The Reality That Is Islam

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Islamic metaphysics is so incredibly different from Judeo-Christian metaphysics. In the former, there is no distinction made between this world (the realm of appearance) and the Absolute (God as He is in himself); meaning, in Islamic thought, the ONLY truth is TRUTH from Gods perspective, which is the truth from the metaphysical; consideration of real-political realities, are SUBORDINATED to Islams metaphysical prerogative, which is the will of Allah, as conveyed by the Quran. In simple terms this means: Muslims will do anything to achieve that end - because that End - the Absolute will of Allah (as contrasted with Judaism, where God has two different names, indicating two different realms of existence) subsumes all temporal activity. Thus, lies are only a means to an end; no religion makes use of the axiom "The end justifies the means" as Islam does, because Islamic metaphysics is ALL ABOUT THE ABSOLUTE STATE OF EXISTENCE - which is life IN ALLAH.

Allah denotes at once Godhead and God as the divine person and Creator. It contains, therefore, both the impersonal and personal aspects of the divinity. – Seyyed Hossein Nasr, The Garden of Truth, pg.35, HarperOne

Unlike in Judaism, where reality is bifurcated into two separate, though, unified states of being, Islam denotes God by One name alone - Allah. He is conflated with Godhead, God as the creator - what else can that then mean if not that this realm be treated EXACTLY as God exists in his Absolute pre-being condition? And does this account for Islam's dismal record of saying on thing and doing another? Perhaps the tale from the Quran of Moses and Al Khidr (the green one) will prove edifying:


Khiḍr, realizing that Moses had the Torah and divine knowledge to draw upon, informs him in a stern manner that their knowledge is of different nature and that "Surely you [Moses] cannot have patience with me. And how canst thou have patience about things about which thy understanding is not complete?"[7] Moses promises to be patient and obey Khiḍr unquestioningly, and they set out together. After they board a ship, Khiḍr damages the vessel. Forgetting his oath, Moses says, "Have you made a hole in it to drown its inmates? Certainly you have done a grievous thing." Khiḍr reminds Moses of his warning, "Did I not say that you will not be able to have patience with me?" and Moses pleads not to be rebuked.

Next, Khiḍr murders a young man. Moses again cries out in astonishment and dismay, and again Khiḍr reminds Moses of his warning, and Moses promises that he will not violate his oath again, and that if he does he will excuse himself from Khidr's presence. They then proceed to a town where they are denied hospitality. This time, instead of harming anyone or anything, Khiḍr restores a decrepit wall in the village. Yet again Moses is amazed and violates his oath for the third and last time, asking why Khiḍr did not at least exact "some recompense for it!"

Khiḍr replies, "This shall be separation between me and you; now I will inform you of the significance of that with which you could not have patience." Many acts which seem to be evil, malicious or somber, actually are merciful. The boat was damaged to prevent its owners from falling into the hands of "a king who seized every boat by force.… And as for the boy, his parents were believers and we feared lest he should make disobedience and ingratitude to come upon them." God will replace the child with one better in purity, affection and obedience. As for the restored wall, Hazrat Khiḍr explained that underneath the wall was a treasure belonging to two hapless orphans whose father was a righteous man. As God's envoy, Hazrat Khiḍr restored the wall, showing God's kindness by rewarding the piety of the orphans' father, and so that when the wall becomes weak again and collapses, the orphans will be older and stronger and will take the treasure that belongs to them. Link


Khidr, the Green one, is obviously a symbol of that faculty which see's things from the perspective of the Godhead; instead of showing consideration for temporal, relative conditions, which Judaism has showed a knack for doing, Islam, as prescribed by this narrative, demands acknowledgement of only the Godhead - who is also identified as being the creator of this world. As Seyyed Hossein Nasr says, some people mistakenly think Islam is polytheistic, inasmuch as its regards everything in this world as a 'theophany' (symbol for something higher). Hossein, however, counters that accusation by saying Islam conceives this world as not being God, but rather, as this world being "plungedin the being of God", which is aptly reflected by the Islamic pilgrimage - the Hajj - where the desert serves as a symbol for the realm of appearance (the multiple) And Allah as the stone in the Ka'aba: the Ka'aba symbolizing the mind which understands, and the stone, the essence understood.

