What is mysticism?

[Laith Al-Doory]

The remarkable thing about the mystical traditions of the three monotheistic religions - Islamic Sufism, Judaic Kabbalah and Gnostic Christian – is their similarity to Hinduism and Buddhism. All doctrines hold that everything is One and that time is an illusion, and all believe in the doctrine of reincarnation and the great work, the perfection of the soul in one’s final incarnation, leading to an ultimate union with the Universal Consciousness.

Sufism is much older than Islam and like the Judaic Kabbalah has its origins in Chaldea in southern Iraq, from where Abraham originated. Chaldea (Khalidiyah) means land of immortality in Arabic and corresponds to the Biblical garden of Eden.

According to the Qur’an, all peoples of the Earth have been sent prophets to guide them. This would explain why the mystical traditions of all the major religions are virtually the same, as they are all of the same Divine origin. There is a passage in the Qur’an that alludes to the doctrine of reincarnation:

[2:28] And you were dead, and He brought you back to life. And He shall cause you to die, and shall bring you back to life, and in the end shall gather you unto Himself.

[Pk_#2]

so so u believe in re incarnation..

[Sinbad]

Sufis belive in reincarnation!? Whoho then they are further away from mainstream islam than even bahais!:D

[Pk_#2]

I don't think all sufi's do..

By the way the Qur'an is in arabic, it cannot be perfectly translated into english..

AsalamuALyakum, must sleep lol

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

The remarkable thing about the mystical traditions of the three monotheistic religions - Islamic Sufism, Judaic Kabbalah and Gnostic Christian – is their similarity to Hinduism and Buddhism. All doctrines hold that everything is One and that time is an illusion, and all believe in the doctrine of reincarnation and the great work, the perfection of the soul in one’s final incarnation, leading to an ultimate union with the Universal Consciousness.

This concept of re-incarnation and of 'union with God' is completely un-Islamic and goes against the clear established Islamic beliefs and teachings.

According to the Qur’an, all peoples of the Earth have been sent prophets to guide them. This would explain why the mystical traditions of all the major religions are virtually the same, as they are all of the same Divine origin. There is a passage in the Qur’an that alludes to the doctrine of reincarnation:

[2:28] And you were dead, and He brought you back to life. And He shall cause you to die, and shall bring you back to life, and in the end shall gather you unto Himself.

The verse is clearly misquoted and taken out of context.

[Skillganon]

The remarkable thing about the mystical traditions of the three monotheistic religions - Islamic Sufism, Judaic Kabbalah and Gnostic Christian – is their similarity to Hinduism and Buddhism. All doctrines hold that everything is One and that time is an illusion, and all believe in the doctrine of reincarnation and the great work, the perfection of the soul in one’s final incarnation, leading to an ultimate union with the Universal Consciousness.

Well good observation.

Sufism is much older than Islam and like the Judaic Kabbalah has its origins in Chaldea in southern Iraq, from where Abraham originated. Chaldea (Khalidiyah) means land of immortality in Arabic and corresponds to the Biblical garden of Eden.

According to the Qur’an, all peoples of the Earth have been sent prophets to guide them. This would explain why the mystical traditions of all the major religions are virtually the same, as they are all of the same Divine origin. There is a passage in the Qur’an that alludes to the doctrine of reincarnation:

[2:28] And you were dead, and He brought you back to life. And He shall cause you to die, and shall bring you back to life, and in the end shall gather you unto Himself.

No this point is misleading. True monotheism (islam) is the first and the oldest of way of life.

That ws the deen of abraham, and all the prophet.

For example paganism is also pretty old. It would be silly to suggest paganism is what the prophets espoused, and delivered to mankind. It would be inconcievable. So your assertion with mysticism, which has very close ties with paganism as one observed, is false and contradictory.

p.s. The verse one quoted does not support reincarnation, mysticism or anything got to do with it.

[Woodrow]

I don't think all sufi's do..

By the way the Qur'an is in arabic, it cannot be perfectly translated into english..

AsalamuALyakum, must sleep lol

That is true but there are many Arabic speaking people that are bilingual, although they may not be able to translate any ayyat perfectly into English they do have a good understanding of the Arabic connotation and can do a fair explanation in English of what is indicated in the Qur'an and I have yet to see any Islamic Scholar ever state in any language that the Qur'an supports belief in reincarnation.

[snakelegs]

The remarkable thing about the mystical traditions of the three monotheistic religions - Islamic Sufism, Judaic Kabbalah and Gnostic Christian – is their similarity to Hinduism and Buddhism. All doctrines hold that everything is One and that time is an illusion, and all believe in the doctrine of reincarnation and the great work, the perfection of the soul in one’s final incarnation, leading to an ultimate union with the Universal Consciousness.

Sufism is much older than Islam and like the Judaic Kabbalah has its origins in Chaldea in southern Iraq, from where Abraham originated. Chaldea (Khalidiyah) means land of immortality in Arabic and corresponds to the Biblical garden of Eden.

According to the Qur’an, all peoples of the Earth have been sent prophets to guide them. This would explain why the mystical traditions of all the major religions are virtually the same, as they are all of the same Divine origin. There is a passage in the Qur’an that alludes to the doctrine of reincarnation:

[2:28] And you were dead, and He brought you back to life. And He shall cause you to die, and shall bring you back to life, and in the end shall gather you unto Himself.

as far as my limited knowledge goes, no muslim (sufi or otherwise) believes in reincarnation and the verse you quoted probably refers to resurrection. also, i think the main thing mystics have in common is that they don't follow doctrines - they go by their own experience of god but some of the things you mentioned do seem to be universal.

[NoName55]

What is mysticism?

dellusional Lunacy

as far as my limited knowledge goes, no muslim (sufi or otherwise) believes in reincarnation and the verse you quoted probably refers to resurrection. also, i think the main thing mystics have in common is that they don't follow doctrines - they go by their own experience of god but some of the things you mentioned do seem to be universal.

I have seen them they are hindu in all but name. In some areas of Pakistan and kashmir there are groups of people who at partician, instead of migrating to hindu part simply changed their names after saying shahadah (but reamained hindus) and some just changed names. to this day older generations practice their hinduism and their offspring are an amalgam of hinduism and sufism.

Then there were 100s of thousands of untouchables who did not want to go with the rest of hindus and voluteered to become Muslim (without first being educated in Islaam, we gave them the new name Musalli and left them to their own devices so they just adapted hinduism into their version of what they call Islam but it is far from it.

