Sufism corrupted shi'sm?

[Ali Jafer]

Salam, i have researched a little bit about the mystical believes of sufiya that also perpetuates in the books of many shia scholars. One of it is wahdat al wajood. Many mujtahidin of Iran have publish the books containing this aqida which they got from ibn arabi the famous sunni sufiya.. Scholars like Hasanzadeh Amoli, khominie etc have written the Exegesis of ibn arabi books as if he was, one of the scholars of shia. Why do our scholars perpetuate these deviant believes in shia population? 

[SO SOLID SHIA]

One mans mystic is another mans deviant. They called Allama Tabatabai a deviant too, then when he passed away they all praised him. 

 simple minds cannot fathom certain ideas and beliefs. Follow whatever path is comfortable for you.

Anyways big up my homies Allama Tabatabai, Syed Ali Qazi, Grandmaster Behjat! 

Fire pon deh Babylon who mek Trouble,

Rastafarai stand alone ! 

 

[Ali Jafer]

Not pointing any personalities.. But this wahdat al wajood is a kufr.. If it is isn't.. Our Imam (عليه السلام) must have dictated about it... But they infact hadiths are against this believe.. If any one have any reference from imam about this aqida. Please show.. I didn't find..  

[Inspector]

11 hours ago, Ali Jafer said:

. One of it is wahdat al wajood

Do you have any doubt that there is just "One Reality"? What is "Wujood" by the way? 

Ever tried to understand the following verses of al-Hadeed;

هو الاول والأخر والظاهر والباطن

 

Edited January 23 by Inspector

[Ashvazdanghe]

12 hours ago, Ali Jafer said:

they got from ibn arabi the famous sunni sufiya.. Scholars like Hasanzadeh Amoli, khominie etc have written the Exegesis of ibn arabi books as if he was, one of the scholars of shia. Why do our scholars perpetuate these deviant believes in shia population? 

Salam taking an idea from someone and explaining  & modification of based on your understanding is not forbidden which people likewise Ayatollah  Hasanzadeh Amoli (رضي الله عنه) & Imam Khomeini (رضي الله عنه) have taken idea from Ibn Arabi but on the other hand they have explained & modified it according Shia viewpoint which they have not done copy cat from him but modified it according to teachings of Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) which most staunch enemy of Ayatollah  Hasanzadeh Amoli (رضي الله عنه) & Imam Khomeini (رضي الله عنه) are Shirazi grouplet which they read something from them in wrong way so then they interpret it in more wrong way so then do Takifir on them just  due to their grudge & enmity & their deviated neo Akhbarism. 

[AbdusSibtayn]

Writing commentaries on their works doesn't mean that these scholars agreed with everything that they said.

I can agree that Aquinas was a great metaphysician and logician without being a Roman Catholic, I can appreciate Hegel's politico-philosophical genius without being an Evangelical Lutheran Protestant, and I can appreciate Marx's remarkable grip on political economy without being a Communist. I can even incorporate some of their ideas in my worldview without being any of these things.

Likewise is the case with the scholars who write on Ibn Arabi, Mulla Sadra, and the like. Just because they have mentioned some positive thing about them in their writings doesn't mean that they endorsed them wholesale, including their incorrect/deviant beliefs.

Wassalam.

[Sabrejet]

Shia'ism, or rather the perfect Deen itself hasn't been corrupted. However, it's hard to ignore the negative effects that Sufism has had on our Hawzas over the years.

The problem is that the Irfani/Pro-Sufi side will call you ignorant and unlearned whenever you try to discuss their specific problematic beliefs. Ayatollah Wahid Khorasani (A.R) is one of those who have called this out.

As for Wahdat ul Wajood, if those who believe it insist that Bani Isra'il did nothing wrong by worshipping the Golden Calf, then you don't need to study 40 years under a master to call them wrong..

