Everything except Allah Almighty (God Almighty) is vain

The saints of Islam, fly in the air, walk on water, visit the heavens and come back as they wish, and say "be" to anything they want and it shall be, and other things. They are the champions of this science, they are the ones to whom, truly, everything except God is vain.

You are joking, right? I have found a friend for you on twitter. Do a search for him and you will find Anjem Choudary. He is infamous in Britain for promoting Islamic extremism. You should get on well with him. I have started tweeting him telling him to preach his garbage to the talking ants.

He's a Sufi of a non-mainstream order in West Africa. This poster isn't really tapped into mainstream Islam at all.

That explains a lot. I once wasted six months disputing with a member of the Rashad Khalifa cult thinking he was a representative of Islamic beliefs. Before I realized he was only a member of a tiny group. On another forum I also had words with another sufi which was equally confusing.

Yeah, they tend to be pretty insistent they are simply "Muslims" which they are, but they certainly aren't representative of the primary schools of theological and jurisprudential thought that most Muslims are associated with. Even a lot of "mainstream" Muslims tend to be influenced by local flavors of Islam or by Sufi style mysticism. It is just really appealing for people to have this belief that they have some sort of secret or unique understanding of the faith that makes them better or more pure Muslims than others. Christianity went through the same thing with the gnostics.
 
It doesn't bother me that he classifies himself simply as a Muslim. What I find bothersome is his attempt to speak for the entire religion which is highly dismissive of the way that most Muslims practice their faith. It is a sin of pride and arrogance on his part that takes his minority view and makes it the face of the faith in general. It just isn't honest discourse. If he wants to talk about his own beliefs that is one thing, but speaking for the entire faith is quite another, especially when he isn't formally trained or educated (but even then it would still be highly dishonest, scholars disagree with each other every day).
 
For the people who are interested in what posters like Osomir are saying, let them know that they are lying. I am not Sufi. I am Muslim. Sufis tell you they are Sufis, others tell you what they are. For my part, I am Muslim.

1.) Sufis are Muslims so there is nothing preventing you from being both. Your insistence that you are simply as Muslim and nothing more specific than that coupled with your heavy instance on what Islam is is to deny Muslims who don't agree with you (hint, most of them) their status as Muslims simply because they don't agree with you. I'm not a big fan of takfiri practices and find them even rather sinful within an Islamic context. Set your pride aside and realize that most Muslims don't practice their faith the way that you do.

2.) That vast majority of Muslims who think that Rumi is a Wali are either certain Sufis, or are heavily influenced by Sufi teachings. The same goes for Muslims who adhere to concepts of Islamic sainthood in general.

3.) You are also from a region where Sufism has a very heavy everyday influence within Islamic tradition. There is nothing bad about it, but even if how you talk about Islam wasn't indicative enough of Sufi influences, your simple geographic location places you within a Sufi dominated region making it likely that your own Interpretation of Islam would have such influences within it.
 
6a00d83451b52369e2019b03296647970d-550wi
Theres no reason to believe in a book humans wrote thousands of years ago, as means of control and answering the questions we were ignorant of, of the day.

A lot of the shit explained away by magic has since been scientifically answered.

Then? You get shit like "new testaments" and Popes "changing the view of the church."

If people dont see the writing on the hot pink sun bright wall, that Religions are full of shit? They're perceptively dumb.

Maybe not dumb in general, just their perception is gullible and lacking deep thought.

I am not an atheist.

Ive no clue how the Universe got here. And neither does anybody.

your summary of the scriptures is extremely shallow. Especially considering they were written by many people over thousands of years for various purposes.

kudos for admitting you don't know what you don't know, but it's a logical fallacy to presume that because you don't know something, no one does.
 
Theres no reason to believe in a book humans wrote thousands of years ago, as means of control and answering the questions we were ignorant of, of the day.

A lot of the shit explained away by magic has since been scientifically answered.

Then? You get shit like "new testaments" and Popes "changing the view of the church."

If people dont see the writing on the hot pink sun bright wall, that Religions are full of shit? They're perceptively dumb.

Maybe not dumb in general, just their perception is gullible and lacking deep thought.