[Curaezipirid]

Salamualaykum, I see many brothers have done a good job repudiating this quote from the first post in the thread, but my temper is such that I want to also:

The remarkable thing about the mystical traditions of the three monotheistic religions - Islamic Sufism, Judaic Kabbalah and Gnostic Christian – is their similarity to Hinduism and Buddhism. All doctrines hold that everything is One and that time is an illusion, and all believe in the doctrine of reincarnation and the great work, the perfection of the soul in one’s final incarnation, leading to an ultimate union with the Universal Consciousness.

Maybe the really remarkable thing is that the similarity is between the Religious thought of every believer no matter what Religion is ascribed to. And so maybe the mystery of mysticism is no mystery at all to any believer, but to non-believers is indubitably a mystery, otherwise they would all be believers.

Actually Islam is formidably based in debunking the myth of mystery in Religious teaching. It is all about making the teaching available to any person whom so seeks. But that process enabled also that shaytan attached their own perversions to the words of Religion, and so these days the mystery might equitably be understood as why one man can perceive Glory and Sorrow in Allah in simultaneous moments, while another man only perceives poverty and pain.

In fact it is wrong to mystify any aspect of any Religious teaching, and even before Islam that became the case, because by shrouding a lesson in mystery, false teachers are able to present themselves as though trustworthy, when they are only occluding reality.

Sufism is much older than Islam and like the Judaic Kabbalah has its origins in Chaldea in southern Iraq, from where Abraham originated. Chaldea (Khalidiyah) means land of immortality in Arabic and corresponds to the Biblical garden of Eden.

So what if Sufism existed before Mohammed, most of Islam already is before Him, but that fact can not detract from his greatness, or from the fact that Jibril descended to teach him the method of correctly compiling older teaching through Qur'an . Kabbalah has its origins in an older school of thought than Chaldea thankyou. The lessons I know is that the origins are with the lineage of Melkizedek, also known as Akhaldan, but the teaching is older even than the Earth itself.

Can anybody define Chaldea or Khalidiyah for me? There are many words people can use and in each instance we might intend to express a portion of our meaning in common, but have other parts of what we understand which can not be communicated. (that being the nature of mystery which we must try to prevent) For example: what is the relationship between words such as Jannah, Atlanta, Jukurrulpa, etc, and is there any worth in mentioning such words unless we have already established a solid ground work of commonly understood meaning.

According to the Qur’an, all peoples of the Earth have been sent prophets to guide them. This would explain why the mystical traditions of all the major religions are virtually the same, as they are all of the same Divine origin.

Yes.

There is a passage in the Qur’an that alludes to the doctrine of reincarnation:

[2:28] And you were dead, and He brought you back to life. And He shall cause you to die, and shall bring you back to life, and in the end shall gather you unto Himself.

The word "reincarnation" has an exact meaning. That is of an incarnation of life that is an exact replica.

If you would like to be alive again in future within an exact replica of what you are today, or even suffer the hell of so trying, then go ahead, but it will not be in Islam that you try.

My own preference in belief in everlasting life as Isa taught, is to believe that Isa is the only yet known example of any actual re-incarnation.

Of course, that is not to say that once we are in the grave we might just stop existing. If we have been wrong ever, we must remember that wrong and decompose all evidence of the wrong so that it will not be in the future, and thereby are we enabled as a species to evolve. That is the context in which Islam refutes re-incarnation. Those whom want to refute that we can cause a more positive future, and so fall back into imagining that in a future life cycle we might accomplish what we ought to be trying to accomplish today, are only of that self of wrongs done, which might never find any future life.

Islam must be strict in this.

Salamualaykum

[NoName55]

................
..............
..................

My own preference in belief in everlasting life as Isa taught, is to believe that Isa is the only yet known example of any actual re-incarnation.
.............
..............

Eesa AlaiSalaam was a re-incarnation? did he die once?

[Trumble]

The remarkable thing about the mystical traditions of the three monotheistic religions - Islamic Sufism, Judaic Kabbalah and Gnostic Christian – is their similarity to Hinduism and Buddhism.

'Gnostic Christian' is not 'the' mystical tradition of Christianity. None of Christianity's most famous mystics (such as Augustine, Symeon, Hildegard of Bingen, Julian of Norwich, John of the Cross etc) were Gnostics.

[Laith Al-Doory]

Any religious manuscript which is not perfectly clear to the reader is mystical. The Qur'an is such an esoteric book. As has already been stated, it cannot even be adequately translated and was barely understood even by Mohammed's contempories. The role of the mystic is to uncover the hidden truth, not to create more mystery. A religion divested of a mystical core is not a religion at all, but a dogmatic ideology.

As reincarnation is very much a part of the Jewish religion, as many a Rabbi would attest, and as a large proportion of the prophets in the Qur'an are Jewish, reincarnation is therefore not something Muslims can refute out of hand.

[NoName55]

the Qur'an is such an esoteric book. As has already been stated, it cannot even be adequately translated and was barely understood even by Mohammed's contempories.

Sahabah did not understand it but the goofy moronic bidhatis do?

The role of the mystic is to uncover the hidden truth

Bah hum bug!
they are nothing more than pretencious liars who give it new non-existant meanings to justify their perverted ways

[Curaezipirid]

Eesa AlaiSalaam was a re-incarnation? did he die once?

Isa undertook to let his body be murdered, and so passed through the full pain of Death, but without actually dying.

Thereby He defines a real re-incarnation.

Salam

[NoName55]

So is it safe to say that you are a Christo-budhist-Ahmadi-Aborigini? Since you seem to have managed to combine four religions in to one. Probably should change way of life in profile!

[Curaezipirid]

Any religious manuscript which is not perfectly clear to the reader is mystical. The Qur'an is such an esoteric book. As has already been stated, it cannot even be adequately translated and was barely understood even by Mohammed's contempories. The role of the mystic is to uncover the hidden truth, not to create more mystery. A religion divested of a mystical core is not a religion at all, but a dogmatic ideology.

The Mysticism is certainly caused by the nature of Religion being a teaching of what might feel intangible to the external mental processes, but as you put it that the role of the mystic is to uncover hidden truth rather than create more mystery, is very much the necessary truth.

When a person is a Saint, or has attained the enlightenment of a Buddha, or Guru, (Saint meaning in one language what Buddha means in another and Guru in yet another, all meaning only evolved into being objectively conscious), then the mystery is no more than honour.

I agree that Qur'an is esoteric and therefore natually mystical, or wonderful perhaps is a better word. The curious nature of the mystery of Allah is that by placing the full mystery into Qur'an, so as every single person is to be given the opportunity to access, so as to prove their own self and nature, (or not), what has happened is that often Religion is becoming more and more mysterious rather than less mysterious. This fact harks to the insideousness with which non-believers account for their lack of belief as though it is only a portion of the mystery. That is why we must only trust a teacher whom can de-mystify the Religion. This is the nature of Islam, to demystify.