Edited January 26 by Sabrejet

[PureExistence1]

5 hours ago, Sabrejet said:

As for Wahdat ul Wajood, if those who believe it insist that Bani Isra'il did nothing wrong by worshipping the Golden Calf

There are people that believe in wahdat ul wujood who believe this???

 

[Inspector]

Unless people don't understand "wujood" (existence) as well as the concept of origin & return, it would be difficult for them to grasp this simple yet difficult to understand concept of wehdat-ul-wajood (unity of existence). 

When the drop returns to its origin, which is the sea, it will lose its entity and its essence as a drop, that is, it will lose that spherical shape and its existence as a drop will cease, but in return for that it unites with the sea and becomes a sea. It will not be said that it is a drop, but rather it is indicated. To it,  it is said that it is the sea.. 

What is with us to understand the ism e mubarak هو الظاهر? How can He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) be الظاهر if one deny the concept of origin & return? 

The things get more complicated yet interesting if we assume that the asma الظَّاهِرُ وَالْبَاطِنُ  are but one!

فَسُبْحَانَ الَّذِي بِيَدِهِ مَلَكُوتُ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ وَإِلَيْهِ تُرْجَعُونَ

Edited January 26 by Inspector

[Sabrejet]

3 hours ago, PureExistence1 said:

There are people that believe in wahdat ul wujood who believe this???

 

This is famously written in Ibn Arabi's Fusoos al Hikam.

[Abu Nur]

5 hours ago, PureExistence1 said:

There are people that believe in wahdat ul wujood who believe this???

 

Yes, nothing wrong with the concept when it is understood correctly. 

[Inspector]

 “All creatures are pure nothingness. I do not say they are small or petty: they are pure nothingness.” Whereas God inherently possesses being, creatures do not possess being but receive it derivatively. Outside God, there is pure nothingness. “The being (of things) is God.” The “noble man” moves among things in detachment, knowing that they are nothing in themselves and yet aware that they are full of God—their being.

(Eckhart Tolle)

[PureExistence1]

1 hour ago, Abu Nur said:

understood correctly. 

Salaam, Would you be willing to explain to to me, because right off the bat, it sounds wrong, but ive come across plenty of things, even some things in the Quran, that once explained correctly made amazing sense.

Thanks brother, and if you dont have the time to help me, its ok..maybe someone else can help me out. I just want to learn!!

Jzk!

[PureExistence1]

53 minutes ago, Inspector said:

Outside God, there is pure nothingness

Salaam, there can not be any "thing" outside of Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) as nothingness is a non reality.

Can you help me understand what this nothingness is?

 

Jzk

[Inspector]

7 hours ago, PureExistence1 said:

Can you help me understand what this nothingness is?

Salam,

It is dissimilarity. Like Him there is nothing (ليس كمثله شيء). 

 

[Ashvazdanghe]

8 hours ago, PureExistence1 said:

even some things in the Quran, that once explained correctly made amazing sense.

Salam this is something likewise concept of Ruh روح which we only know too few from it which anyone has his interpretation which although is a creature of Allah but some people have mistaken it with Allah which Allah is origin of everything which we & all of creation will return to him  but on the other hand for creating anything , nothing separated or added to him but some people mistaken  Wahdat al Wujud as returning separated portion of Allah to him in similar fashion of pantheism & holy spirit in Christianity but on the other hand Shia scholars have considered    Wahdat al Wujud as returning everything to origin in world of particles  alam-e-Dharr & Paradise & hell without returning separated part of Allah to him which nothing from creation  have been separated or will rejoin to him as part of him . 

[Ashvazdanghe]

Reliance on Everything Else Other than Allah Is a Result of Lack of Belief in the Unity of Divine Actions

What has been mentioned is a reflection of the belief in the unity of divine actions in the human perception, temperament and behavior of man and that man ought to rely only on Allah and not pay any heed to anything else other than Allah regardless that before arriving at the stage of inner witnessing of the unity of divine actions, man depends on other people and imagines that he is in need of them and hopes that they will provide his needs and solve his problems.