I am not an atheist.

Ive no clue how the Universe got here. And neither does anybody.

your summary of the scriptures is extremely shallow. Especially considering they were written by many people over thousands of years for various purposes.

kudos for admitting you don't know what you don't know, but it's a logical fallacy to presume that because you don't know something, no one does.
Its logical retardedness and lack of depth of character to be a Mormon.
 
Not if you don't use circular reading and actually study things out.

There isn't really anything logical about believing in God / a specific religion. Does there need to be though in order for faith and religion to have meaning? If it WERE logical, would faith even have any meaning?
 
For the people who are interested in what posters like Osomir are saying, let them know that they are lying. I am not Sufi. I am Muslim. Sufis tell you they are Sufis, others tell you what they are. For my part, I am Muslim.

1.) Sufis are Muslims so there is nothing preventing you from being both. Your insistence that you are simply as Muslim and nothing more specific than that coupled with your heavy instance on what Islam is is to deny Muslims who don't agree with you (hint, most of them) their status as Muslims simply because they don't agree with you. I'm not a big fan of takfiri practices and find them even rather sinful within an Islamic context. Set your pride aside and realize that most Muslims don't practice their faith the way that you do.

2.) That vast majority of Muslims who think that Rumi is a Wali are either certain Sufis, or are heavily influenced by Sufi teachings. The same goes for Muslims who adhere to concepts of Islamic sainthood in general.

3.) You are also from a region where Sufism has a very heavy everyday influence within Islamic tradition. There is nothing bad about it, but even if how you talk about Islam wasn't indicative enough of Sufi influences, your simple geographic location places you within a Sufi dominated region making it likely that your own Interpretation of Islam would have such influences within it.

Most muslims might disagree with muslim75 that he practices the only islam-----
but it is also a fact that most muslims truly believe that there IS A ONE AND ONLY
islam. Many muslims consider Sufism a kind of heresy. It seems to me that muslim
75 expresses himself VERY ISLAMICALLY. Among the first "facts" I learned about islam is -------"there are crazy people in Pakistan" ----to wit "Shiites"----my informant was a sunni. The way he expressed the idea, with obvious disgust..,, they might just as well be a sect of schizophrenics......not just "another form"
 
For the people who are interested in what posters like Osomir are saying, let them know that they are lying. I am not Sufi. I am Muslim. Sufis tell you they are Sufis, others tell you what they are. For my part, I am Muslim.

1.) Sufis are Muslims so there is nothing preventing you from being both. Your insistence that you are simply as Muslim and nothing more specific than that coupled with your heavy instance on what Islam is is to deny Muslims who don't agree with you (hint, most of them) their status as Muslims simply because they don't agree with you. I'm not a big fan of takfiri practices and find them even rather sinful within an Islamic context. Set your pride aside and realize that most Muslims don't practice their faith the way that you do.

2.) That vast majority of Muslims who think that Rumi is a Wali are either certain Sufis, or are heavily influenced by Sufi teachings. The same goes for Muslims who adhere to concepts of Islamic sainthood in general.

3.) You are also from a region where Sufism has a very heavy everyday influence within Islamic tradition. There is nothing bad about it, but even if how you talk about Islam wasn't indicative enough of Sufi influences, your simple geographic location places you within a Sufi dominated region making it likely that your own Interpretation of Islam would have such influences within it.

Most muslims might disagree with muslim75 that he practices the only islam-----
but it is also a fact that most muslims truly believe that there IS A ONE AND ONLY
islam. Many muslims consider Sufism a kind of heresy. It seems to me that muslim
75 expresses himself VERY ISLAMICALLY. Among the first "facts" I learned about islam is -------"there are crazy people in Pakistan" ----to wit "Shiites"----my informant was a sunni. The way he expressed the idea, with obvious disgust..,, they might just as well be a sect of schizophrenics......not just "another form"

He is expressing himself very islamically under a specific brand of Islam heavily influence by western African Sufi orders. There is disagreement over what Islam is all over the world. I have no trouble with discussions about the general nature of Islam as a singular entity, but that's not what he is doing, he is preaching a specific an non-mainstream branch of Islam as the only form of Islam that exists which is dishonest and ignores the claim to faith of most other Muslims in the world.
 