Demystifying of the (curiously veilled) hidden regard we hold in our essence for Allah, is what leads us to finding that all prophesies are to be, or already being, revealed. The causes of every wrong become exposed and so are able to be embedded in correct place and time as events occur. That is what story of Qur'an is.

The revealing is the portion in which Isa bridged the truth.

Salam

[Curaezipirid]

Eesa AlaiSalaam was a re-incarnation? did he die once?

Isa undertook to let his body be murdered, and so passed through the full pain of Death, but without actually dying.

Thereby He defines a real re-incarnation.

Salam

so is it safe to say that you are a Christo-budhist-Ahmadi-Aborigini since you seem to have managed to combine four reigions in to one. Probably should change way of life in profile!

No.

Well you should know, even named as NoName55, that Islam is the only Religion in which every other Religion can reconcile.

By implying that a person able to reconcile other Religions into Islam, ought to be named as belonging to as many Religions as can be found to have meaning in Islam, is to undermine the worth and wonder of Islam.

Though I notice that you used the word "probably", and the probability and statistics equations tend to refute my existance usually.

But there was a statistician whom was diagnosed with a disease with a 100% fatality rate. He cured himself of belief in statistics and then received a cure of the disease.

Salam

[NoName55]

Wa Alaikum

[Laith Al-Doory]

A mystic is not an ordinary person but somebody who has developed an intuitive faculty to a high degree giving him an inner sense of knowing. To disparage mysticism is to disparage every holy person that ever lived.

The Qur'an is a mystical book that requires interpretation. The question arises as to who's word can be trusted to give that interpretation. Mainstream Muslims would argue that the Hadith provides the answers. However, the Hadith was not transcribed by Mohammed and for the most part was not written by mystics, but by ordinary people prone to lies, bigotry and irrationality. Nevertheless, many mainstream Muslims quote the Hadith as if it were holy text.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

A mystic is not an ordinary person but somebody who has developed an intuitive faculty to a high degree giving him an inner sense of knowing. To disparage mysticism is to disparage every holy person that ever lived.

Define 'holy'. In Islam there is no one who is considered 'holy' so that he has some special hidden knowledge of the Qur'an that others don't have.

The Qur'an is a mystical book that requires interpretation. The question arises as to who's word can be trusted to give that interpretation.

It's a non-question. The only correct understanding of the Qur'an is the understanding that the first three generations had as the Messenger isolated them out by saying that they are the best of this nation.

Mainstream Muslims would argue that the Hadith provides the answers.

Yes, and the Hadith are understood by the understanding of the Companions and the first three generations.

However, the Hadith was not transcribed by Mohammed and for the most part was not written by mystics, but by ordinary people prone to lies, bigotry and irrationality.

But they were transcribed in front of him during his time and in the times of the Companions. The Companions are of a higher status than any 'mystic' can possibly ever reach and those that followed them in the next generations. Would the Hadith be of higher authenticity to you if they were written by some so-called mystics who know nothing of the exact and precise science of writing and classifying hadith?

Nevertheless, many mainstream Muslims quote the Hadith as if it were holy text.

While the text of the Hadith itself is not holy as the text of the Qur'an where one gets rewarded for simply reciting it, the hadith do hold the same legal weight as the Qur'an.

[Curaezipirid]

Salamualaykum, I see Al Madani has already been disproving the following statement from Laith Al-Doory, however, there are a few other refutations which my mind naturally springs to, that I can provide. My mind is not so trained in a Muslim education, yet also is in full agreement with Qur'an and other Ahadith, so it is worthy to contrast my refutation with that of an educated Muslim.

A mystic is not an ordinary person but somebody who has developed an intuitive faculty to a high degree giving him an inner sense of knowing. To disparage mysticism is to disparage every holy person that ever lived.

The Qur'an is a mystical book that requires interpretation. The question arises as to who's word can be trusted to give that interpretation. Mainstream Muslims would argue that the Hadith provides the answers. However, the Hadith was not transcribed by Mohammed and for the most part was not written by mystics, but by ordinary people prone to lies, bigotry and irrationality. Nevertheless, many mainstream Muslims quote the Hadith as if it were holy text.

First I agree that a person named as a Mystic is not an ordinary person. Usually the reason anybody is labelled as a Mystic, is because other persons can not fathom how they are sustaining Islam. Sometimes that is why we are cautious of every matter of any mystical nature, it just seems impossible and so we assume a lie. In fact there are texts in mystical traditions, such as the Kalama Sutra of Buddhism, which instruct us not to believe that any phenomenon is Holy only because of its Mystery. So while a Mystic is not ordinary, a real Mystic always resembles and presents their self as normally as can possibly be attained.

Laith Al-Doory writes that a mystic, being un-ordinary, is rather: "developed an intuitive faculty to a high degree which give him an inner sense of knowing", but here I have to disagree. The "Intuition" is not a well enough defined word to use. What is intuitive to me, might be against all wants to another person, and so if you say that intuition defines a mystical tradition, then you invite those persons whom intuitively want to sin to acquire empathy with real Holy men.

The wisdom held in Judaism about mysticism is a reference to the wonderment of witnessing miracle.

Please beware of confusing that real traditional worth with those whom seek only to imitate it.

About what you tell of Ahadith, you ought to get your facts straight. Ahadith is all very rigorously well documented as the exact words of Mohammed. We can equate Ahadith to having actual documentary evidence of every word spoken by a figure like Moses: what enormous value these sentences must be regarded in. Whose regard the sentences of Ahadith are being held by, is what ever defines the nature of as less than Holy.

You write that Qur'an is mystical, and therefore requires interpretation. But therein you are forgetting the nature of Prayer. Is it not the truth that really valuable intuition is engaged through Prayer, or mediation being the same mental state.

What is unique among all Religions to Islam, is that a facility has opened within Human mental processing, which enables any person to enter into that Prayerful state of mind as a Mystic. For one man he might be able to be in that state of mind 24 hours a day by nature, yet for another, he need bow down with an Imam within Mosque to be so able. Yet Islam teaches that the beneficience of that state of mind need be provided into the experience of every individual. While I am stable in that state of mind constantly, I can thereby, because the state of mind has been made available to every Muslim, begin to learn why, and understand the condition, in which other persons find it difficult to sustain a stable frame of mind and emotion, when in the full flow of real prayer. So in Islam we all commit to providing for one another, to equal out those balances. It is that because of this process very very many of the early Muslims truly aspired to correcting the Human biological weakness which prevented them before from being equitably able as any Mystic or Holy teacher. That aspriation and the commitment it requires are a frightening thing to acquire certainty of, and Islam is enabling of that fear to be accepted. Islam must be acknowledged by Mystics and teachers of all Religions in this status. The companions of Mohammed ought to by right all be given the same status as any Mystic of Judaic ancestry.

