Sufism - The Truth About the "truth"

[c0de]

The ultimate goal which the sufi is supposed to be striving for is fana (annihilation) of the self. More specifically, it is called Baqaa-bi-Allah, "annihilation in the eternal consciousness". This ultimate understanding/state in which the self is annihilated (fana) comes when the seeker realizes that man is not good, nor evil, but nothing. That he is neither +1, nor is he -1. Man, is a zero: that the "self", does not actually exist, at all.

This problem; however, is that this was as true at the beginning of the seeker's journey, as it will be at its end. This is why the idea of "achieving" the goal of fanaa is itself proof a fundamental misunderstanding in sufism, because you can not "achieve" something which is a matter of fact. This might be considered a semantical argument but it is not. The reason I brought this up is to highlight the hierarchical nature of the misguided institution in this "truest" of the paths in the Islamic religion. The sufis believe there are levels of perfection, that can be attained by the novice through the guidance of the sheikh (a spiritual master). However, this is close to blasphemy in Islam, as God is sufficient to guide anyone to Himself, as He so pleases. So even this most "esoteric" of paths is not free of corruption because of its institutionalization.

As much respect as I have for the original Asharite philosophers, their compromise came when they allowed the concept of free-will. In doing so, they opened the way for idea of "achieving" fanaa, just as the Buddhist or Hindu philosophies preached, because it allowed the seeker to somehow "earn" his way to the Lord through good works (or to "nirvana" or "knowledge" in the case of the other philosophies), when the fact is that no one can "earn" anything, in any real sense.

The reason why these concepts are so harsh, because no one actually wants to think like this. It is too clear cut, and therefore > suffocating. In theory it erases pride by canceling out free-will entirely. But man, by nature, does not want to let go of his nature. Not even one who has realized this ultimate truth will ever be actually apply it in its fullest form, because man is a forgetful creature, weak and easily tempted into believing he actually exists. This is why Adam ate the apple in the first place, according to the Quran, not because he wanted to rebel, or sin, but because he simply forgot God's warning. No human being can ever truly be perfect, because real wisdom/perfection can never be "achieved" by a human, no matter how pious they may be. Because even his piety is a gift from God, and is never earned. Consequently, it also shows the infinite mercy of the Creator, who guides such a deluded creature, in such a way as to allow him to believe in his existence when it is ultimately, just an illusion. And that, (in my not so humble opinion,) is the point of the journey and the most important realization.

Anyways, enough of this.... here, listen to this, and forget about what you just read:

YouTube - Mai ne Mein

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTybbAri_3g&feature=channel_page[/youtube]

 

[Snoopy]

Hi again c0de,

I had a bit of an exchange with Muslimwoman on Sufism a good while ago (when she posted here!!!) simply because I was interested to find out about it…she recommended a magazine actually…


Baqaa-bi-Allah sounds somewhat like the notion of anatta, - self hood as is commonly understood being a delusion to help us get through our mundane lives.

So does Sufism view fanaa as something to achieve? I’m not sure that the Buddhist philosophy that I understand espouses achievement as such, rather the realisation of what already is, and you also intimate Sufism is concerned with realisation ("when the seeker realizes")...?

s.

 

[c0de]

Hey Snoop,

The hierarchical nature of the path is what sets up the realization as an achievement. It is said that the "novice" needs a "spiritual master" to be guided through the different "levels" of "perfection". For example, in sufism, apparently, there are 4 different levels: Faná -fi-Shaikh, Faná-fi-Rasul, Faná-fi-Allah, and Baqaa-bi-Allah. As if the "master" can ever actually prove to the student that he has actually attained any of these levels, or even that it is through his guidance that the novice can attain these himself. But most attrocious is the suggestion that the master is actually capable of seeing into the heart of the student and guaging his level of "perfection".

I will restrict myself to discussing only Sufism, but as far as I know, all "esoteric" systems have similar grading schemes. And it is this system which turns the realization into an achievement, through institutionalization.

(Good question by the way, I should have been more clear about this in my first post).


p.s. I totally forgot how to embed!! (it's been a while)

[youtube]XTybbAri_3g&feature=channel_page[/youtube]

 

[Snoopy]

Hey Snoop,

The hierarchical nature of the path is what sets up the realization as an achievement. It is said that the "novice" needs a "spiritual master" to be guided through the different "levels" of "perfection". For example, in sufism, apparently, there are 4 different levels: Faná -fi-Shaikh, Faná-fi-Rasul, Faná-fi-Allah, and Baqaa-bi-Allah. As if the "master" can ever actually prove to the student that he has actually attained any of these levels, or even that it is through his guidance that the novice can attain these himself. But most attrocious is the suggestion that the master is actually capable of seeing into the heart of the student and guaging his level of "perfection".