For the people who are interested in what posters like Osomir are saying, let them know that they are lying. I am not Sufi. I am Muslim. Sufis tell you they are Sufis, others tell you what they are. For my part, I am Muslim.

1.) Sufis are Muslims so there is nothing preventing you from being both. Your insistence that you are simply as Muslim and nothing more specific than that coupled with your heavy instance on what Islam is is to deny Muslims who don't agree with you (hint, most of them) their status as Muslims simply because they don't agree with you. I'm not a big fan of takfiri practices and find them even rather sinful within an Islamic context. Set your pride aside and realize that most Muslims don't practice their faith the way that you do.

2.) That vast majority of Muslims who think that Rumi is a Wali are either certain Sufis, or are heavily influenced by Sufi teachings. The same goes for Muslims who adhere to concepts of Islamic sainthood in general.

3.) You are also from a region where Sufism has a very heavy everyday influence within Islamic tradition. There is nothing bad about it, but even if how you talk about Islam wasn't indicative enough of Sufi influences, your simple geographic location places you within a Sufi dominated region making it likely that your own Interpretation of Islam would have such influences within it.

Most muslims might disagree with muslim75 that he practices the only islam-----
but it is also a fact that most muslims truly believe that there IS A ONE AND ONLY
islam. Many muslims consider Sufism a kind of heresy. It seems to me that muslim
75 expresses himself VERY ISLAMICALLY. Among the first "facts" I learned about islam is -------"there are crazy people in Pakistan" ----to wit "Shiites"----my informant was a sunni. The way he expressed the idea, with obvious disgust..,, they might just as well be a sect of schizophrenics......not just "another form"

He is expressing himself very islamically under a specific brand of Islam heavily influence by western African Sufi orders. There is disagreement over what Islam is all over the world. I have no trouble with discussions about the general nature of Islam as a singular entity, but that's not what he is doing, he is preaching a specific an non-mainstream branch of Islam as the only form of Islam that exists which is dishonest and ignores the claim to faith of most other Muslims in the world.

yes---I understand what you say----but his describing his own brand of islam
as the "one and only" is a very Islamic thing to do----you seem to be trying
to convince him that the habit is NOT ISLAMIC --------
 
For the people who are interested in what posters like Osomir are saying, let them know that they are lying. I am not Sufi. I am Muslim. Sufis tell you they are Sufis, others tell you what they are. For my part, I am Muslim.

1.) Sufis are Muslims so there is nothing preventing you from being both. Your insistence that you are simply as Muslim and nothing more specific than that coupled with your heavy instance on what Islam is is to deny Muslims who don't agree with you (hint, most of them) their status as Muslims simply because they don't agree with you. I'm not a big fan of takfiri practices and find them even rather sinful within an Islamic context. Set your pride aside and realize that most Muslims don't practice their faith the way that you do.

2.) That vast majority of Muslims who think that Rumi is a Wali are either certain Sufis, or are heavily influenced by Sufi teachings. The same goes for Muslims who adhere to concepts of Islamic sainthood in general.

3.) You are also from a region where Sufism has a very heavy everyday influence within Islamic tradition. There is nothing bad about it, but even if how you talk about Islam wasn't indicative enough of Sufi influences, your simple geographic location places you within a Sufi dominated region making it likely that your own Interpretation of Islam would have such influences within it.

Most muslims might disagree with muslim75 that he practices the only islam-----
but it is also a fact that most muslims truly believe that there IS A ONE AND ONLY
islam. Many muslims consider Sufism a kind of heresy. It seems to me that muslim
75 expresses himself VERY ISLAMICALLY. Among the first "facts" I learned about islam is -------"there are crazy people in Pakistan" ----to wit "Shiites"----my informant was a sunni. The way he expressed the idea, with obvious disgust..,, they might just as well be a sect of schizophrenics......not just "another form"

He is expressing himself very islamically under a specific brand of Islam heavily influence by western African Sufi orders. There is disagreement over what Islam is all over the world. I have no trouble with discussions about the general nature of Islam as a singular entity, but that's not what he is doing, he is preaching a specific an non-mainstream branch of Islam as the only form of Islam that exists which is dishonest and ignores the claim to faith of most other Muslims in the world.

yes---I understand what you say----but his describing his own brand of islam
as the "one and only" is a very Islamic thing to do----you seem to be trying
to convince him that the habit is NOT ISLAMIC --------

It's a common trait among a lot of religious individuals. I'm trying to convince him to be intellectually honest.
 