I hope that Laith Al-Doory can recognise now what is real of the difference Islam holds in respect of the nature of the Mystery of Allah.

Alaykumuassalam

[Laith Al-Doory]

[6:115] The word of your Lord is complete, in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient.

With regard to the Hadith, it does indeed abrogate the Qur'an and provides stories and laws in addition to it. Stoning, for example is not mentioned in the Qur'an.

The intuitive faculty is not to be confused with the instinctive. The instinctive is defined by the past, the accumilation of past knowledge to form a personality. The intuitive is that which connects a person to God, a sense of absoltue knowing not based on past experience.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

[6:115] The word of your Lord is complete, in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient.

With regard to the Hadith, it does indeed abrogate the Qur'an and provides stories and laws in addition to it. Stoning, for example is not mentioned in the Qur'an.

Eid is not mentioned in the Qur'an either. Looks like you won't be celebrating Eid with us.

The intuitive faculty is not to be confused with the instinctive. The instinctive is defined by the past, the accumilation of past knowledge to form a personality. The intuitive is that which connects a person to God, a sense of absoltue knowing not based on past experience.

The intuitive cannot be relied upon unless it is in complete accoradance with the Sharia and complete accordance with the Sharia only comes with knowledge of the Sharia, not based on dreams and visions that a so called 'mystic' may experience.

[Laith Al-Doory]

There are several schools of the Shariah. Which one could you be refering to?

You have missed the whole concept of an intuitive faculty. The Qur'an itself is a product of it. Mohammed's ability to receive the Qur'an makes him a mystic. Mysticism is the foundation of all religion. It is so-called 'Islamic fundamentalists' who wish to reduce Islam to a political dogma like communism.

[NoName55]

I must be dumb since I only know of 4 madhahib not several (an unspecified number) :X :blind:

Edit:
4 madhahib not several but 1 Shariah( thanx to Br.al-Madani post for reminder)

[NoName55]

Politics? is that not to do with every day life? is Islaam not a complete way of life? where is the contradiction between Islaam and "politcal"?

Fundametalism? does that not mean the basics anymore?

God dang it! people keep changing dictionary definitions and I am always to slow to catch upand alway last to know :omg::-[:blind::X

[Trumble]

Mysticism is the foundation of all religion. It is so-called 'Islamic fundamentalists' who wish to reduce Islam to a political dogma like communism.

Indeed. When people start to search for the truth themselves, and particularly if they start to find it, it becomes far more difficult to control what they think. To someone who has found God, the interpretations of those who have not become irrelevant.

As I understand it, not only did the authentic Sufi schools all insist that not only must their members be practicing muslims and fully accept and obey the Sharia, they actually believed it was essential to understanding Sufism. No doubt someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

There are several schools of the Shariah. Which one could you be refering to?

Shariah itself is one, the schools of thought have nothing to do with what we are discussing. By Shariah I mean the Islamic laws. Why don't you clarify what you are trying to say?

You have missed the whole concept of an intuitive faculty. The Qur'an itself is a product of it. Mohammed's ability to receive the Qur'an makes him a mystic. Mysticism is the foundation of all religion.

Incorrect. Because that would imply that every 'mystic' is a Prophet due to your inverse comparison. But this entire belief is incorrect because we know from the authentic hadiths how the Wahi came to the Messenger.

It is so-called 'Islamic fundamentalists' who wish to reduce Islam to a political dogma like communism.

It's so easy to point fingers. Why don't you define what a 'fundamentalist' is and give examples of what they reduced Islam to?

[Laith Al-Doory]

An example of 'Islamic Fundamentalism' is the sectarian war now raging in Iraq. Political dogma is not the way forward.

The Shariah is not one and has been altered several times over the centures. The different schools of the Shariah interpret it very differently.

A mystic is not necessarily a prophet in the Qur'anic sense, but a prophet is most certainly a mystic, having the ability to divine the future.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

An example of 'Islamic Fundamentalism' is the sectarian war now raging in Iraq. Political dogma is not the way forward.

Though I agree that there should not be a sectarian war, I don't believe that the reason for it is 'Islamic Fundamentalism'.

The Shariah is not one and has been altered several times over the centures. The different schools of the Shariah interpret it very differently.

Those are just schools of Jurisprudence. The principles and the purposes of the Sharia are the same regardless of what school of jurisprudence it is.

A mystic is not necessarily a prophet in the Qur'anic sense, but a prophet is most certainly a mystic, having the ability to divine the future.

Can you please give me a clear definition of a 'mystic', according to you, i.e. what you believe they can/cannot do?

And as for divining the future, then that is a matter of the Unseen. The knowledge of the Unseen is only with Allaah and the Messenger knows only as much as is revealed to him. He cannot know it of himself, much less the 'mystics'.

6: 50 Say: "I don't tell you that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor (that) I know the unseen; nor I tell you that I am an angel. I but follow what is revealed to me by inspiration..."

6:59 And with Him are the keys of the Unseen, none knows them but He..

[Laith Al-Doory]

With regard to the Shariah, it is all very well to talk of principals, but in practice, there is no universality.

According to the Qur'an, everything is God's will, therefore, what ever a mystic sees is God's will. For a person to be so inspired, one must first have the tuning equipment, so to speak, to be able to pick up such information. Mohammed, like the other prophets in the Qur'an, was not by any means an ordinary person. A methodology for the development of such a faculty is contained in the Islamic way of living, something most religions reserve for the priesthood.

[Abdul Fattah]

You know the impression I always get from mysticism? You know these toys for little kids? it's like a plank with different types of holes in it, a square hole, a trianglehole, a round hole, and so on, and then there's a whole bunch of blocks that only fit trough their respectively shaped holes.
Well the way I see mysticism is like: "look, here's a big giant hole where all of your blocks fit in!"

Mysticism's power lies in it's ambiguity. By not clearly defining what it's all about, it relies on people's imagination to answer the questions for themselves. When they put a small square block in the big hole, it relies on people to "Imagen" a smaller square hole inside the big hole and so on.

That Sufi's mixed this with Islam I find disturbing. Islam is perfect and has an answer to everything, so why why use the big, undefined hole to answer questiosn, when we already have neatly shaped holes to fit in all our blocks? It just adds confusion and opens the door to misinterpretation.