Sharia mandates "Taqiyya" which roughly translated, can be understood as "holy lying", which is to say, lying for the sake of Allah, or, lying for the sake of the Absolute spiritual condition Islam believe God desires for mankind. This basic metaphysic - the absolute being of prime importance - explains the severity and austerity of Islamic jurisprudence: Parents are expected to kill disobedient children, or, at least not interfere if they are discovered to be rebelling against Islam; hands are cut off, legs are cut off, tongues are cut out - even if all these appendages serve as symbols for spiritual organs, is it not still barbaric, that is, isn't man HARDENED by such cruelties? In Islams perspective - which is only that of the transcendent Absolute - it's a non issue; undoubtedly, it is an awful and terrifying thing, but that after all is how one experiences the Godhead, as a mysterium tremendum (latin: terrifying mystery). Islam is all about bringing the Godhead into this world, despite the terrors it will bring.

Even beyond the great problem Islam poses to the west, a deeper and more intractable issue is Islams' relationship with Judaism and Israel. In the above allegory between Moses and Khidr, Moses is seen as a symbol for the ego, while Khidr, as the divine imminent self (Allah in man). Already, this basic formulation of Islam pits one against the other; Islam as the proper perspective, against Judaism, the egoistic, "superficial" morality of the ego. How can Judaism and Islam ever hope to compromise if Islam is so fundamentally reactionary in it's opinions? If only Islam is correct - and this is a foregone conclusion given what we have explained about Islam - how can anything Islam has to say be treated as anything but a paean to Allah? Whether that be calls for peace, compromise, etc, all of that will be said for no other purpose but advancing the situation of Islam. So, what is Israel to do? How can you fight an enemy who has such a lofty - albeit, demonic - conception of it's mission? How do you combat it?
edit on 17-4-2012 by dontreally because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Islam calls for violence against persecutors of Islam.
Christianity calls for peace and for you to turn the other cheek.
Any religion that promotes violent is a false one in my eyes.
You however are free to believe in what you want.

Surah 2:190-193
"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they first fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression."

edit on 17-4-2012 by GmoS719 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 




In the former, there is no distinction made between this world (the realm of appearance) and the Absolute (God as He is in himself);


Islam seperates reality into the "Creator" and the "created".



Sharia mandates "Taqiyya" which roughly translated, can be understood as "holy lying", which is to say, lying for the sake of Allah,


Lying, huh?
Please tell me the story of Jacob, later renamed Israel. I'd like to hear it from you. Thanks.





Parents are expected to kill disobedient children, or, at least not interfere if they are discovered to be rebelling against Islam; hands are cut off, legs are cut off, tongues are cut off - even if all these appendages serve as symbols for spiritual organs, is it not still barbaric?


If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
- Deuteronomy 21:18-21



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by GmoS719
 





Christianity calls for peace and for you to turn the other cheek.


Christianity calls every other religion as being "satanic" or "of the devil"....even if they adore Jesus as a holy man and a prophet.

Yet, christianity is infatuated with a religion that calls Jesus a false prophet and denies him this day.

Now, you can sit here and point fingers at Islam all you want...the fact is that you christians are guilty of supporting a people who literally HATE the central figure of your religion..... while spitting on a people who adore Jesus.

Its kind of like looking at christians cheering on the anti-christ...



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by GmoS719
 


Christianity calls for peace and for you to turn the other cheek.





You don't know what you are talking about...


"Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?" (Acts 23:3).



ALL organized religion seeks the destruction of any infidel...and the beauty of it is, it's all subjective. You don't have to back it up, just take action in the name of your god.


edit on 17-4-2012 by facelift because: grammar



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by facelift
reply to post by GmoS719
 


Christianity calls for peace and for you to turn the other cheek.





You don't know what you are talking about...


"Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?" (Acts 23:3).



ALL organized religion seeks the destruction of any infidel...and the beauty of it is, it's all subjective. You don't have to back it up, just take action in the name of your god.


edit on 17-4-2012 by facelift because: grammar


" God shall smite thee " Keyword God.
Get it right.
Take a look at my post again.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 


Also, I know this thread is going to get filled up by pro-Israeli/Jewish Christians in a matter of minutes... so before that, I'd like to hear your opinion on Jesus Christ.

-Do you see Jesus as Messiah, as the christians (and Muslims) do?
-Do you see him at least as a man who had divine essence?
-Or do you see Jesus as a false prophet?
-Most importantly, is your belief system compatible with Jesus?


Thanks in advance.
edit on 17-4-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


Again, this is about the dualistic approach in Judaism. The Torah says one thing, but the Rabbis - the legal codifiers of the law - prescribe another.

Why is this relevant? Someone philosophically inept wouldn't notice the difference, but this dichotomy reflects Judaim's whole raison d'etre. There is the commandments of God, as reflected in the Torah, and then is there is the interpretation of HOW and WHEN those laws are to be applied.

