From tariqas-digest-approval@europe.std.com Wed Sep 18 14:29:37 1996
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 07:06:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: tariqas-digest-approval@europe.std.com
Reply-To: tariqas-digest@world.std.com
To: tariqas-digest@world.std.com
Subject: tariqas-digest V1 #141
[The following text is in the "unknown-8bit" character set]
[Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set]
[Some characters may be displayed incorrectly]
tariqas-digest Sunday, 15 September 1996 Volume 01 : Number 141
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Zainuddin Ismail <sham@po.pacific.net.sg>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 19:03:18 +0800 (SGT)
Subject: Re: Desire
Salam.Marriage in normal situations is part of the Sunnah of the Prophet
Muhamamd s.a.w.
Prophet Muhammad encouraged young men to get married.Islamic Law has
delineated the categories of marriage as a)OBLIGATORY b)Sunnat i.e deserving
merit if done c)Makruh i.e
deserving merit if not done d)Haram or Forbidden if there is probability of
injustice to either party for eg if one party has AIDS.I will come back when
I have the correct quotations from Quran and Hadis.
At 18:25 9/13/96 CDT, you wrote:
>Are there examples of sufis who remained celibate?
>
------------------------------
From: Zainuddin Ismail <sham@po.pacific.net.sg>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 19:35:17 +0800 (SGT)
Subject: Re: Desire
Salam.When I was much younger I visited a sage who was also a medical man to
ask him to remove sexual desire from me temporarily i.e before I got
married.Not that I was misbehaving sexually but it was because I perceived
it as a nuisance.I would like to quote Qadi 'Iyad on subject of superiority
of marriage over celibacy
"How can it be that marriage has so many virtues when Allah praised Yahya
son of Zakariyya (John the Baptist) for being chaste?How could Allah praise
him for not doing something considered to be a virtue? Furthermore , 'Isa
ibn Maryam remained celibate.If things were as you claim , would he not have
married ?"
"The answer is this: It is clear that Allah did praise Yahya for being
chaste.It was not as someone has said , that he was timid or without
masculinity .Astute commentators and critical scholars reject this assertion
, saying that it would imply an imperfection and a fault and that is not
fitting for one of the prophets.It means that he was protected from wrong
actions, i.e. it was as if he were kept from them.Some say that he was kept
from all his bodily appetite and some say that he did not have any desire
for women.
It is clear from this that the lack of the ability to marry is an
imperfection .Virtue lies in its taking place.Therefore the absence of it
can only be through the existence of a counter virtue, either striving as in
the case of 'Isa or by having sufficiency from Allah as Yahya did, since
marriage frequently distracts from Allah and brings a person down into this
world.
Someone able to marry and carry out the obligations incurred by marriage
without being distracted from his Lord has a lofty degree.Such is the degree
of our Prophet , may Allah bless him and grant him peace.Having many wives
did not distract him from worshipping his Lord .Indeed, it increased him in
worship in that he protected his wives, gave them their rights, earned for
them and guided them.He clearly stated that such things were not part of his
portion of his earthly life but thatthey are part ofthe portion of the
earthly life of others....." from translation by Aisha Abddarrahman Bewley.
Now one realises why in normal circumstances where marriage is wajib or
sunnat , the married person earns more thawab (merit) for his religious
deeds or ibadah than if he or she were unmarried.
At 17:20 9/13/96 CDT, you wrote:
>Michael J. Moore writes:
>> ohla0003 wrote:
>> >
>> > >What is the cure for sexual desire?
>> > >
>> > >Asim
>> >
>> > Marriage.
>>
>> The question is based on the false premise that
>> sexual desire is an ailment. It is like asking
>> "What is the cure for having a left hand?"
>
>Okay. Perhaps that premise should be discussed. It is not
>obvious to me that sexual desire is *not* an ailment. For
>one thing it brings the "self" to the fore. In fact it
>probably represents the animal "self" at the pinnacle of its
>power and control over the mind. I was reading Rumi last
>night and he said, "take this dog hunting and you will be
>the quarry". If you look at newly married couples or people
>who have just started a physical relationship, they are
>highly self-absorbed.