[Curaezipirid]

You know the impression I always get from mysticism? You know these toys for little kids? it's like a plank with different types of holes in it, a square hole, a trianglehole, a round hole, and so on, and then there's a whole bunch of blocks that only fit trough their respectively shaped holes.
Well the way I see mysticism is like: "look, here's a big giant hole where all of your blocks fit in!"

Mysticism's power lies in it's ambiguity. By not clearly defining what it's all about, it relies on people's imagination to answer the questions for themselves. When they put a small square block in the big hole, it relies on people to "Imagen" a smaller square hole inside the big hole and so on.

That Sufi's mixed this with Islam I find disturbing. Islam is perfect and has an answer to everything, so why why use the big, undefined hole to answer questiosn, when we already have neatly shaped holes to fit in all our blocks? It just adds confusion and opens the door to misinterpretation.

Salamalaykum Abdul Fattah

You make a very good point here.

Any of us whom have discovered any residual worth in any of the world's older Religious traditions; a worth that might still be presenting itself as though of an intangible mysterious nature; must be enabled to present what we have found of any real worth in Islam, in a demystified fashion.

If any worth exists in any of the traditions which are presented in the "mystery" so named in the old testament, for example, then what defines it as sustaining worth is that it can also be scientifically explained within the context of Islam.

In fact every tradition which any person might describe as of a mysterious nature, has not possibility of worth unless it can also be described scientifically.

But even as Muslims we all know that certain facts of the science of nature in Allah need careful mental preparation. So perhaps that is what has previously been defined as mysterious, those facts which can not be known until other facts are fully mentally assimilated.

However because so much abuse has been worked by naming factual scientific data as unavailable to whom needs it, by those whom stole of Islamic worth and then began fencing off portions of the full teaching of Islam, as though only accessible to themselves - but when they could not comprehend what they were accessing: we are left unable to trust any matter which is presented only in mystery.

But was not that always the case? That to believe and trust in any tradition which has a mysterious heritage, we must be able to go through a safe process of mentally de-mystifying what the real nature is.

That is to say: if any body is at all attracted to any mystery, do not touch it until the right shape hole for the right shape piece has become apparent!

Salamalaykum

[poga]

ASSALAMUALAIKUM
brother no name 55 number
re-incarnation is lie and this lie cannot harm islam because we have AL QURAN and SUNNAH to refute every fabrication
but your harsh and stupid comments about pakistani and hindustani muslims can divide the ummah and harm our unity

[Woodrow]

Just a little food for thought.

Mysticism is propably called mysticism because we do not understand it. If we understand it, it probably isn't a mystery and therefore not mysticism.

We are probably wasting our time and offending each other just to come to the conclusion that we do not know and really have no need for concern.

[Fishman]

Sufis belive in reincarnation!? Whoho then they are further away from mainstream islam than even bahais!:D

:sl:
They way I understand it, there are two types of Sufism. One type is an important part of Orthodox Islam, and does not entail any unislamic doctrines like reincarnation. It is simply a spiritual practice to increase one's love for Allah and his Prophet (peace be upon him). The other type is 'philosophical sufism', a phenomenon probably caused by the mixing of ancient Greek and Hindu philosophies with Islam. This form of Sufism believes in various things which are not accepted by mainsteam Islam, including reincarnation.
:w:

[Trumble]

I hope I can say this without offending anybody but to me mysticism is the very heart of religion.

Symbols (words) and associated mental constructs are simply inadequate to explain the concepts - direct experience of the proverbial IT - with with mysticism deals. Any written/spoken source, from wherever it comes, is merely the 'dumbed down' version for those incapable of, or unwilling to strive for the mystical experience.

[Curaezipirid]

Salamualaykum

I agree with both these posts, and thanks to who provided.

:sl:
They way I understand it, there are two types of Sufism. One type is an important part of Orthodox Islam, and does not entail any unislamic doctrines like reincarnation. It is simply a spiritual practice to increase one's love for Allah and his Prophet (peace be upon him). The other type is 'philosophical sufism', a phenomenon probably caused by the mixing of ancient Greek and Hindu philosophies with Islam. This form of Sufism believes in various things which are not accepted by mainsteam Islam, including reincarnation.
:w:

Is there any evidence of the "philosophical sufism" (which is that form prevalent in 'the west' as the form of sufism associated with the name "Sufi"), being connected through Indigenous and aboriginal people of the middle east with the Buddhist Tradition in places like Afghanistan, (that is older than the Tibetean Buddhist tradition holds records)?

I hope I can say this without offending anybody but to me mysticism is the very heart of religion.

Symbols (words) and associated mental constructs are simply inadequate to explain the concepts - direct experience of the proverbial IT - with with mysticism deals. Any written/spoken source, from wherever it comes, is merely the 'dumbed down' version for those incapable of, or unwilling to strive for the mystical experience.

This is the solid fact. To need to express Religious belief in words, can only "dumb down" the full teaching.

That is why anybody bothers to argue at all on the part of Mysticism.

Woodrow wrote that we only fail to understand, and that is what labels the mysterious a mystery.

But think of this:

For one man he knows, but fails to understand, while for another man he understands, but has no knowledge of the way of expression of what he understands. Both become taken with the mystery.

It is the same mystery as is the mystery of nature.

Salam

[Curaezipirid]

Sufis belive in reincarnation!? Whoho then they are further away from mainstream islam than even bahais!:D

The Sufi I know is closer to Islam than Bahai, and I am surprised to find Bahai being named in any association with Islam.

Could you state why that can be?

[poga]

mysticism is a system of contemplative prayer and spirituality aimed at achiving direct intuitive experiance of divine it is a experiance of reality surpassing normal human understanding it begins with one becomes alone with only his self to accompany him self and it is nothing new our prophet MUHAMMAD SALLEL LA HU ALAHI WA SALLIM used to contemplate alone at mount HIRA

[Fishman]

Is there any evidence of the "philosophical sufism" (which is that form prevalent in 'the west' as the form of sufism associated with the name "Sufi"), being connected through Indigenous and aboriginal people of the middle east with the Buddhist Tradition in places like Afghanistan, (that is older than the Tibetean Buddhist tradition holds records)?

:sl:
I wouldn't say that philosophical Sufism is common in the west, its mostly common among hippy-types who who deny its Islamic connections completely.

Also, Sufism isn't a sect, unlike some people seem to think, its a type of religious practice. There are many none Sufis who believe it is valid. But I shall say no more, as this is starting to stray into sectarian grounds...
:w:

[Skillganon]

Sufism is a sect.

It never was part of Islam or never practice of the salaf. It was later introduced into it.