For instance, there is an anecdote in the Talmud where one Rabbi argues that the law should be interpreted in such a way, and another group (the majority) argues in another; a miracle occurs, a voice is heard from the heavens that says "He (the first Rabbi" Is right, the law is on his side". Another Rabbi responds, we do not respond to miracles, and the Rabbi's opted for the opinion of the majority.

In other words, even though the Bible recommends that a disobedient son be severely punished, the HUMAN response (which is as much a command, one could say, it's the ordinance of reason against the ordinance of emotion) to that is compassion, thus, the Rabbis of the Talmud also said; "A court which kills more then one person in 50 years is a killing court".

Judaism reconciles two opposing drives - that of absolute reason - what the cold letter of the law demands (and the law should be considered, since it keeps man anchored to objectivity) and that of real human conditions, which is what the heart demands.

You, my friend, need to know more about Islam. Read Annemarie Schimmel "Mystical dimensions of Islam" - my understanding of it is completely correct. I base myself on their writings; on seyyed hussein nasr, frithjof schuon, martin lings, rene guenon...modern experts on Islamic mysticism, Who are you basing yourself on?



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 


Thanks for your reply.


But.... I seem to recall asking you a few questions.

You said something about lying in Islam.
I asked you earlier...
"Please tell me the story of Jacob.

And please elaborate on the parts where Jacob did some rather "dishonest" things.

(edit)



edit on 17-4-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 



For instance, there is an anecdote in the Talmud where one Rabbi .....


Looks like you expect me to listen to stuff from the Talmud and Rabbis...

Very well.
Is it ok if I post stuff from the perspectives of non-Jewish scholars... you know, muslims and stuff?
Would that be fair?


edit on 17-4-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 




You, my friend, need to know more about Islam. Read Annemarie Schimmel "Mystical dimensions of Islam" - my understanding of it is completely correct. I base myself on their writings; on seyyed hussein nasr, frithjof schuon, martin lings, rene guenon...modern experts on Islamic mysticism, Who are you basing yourself on?



I'd love to "appeal to authority" as well, but I have a feeling its better we reason this out ourselves, for as long as we can.

You stick to your Talmudic Rabbis and I'll stick with my "sources".



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


How is that relevant? The fact is, the Rabbis do not endorse lying, while Sharia does.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   
i must admit i instantly start getting a severe headache if a fundamental discussion about religion comes along.
it gets even more worse if people try to compare religions with each other and quote this passage of the bible with that passage from the quran.

but be it

better have it here as a discussion than in real life beating each other up.

at this point it gets very obvious that there are differences between religions that can lead to wars
therefore and JUST therefore western nations developped secularism, and a law that leaves enough room
to host many religions alltogether in a nation.

many religions and their highest 'leader', 'spokesman', 'mullah', 'lama' or however you call them depending on your personal believe are able to get along with that, under the concept that religion in itself has to be peaceful.

but islam,- at least imho -, has no tolerance in this, cause the majority does not accept any other law along with the sharia.

in almost all nations where islam and the sharia has a high influence on people the majority of people is unhappy, and lives in a more or less chaotic state.
in few nations harbouring a majority of muslim people the concept of secularism works, while having the cleriks yelling about this, THAT loud that the rest of the world starts to develop some headache too.
Now looking at nations where there is no sharia @work and secularism rules the division of lawmaking and religion even the muslim appear to be happy ... strange ?
the only thing they demand there is ... introducing sharia-law as the law itself ... strange ?

so what is it ?

from reading the OP i got the impression that something i think about the islam concept is missing.
and this is why i post here in this thread

from what i know .. and please feel free to correct me in that .. the muslim see their presence on this planet as a time where they have to get through, to finally end up in ..ehm .. heaven/paradise ?
with the implementation that their time here on earth is a penalty, and a time they have to be ...how can i describe that ..hmm ...collecting sort of points ... to own their very place in heaven/paradise ?

this view on that .. to be determined if right or wrong .. explains at least to me their deep conflict with other religions and societies they interact with.
they MUST win in an interlectual battle about their religion cause of that ?
otherwise giving in ...would be a clear violation of the quran ?

forgive me if this may not fit completly into the context, but i see a specific need to have that viewpoint about islam verified, or denied.

thanks in advance



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


How is that relevant? The fact is, the Rabbis do not endorse lying, while Sharia does.


The Talmud doesn't endorse lying to Gentiles?

Rabbi Yosef said some funny things bout Gentiles not long ago
edit on 17-4-2012 by mayabong because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by mayabong
 


And He - unlike in Islamic societies - was duly censured in Israel's media (and by Jewish organizations around the globe) for saying what he did.