I will restrict myself to discussing only Sufism, but as far as I know, all "esoteric" systems have similar grading schemes. And it is this system which turns the realization into an achievement, through institutionalization.

Hey there.

As an ignoramus in Sufism I’m here to understand. I can only compare against other stuff. Yes, I think maybe the key is the institutionalisation. From this can come the hierarchy and so things to be achieved, measured and monitored. How formal and overt this is may presumably vary across religious paths. I think there’s a tension that perhaps cannot ultimately be resolved? Left to our own devices how “well” do we think we are “doing” in achieving that which cannot be achieved? Step into an institution and how much do we defer to the assessment of others?


Assessement of my intellectual understanding is one thing, but there's only me inside my head I think!

(and I really enjoyed that song...mesmerising...)


s.

 

[c0de]

I think there’s a tension that perhaps cannot ultimately be resolved? Left to our own devices how “well” do we think we are “doing” in achieving that which cannot be achieved? Step into an institution and how much do we defer to the assessment of others?

Exactly!

(warning: "zen" moment incoming)

Assessement of my intellectual understanding is one thing, but there's only me inside my head I think!

Ah, but the point is to realize that there is no "you" inside "your" head.

(and I really enjoyed that song...mesmerising...)

I know eh, it is entrancing.

 

[wil]

I've only danced around the periphery of sufism. I have attended a week retreat...great veggie food, lots of dance and whirling and meditation.

dancesofuniversalpeace.org

find a dance near you, this is a interfaith based sufi group which focuses on chant and movement, a great mediative experience and they have hundreds of dances, so many different religions honored...quite the experience

 

[Snoopy]

(warning: "zen" moment incoming)
Ah, but the point is to realize that there is no "you" inside "your" head.

Yes, you were right about the incoming zen moment, and I'm trying to steer clear, here! This is a good example, we need to talk about a "me" if only as a label in our mundane lives; but when we try to locate it, where is it? (and if we can't locate us, how can another assess us?....)

So what is the crucial difference/s between Sufism and Islam; given your OP?

s.

 

[c0de]

... but when we try to locate it, where is it? (and if we can't locate us, how can another assess us?....)

Coming to terms with a lack of "me" and a lack of "us" is the whole game. In science and philosophy the same question has been labeled the "mind/body problem." The scientists, philosophers and mystics have all been trying to come to terms with defining consciousness forever, with no result.

Most of them have rejected the spirit by saying that there is only matter. They say that consciousness is an illusion, created by the interactions of the neurons in your head. The other group (a very small minority) has argued that matter is the illusion, not consciousness. The third option, that is stated here, says that both matter and consciousness are an illusion. Neither matter, nor our consciousness actually exist, in any real sense. (As can be inferred from "every thing is perishable but He" 28:88 - Quran)

Basically, (as far as I can see) the first step is to realize that our perception of the material world is an illusion. I think that during this stage, the seeker usually believes that man is essentially good or evil (probably the latter).

Then comes the second, more profound realization: that it is our perception itself that is the actual illusion. There is a lot of issues that need resolution before one can accept this. The idea of Divine Mercy, and Purpose need to be clarified (through an understanding revelation, which of course is granted, not earned) before any of this makes sense. But once they are, the seeker can understand that "good" and "evil" can not be essential traits of the human being, as that presupposes the existence of a "self", which is the illusion the seeker is trying to chase away in the first place.

In order to understand the first step, I would direct you to the philosophy of immaterialism, or subjective idealism, specifically the work of George Berkley. I do not really know how far Berkley developed (or even agreed with) the second point (he probably did not discuss it). I have not yet read his works, but I do know that he (apparently) did a very good job in formalizing the first step.

So what is the crucial difference/s between Sufism and Islam; given your OP?

I would not dare to draw a line between Sufism and Islam. I merely pointed out a flaw, just as I have pointed out flaws in other sectarian institutions. Of course, as long as the declaration pf these institutions is the same (i.e. belief in One God and in Muhammad (pbuh) being the last prophet) the path is still one of Islam. God, of course, is capable of guiding someone even through misguidance, which is where we all start. All life begins in darkness; no one is born with any inherent knowledge.