At earliest you can say they where ascetic but that was going into the extreme of it, and not to mention it would not exactly equate to sufism as whole.

Nowdays it cannot be said sufism is without strange saying, belief, fantastical tales, vulcan mind melds with shiekh spock, innovation, shirk.

Obviousely they differ amongst one group to another from belief, practice, innovation to shirk.

Allah(swt) messeneger has made it clear their is one path and that path is what he and his companions where upon...any other path is leading to hellfire.

Wassalam.

[Laith Al-Doory]

Sufism is a sect.

It never was part of Islam or never practice of the salaf. It was later introduced into it.

At earliest you can say they where ascetic but that was going into the extreme of it, and not to mention it would not exactly equate to sufism as whole.

Nowdays it cannot be said sufism is without strange saying, belief, fantastical tales, vulcan mind melds with shiekh spock, innovation, shirk.

Obviousely they differ amongst one group to another from belief, practice, innovation to shirk.

Allah(swt) messeneger has made it clear their is one path and that path is what he and his companions where upon...any other path is leading to hellfire.

Wassalam.

Presumably in this one path, one must be male. Mohammed and his companions, like Jesus and his companions and every other prophet were men. Where does that leave women? Are you implying that all women shall burn in hell-fire? A Sufi would argue, of course, that everybody incarnates as male upon his final and perfected incarnation.

[Fishman]

Presumably in this one path, one must be male. Mohammed and his companions, like Jesus and his companions and every other prophet were men. Where does that leave women? Are you implying that all women shall burn in hell-fire? A Sufi would argue, of course, that everybody incarnates as male upon his final and perfected incarnation.

:sl:
Sufis do not believe in reincarnation, and women will enter Heaven. Just because all the prophets were men doesn't mean that women will all go to Hell.
:w:

[Abdul Fattah]

Selam aleykum Laith Al-Doory
What he meant was that we should only follow that path (path of those exclusive group of people mentioned) He never said anybody not belonging to that group will be in hellfire.

[Laith Al-Doory]

:sl:
Sufis do not believe in reincarnation, and women will enter Heaven. Just because all the prophets were men doesn't mean that women will all go to Hell.
:w:

Sufis do in fact believe in reincarnation. Of the many heavens of Islam, the highest is reserved for men. There is no reference to the female gender in the paradise of Islam. The term 'houri' in the Qur'an is in fact grammatically masculine even though it is translated as feminine or sometimes replaced with the feminine 'houria'. Likewise the term for 'companion' is often replaced with 'wife' by translaters of the Qur'an.

Judaism and Christianity hold similar doctrines. '. . . no woman shall enter the kingdom of heaven except as a man . . .' is a quote from Jesus in the Gospels.

[rav]

Sufis do in fact believe in reincarnation. Of the many heavens of Islam, the highest is reserved for men. There is no reference to the female gender in the paradise of Islam. The term 'houri' in the Qur'an is in fact grammatically masculine even though it is translated as feminine or sometimes replaced with the feminine 'houria'. Likewise the term for 'companion' is often replaced with 'wife' by translaters of the Qur'an.

Judaism and Christianity hold similar doctrines. '. . . no woman shall enter the kingdom of heaven except as a man . . .' is a quote from Jesus in the Gospels.

Shalom,

I would love to hear where Judaism holds such a belief.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

Sufis do in fact believe in reincarnation. Of the many heavens of Islam, the highest is reserved for men. There is no reference to the female gender in the paradise of Islam. The term 'houri' in the Qur'an is in fact grammatically masculine even though it is translated as feminine or sometimes replaced with the feminine 'houria'. Likewise the term for 'companion' is often replaced with 'wife' by translaters of the Qur'an.

Why don't you bring your proof? You cannot make heretical claims like this without proving them. So bring the proof please.

Or else I will simply delete your post and close this thread because you are spreading false and inauthentic information. This is your only chance.

[Laith Al-Doory]

A Sufi verse:

"I died as mineral and became a plant,
I died as plant and rose to animal,
I died as animal and I was man.
Why should I fear?
When was I less by dying?"

Admittedly, with the rise of so-called 'Islamic fundamentalism' sufis are now less open in their beliefs.

With regard to the wording in the Qur'an in its description of Paradise, this is self-evident to anybody with a basic understanding of Arabic.

[NoName55]

Brother said Proof from reputable source, Not more ramblings.

:(

[Fishman]

A Sufi verse:

"I died as mineral and became a plant,
I died as plant and rose to animal,
I died as animal and I was man.
Why should I fear?
When was I less by dying?"

Admittedly, with the rise of so-called 'Islamic fundamentalism' sufis are now less open in their beliefs.

With regard to the wording in the Qur'an in its description of Paradise, this is self-evident to anybody with a basic understanding of Arabic.

:sl:
The Quran says we only die once though:

Nor will they there Taste Death, except the first Death; and He will preserve Them from the Penalty Of the Blazing Fire." (The Quran, 44:56).

Harldly any Sufis believe in reincarnation anyway, and certainly no Orthodox Muslims (who some people on this board seem to think are Sufis).
:w:

[Laith Al-Doory]

There is no contradiction here. A personality does in fact die only once. The conscious self does not pass onto the next incarnation, which may be physically completely different. The memory of the previous incarnation is effectively absorbed into the subconcious to form the instinctive self. Everybody is born with an instinctive self. One's personality is defined by one's past, an accumilation of all past experience, including that of previous incarnations. If one had not lived before, one would have the instincts and intelligence of an ant. However, for all intents and purposes, you only have one physical life, which is why the doctrine of reincarnation does not form a major part of Islamic teaching.

It is not my intention to prove anything, but to explain. If people want proof, they should do some research of their own.

[Trumble]

Brother said Proof from reputable source, Not more ramblings. :(

Would you not class Rumi as a 'reputable source'?

Here's the whole poem;

I died as a mineral and became a plant,
I died as plant and rose to animal,
I died as animal and I was Man.
Why should I fear? When was I less by dying?
Yet once more I shall die as Man, to soar
With angels blest; but even from angelhood
I must pass on: all except God doth perish.
When I have sacrificed my angel-soul,
I shall become what no mind e'er conceived.
Oh, let me not exist! for Non-existence
Proclaims in organ tones, 'To Him we shall return.'

Interpret as you will. :)

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

Would you not class Rumi as a 'reputable source'?

No.

[Trumble]

No.

Very helpful, I'm sure.

Why not?

[NoName55]

Very helpful, I'm sure.

Why not?

greetings

Did I not apologize via private message about any missunderstandings? and gave a little more detailed explaination?