He, along with the Rabbinic establishment, is very out of touch with the spiritual crux of Judaism; the vast majority of Jews, and even most Orthodox (barring those ultra-orthodox who share his brash sentiments) believe all people to be on equal footing in Gods sight. No one is a servant of any other; if anything, we are servants of God and God alone.

Different religions exist for different types of people, the only thing that unites us is our living in accord with what C.S Lewis so rightly called "the Tao" - that spiritual reality which underlies all things. Those who live in accord with the "tao" are to be found in all religions (though strangely absent from C.S. Lewis' documentation of it in sacred literature is Islamic writings) Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Jewish, and only those who live outside it are those who either make claim to a higher revelation (such as Muslims) or Atheists/Gnostics (in the heretical sense)... Now..Isn't that ironic? It helps explain, at least, why radical leftists support Islamic radicals; they both derive their 'power' from the same ground, albeit, leading in entirely different directions.

For example, Muslims go 'outside' the system (the world of creation), ignore temporal conditions, to live in accord with Allah's will as enunciated by the Quran and elucidated by it's jurists. This belief in the Absolute (which is Allah) reflected in his holy writ - His Quran - binds the world of creation to the Absolute. Muslims - at least good Muslims who understand the gist of Islam - by virtue of living in accord with sharia, are lifted above the world of mere 'appearance'.

On the other side, with Atheists, who make no claim to any objective truth or standard, base their actions on pure instinct or whatever psychological content happens to impel them into action at any time. Both claim to be 'outside the system' both radically diverge from conventional and traditional morality, as taught by ancient Judaism, Christianity (ignoring the heretical branches) Confucianism, Hinduism - religions which submit to the rule of the Tao, whether it be called the Law of Hashem, Tao, The golden rule, the Law of Manu etc.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Hey dontreally!

If you don't mind me saying, you seem very obsessed with how mysticism and the the metaphysical dimension of abrahamic religions affect the world today. Personally, if you ask me, if there was a part of religion and belief that has the least effect of all on the world today, it would be the mystical aspect of it. It seems utterly irrelevant to anything going on.

For some reason, you've latched on to the idea of this mystical element being at the root of anti-jewish conflict in the world today. I can't comprehend how you reached this conclusion, but you do post a lot of threads trying to support it. Perhaps you have something against mysticism in general. I personally have no stake in defending mysticism, I don't really subscribe to that worldview, I just pointed this out, because it seems odd.

I know next to nothing about Seyyed Hossein Nasr, but his words are no more authoritative on the subject of Islam (even the mystical aspect) than any other muslim/mystic, especially considering that many muslims/mystics disagree with them (at least in the form you are attempting to portray them).

As far as your topic goes, I have to disagree on the major crux behind your theory. First off, surely you understand how extreme Islam is in its monotheism. NOTHING is God except God. NOTHING is a symbol of God. God is God. Skorpion put it well...the traditional dualistic understanding of reality for muslims is "Creator and Created". Does anyone (except sometimes rabid ignorant Christian fundamentalists who want to pick a bone with the theology of Islam) seriously think that Islam is polytheistic?

As far as Taqiyya goes, to translate it as "Holy Lying" in any sense at all is laughable. According to the Quran, muslims are permitted to lie about their faith if revealing that they are muslims would result in harm or persecution to them. To conflate this to "lying for the sake of the Absolute spiritual condition Islam believe God desires for mankind" is a bit...well, silly. In fact, the entire idea of using the concept of "taqiyya" as a stick to beat muslims with is a bigotry akin to the Christian idea that Kol Nidre gives Jews license to lie to others.

I do find it interesting that you, as a follower of Judaism would agree with the viewpoint that it is okay to go against the word of the Torah if there is Rabbinical consensus to do so. Is this a common jewish view?
edit on 18-4-2012 by babloyi because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by GmoS719
Islam calls for violence against persecutors of Islam.
Christianity calls for peace and for you to turn the other cheek.
Any religion that promotes violent is a false one in my eyes.
You however are free to believe in what you want.

Surah 2:190-193
"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they first fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression."

edit on 17-4-2012 by GmoS719 because: (no reason given)


Uhh, I'm not sure if you understood what you just posted if you used this as a backing to justify that Muslims are violent. Quoting this and using it as a reasoning for the violent acts of certain individuals means that you apparently do not agree with 'defending yourself and/or others'; it's inane.This verse means those who attacked the Muslims, are told to fight back for justice. The verses even say that if the people who started the fight begin to stop and make peace , then the Muslims must also stop and make peace as well, far from terrorism. Historically, this refers to the Battle of Badr. Although what you've stated is in context, you certainly don't understand what it says. Ontop of this, it's historically out of context.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 



The fact is, the Rabbis do not endorse lying, while Sharia does.