@ Wil

Those whirling dervishes are actually splinter groups... the real sufis are very orthodox. Even the conception of Rumi in popular culture as some liberal "universal" poet, is actually a misconception.

 

[dailogue is the best]

This problem; however, is that this was as true at the beginning of the seeker's journey, as it will be at its end. This is why the idea of "achieving" the goal of fanaa is itself proof a fundamental misunderstanding in sufism, because you can not "achieve" something which is a matter of fact. This might be considered a semantical argument but it is not. The reason I brought this up is to highlight the hierarchical nature of the misguided institution in this "truest" of the paths in the Islamic religion. The sufis believe there are levels of perfection, that can be attained by the novice through the guidance of the sheikh (a spiritual master). However, this is close to blasphemy in Islam, as God is sufficient to guide anyone to Himself, as He so pleases. So even this most "esoteric" of paths is not free of corruption because of its institutionalization.

Actually, Code, I think you have ignored many facts, and rushed in to accuse sufism to be close to blasphemy.

Both the Quran, and the prophetic sunna says of the necessity of having a spiritual master. How can you deny that? Wasnt the prophet Muhammad pbuh a spiritual master? Were not all the prophets spiritual masters that God sent to guide us? Why did God send messangers then if there was no need of somenone to guide?!!!

Moses pbuh said that I knew everything, and God sent him a good servant on whom God bestowed the knowledge of the unseen to teach him that there were still other things that he (Moses pbuh) didnt know. I meant the story mentioned in the Cave chapter. Was not that good servant a spiritual master to Moses (pbuh)?

How can we depend on a physical master to get a shape body, and not depend on a spiritual master to shape ourselves?

Those good servants of God who managed to reach the peaceful soul, and were given that honour of helping others to get to Allah dont claim that they guide others, though they really guide them. Those good servants are really free from themsleves, and they know that everything is of God's favour, and that what they teach to others. "It is God who guides. We are only a cause/instrument God uses to guide others" that what they say.

I really dont get on what basis you refused that some guide others?!!!

Because even his piety is a gift from God, and is never earned. Consequently, it also shows the infinite mercy of the Creator, who guides such a deluded creature, in such a way as to allow him to believe in his existence when it is ultimately, just an illusion. And that, (in my not so humble opinion,) is the point of the journey and the most important realization.

There is a saying which says: " if you dont come to God, he will make you come to Him. So, how beautiful it would be if you come to him by yourself"...

We are responsible of our purification, Code, we have to srive for it. And I would be the happiest if I found a spiritual master. Yet, there is a spiritual master of all of us, which is the prophet Muhammad pbuh. His sunnah and teachings are light and guidance, peace be upon him and his family..
[91:7] The soul and Him who created it.
[91:8] Then showed it what is evil and what is good.
[91:9] Successful is one who redeems it.
[91:10] Failing is one who neglects it

Anyways, enough of this.... here, listen to this, and forget about what you just read:

Thank yo, Code. It is fantastic music. Here is mine: a sufi poem which wonders in the nature of self: I know not who I am

YouTube - Rabbi Shergill - Bulla Ki Jaana Maen Kaun

 

[Snoopy]

Hi c0de,

Coming to terms with a lack of "me" and a lack of "us" is the whole game.

The “whole game” of Sufism? (which you later say you would not dare draw a line between it and Islam?) Is there no self ultimately in Sufism, and so also in Islam?

In science and philosophy the same question has been labeled the "mind/body problem." The scientists, philosophers and mystics have all been trying to come to terms with defining consciousness forever, with no result.

I think it’s a bit broad brush to say “no result.” For example, this “problem” of mind/body exists only if one believes that there is a separation between what we call mind and body. If it is understood that there is no such duality, then there is no such problem, is there?

The third option, that is stated here, says that both matter and consciousness are an illusion. Neither matter, nor our consciousness actually exist, in any real sense. (As can be inferred from "every thing is perishable but He" 28:88 - Quran)

Just because “every thing is perishable but He”, does that actually infer that both matter and consciousness are an illusion (in Sufism and / or Islam) ?

In order to understand the first step, I would direct you to the philosophy of immaterialism, or subjective idealism, specifically the work of George Berkley. I do not really know how far Berkley developed (or even agreed with) the second point (he probably did not discuss it). I have not yet read his works, but I do know that he (apparently) did a very good job in formalizing the first step.