>
>
>Asim
>
------------------------------
From: woodsong@juno.com (Carol Woodsong)
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 11:09:33 EDT
Subject: Re: Desire
Hello friends,
>Salam.Rabia Al Adiway was a celibate.She had a few suitors among very
>prominent Sufis but she said that her love for Allah meant that she
>had no place in her heart for others.It was all-consuming.
I think this is most likely a difference in the way we use words... but
it seems to me that an /all-consuming love of Allah/ would mean there is
/more/ room in the heart for others. Love is expansive... the more i
love Allah, the more love i have to give to others. In fact, the
'others' /are/ Allah... so i MUST love them /as/ i love Allah.
Perhaps we're talking about more mundane aspects of life. If love of
Allah is all-consuming, i can see how sharing a 'mundane' life (i.e
marriage) might not be beneficial to either person.
peace,
carol
------------------------------
From: frank gaude <frank@sierra.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 08:55:08 -0700
Subject: Re: Desire
Hello, everybody!
Carol Woodsong wrote:
[...]
> Love is expansive... the more i
> love Allah, the more love i have to give to others. In fact, the
> 'others' /are/ Allah... so i MUST love them /as/ i love Allah.
Most of the time I try not to judge "right or wrong" but in this case I
JUDGE: You are "right", living on the mark, woodsong!
As you love you expand into bigger and bigger worlds becoming You, and
finally, YOU are IT, Allah, in all glory! Allah is All, and the love is
the thread that connects All Life into a tapestry of Glory.
Peace and love,
tanzen
------------------------------
From: Dr Syed Rashid Ali <rasyed@emirates.net.ae>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 17:55:34 +0400
Subject: Re: Ahmadiyya/Qadiani movement
Michael J. Moore wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I question if this (below) is appropriate material for this mail-list.
> This is not a strictly Islamic list and my understanding is that
> everybody is welcome to participate. There is no discussion
> in this, only name calling i.e. "EVIL".
Dear Michael
I am sorry I didn't mean to mail this material to this forum.
I posted a reply about the dreams and forgot to delete the rest.
I am sorry again if it had caused any displeasure to any of the
members in this forum.
Wassalam
Rashid
>
> I know nothing about the Ahmadiyya/Qadiani movement, so I am not
> saying that it 'is' or "isn't" evil. But I think that what we need
> here is calm discussion of the details. If somebody wants to discuss
> the beliefs of this group, then I have no objection to that.
> Each individual may draw
> there own conclusion as to whether something is evil or not.
>
> Now if I hear somebody calling somebody else some names, I am
> inclined to think negatively towards the name caller and
> to reserve opinion about the targeted person.
>
> Salaams,
> -Michael-
>
>
> > Rashid
> > --
> > ****************************************************************************
> > "YOU CAN'T BE FAITHFUL UNLESS YOU LOVE ME MORE THAN YOUR FATHER,
> > YOUR SON & ALL MANKIND."(Sahih Bukhari)
> > ***************************************************************************
> >
------------------------------
From: James McCaig <jmccaig@worldweb.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 13:17:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Desire
At 11:04 PM 9/12/96 CDT, you wrote:
>What is the cure for sexual desire?
>
>Asim
>
Dear Asim,
Is sexual desire a disease in need of a "cure"? Curing this malady could
result in the extinction of mankind.
As I get deeper into my sixties I hope no spontaneous cure arises within me!
Maharaj James McCaig | Sufi Center of Washington
Brotherhood/Sisterhood Representative | Keepers of Sufi Center Bookstore
United States | http://guess.worldweb.net/sufi
jmccaig@worldweb.net
------------------------------
From: i-k@dircon.co.uk
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 21:35:49 +0100
Subject: Contradiction
/ | \ | ||
Assalamu alaikum o_\__,_|_s o )/|_w_||
( : (
Is it a contradiction to find a person to be quite self-centred and yet
very generous by nature?