Quote

Or, he fears that they will harm him. In reality, he believes in the independence of causes and effects in influencing events and puts his faith in them. With all certainty, this trend is not compatible with monotheistic thinking. The exigency of monotheistic knowledge is that man ought not to give his heart to and not rely on all else save Allah. In this regard

, the Noble Prophet (S) states:

“O Abu Dharr! A man does not attain perfect comprehension and complete scholarship until he perceives people as camels lacking in understanding being moved by Allah, the Exalted, and then he looks at himself and sees himself lower than all of them.”

Quote

It is interesting that the Noble Prophet’s (S) expression is that no person is a perfect scholar until he perceives the will of people in the hands of other than them, like camels whose harnesses are in the hands of the camel driver and he guides the drove of camels and they have no free will of their own. Selecting the course of direction, arranging and managing duties are controlled by the one in whose hands are their harnesses.

In the beginning, man fantasizes that other people are independent in their movements, in their wars and victories and the events that come to pass. But when his cognition grows and he attains monotheistic knowledge, he conceives them as a convoy of camels whose harnesses are in the hands of someone else and the order of the movements of these causes as being in the hands of Allah. It is true that the causes and effects are at work and this order is in a state of movement, this order is not a series of movements. There is someone who has gotten the reigns and harnesses of these horses in his hands.

Of course, this does not imply that people are under compulsion, but the point is that absolute influencing is not in their hands; it is not true that they are the doers of all their deeds and the deciders of their affairs. They are under the influence of another order and a will above the human will controls them. Therefore, a monotheist is a person who does not forget Allah and does not overlook the hand of Allah in the order of the cosmos; in other than this case, he has not comprehended monotheism.

Of course, explaining this matter is not easy and exposition does not play a fundamental role in perceiving and understanding this reality, on the contrary we ought to ask Allah to grant us the grace to conceive these realities.

Quote

Man ought not to feel safe from the insinuations of the accursed Devil for the reason that the Devil never at all leaves man free on his own. The Devil strives harder at misleading those who have set foot on the right course and are traversing the path of perfection. But weak people go after the Devil of their own volition and there is no need for the Devil to deviate them.

https://www.al-islam.org/provisions-journey-mishkat-volume-1-muhammad-taqi-misbah-yazdi/lesson-23-perfect-scholar-and

 

Edited January 27 by Ashvazdanghe

[Inspector]

Wahdat-ul-Wajood asserts that there is only one Being, and all existence is nothing but the manifestation or outward radiance of that One Being. In that sense, nothingness implies dissimilarity otherwise you can see the manifestations of "The Only Being". 

This is unanimously agreed & purely shi'i concept of how we look at it. 

[Abu Nur]

13 hours ago, PureExistence1 said:

Salaam, Would you be willing to explain to to me, because right off the bat, it sounds wrong, but ive come across plenty of things, even some things in the Quran, that once explained correctly made amazing sense.

Thanks brother, and if you dont have the time to help me, its ok..maybe someone else can help me out. I just want to learn!!

Jzk!

Wa Aleikum Salaam, 

There is nothing wrong with our common understanding of Tawheed. Wahdat al Wujud is just beautiful described how actually only Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Exist because He is the Existence Himself. Everything else is just His manifestation of His names and attributes that are also real. So we are only real because of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) constant is creating, making us to be. All praise to Him (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) because everything is nothing but Him manifesting His names and attributes. 

People usually confuse here that we are somehow part of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), when that is actually shirk. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is One and Absolute and no one else is part of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) because no one manifest absolutely Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) names and attributes, only Himself do.

One said once beautifully that it is as Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is looking at Himself (His beauty) when He see the creations because everything is nothing but Himself acting. 

 

Edited January 27 by Abu Nur

[Diaz]

1 hour ago, Abu Nur said:

People usually confuse here that we are somehow part of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), when that is actually shirk.