Thanks, I’ll check him out.

I would not dare to draw a line between Sufism and Islam. I merely pointed out a flaw, just as I have pointed out flaws in other sectarian institutions. Of course, as long as the declaration pf these institutions is the same (i.e. belief in One God and in Muhammad (pbuh) being the last prophet) the path is still one of Islam. God, of course, is capable of guiding someone even through misguidance, which is where we all start. All life begins in darkness; no one is born with any inherent knowledge.

If Sufism asserts that “man is not good, nor evil, but nothing” (from your OP) then how is Sufism concerned with the guidance of One God; “One God” is guiding “nothing”??? Is the One God guidance towards the realisation of "being" no thing?

Even the conception of Rumi in popular culture as some liberal "universal" poet, is actually a misconception.

Care to correct this misconception?


s.

 

[Snoopy]

In order to understand the first step, I would direct you to the philosophy of immaterialism, or subjective idealism, specifically the work of George Berkley. I do not really know how far Berkley developed (or even agreed with) the second point (he probably did not discuss it). I have not yet read his works, but I do know that he (apparently) did a very good job in formalizing the first step.

In his two great works of metaphysics, Berkeley defends idealism by attacking the materialist alternative. What exactly is the doctrine that he's attacking? Readers should first note that “materialism” is here used to mean “the doctrine that material things exist”. This is in contrast with another use, more standard in contemporary discussions, according to which materialism is the doctrine that only material things exist. Berkeley contends that no material things exist, not just that some immaterial things exist. Thus, he attacks Cartesian and Lockean dualism, not just the considerably less popular (in Berkeley's time) view, held by Hobbes, that only material things exist.

George Berkeley (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

like I said, remove the dualism and you remove the "problem"...

s.

 

[Snoopy]

I think you have ignored many facts, and rushed in to accuse sufism to be close to blasphemy.

Hi ditb,

Are you a Sufi?

Here is mine: a sufi poem which wonders in the nature of self: I know not who I am

..and I enjoyed this too. Thanks

s.

 

[wil]

Namaste Code,

So which Sufi orders have you gone and played with?

What Sufi services and classes are you attending?

Are you gathering your info from a sufi?

 

[c0de]

DITB + Snoop + Wil

Good morning all



@ DITB

In your rushed attempt to contradict me, you ended contradicted yourself sis (which, I always find cute ). You cite the example of Moses PBUH, but I ask you to reconsidered the meaning of this story, and how it supports my point, and not yours. Did you notice that when Moses (pbuh) asked Khidr (ra) to be his "spiritual master", he refused? That was the real point of the story. Khidr (ra) knew that you could not impart knowledge to someone who has not yet reached the level to be able to process that knowledge himself. This wise sage knew that he had no power to "guide" anyone, even if the student was himself a wise prophet of God. Furthermore, if you also notice in the beginning, God says in the Quran that Moses (pbuh) met a servant whom God had taught knowledge from Himself. What does that tell you?

Also, you already agree that #1: We are responsible for guiding ourselves, #2: God is the only true source of guidance and #3: the Prophet is himself the spiritual leader of Muslims. All of these facts taken together negate any reason that we stand in need of a "spiritual master" other than God and his Prophet. We have the Quran, and sunnah to guide us (primary source always being the Quran, of course). That is all we need. Please refer to my second post again to see the reason why you can not trust any "spiritual masters" anyway.

btw, thanks for the song, there are many different versions of this
Here is one by a Pakistani rock band: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBsD3pfLL8s


@ Snoop

Not the "whole game" of sufism dude, I was referring to life in general. Whatever path the seeker chooses, he will come to the same questions. As for the mind/body problem, I agree that dualism is the problem, however those who have resolved the issue in favor of the body (i.e. matter) have not solved the problem at all. Consciousness can not be explained away by a simple materialistic explanation, because they still dont know what it is, how it works etc. Nor has our understanding of matter been resting on "solid" ground, ever since the advent of Quantum Physics. It seems that matter, seems to be out of the grasp of simple materialistic explanations after all (ironic, isn't it?)

As for the assertions and inferences in my post, that verse in the Quran, (I think) does infer that matter and consciousness (everything besides God Himself) is an illusion, in a sense. To clarify: I agree with the existentialists when they say that "existence precedes essence". However, unlike the existentialist, I do not believe that anything or anyone actually exists other than God. Therefore, the point I am making is that only God has a true essence, and the "essence" of "us" is an illusion, that "we" think "we" possess.