If Not, here goes again + little more

Reputable in this context means, an author/scholar who writes according to guidance From Quraan and Sunnah of RasulAllah Muhammad P.B.U.H.

Disreputable source in this context is any one one who mixes and matches, or sees God and/or Prophets in his dreams in which they tell him to write contrary to the way Rightly guided wrote or taught.

Edit:
What is wrong with a simple truthful No, Not every one enjoys writing long winded useless posts and argument when a simple concise answer will suffice

[Trumble]

Did I not apologize via private message about any missunderstandings? and gave a little more detailed explaination?

Yes, you did, and thank you for that.

Reputable in this context means, an author/scholar who writes according to guidance From Quraan and Sunnah of RasulAllah Muhammad P.B.U.H.

Disreputable source in this context is any one one who mixes and matches, or sees God and/or Prophets in his dreams in which they tell him to write contrary to the way Rightly guided wrote or taught.

I understand that is what you and Al Madani (to whom I was replying) mean, but to me it makes no sense in this context. The point at issue is what Sufis may or may not believe, specifically in regard to reincarnation of some sort - not whether they are necessarily correct in believing it. That is clearly a matter of opinion, which like all theological issues cannot be proven either way. Laith Al-Doory made the extent of his claim quite clear and the request made of him makes no sense if taken in the context you are suggesting.

I would consider that Rumi is about as reputable as you can get as a source regarding what Sufis believe (or at least believed), certainly far more reptutable than the sort of scholar you suggest, who rejects Sufism as heretical before even starting to explain it. It would be as absurd as asking the Pope to explain Islamic belief rather than an Islamic scholar.

[Curaezipirid]

Sufis do in fact believe in reincarnation. Of the many heavens of Islam, the highest is reserved for men. There is no reference to the female gender in the paradise of Islam. The term 'houri' in the Qur'an is in fact grammatically masculine even though it is translated as feminine or sometimes replaced with the feminine 'houria'. Likewise the term for 'companion' is often replaced with 'wife' by translaters of the Qur'an.

Judaism and Christianity hold similar doctrines. '. . . no woman shall enter the kingdom of heaven except as a man . . .' is a quote from Jesus in the Gospels.

Shalom,

I would love to hear where Judaism holds such a belief.

:sl:



Why don't you bring your proof? You cannot make heretical claims like this without proving them. So bring the proof please.

Or else I will simply delete your post and close this thread because you are spreading false and inauthentic information. This is your only chance.

A Sufi verse:

"I died as mineral and became a plant,
I died as plant and rose to animal,
I died as animal and I was man.
Why should I fear?
When was I less by dying?"

Admittedly, with the rise of so-called 'Islamic fundamentalism' sufis are now less open in their beliefs.

With regard to the wording in the Qur'an in its description of Paradise, this is self-evident to anybody with a basic understanding of Arabic.

Brother said Proof from reputable source, Not more ramblings.

:(

:sl:
The Quran says we only die once though:


Harldly any Sufis believe in reincarnation anyway, and certainly no Orthodox Muslims (who some people on this board seem to think are Sufis).
:w:

There is no contradiction here. A personality does in fact die only once. The conscious self does not pass onto the next incarnation, which may be physically completely different. The memory of the previous incarnation is effectively absorbed into the subconcious to form the instinctive self. Everybody is born with an instinctive self. One's personality is defined by one's past, an accumilation of all past experience, including that of previous incarnations. If one had not lived before, one would have the instincts and intelligence of an ant. However, for all intents and purposes, you only have one physical life, which is why the doctrine of reincarnation does not form a major part of Islamic teaching.

It is not my intention to prove anything, but to explain. If people want proof, they should do some research of their own.

Would you not class Rumi as a 'reputable source'?

Here's the whole poem;

I died as a mineral and became a plant,
I died as plant and rose to animal,
I died as animal and I was Man.
Why should I fear? When was I less by dying?
Yet once more I shall die as Man, to soar
With angels blest; but even from angelhood
I must pass on: all except God doth perish.
When I have sacrificed my angel-soul,
I shall become what no mind e'er conceived.
Oh, let me not exist! for Non-existence
Proclaims in organ tones, 'To Him we shall return.'

Interpret as you will. :)

No.

Very helpful, I'm sure.

Why not?

greetings

Did I not apologize via private message about any missunderstandings? and gave a little more detailed explaination?

If Not, here goes again + little more

Reputable in this context means, an author/scholar who writes according to guidance From Quraan and Sunnah of RasulAllah Muhammad P.B.U.H.

Disreputable source in this context is any one one who mixes and matches, or sees God and/or Prophets in his dreams in which they tell him to write contrary to the way Rightly guided wrote or taught.

Edit:
What is wrong with a simple truthful No, Not every one enjoys writing long winded useless posts and argument when a simple concise answer will suffice

This is just as usual in the forum, a hilarious series of misunderstandings of one another.

Sufism is a cultural identification and not a Religion. There are Sufi persons who are Mujahideen of Islam, and Sufi who are not yet converted.

Rumi is not a proper source for Shari'ah, but a very good source for communication of culture.

As to the belief of hereafter, there are real and really simple ways to reconcile various slight differences, which often turn out to be larger differences when translated into the English language than in other languages.


The fact of re-incarnation doctrines is that they are dangerous for any person to believe in unless the Soul is fully awake.

Yet there are individuals whom can not, in Allah, escape belief in having existed in a different time and place from their own present bodily life. The world provides a number of different explainations for such mental experiences. But what is the only important fact in Allah, is that if you take action in the world (even just breathing) within information from such a mental experience, then you are taking responsibility for acquiting the experience to the Angel of Death.

For example, I have experienced what are known as somatic hallucinations, in which I remembered being an animal. But because my present Human body has had that memory, I must acquit the experience again. The animal self is in me, yet not who my true self wants to be, so to attain Jannah, must I demolish and decompose that animal self through the grave.

It is a very common experience among all Australian Aborigines to regularly receive somatic hallucinations of being an animal, and we bring on such in each other very readily by will, as a measure of inducing fear of sinning. If ever our posture is less than perfect at any moment we can be caused to go into the belief that we are becoming more animal and less human. It is a biological condition of our race. But it is a biological condition in which we realise that we are truly willing to endure the experience because it reminds us so well of why we prefer to be in perfectly Human stance at all times. In that it is also that we are enabled in prayer very readily through the experience.

Our culture teaches that before we were born we were not Human but were only a part of nature, and that after we die our body will decompose and return to nature. In returning to nature, perhaps it will happen that I am a kangaroo again, or a blade of grass, and our way is to be proud of so being the sustaining force of our food sources. There is even a story about a man who refused to eat meat, and then perished in a famine, and then he turned into a tree, but the tree with his Soul in it arose into becoming the southern cross. So His soul arose into Heaven, not from a Human form, but from a tree. This is an important story in which much faith among our race is based.