Thank you brother for explaining it because I was confused. Who believe we (humans) are part of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) tho? 

[Ali Jafer]

The whole concept of wahdat al wajood that you all are trying to explain are self made by the sufis. There is no comparison between the wajood of allah and the beings. They both are two different identities. THEY ARE NOT ONE WAJOOD!! Our imams have thousand of hadiths on tawheed, zaat o sifaat of allah, but they never ever gave such concepts, instead they rejected them and did takfeer of sufism. But woe be onto us that we just want to follow the fallibles like our sufi masked scholars and there SELF MADE PHILOSOPHICAL Kufriyaat... 

SHISM has been too much corrupted by these sufi skinned shia scholars of hawza that you all will believe anything and defend anything they say.. Without even having slightest of the idea about the teachings of our imams. All of these sufi masked shia scholars wrote VOLUMES OF BOOKS on this kufr without even mentioning any hadees of our imams, instead idolising nasibis like ibn ARABI and corrupting our religion. 

May allah save us from these false scholars, there false teachings and preserve our aqida. 

May allah hasten the return of imam  ع

[Abu Nur]

2 hours ago, Diaz said:

Thank you brother for explaining it because I was confused. Who believe we (humans) are part of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) tho? 

Some think that Wahjad Wujud is like pantheism, when it is actually not. It does not make the claim that universe is identical to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), which would be shirk.

[Abu Nur]

33 minutes ago, Ali Jafer said:

The whole concept of wahdat al wajood that you all are trying to explain are self made by the sufis. There is no comparison between the wajood of allah and the beings. They both are two different identities. THEY ARE NOT ONE WAJOOD!! Our imams have thousand of hadiths on tawheed, zaat o sifaat of allah, but they never ever gave such concepts, instead they rejected them and did takfeer of sufism. But woe be onto us that we just want to follow the fallibles like our sufi masked scholars and there SELF MADE PHILOSOPHICAL Kufriyaat... 

SHISM has been too much corrupted by these sufi skinned shia scholars of hawza that you all will believe anything and defend anything they say.. Without even having slightest of the idea about the teachings of our imams. All of these sufi masked shia scholars wrote VOLUMES OF BOOKS on this kufr without even mentioning any hadees of our imams, instead idolising nasibis like ibn ARABI and corrupting our religion. 

May allah save us from these false scholars, there false teachings and preserve our aqida. 

May allah hasten the return of imam  ع

They are two different entities (one is absolute and one is manifestation of the absolute), and no one is claiming that they are one in their absoluteness. The problem with those who deny Wahjad Wujuud is that they never understand it in first place or they hate whatever is associate with Sufism.

Wahjad Al Wujud is more like an perspective (God as its sole instance) when we focus totally to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and see that there is only Him (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) who manifest Himself.

Edited January 27 by Abu Nur

[Ali Jafer]

40 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

They are two different entities (one is absolute and one is manifestation of the absolute), and no one is claiming that they are one in their absoluteness. The problem with those who deny Wahjad Wujuud is that they never understand it in first place or they hate whatever is associate with Sufism.

Wahjad Al Wujud is more like an perspective (God as its sole instance) when we focus totally to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and see that there is only Him (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) who manifest Himself.

Please do not try to fool the people, we know understand this kufriya. 

In the book Sharah fusoos al hakam (exegesis of book by ibn arabi) by hasanzadeh amoli - he writes "when a man sees a woman, he actually sees haq in her and at time of intercouse, man sees woman that is haq (allah) sees haq(allah). 

Nauzubillah... Similarly if u see the works of ibn arabi, or khomini's exegesis of fussos al hakam , or other  scholar's, you will find numerous of these examples of layers of complicated philosophical concepts, but all of them are totally kufr. 

[Abu Nur]

27 minutes ago, Ali Jafer said:

Please do not try to fool the people, we know understand this kufriya. 