In the One Light
Ivan
i-k@dircon.co.uk
------------------------------
From: Rabia Kathleen Seidel <seidel@top.monad.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 18:05:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Desire
Salaam aleikum one and all!
The subject of sexual desire reminds me of the words of Ahmad
al-Ghazzali:
"Vices are unethical forms of the natural propensities of man.
Propensities become harmful when they engender love for the world at the
expense of spiritual development... Vices are the wrong developments of
human propensities which act as curtains between man and his goal."
And of Ibn Arabi, who wrote in the Fusus al-Hikam::
"He who loves women in this manner (i.e., the manner of the Prophet,
peace and blessings upon him) loves them by Divine love; but he who
loves them only by virtue of natural attraction, deprives himself of the
inherent knowledge of this contemplation."
Sexual desire is part of our wiring, not deleterious in and of itself.
Allah has formed us, and formed us well. It is our intention and how we
proceed to fulfill our desires that makes the difference between
degradation and enervation, and exaltation and fulfillment.
What if we think of sexual desire in light of these words:
"And we shall show them Our signs in the horizons and in themselves."
(Surah 41:53)
As above, so below. At best, sexual desire is a call to union with the
Beloved ^Ö a terrestrial mirror of a subtle and fundamental reality. The
image of the lover and the beloved is one of the most consistent
metaphors in Sufi poetry ^Ö in fact, in the mystical literature of many
traditions. There's a good reason for that!
Ashk olsun ^Ö Let it become love!
Rabia Kathleen Seidel
------------------------------
From: malek@icanect.net (JAZ)
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 18:42:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Contradiction
>
>
> / | \ | ||
>Assalamu alaikum o_\__,_|_s o )/|_w_||
> ( : (
>Is it a contradiction to find a person to be quite self-centred and yet
>very generous by nature?
>
>
>In the One Light
>
>Ivan
>i-k@dircon.co.uk
>
>This is a provacative question for me. To take it further one must explore
the notions of "self-centeredness" and "generosity". With regards to the
former, are we talking centeredness of self or self-absorption; regarding
the latter, one must consider intent and outcome. Often, what appears as
generosity is either a controlling mechanism or compensation for perceived
inadequacy of self. It would be interesting to hear from those with a
knowledge of the literature on these issues.
Peace,
JAZ
- --
Internet Communications of America, Inc.
------------------------------
From: woodsong@juno.com (Carol Woodsong)
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 18:44:17 EDT
Subject: ignorant question...
Hello friends, :)
Please forgive my ignorant question(s). I realize that this forum is an
'open' forum, but it is also primarily a Sufi forum (at least as i
understand it). Recently there have been several questions asked here.
What confuses me is not that these questions are being asked <<smile>>,
but the 'tone' of the questions (and answers). It seems to me that the
questions are being asked as though there is always a 'right' and 'wrong'
answer to these questions, not simply an array of possible ways of seeing
a particular issue/question. Is this a Sufi perspective?
If we want to assume that there is /an/ answer to these questions, do we
also assume that there are those here who are capable and/or authorized
to answer these questions conclusively? If so, would this be an
accepted 'Sufi' answer? Do we ask for credentials of those giving
'answers'?
Again, i know my questions are extremely ignorant. I do not know what it
means to be Sufi... i would be grateful if someone could help me
understand.
Please forgive me if my questions seem offensive. I wish no one offense!
I ask, because i am confused. I was thinking that Sufis believed that
one must find one's own 'answers'.... am i wrong?
with love,
carol
------------------------------
From: ASHA101@aol.com
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 23:18:45 -0400
Subject: Re: ignorant question...
>>> I was thinking that Sufis believed that
one must find one's own 'answers'.... am i wrong? <<<
that you must find the answer yourself, is not the same thing as saying you
must find your own answer. On one level there is a right and wrong, on
another level that would be non-sequitur, there are many levels from which
one might be speaking. Just giving one's opinion is something that one can do
on any forum, on this forum hopefully people are generally refelcting
something of the sufi view or perspective and indeed it can sometimes be
confusing when people may be comming from and addressing different levels of
thinking.