For the people who are interested in what posters like Osomir are saying, let them know that they are lying. I am not Sufi. I am Muslim. Sufis tell you they are Sufis, others tell you what they are. For my part, I am Muslim.

1.) Sufis are Muslims so there is nothing preventing you from being both. Your insistence that you are simply as Muslim and nothing more specific than that coupled with your heavy instance on what Islam is is to deny Muslims who don't agree with you (hint, most of them) their status as Muslims simply because they don't agree with you. I'm not a big fan of takfiri practices and find them even rather sinful within an Islamic context. Set your pride aside and realize that most Muslims don't practice their faith the way that you do.

2.) That vast majority of Muslims who think that Rumi is a Wali are either certain Sufis, or are heavily influenced by Sufi teachings. The same goes for Muslims who adhere to concepts of Islamic sainthood in general.

3.) You are also from a region where Sufism has a very heavy everyday influence within Islamic tradition. There is nothing bad about it, but even if how you talk about Islam wasn't indicative enough of Sufi influences, your simple geographic location places you within a Sufi dominated region making it likely that your own Interpretation of Islam would have such influences within it.

Most muslims might disagree with muslim75 that he practices the only islam-----
but it is also a fact that most muslims truly believe that there IS A ONE AND ONLY
islam. Many muslims consider Sufism a kind of heresy. It seems to me that muslim
75 expresses himself VERY ISLAMICALLY. Among the first "facts" I learned about islam is -------"there are crazy people in Pakistan" ----to wit "Shiites"----my informant was a sunni. The way he expressed the idea, with obvious disgust..,, they might just as well be a sect of schizophrenics......not just "another form"

He is expressing himself very islamically under a specific brand of Islam heavily influence by western African Sufi orders. There is disagreement over what Islam is all over the world. I have no trouble with discussions about the general nature of Islam as a singular entity, but that's not what he is doing, he is preaching a specific an non-mainstream branch of Islam as the only form of Islam that exists which is dishonest and ignores the claim to faith of most other Muslims in the world.

yes---I understand what you say----but his describing his own brand of islam
as the "one and only" is a very Islamic thing to do----you seem to be trying
to convince him that the habit is NOT ISLAMIC --------

It's a common trait among a lot of religious individuals. I'm trying to convince him to be intellectually honest.

Several years ago----I saw a televised interview on the question of Salman
Rushdie. The person interviewed was an Iranian female representative----
who was also a lawyer. Her argument was that Salman Rushdie's crime was
of THE MOST SERIOUS kind------because it attacked THE ONE AND ONLY
TRUTH-----therefore ---logically---he should be subjected to the most serious
penalty. --------you want to try to crack that logic???
 
Osomir,

You are lying. Sufis tell you they are Sufis and actually give you more details about Sufism or the branch of Sufism they belong to. One more time, I am not Sufi. I am Muslim. West Africa has a lot of Sufism, you are right, but the non-Sufis are by far the majority.

I do speak for Islam as if I know the truth about Islam because the truth about Islam is written black on white on books you'll find in the Islamic libraries. It has been sitting on Islamic libraries' shelves for about 1400 years. Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) indicated clearly which authors to look for when he said:

"My Companions are like stars. Whichever of them you follow you will be guided."

"The men who possess knowledge (Ulama) are the inheritors of the prophets."

So read the works of the Companions, or that of the scholars who are like the prophets (in other words, who fly in the air, walk on water, whose body remain unchanged 50, 60 or 150 years after their death, who say be to a thing and it is, and so on...); and whatever you read from them that is the truth about Islam. If there is a contradiction between two of them, try to reconcile the difference, because you are supposed to be intelligent.