In the book Sharah fusoos al hakam (exegesis of book by ibn arabi) by hasanzadeh amoli - he writes "when a man sees a woman, he actually sees haq in her and at time of intercouse, man sees woman that is haq (allah) sees haq(allah). 

Nauzubillah... Similarly if u see the works of ibn arabi, or khomini's exegesis of fussos al hakam , or other  scholar's, you will find numerous of these examples of layers of complicated philosophical concepts, but all of them are totally kufr. 

I'm not fooling anyone. There is nothing kufr on it. The example you told here have nothing problem when a man of intellect witness the beauty and the pleasure God have created to be experienced trough the wife and husband bonding.

 

[AbdusSibtayn]

7 hours ago, Inspector said:

Wahdat-ul-Wajood asserts that there is only one Being, and all existence is nothing but the manifestation or outward radiance of that One Being. In that sense, nothingness implies dissimilarity otherwise you can see the manifestations of "The Only Being". 

This is unanimously agreed & purely shi'i concept of how we look at it. 

This is because many of them conflate 'wahdat al-mawjud' (Unity of the 'Existents' and 'Everything is God', astaghfirullah) with 'wahdat al-wujud' (Unity of 'Existence'). 

Existent=\= Existence. 

As Sayyid Kadhim Yazdi (rh) in his Sharh Urwat al-Wuthqa has said, the former belief is shirk, while the latter isn't. 

I'm not very big on philosophical speculation and metaphysical nitpicking in aqaid myself, but takfir of the ulama, who have more love for the Ahlul Bayt (ams) and more knowledge of their teachings in their toenails than all of us combined, is a very serious matter. 

[Inspector]

2 hours ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

wahdat al-mawjud'

Salam! 

If we think that there is none but One Being/Existence (وجود) in reality then there is the only same present (موجود). 

I often think about why I am even "mawjud"? I realize that it is the معيت of that One reality which makes me mawjud. Perhaps I am not even mawjud, it is only He (glory to be Him) who deserve & said to be mawjud. 

و هو معكم اين ما كنتم

It should be noted that the معيت I am talking about is not the one which "mujassimah" suggests nor it is the one which limits Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in anyway. You can understand it as a humility of servant who negates his own self by turning face towards the One Reality who is accompanying him. As Amir ul Mo'mineen (عليه السلام) said in his munajaat;

مولاي يا مولاي

انت الحي و انا الميت

و هل يرحم الميت الا الحي

[AbdusSibtayn]

13 hours ago, Inspector said:

Salam! 

If we think that there is none but One Being/Existence (وجود) in reality then there is the only same present (موجود). 

I often think about why I am even "mawjud"? I realize that it is the معيت of that One reality which makes me mawjud. Perhaps I am not even mawjud, it is only He (glory to be Him) who deserve & said to be mawjud. 

و هو معكم اين ما كنتم

It should be noted that the معيت I am talking about is not the one which "mujassimah" suggests nor it is the one which limits Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in anyway. You can understand it as a humility of servant who negates his own self by turning face towards the One Reality who is accompanying him. As Amir ul Mo'mineen (عليه السلام) said in his munajaat;

مولاي يا مولاي

انت الحي و انا الميت

و هل يرحم الميت الا الحي

Wassalam, 

I think a 'mayyit' is still technically 'mawjud'.

I don't know/understand much about these matters or speculative philosophy, and prefer to stay silent on these things.

[AbdusSibtayn]

13 hours ago, Inspector said:

Salam! 

If we think that there is none but One Being/Existence (وجود) in reality then there is the only same present (موجود). 

I often think about why I am even "mawjud"? I realize that it is the معيت of that One reality which makes me mawjud. Perhaps I am not even mawjud, it is only He (glory to be Him) who deserve & said to be mawjud. 