There is a general sufi sense of cosmology but how that is explained and
examined shows much diversification amoung sufis. To be a sufi is not to be
anything in anyway ... it is actually something but not necessasarily to be
defined by schollars, so there is a great deal of tollerance practiced by the
sufis (even the schollars are tollerant)
There is also the philosophy of sufism which is very diverse, the mysticism
of sufism which is very beautiful and also diverse, but in the esoterics
there seems to be some unity of perspective and understanding. For instance,
in general sufis refer to life as a journey ... well maybe that doesn't seem
like such a big thing to agree upon, but it is an important way of seening
life. Sufis don't look at the physical world as just an illusion but consider
it more like clues to reality .... things like that.
So, sufism isn't just the idea that everyone has thier own idea about beauty
becasue beauty is relative ... not at all, sufis believe in beauty as
something real, to be percieved and that it is not that beauty is relative
but that the depth perception of different people is different. So there are
two things depth perception (which has nothing to do with right and wrong)
and levels or kinds of perspecitive which in some perspectives may have to do
with right and wrong and in other perspectives has nothing to do with those
things. But sufisim is not just being tollerant about everyone having an
opinion, thoug sufis are tollerant about that ... and on one level it is true
that there are no answers but those that you cocreate consciously but when we
are on that level, we rarely talk in the normal manner.
-Asha
------------------------------
From: Zainuddin Ismail <sham@po.pacific.net.sg>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 12:54:34 +0800 (SGT)
Subject: Re: Desire
The exemplar for Muslims , whether for Sufis or non-Sufis is the Prophet
Muhammad s.a.wassalam.This is clearly shown in the Quran where it states
"If you love Allah , then follow me (Muhammad).Allah will love you and
forgive you"
Anyone who understands the Quran even superficially will note that this
means "If you want to want to follow the path of loving Allah, then love
Muhammad and follow his Sunnah particularly the reality of his Sunnah and
not just externalistic aspects.Allah Who is Eternally All-Loving will
manifest his love for you , forgive you and remove the effects of your
trangressions and sins.
At 02:34 9/14/96, you wrote:
>Rabi'a al-Awliya for one.
>
>>Are there examples of sufis who remained celibate?
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Zainuddin Ismail <sham@po.pacific.net.sg>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 13:09:55 +0800 (SGT)
Subject: Re: Desire
Salam.
Our Sunnah as Muslims is the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad.Further reading
of the interpretation of the Sunnah always shows the flexibility for those
who are unable to follow the norm through no fault of their own.It is more
difficult for normal people with latent sexual desire to move up the
mountain of self-development if they remain unmarried even though there were
wholesome possibilities of marriage.Could someone quote
what Rumi said about marriage.Here are two persons so designed by Nature
that tests and trials are accentuated to accelerate their
self-development.Muhammad our Beloved said "There is nothing like marriage
for two persons in love" Blind arranged marriages where the prospective have
not seen each other at all through mutual and wholesome observation and
communication is contrary to the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad and the
Islamic Law.
Even for two persons supposedly or really in love, there will be tests and
trials to bring out the gold in their hearts .In this way they can rise
through the following stages
1)Nafs Ammara where egoism and animalism overrides all other six aspects of
human spirit
2)Nafs Lawwama where they go through the conflict of conscience
3)Nafs Mulhima where their wholesome values assert themselves over the
previous two
4)Nafs Mutmainna where through trials and tribulations they have reached the
stage of Soul at Peace which is the minimum entry qualification for Heaven
5)Nafs Radia which is the Soul at the stage where one is Pleased with God "O
Allah I am pleased with Thee as my Lord, I am pleased with Prophet Muhammad
as my Prophet ....."
6)Nafs Mardia where the lover realises that Allah is pleased with him or her
7)Nafs Kamila was Safiya the stage of completion and purity which is the
highest stage achievable for any human being , male or female , as long as
they are on this earth.