"Rabbis do not endorse lying,"
For the record, these are YOUR words, not mine.

*shrugs*
okay....Ill take your word for it....

Here are some Rabbis speaking about Islam.

Since you say "Rabbis do not endorse lying", I am assuming these Rabbis are speaking the truth.






edit on 18-4-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   
no true scotsman fallacy coming from the OP in 3, 2, 1....

second line...



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by babloyi
 





If you don't mind me saying, you seem very obsessed with how mysticism and the the metaphysical dimension of abrahamic religions affect the world today. Personally, if you ask me, if there was a part of religion and belief that has the least effect of all on the world today, it would be the mystical aspect of it. It seems utterly irrelevant to anything going on.


I think it's perfectly reasonable to believe that the Sheikhs and Imams of Islam base their sharia on metaphysical considerations - i.e. the ACTUAL significance of their religion, rather than anything else... Am I "weird" that I take this philosophical dimension to be of primary importance, rather than, say, believe the 'promises' that Islamic politicians make to the Jewish state? Funny - that once I pick on Islam (which would be your religious affiliation, would it not?) and point out it's metaphysical preoccupation with the absolute - which is undoubtedly the central idea of Islamic metaphysics (outside of metaphysics, religion is rather pointless. So if I treat political events as being conditioned by this dimension of religion, I think that's a fair and reasonable assumption) you take out the big words - that I am 'obsessed' because I've bothered to research this aspect of religious belief and attempted to link it with the political realm....I think it's rather innovative.





For some reason, you've latched on to the idea of this mystical element being at the root of anti-jewish conflict in the world today.


Call it mystical, or ideological, whatever word you prefer, it is definitely the basic ingredient for why the world's elite have always picked on the Jews.




I can't comprehend how you reached this conclusion, but you do post a lot of threads trying to support it.


It's really not that difficult to comprehend: many other people I've spoken with about this, professionals in their own fields, have understood the philosophic juxtaposition I make between Judaism and what's been termed the "perennial" traditions. Basically, and simply put, Judaism puts more stock into the realm of "appearance" - something Islam does not; Something Christianity, in it's own unique fashion, also averts, and something which, of course, Eastern religions are unequivocally philosophically opposed to - see "Maya"... This is basically it in a nutshell.

Now, since this is so - that Judaism is so unlike these major other religions in this very explicit way - wouldn't it be reasonable to conjecture a possible conspiracy against the Jews? Since it has gone from Biblical times, to Greco-Roman times, into the Islamic and Christian era, and then again transforming itself into totally different terms in the "enlightened" era: Does this not beg the question? I think it does, and I think more than enough evidence exists to suggest a conspiracy at the upper echelons of society - which to me implies a consortium of elements, from religious, industrial, and government, colluding against the Jewish people as one among their many agendas.

Man has always had a fascination with "myth" - perhaps today's myth is being acted out on the world stage, with the various pieces playing their archetypal role, and the Jews - cast as the defenders of the realm of "illusion" - as the archetypal devil, or dragon to be slayed by the concerted effort of the Universal (or United Nations)... Which better party to play the role of the Absolute, then Islam? Is this what the Hadiths means when it talks about the confrontation between Islam and Judaism at the end of days? I think that's plausible!




I know next to nothing about Seyyed Hossein Nasr, but his words are no more authoritative on the subject of Islam (even the mystical aspect) than any other muslim/mystic, especially considering that many muslims/mystics disagree with them (at least in the form you are attempting to portray them).


I know there are philosophical differences of emphasis between the various schools of Islamic thought i.e. sunni, shi'ite, druze etc, but I think most knowledgeable Muslims can agree on this basic formulation - that Allah (And btw, Seyyed Hossain Nasr bases his metaphysical exposition on Ibn Arabi - a de facto authority on Islamic Metaphysics) understood in purely metaphysical terms (something only few - the elite - are educated in) symbolizes the Absolute i.e. the Godhead; and as modern experts in Islamic mysticism explain, he is also conflated with the creator, in other words, the creation is a desert, and God - the Absolute - the Ka'aba, with it's square shape symbolizing (amongst other things) the mind which understands, and the stone inside it, the essence understood.

The hundreds of deaths during the Hajj each year (from getting trampled to death) perfectly reflects this metaphysics: In their euphoria, the only thought the worshiper has is of Allah (the Absolute, which means getting as close as possible to the Ka'aba), and any thought which detracts from that pristine awareness is an ontological step down from the Absolute into the relative - in other words, to concern yourself with people getting trampled to death would be discordant with the essence of Islam.
edit on 18-4-2012 by dontreally because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join