و هو معكم اين ما كنتم

It should be noted that the معيت I am talking about is not the one which "mujassimah" suggests nor it is the one which limits Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in anyway. You can understand it as a humility of servant who negates his own self by turning face towards the One Reality who is accompanying him. As Amir ul Mo'mineen (عليه السلام) said in his munajaat;

مولاي يا مولاي

انت الحي و انا الميت

و هل يرحم الميت الا الحي

Wassalam, 

I think a 'mayyit' is still technically 'mawjud'.

I don't know/understand much about these matters or speculative philosophy, and prefer to stay silent on these things.

[Ashvazdanghe]

On 1/27/2024 at 5:44 PM, Ali Jafer said:

In the book Sharah fusoos al hakam (exegesis of book by ibn arabi) by hasanzadeh amoli

Salam it's just shows your lack of knowledge & common rhetoric of Shirazi grouplet  which your hateful rhetoric is just based on typical hateful rhetoric of Shirazi grouplet against both of Aytollah Hasanzadeh Amoli (رضي الله عنه) & Imam Khomeini (رضي الله عنه) by mistranslation & misinterpretation of their works which your hateful rhetoric has no scientific or rational value which is just based blind hatred ; which you are doing Takfir on them in similar fashion of Wahabist due to your total ignorance & blind hatred .

On 1/27/2024 at 5:44 PM, Ali Jafer said:

- he writes "when a man sees a woman, he actually sees haq in her and at time of intercouse, man sees woman that is haq (allah) sees haq(allah). 

This is just distortion of shirazi grouplet for insulting to both of women & shia scholars for mistranslation & misinterpretation of their words into a sexual text ; which in opposition to your distortion original words of revered shia scholars likewise  Aytollah Hasanzadeh Amoli (رضي الله عنه) in Sharah fusoos al hakam has said that 

Quote

 از نظر حقیقت میان زن و مرد امتیازى نیست و حقیقت زن عین حقیقت مرد است و فقط از جهت تعیّن و تشخیص از یکدیگر ممتازند. و چون زن و مرد در حقیقت انسانیت مشترکند و انوثت و ذکورت امرى عارضى هر دو مى‏توانند مقامات عرفانى را طى کنند. محى الدین مى‏گوید: 

In terms of Haq (truth) , there is no distinction between men and women, and the Haq  of a woman is the same as the Haq of a man, and they are distinguished from each other only in terms of determining and distinguishing. And since men and women share humanity in reality, and femininity and masculinity are incidental, both of them can pass through mystical ranks. Muhyiddin says:

Quote

 «انّ هذه المقامات لیست مخصوصة بالرجال فقد تکون للنساء ایضاً لکن لماکانت الغلبة للرجال تذکر باسم الرجال»(4)

4. شرح فصوص الحکم تصحیح آقاى حسن زاده آملى، ج 2، ص 127. 

passing  mystical ranks, it is not reserved for men, but also it's  for women too, but since it is mostly men who are on this path, their names have been mentioned.(4)

(4) Sharah fusoos al hakam (exegesis of book) rectification of mr Hasanzadeh Amoli , V2 , p127

On 1/27/2024 at 5:44 PM, Ali Jafer said:

hasanzadeh amoli - he writes "when a man sees a woman, he actually sees haq in her and at time of intercouse, man sees woman that is haq (allah) sees haq(allah). 

According to Ayatollah  Hasanzadeh Amoli & in opposition to your sexual rhetoric 

Otherwise, women such as Maryam bint Imran and Asia, the wife of Pharaoh, and Khadijah and Fatimah (sa) reached this position. A woman is more perfect than a man. Muhyiddin, in Fass Muhammadi, when he talks about the popularity of women for the Prophet (PBU),

writes: Because the most holy essence of Allah is immaculate from that it can't be seen without glory and manifestation, any manifestation that is more comprehensive of the names and attributes of Allah are divine, it shows Allah better, and a woman is more perfect than a man in being the manifestation of Allah, because a man is only an embodiment of acceptance and passivity, because he is a creature of Haq, and in terms of being a creature, he has accepted the creation, but a woman It is both a manifestation of divine acceptance and passivity and a manifestation of divine action and influence. Because it makes a man fascinated and loved[the woman], and this possession and influence is a sign of Allah's activity. It is based on the fact that a woman is more perfect than a man. If a man wants to see Allah in his manifestation, his intuition is not complete, but if he wants to see Allah in the manifestation of a woman, his intuition will reach perfection and status. That is why the woman became beloved of the Holy Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) .(5)