At 10:19 9/14/96 +0800, you wrote:
>
>
>
>On Fri, 13 Sep 1996, Asim Jalis wrote:
>
>> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 96 18:25:46 CDT
>> From: Asim Jalis <jalis@math.wisc.edu>
>> Reply-To: tariqas@facteur.std.com
>> To: tariqas@facteur.std.com
>> Subject: Re: Desire
>>
>> Are there examples of sufis who remained celibate?
>>
>as salaamu 'alaikum
> as far as I know, Rabi'a of Basra, Hasan of basra, and many others
>whom I cannot remember:-)
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Lilyan Kay <lilyan@u.washington.edu>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 22:51:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Desire
On Fri, 13 Sep 1996, Asim Jalis wrote:
> If you look at newly married couples or people
> who have just started a physical relationship, they are
> highly self-absorbed.
>
>
> Asim
asalaam-u-aleikum
If you look at people who aren't in this category, they often are highly
self absorbed.
If the relationship is an expression of their love of self/nafs, then this
is what happens.
If the relationship is an expression of their love of Allah swt, in
which they perceive His reflection in one another, where this is the basis
of love, then this is an entirely different thing.
You could fill in the blank here, it doesn't have to be about sex. It
could be about any human endeavor or experience. It could also evolve from
a lower to a higher state, Insha'allah, and this is the potential when
young people marry and grow old together.
We can find examples here and there of celibates whom we revere, but it
makes no sense for a Muslim to aspire to this when the one whose example
we have pledged to follow spoke against intentional lifelong celibacy.
peace and blessings
Lily
>
------------------------------
From: maarof <maarof@pc.jaring.my>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 14:40:26 +0800
Subject: Re: ignorant question...
I don't know if there are such things as ignorant questions. I have
only ignorant answers (i.e i admit i'm ignorant ... so the answers
are from the point of ignorance). I'm one of the 8 not-blind children who
will describe your "elephant"... so here goes...
On Sat, 14 Sep 1996, woodsong@juno.com (Carol Woodsong) wrote:
>Hello friends, :)
>
>Please forgive my ignorant question(s). I realize that this forum is an
>'open' forum, but it is also primarily a Sufi forum (at least as i
>understand it). Recently there have been several questions asked here.
>What confuses me is not that these questions are being asked <<smile>>,
>but the 'tone' of the questions (and answers). It seems to me that the
>questions are being asked as though there is always a 'right' and 'wrong'
>answer to these questions, not simply an array of possible ways of seeing
>a particular issue/question. Is this a Sufi perspective?
The tone of question is how "we" see it. It is diferent from person to person.
Sometimes, i hear too much answer: "Ask your Sheikh" and I think this is
the Sufi perspective. There's also another perspective, i.e to discuss it
among friends ... so this might be the perspective of this sufi interest group.
Is there such thing as a consensus answer to things? It might not be the right
answer.
>
>If we want to assume that there is /an/ answer to these questions, do we
>also assume that there are those here who are capable and/or authorized
>to answer these questions conclusively? If so, would this be an
>accepted 'Sufi' answer? Do we ask for credentials of those giving
>'answers'?
Of course there are capable people in this group. Most are observers,
and have seen the questions and the answers before. Some are too lazy
to give their interpretation of issues.
>Again, i know my questions are extremely ignorant. I do not know what it
>means to be Sufi... i would be grateful if someone could help me
>understand.
Forget about the term "sufi". Use the term "life". What it means
to be living? I define sufism as the state of remembrance of higher
reality .. so what?
>Please forgive me if my questions seem offensive. I wish no one offense!
> I ask, because i am confused. I was thinking that Sufis believed that
>one must find one's own 'answers'.... am i wrong?
>
>with love,
>carol
>
Please forgive me for my arogant answer. These are from an ignoramus, remember?
salam
maarof
------------------------------
From: millerry@teleport.com (Ryan)
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 23:55:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: logic and reason
A question has recently plagued me and I was wondering wheather you
folks could help me out. Only In the past couple years have I been into
religion, however, I have always been interested in science.