You also questioned the purpose of guidance (in the case we are all just "nothings"). But I already pre-empted your questions when I said that this point of view (in order to be accepted and understood) requires a firm understanding of the purpose of life beforehand. And this is given to God through an understanding of revelation. I also said that this knowledge is given, not earned. It can not be rationalized. But I will say that (I think) the secret lies in understanding the dichotomy between the finite versus the infinite.

As for Rumi, he once said that anyone who is under the impression that he is more a universal figure should dispel such thoughts, as he is first and foremost a Muslim.


@ Wil

A friend of mine is a sufi, following the Maliki fiqh, which is considered the most "pure" and authentic school of Sunni orthodox establishment. Many of the well known Sufis (like Imam Hamza Yusuf, for example) are Maliki. This friend of mine is not a novice either, he has delivered khutbas (sermons) at his local mosque during Friday prayers. My knowledge of the sufis, their history, etc. comes from him and my own research into the matter. It are these original sufis who are very critical of the splinter groups (which later developed) of dervishes and what not, that you "played" with.

 

[dailogue is the best]

Good morning all

@ DITB

In your rushed attempt to contradict me, you ended contradicted yourself sis (which, I always find cute ). You cite the example of Moses PBUH, but I ask you to reconsidered the meaning of this story, and how it supports my point, and not yours. Did you notice that when Moses (pbuh) asked Khidr (ra) to be his "spiritual master", he refused? That was the real point of the story. Khidr (ra) knew that you could not impart knowledge to someone who has not yet reached the level to be able to process that knowledge himself. This wise sage knew that he had no power to "guide" anyone, even if the student was himself a wise prophet of God. Furthermore, if you also notice in the beginning, God says in the Quran that Moses (pbuh) met a servant whom God had taught knowledge from Himself. What does that tell you?

Good afternoon, brother

Actually, c0de, Khidr (ra) didnt refuse to teach Moses pbuh. He simply said:
[18:67] He said, "You cannot stand to be with me.
<A name=68>[18:68] "How can you stand that which you do not comprehend?"

This dailogue between Moses pbuh and Khidr ra simply teaches us the morals that should spread between a teacher and a student. Normally, a student tries to rush in to know everything, and may make many comments before listening to his teacher. Here, Khidr ra taught Moses pbuh the morals that he should follow as a student if he wanted to take knowledge/ guidance for him (khidr ra). Hence, in the next verses, we find Moses pbuh accepting the conditions, and the trip of guidance then took place:

[18:69] He said, "You will find me, GOD willing, patient. I will not disobey any command you give me."
<A name=70>[18:70] He said, "If you follow me, then you shall not ask me about anything, unless I choose to tell you about it."
<A name=71>[18:71] So they went....

Moses pbuh is a prophet, and the nearest to God are the prophets, and we find Moses pbuh asking Khidr ra for guidance:
[18:65] They found one of our servants, whom we blessed with mercy, and bestowed upon him from our own knowledge.
<A name=66>[18:66] Moses said to him, "Can I follow you, that you may teach me some of the knowledge and the guidance bestowed upon you?"




There is no harm in having a spiritual master. On the contrary, it is somethin that the Holy Quran and the prophetic sayings, and the teachings recommend.

As far as that khidr ra is concerned, he didnt claim that the guidance he had is him. No, c0de. It is guidance bestowed on him by God. Hence, his duty then is to transmit this guidance to others. I dont think that something hard to grasp. If you look deeply at the story of Moses pbuh and Khidr ra, you will find it saying of the necessity of having a spiritual master.

Also, brother, this story reveals that there are good servants of God on whom God bestowed deep knowledge, and guidance. And the action of Moses pbuh teaches us to seek knoweldge from those good sages.

Also, you already agree that #1: We are responsible for guiding ourselves, #2: God is the only true source of guidance and #3: the Prophet is himself the spiritual leader of Muslims. All of these facts taken together negate any reason that we stand in need of a "spiritual master" other than God and his Prophet. We have the Quran, and sunnah to guide us (primary source always being the Quran, of course). That is all we need. Please refer to my second post again to see the reason why you can not trust any "spiritual masters" anyway.

