujud as being a concept that may allow for salvation for non-muslims even though Islam is the Haq according to him. I am leaning in favor of that. After all I do not even know if I will make it to Jannah as I have mountains of sin, but May Allah have mercy upon us all.

On 4/5/2021 at 1:17 AM, 313_Waiter said:

I don’t understand what non-reality or non-existence would mean in light of what Ayatollah Hasanzadeh wrote. Perhaps you could enlighten me InshaAllah (JazakAllah Khayr).

I understand what he is saying theoretically not experiential as unfortunately I am not of the 'arifin or the righteous. Perhaps Allah will guide me to such a path and experience. In my opinion what he means is existence is all that we experience in terms of consciousness. We are in a way 'experience' or 'experiencing', 'perceiving' and thus 'perceiving' or 'witnessing' is existence. Similar I think to 'I am' in its more purified form. Non-existence or reality I think is that he is describing annihilation. The ego does not exists and nothing exists so to speak but not nihilistically. Another way of describing what he means here is that Allah is just the name for the Divine Unity, but we cannot conceive of Allah thus we say Allahu Akbar (Allah is greater than what we think). No concept or perception can truly capture him. Again this is my interpretation of his wording and its based theoretically and not based on gnosis, which is to say hes casting pearls before swine (me).

On 4/5/2021 at 1:17 AM, 313_Waiter said:

The “Big Bang” which scientists talk about could be one instance of such noise. Though it’s important to not take science as one’s ilah given it changes every decade or so.

Agreed.

[313_Waiter]

On 4/15/2021 at 10:52 PM, MexicanVato said:

Speaking of which I am reading a book by the Sufi Sunni Gibril Fouad Haddad called 'The Muhammadan Light in the Qur'an, Sunna, and Companion-Reports'.

Khalil Andani (Ismaili Professor) has written a journal about The Muhammadan Light based on Shia as well as Sufi-Sunni narrations. I have read half of it and it is pretty good so far.

It can be found here:

https://brill.com/view/journals/jss/8/2/article-p99_1.xml?fbclid=IwAR2VOKZzEMg1NoXOeKyUTU8oKn4oXR5MZSebA4MZU4Zla-irsXHdVZtxX-o

This is a short video he made based on some of this article:

[313_Waiter]

5 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

I still struggle with absolute non-duality that is similar to the Advaitists.

I am a jāhil but I lean towards non-duality. Some of Rupert Spira’s talks have helped:

He has been listed as one of the most “awakened” mystical teachers according to this random list I found on reddit (Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) should be on top but I found this list interesting):

 

[MexicanVato]

Yes, I am aware of Rupert Spira. I used to listen to his talks when I was non-muslim. He is sharp in his school of Advaita and also he is one that speaks of Kashmir Shaivism. There is also Mooji who is quite popular in the neo-advaita world. I like to understand such concepts from Islamic figures if we are to determine if the same creed can be found in the Qur'an, hadith and teachings of the Ahlul Bayt. Again we fall into the possibility of giving credence to non-muslim teachers which means it could equate to us giving bayah to gurus outside of Islam. Now perhaps I am falling into ghuloo for wanting to stay within the Islamic realm, but in order to satisfy my understanding of such teachings I need to see it from Islam. Going back to Nuh Keller's statement I wonder if some of the experiences of non-duality that non-muslims experience are these temporary experiences which they hold onto after their states of meditation and posit that God and creation are one. Just as Meister Eckhart or others may have some unveiling but shortly after attribute such to the 'trinity'.

Here is a video that sheds more light on Wahdat al-wujud quoting many sufi mystics that does not contain tashbih if you reflect deeply on the quotes:

 

[313_Waiter]

Salaam brothers,

I am also interested in what your opinion is regarding such matters, and also anyone else who wants to comment.

@Muhammed Ali @Ayuoobi

Feel free to comment if you have any thoughts on this topic (also feel free to refrain from commenting).

[Guest Fulan Mr Fulan]

4 minutes ago, 313_Waiter said:

Salaam brothers,

I am also interested in what your opinion is regarding such matters, and also anyone else who wants to comment.

@Muhammed Ali @Ayuoobi

Feel free to comment if you have any thoughts on this topic (also feel free to refrain from commenting).

Salam Brother

it is always a pleasure reading your posts.  

• Primary Topic: Personal Happiness (Or Ending Personal Mental Suffering) from Within
• Saintly (Ethical, Loving, Joyful) Behavior
• Teaches from Direct Personal ExperiencE

this is part of interesting. It is a criteria made by a someone who believes himself to be a separate person / self.  (He is projecting his limitations and beliefs) in this criteria.  
 

Firstly there is no true “personal” happiness.  A “person” is by definition a suffering entity because a person by definition is one who experiences the duality between the two (pleasure and displeasure or precisely, happiness and sadness).  True happiness is beyond this duality and as such is simply “lack of suffering”).  He says,  “ending personal mental suffering from “within”, which again is another projected belief of a duality between subject and object (inside and outside), within and outward.  
 

regarding Saintly, (sure, one must be ethical, but much of what people imagine to be ethical is also a personal belief.).  His criteria explains more about him (the one who made the criteria) than about anyone else.  
 

on the top of the list should be Prophet Muhammad (S) and then all the Prophets.  Then the Ahlul Bayt, the Sahaba and the rest of the Awliya of Allah (which may or may not include people from that list).