Can logic and reason, powerful tools in science, be just as useful
in discovering divine truths? Or is intuition and experience more valued
in religion?
always eager to learn, Ryan
------------------------------
From: Fred Rice <darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 20:49:19 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Re: logic and reason
Dear Ryan, Peace be with you....
On Sat, 14 Sep 1996, Ryan wrote:
> A question has recently plagued me and I was wondering wheather you
> folks could help me out. Only In the past couple years have I been into
> religion, however, I have always been interested in science.
> Can logic and reason, powerful tools in science, be just as useful
> in discovering divine truths? Or is intuition and experience more valued
> in religion?
>
> always eager to learn, Ryan
There are many people on this list with academic qualifications in
science.... I am currently doing my Ph.D. (almost complete) in
theoretical physics.
I do think that reason can be a powerful tool, but in my own experience,
I think there has to be some experience of a spiritual nature for there
to be _no possibility of doubt_ in your religion. It is possible to argue
one way or another in various ways, but if you have a spiritual
experience yourself, of an overwhelming nature, then that is impossible
for you to doubt, because it happened directly to *you*.
I don't think there is any conflict between science and religion....
By the way, in Islam, there are two traditional ways to knowledge
of God, that of science and logic, and that of direct experience
(Sufism). There are some traditional Islamic works which explore
the relationship between these two things, and some people are known
as having done some of both! One of those was, for example,
Ibn Sina (Avicenna), who was both a scientist (particularly in
medicine and philosophy) yet was also more-or-less on the Sufi path,
I think, later in his life....
One of the traditional Islamic texts which also explores this theme is
the book "The Story of Hayy ibn Yaqzan" by Ibn Tufayl (a translation is
published by Octagon Press). It is a story which is in fact a parable
of these two ways of knowing God.... (I haven't actually read the whole
book myself, however -- only commentaries on it, from the book "Islamic
Naturalism and Mysticism" by S. S. Hawi).
Wassalam,
Fariduddien
------------------------------
From: Fred Rice <darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 21:06:30 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Re: ignorant question...
Assalamu alaikum (peace be with you), Carol....
Sorry if I unintentionally repeat what someone else has already said....
On Sat, 14 Sep 1996, Carol Woodsong wrote:
> Please forgive my ignorant question(s). I realize that this forum is an
> 'open' forum, but it is also primarily a Sufi forum (at least as i
> understand it). Recently there have been several questions asked here.
> What confuses me is not that these questions are being asked <<smile>>,
> but the 'tone' of the questions (and answers). It seems to me that the
> questions are being asked as though there is always a 'right' and 'wrong'
> answer to these questions, not simply an array of possible ways of seeing
> a particular issue/question. Is this a Sufi perspective?
Hmm.... I think there is often a "right" and "wrong" answer, but often
it depends on the context! Many people tend to think that there is
always an absolutely "right" or "wrong" answer, applicable to every
situation, and forget to take the context into account....
But Allah knows best.
> If we want to assume that there is /an/ answer to these questions, do we
> also assume that there are those here who are capable and/or authorized
> to answer these questions conclusively? If so, would this be an
> accepted 'Sufi' answer? Do we ask for credentials of those giving
> 'answers'?
The majority of us here (including me :) are not really qualified, I
think.... however, if you really want a good answer to your questions,
there are in fact some Sufi Shaykhs who are reachable by email. Just try
out some of the web sites of the various Sufi orders (try Habib's list of
Sufi web sites to start with, at http://world.std.com/~habib/sufi.html ).
At some of them, you can contact the Shaykh by email (eg. Shaykh Taner
Ansari at the Qadiri-Rifa'i web page, for instance). There are also a
few others lurking around the net.... :)
> Again, i know my questions are extremely ignorant. I do not know what it
> means to be Sufi... i would be grateful if someone could help me
> understand.
I don't know.
Peace :)
Fariduddien
------------------------------
End of tariqas-digest V1 #141
*****************************