By the way, c0de, have you ever read what those spiritual masters teach their novice?! Actually, they teach nothing but the mentioning of God, praising Him, loving Him, being committed to His teaching. They teach nothing but the love of Muhammad pbuh, praising him, and being committed to his teaching and sunnah. Do those spiritual masters come with something new? No, they just live a devouted life for the love of Allah and his prophet Muhammad pbuh. And that is the main role of the spiritual master: to keep his eye on you to make sure that you are taking the right road towards Allah and his prophet pbuh, and you are in your way to uproot the love of this wordly life from your heart.

By the way, can you achieve an academic degree without having a teacher?!!

btw, thanks for the song, there are many different versions of this
Here is one by a Pakistani rock band: YouTube - Junoon - Bulleya

[/quote]

Thanks, c0de. I prefer my version due to its smooth music, and the soft voice of the singer

 

[dailogue is the best]

Hi ditb,

Are you a Sufi?

..and I enjoyed this too. Thanks

s.

Hi, snoopy,

I cant dare to say I am sufi, simply because to get this degree it means that you have manged to get rid of the self, and I am still in a daily struggle with it

I am very interested in sufism, and I ve been reading a lot about it. I like the world of sufism because it is the only branch within the Islamic thought that focuses on the human soul and its purification to get to Allah.

"Oh, you who serve your body, how much drained you become by serving it, and you seek winning in something that is to be lost

Take care of yourself, and continue its virtue because you are human by soul, and by body"

As for the song, you r welcome

 

[c0de]

Good afternoon, brother

Actually, c0de, Khidr (ra) didnt refuse to teach Moses ...

Actually, he did refuse, eventually. In the beginning he just warned him that he would not be able to follow him. Which was proven true, and they parted company. Consider their interaction, and compare it with the sufi "spiritual masters".

This dailogue between Moses pbuh and Khidr ra simply teaches us the morals that should spread between a teacher and a student.

No, it doesn't.

Here, Khidr ra taught Moses pbuh the morals that he should follow as a student if he wanted to take knowledge/ guidance for him (khidr ra).

Actually, what he did was state a plain and simple fact upon first meeting with Moses (pbuh): no one can have patience (i.e. understand and accept) that of which they have no knowledge. That was the real lesson.

There is no harm in having a spiritual master. On the contrary, it is somethin that the Holy Quran and the prophetic sayings, and the teachings recommend.

Where does the Quran recommend it?

Hence, his duty then is to transmit this guidance to others.

That is not exactly what a spiritual sufi master does. He claims to be able to guide another to "purification", when he himself has no proof that he is purified.

If you look deeply at the story of Moses pbuh and Khidr ra, you will find it saying of the necessity of having a spiritual master.

The opposite, actually.

Also, brother, this story reveals that there are good servants of God on whom God bestowed deep knowledge, and guidance. And the action of Moses pbuh teaches us to seek knoweldge from those good sages.

Nope. It teaches us that even if we meet those gifted ones, we will not be able to learn anything from them, as God has taught them from Himself. They know what we do not, because they are chosen for that knowledge, and we are not. You can not "earn" God's gifts, not even if you are a Prophet.

By the way, c0de, have you ever read what those spiritual masters teach their novice?!

Yes.

Actually, they teach nothing but the mentioning of God, praising Him, loving Him, being committed to His teaching.

Exactly... they have nothing to teach what the student can (and should) learn by himself.

No, they just live a devouted life for the love of Allah and his prophet Muhammad pbuh.

Can you see into their heart? (no)
Let God be the judge of another person's character.

And that is the main role of the spiritual master: to keep his eye on you to make sure that you are taking the right road towards Allah and his prophet pbuh, and you are in your way to uproot the love of this wordly life from your heart.

Can he see into your heart? (no)
Let God be the judge of you and your character.

By the way, can you achieve an academic degree without having a teacher?!!

Actually, yes, you can. Many of the smartest prodigies in history were not schooled by professors (as they were smarter then them even when they were kids).

Also, by the way, you are forgetting that the Prophet was never taught by anyone either.

Thanks, c0de. I prefer my version due to its smooth music, and the soft voice of the singer

Like I told you before sis, your taste in music sux (lol)

: p

 

[wil]

I cant dare to say I am sufi, simply because to get this degree it means that you have manged to get rid of the self, and I am still in a daily struggle with it

This is in line with the Sufis I've met. Not that they've rid themselves completely of self, but they are focused on that path.

I've looked at Sufism is to Islam what Kabalah is to Judaism and New thought is to Christianity.

 

[Snoopy]

OOOohh plenty to ruminate on...



sorry............

s.

 

[wil]

Don't get yourself into a spin....