I don't claim to know about the truth of Islam in the exclusion of others. But read Al Ghazali, or Hasan Basri, or Fudhail Iyadh, or Imam Shafi or Imam Malik, or Uways Qarni, or Ibn Arabi, or Rumi, or Abd Al Qadir Jilani, or Ad Darqawi, or Abul Abbas Sabti, etc...They wrote the absolute truth about Islam, whether you like it or not; that is not debatable. Re-read the two sayings of Muhammad above, this is not debatable. People know this and don't care, like the Shia who insult the Companions. I told you just before that Muhammad said:
"My Companions are like stars. Whichever of them you follow you will be guided."

I unfortunately don't have time to reply to your post, but this is sufficient.
 
1.) Sufis are Muslims so there is nothing preventing you from being both. Your insistence that you are simply as Muslim and nothing more specific than that coupled with your heavy instance on what Islam is is to deny Muslims who don't agree with you (hint, most of them) their status as Muslims simply because they don't agree with you. I'm not a big fan of takfiri practices and find them even rather sinful within an Islamic context. Set your pride aside and realize that most Muslims don't practice their faith the way that you do.

2.) That vast majority of Muslims who think that Rumi is a Wali are either certain Sufis, or are heavily influenced by Sufi teachings. The same goes for Muslims who adhere to concepts of Islamic sainthood in general.

3.) You are also from a region where Sufism has a very heavy everyday influence within Islamic tradition. There is nothing bad about it, but even if how you talk about Islam wasn't indicative enough of Sufi influences, your simple geographic location places you within a Sufi dominated region making it likely that your own Interpretation of Islam would have such influences within it.

Most muslims might disagree with muslim75 that he practices the only islam-----
but it is also a fact that most muslims truly believe that there IS A ONE AND ONLY
islam. Many muslims consider Sufism a kind of heresy. It seems to me that muslim
75 expresses himself VERY ISLAMICALLY. Among the first "facts" I learned about islam is -------"there are crazy people in Pakistan" ----to wit "Shiites"----my informant was a sunni. The way he expressed the idea, with obvious disgust..,, they might just as well be a sect of schizophrenics......not just "another form"

He is expressing himself very islamically under a specific brand of Islam heavily influence by western African Sufi orders. There is disagreement over what Islam is all over the world. I have no trouble with discussions about the general nature of Islam as a singular entity, but that's not what he is doing, he is preaching a specific an non-mainstream branch of Islam as the only form of Islam that exists which is dishonest and ignores the claim to faith of most other Muslims in the world.

yes---I understand what you say----but his describing his own brand of islam
as the "one and only" is a very Islamic thing to do----you seem to be trying
to convince him that the habit is NOT ISLAMIC --------

It's a common trait among a lot of religious individuals. I'm trying to convince him to be intellectually honest.

Several years ago----I saw a televised interview on the question of Salman
Rushdie. The person interviewed was an Iranian female representative----
who was also a lawyer. Her argument was that Salman Rushdie's crime was
of THE MOST SERIOUS kind------because it attacked THE ONE AND ONLY
TRUTH-----therefore ---logically---he should be subjected to the most serious
penalty. --------you want to try to crack that logic???

Most religion isn't logical. If it were then there would be no need for faith. That being said the issue of the satanic verses attacks a more fundamental concept within Islam (the notion of Monotheism and Muhammad's legitimacy as a prophet). So that is going to be more encompassing than say a belief that Rumi is an Islamic saint. In either case, there are and have historically been a lot of Muslims who believe that the verses existed and were stricken, they have different explanations for them.
 
Osomir,

You are lying. Sufis tell you they are Sufis and actually give you more details about Sufism or the branch of Sufism they belong to. One more time, I am not Sufi. I am Muslim. West Africa has a lot of Sufism, you are right, but the non-Sufis are by far the majority.

I do speak for Islam as if I know the truth about Islam because the truth about Islam is written black on white on books you'll find in the Islamic libraries. It has been sitting on Islamic libraries' shelves for about 1400 years. Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) indicated clearly which authors to look for when he said:

"My Companions are like stars. Whichever of them you follow you will be guided."