The tree has no fear in Allah. Fear in Allah ends when the Human form accepts itself in the face of the Angel of Death.

So you see, my own culture has adherence to Islam, without ever claiming belief in reincarnation, but neither denying that we might want to avoid certain uncomfortable future consequences.

Frankly, my Human form carries so very much unwanted shaytan dialogue, that it will be a great relief to be eventually rid of it all (after I pass through the grave) and be able to work towards attaining Jannah from the shelter of the flora and fauna. At least flora and fauna can not lie, except in the obvious lie of not being the habitation of Human Souls.

Surely australian Aborigines can not be the only Muslims who believe alike to what I here describe?

[Curaezipirid]

Sufis do in fact believe in reincarnation. Of the many heavens of Islam, the highest is reserved for men. There is no reference to the female gender in the paradise of Islam. The term 'houri' in the Qur'an is in fact grammatically masculine even though it is translated as feminine or sometimes replaced with the feminine 'houria'. Likewise the term for 'companion' is often replaced with 'wife' by translaters of the Qur'an.

Judaism and Christianity hold similar doctrines. '. . . no woman shall enter the kingdom of heaven except as a man . . .' is a quote from Jesus in the Gospels.

I certainly am not intending to enter the kingdom of heaven in any form other than my own true feminine form. Frankly, I'd rather eternity in Jahannam that to try to go to heaven as a man.

But females perceive the future of the self, while male self perceives only the past. Because of that there is a danger of a female person imagining what Jannah might be like and being wrong, and so the whole female population is not generally encouraged to know about Jannah, that is, unless it is truly impossible in Allah not to know.

But, um, what is the whole quote you take that sentence from, surely it can not be telling woman to enter heaven as men, which is what you accidentally make it seem to be by putting only those words and not the whole context it is taken from.

Perhaps now you might perceive why I tell that there must be a way into Jannah through Jehannam, because being a female and even knowing that sihr exists, there can be no way to attain Jannah without some method of permanently finishing with the self which forms to protect us from the wrongs in sihr. The advantage of a female is in being able to so perceive that reality can be, while male's fear is greater before the hour, female acceptance of fear in Allah will be greater after the hour of judgment. That is because a mans sensibility of emotions is future oriented and a females is past oriented. At this time, unless you already descended into Jehannam, if you are a female, you can not possibly be sustaining adequate fear.

[Laith Al-Doory]

The principal of masucline and femine, when applied to people, rather than as abstract concepts, is not a polarity, but a relative difference, and this relative difference exists to a large extent in both sexes. The purely masculine mindset could be described as outward looking and animalistic, and the purely feminine as inward looking and psychotic, but such extreme personality types rarely exist in the population as a whole.

Esoteric doctrine calls for the perfect synthesis of opposites, the perfection of the soul in one's final incarnation, which happens to be male. How one sees oneself in this lifetime is a matter for the ego.

According the the Qur'an, woman is the physical embodiment of status (desire) status being something man should not aspire to. Woman effectively embodies the nation state: she is the object for which generations of young male subjects have been deemed expendible.

[Abdul Fattah]

Laith Al-Doory
I'm sorry but that view is downright offensive towards woman.

woman is the physical embodiment of status (desire) status being something man should not aspire to

Isn't that just a fancy way of saying they are lust-objects? Where in the Qur'an does it say that anyway?

Woman effectively embodies the nation state: she is the object for which generations of young male subjects have been deemed expendible.

So now they are mere concubines?

[Laith Al-Doory]

Status has little to do with sexual desire. Status is a passive state of being, not an active state of doing and therefore feminine rather than masculine. Personal status, as opposed to the accumilation of the trapings of status, is a measure of how much a society values one's life. The death of women still fills the public imagination with a far greater dread than does the death of men. Status obsessed society, apart from its inherent materialism, is saturated with imagery of highly objectified women. Historically, high status males also objectify themselves in fine clothes and jewelry.

The notion that the female is the supreme object of desire is in fact a cultural myth. When was the last time you saw a *****d of hysterical school boys waiting for a glimpse of Pamela Anderson? The male is more inclined to be polygamous, where as the female is more inclined to be obsessed by a single male.

[Abdul Fattah]

I didn't say anything about females being a supreme object of desire, I only interpreted what you said.

[Laith Al-Doory]

A person's desires or wants are not necessarily sexual. A person may have an obsessive desire for wealth and luxury. Increasingly we live in a society obsessed by manufactured wants at the expense of everything else. Having the latest Mercedes seems to be the be all and end all in some people's minds.

[rav]

You know the impression I always get from mysticism? You know these toys for little kids? it's like a plank with different types of holes in it, a square hole, a trianglehole, a round hole, and so on, and then there's a whole bunch of blocks that only fit trough their respectively shaped holes.
Well the way I see mysticism is like: "look, here's a big giant hole where all of your blocks fit in!"

Mysticism's power lies in it's ambiguity. By not clearly defining what it's all about, it relies on people's imagination to answer the questions for themselves. When they put a small square block in the big hole, it relies on people to "Imagen" a smaller square hole inside the big hole and so on.

Shalom (Peace),

I have thought about this post for a while now and it is actually a very interesting post. It is a point which I have pondered essentially since I read it, which was a while ago. My impression from it however has a much wider capacity which may stray off topic. It is in a sense, the impression I get from Islam. Islam is very logical. The religion was created in such a way, where everything must have an answer, paradox’s which can be found in the Tanakh (i.e. Hebrew Bible) must ultimately be the equivalent of a blatant contradiction and therefore, lead to doubts about the authenticity of the religion. So much time is devoted to “refuting” so called “contradictions” and pointing out the conflicts within the sacred books of other religions. It is all very logical. In fact, it is entirely logical. But logic does not determine how valid a religion is, at least in my point of view. G-d is not understandable, nor is it “logical” in the standards that Muslims apply towards religion. G-d cannot be entered into a math equation because G-d is the math equation. It is what I would call monism. The impression I get from your post is that you are determined to make G-d, religion, and existence into something that is logical according our understanding of logic, but that is not the case. G-d created everything, and is in a sense everything. G-d cannot have form as Islam proudly proclaims and I agree. However, you must stand by that very statement in that G-d cannot be formed into a certain hole that things can move through. Since G-d is everywhere and everything, in a way, no hole can be made larger, because everything that you must put through the hole in your analogy was created by G-d and is therefore smaller than G-d, but in essence still a part of Him.