(5) Sharah fusoos al hakam (exegesis of book) rectification of mr Hasanzadeh Amoli , V2 , p 1345

On 1/27/2024 at 5:44 PM, Ali Jafer said:

and at time of intercouse, man sees woman that is haq (allah) sees haq(allah). 

To clarify Ibn Arabi's speech, two points are stated. 1- The fact that a woman is active (subject) and passive in relation to a man is mentioned, that is, a woman is passive from a man and is the active (subject)  in him, not passive from him and she is the active  in him, that is, a woman is influenced by a man and influences him in a different way ; which fascinates him. Of course, a woman is a manifestation of Allah's creativity in her influence on the fetus, and she has a creative role in organizing the fetus in the womb.

2- The meaning of love in this discussion is divine love, not animal lust, as Muhyiddin himself says:

Quote

«و من احبّهنّ على جهة الشهوة خاصة نقصه علم هذه الشهوة فکان صورة بلاروح عنده»(6)

If someone loves women from a natural instinct, he does not know the secret of this desire, and since the knowledge of the purpose and awareness of the secret is like the soul, and the tendency itself is like the face and body, the people of lust without divine love are like the face (body) without the soul.(6)

(6) Sharah fusoos al hakam (exegesis of book) rectification of mr Hasanzadeh Amoli , V2 , p 1350

http://ensani.ir/fa/article/53180/زن-و-عرفان

 

 

Edited January 29 by Ashvazdanghe

[Inspector]

On 1/28/2024 at 3:05 PM, AbdusSibtayn said:

think a 'mayyit' is still technically 'mawjud'.

Salam!

You missed my point brother. 

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) negating his own life while mentioning Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) as الحي. 

"O Master! You are Ever-Living and I am dead".

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was not really dead while uttering these words. 

I hope you know the following divine words:

"My servant continues to draw near to Me with supererogatory works so that I shall love him. When I love him I am his hearing with which he hears, his seeing with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes and his foot with which he walks"

Anyway, maiyyit could be "mawjud" for others. Maiyyit itself is devoid of consciousness so there is no "ilm e huduri" (علم الحضوري) in maiyyit to experience its presence. 

On 1/28/2024 at 3:05 PM, AbdusSibtayn said:

don't know/understand much about these matters or speculative philosophy

Ok so I am not going to burden you more . 

Wassalam!

Edited January 29 by Inspector

[313_Waiter]

 

[In Gods Name]

Absolutely.

 

[Future_Banker_Insha Allah]

On 1/22/2024 at 11:20 PM, SO SOLID SHIA said:

One mans mystic is another mans deviant. They called Allama Tabatabai a deviant too, then when he passed away they all praised him. 

 simple minds cannot fathom certain ideas and beliefs. Follow whatever path is comfortable for you.

Anyways big up my homies Allama Tabatabai, Syed Ali Qazi, Grandmaster Behjat! 

Fire pon deh Babylon who mek Trouble,

Rastafarai stand alone ! 

 

PRAISE JAH PRAISE JAH HOLLYYY JAH DEM BWOY NAH KNOW BOUT NUTTIN HIM NAH GWARN KNOW NUFF IF HIM NAH OPEN HIS MIND AND LOOK PON DEM

IDEA MI BREDDAH? YUH ZIMMIE. RAAAAAHTIIIIDDD

 

 

[Lion of Shia]

Author David Livingstons book claims Sufism came out of Ismaili Shiaism.