"The men who possess knowledge (Ulama) are the inheritors of the prophets."

So read the works of the Companions, or that of the scholars who are like the prophets (in other words, who fly in the air, walk on water, whose body remain unchanged 50, 60 or 150 years after their death, who say be to a thing and it is, and so on...); and whatever you read from them that is the truth about Islam. If there is a contradiction between two of them, try to reconcile the difference, because you are supposed to be intelligent.

I don't claim to know about the truth of Islam in the exclusion of others. But read Al Ghazali, or Hasan Basri, or Fudhail Iyadh, or Imam Shafi or Imam Malik, or Uways Qarni, or Ibn Arabi, or Rumi, or Abd Al Qadir Jilani, or Ad Darqawi, or Abul Abbas Sabti, etc...They wrote the absolute truth about Islam, whether you like it or not; that is not debatable. Re-read the two sayings of Muhammad above, this is not debatable. People know this and don't care, like the Shia who insult the Companions. I told you just before that Muhammad said:
"My Companions are like stars. Whichever of them you follow you will be guided."

I unfortunately don't have time to reply to your post, but this is sufficient.
I have read them, which is why I know that even they didn't agree with one another. In fact other writers such as Ibn Taymiyyah considered Ghazali something of a religious joke. Nor are the writings of Rumi, akin to those of Shafi, and Shafi and Maliki certainly had differences of thought as is evidenced by the fact that they led to two completely different schools of Islamic jurisprudence. You're being dishonest in order to try to present Islam (YOUR Islam) as some sort of monolith that has never existed before in the history of the religion.
 
You are lying. Re-read my post, it is very clear. Ibn Taymiyya is not the only one who disagrees with the great scholars of Islam, Al Qaeda and the Saudis also do. The Saudis, since they have the oil money tend to spread their version of Islam everywhere. But Imam Ghazali is probably the greatest theologian in the history of Islam, and the Muslim world largely accepts it.

Rumi and Shafi don't have opposite teachings, but complementary teachings. To speak simply, Imam Shafi focuses on how to pray, while Rumi focuses on what praying means. The two tyes of teachings go together.
 
You are lying. Re-read my post, it is very clear. Ibn Taymiyya is not the only one who disagrees with the great scholars of Islam, Al Qaeda and the Saudis also do. The Saudis, since they have the oil money tend to spread their version of Islam everywhere. But Imam Ghazali is probably the greatest theologian in the history of Islam, and the Muslim world largely accepts it.

Rumi and Shafi don't have opposite teachings, but complementary teachings. To speak simply, Imam Shafi focuses on how to pray, while Rumi focuses on what praying means. The two tyes of teachings go together.

Oh I agree that Ghazali is a popular writer even for mainstream Muslims. But to casually lump him together with people like Rumi isn't very appropriate, It's also worth pointing out in your list that you included some very heavily Sufi or Sufi influenced Islamic thinkers and mystics. They certainly do NOT agree with each other. I also noticed that you conveniently ignored the fact that Maliki's and Shafi's teachings lead to two different schools of general Islamic jurisprudence.
 
Not if you don't use circular reading and actually study things out.

There isn't really anything logical about believing in God / a specific religion. Does there need to be though in order for faith and religion to have meaning? If it WERE logical, would faith even have any meaning?

Didn't say there was, but I'm familiar with GT. He frequently uses circular reasoning and other fallacies in his arguments.
 
What about violent verses in the Quran? The degradation of women in muslim texts? I don't get it...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
God is above any form of humanness.

Islam does not teach that the Bible was true. Islam teaches that God revealed a book to Jesus, the Gospel. God Almighty Himself revealed the real Gospel to Jesus, the real Torah to Moses, the Qur'an to Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family)....

God did not intend to protect the Gospel from being changed. Jesus is not the last prophet. But Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) is the last prophet.
If the Bible cannot be trusted because it was corrupted by Jews (or that certain books which were God’s word were magically vanished by the Catholic Church as many ignorant pagans claim), then why do Muslims also claim that it was because God did away with the Bible to replace it with something better? Which is it?: The Jews defeated God or God negated his word?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top