Sufism

Salam

Mr Philips is an American convert to Islam who is extremely anti-Sufi.

He is also anti-Sunni, anti-Shia, anti-Jew, anti-Hindu, anti-Sikh,
anti-Brelwi, anti-music, anti-cemetery, anti-American and so on.

In short, he is a Wahhabi.

Omrow

[quote="seema*"]

i'm afraid to say this but Bilal philips often loses his mind and says some weird things i've seen it happen live on telly - sorry Judda, though we may not be stable ourselves we should at least take stable and sane teachers for our divine guidance

salaam[/quote]

isnt that what i just said Omrow

Salam

Yes Seemo. Your words are far too great for everyone to comprehend.

For some people, like Jedda, things need to be spelt out.

Omrow

[quote="Judda"][quote="Dawud"][quote="Judda"]using dhikr beads is shirk and biddah, bilal philips sed the sahaba never used them....[/quote]

Fine, hypothetically speaking, lets say, The Sahaba RA didn't use the zhikr beads.

How are they shirk? Please explain?

:?[/quote]
they r not decreed by god, thus they 'allogerically' represent another god besides which makes them shrik....[/quote]

2 things Jo-dda my man:

1./ Please explain why they are not decreed by Allah SWT, (hypothetically speaking) lets say The Blessed Sahaba RTA never did use, them, as they did not use PC's for example. What evidence beside 'this' do you have friend? 🙂

2./

Courtsey of Constantine's Shaykh:

[b]Allegory[/b]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

An allegory (from Greek αλλος, allos, "other", and αγορευειν, agoreuein, "to speak in public") is a figurative mode of representation conveying a meaning other than and in addition to the literal. Through allegory a subject of a higher spiritual order is described in terms of that of a lower which is made out to resemble it in properties and circumstances, the principal subject being so kept out of view that we are left to construe the drift of it from the resemblance of the secondary to the primary subject.

Allegory is generally treated as a figure of rhetoric, but an allegory does not have to be expressed in language: it may be addressed to the eye, and is often found in painting, sculpture or some form of mimetic art. The etymological meaning of the word is wider than that which it bears in actual use. Though it is similar to other rhetorical comparisons, an allegory is sustained longer and more full in its details than a metaphor, and appeals to imagination where an analogy appeals to reason. The fable or parable is a short allegory with one definite moral.

Northrop Frye discussed the continuum of allegory from what he termed the "naive allegory" of The Faerie Queen to the more private allegories of modern paradox literature. The characters in a "naive" allegory are not fully three dimensional, for each aspect of their individual personalities and the events that befall them embodies some moral quality or other abstraction. The allegory has been selected first: the details merely flesh it out. Since meaningful stories are always applicable to larger issues, allegories may be read into many significant stories, sometimes distorting their author's overt meaning. J.R.R. Tolkien's distaste for allegory is famous: many people have suggested that Lord of the Rings was an allegory for the World Wars, an interpretation which the author sharply denied.

The allegory has been a favourite form in the literature of nearly every nation. The Hebrew scriptures present frequent instances of it, one of the most beautiful being the comparison of the history of Israel to the growth of a vine in Psalm 80:8-17. In the Rabbinic tradition fully-developed allegorical readings were applied to every text, with every detail of the narrative given an emblematic reading, a tradition that was inherited by Christian writers, for whom allegorical similitudes are the basis of exegesis, the origin of the arts of hermeneutics. The late Jewish and Early Christian visionary Apocalyptic literature, with its base in the Book of Daniel, presents allegorical figures, of which the Whore of Babylon and the Beast of Revelation are simply the most familiar.

In classical literature two of the best known allegories are the cave of shadowy representations in Plato's Republic (Book VII) and the story of the stomach and its members in the speech of Menenius Agrippa (Livy ii. 32); and several occur in Ovid's Metamorphoses. In Late Antiquity Martianus Capella organized all the information a 5th-century upper-class male needed to know into an allegory of the wedding of Mercury and Philologia, with the seven liberal arts as guests, an allegory that was widely read through the Middle Ages.

Medieval thinking accepted allegory as having a reality underlying any rhetorical or fictional uses. The allegory was as true as superficial facts. Thus, the bull Unam Sanctam (1302) presents themes of the unity of Christendom with the pope as its head in which the allegorical details of the metaphors are adduced as actual facts which take the place of a logical demonstration, employing the vocabulary of logic:"Therefore of this one and only Church there is one body and one head—not two heads as if it were a monster... If, then, the Greeks or others say that they were not committed to the care of Peter and his successors, they necessarily confess that they are not of the sheep of Christ" (complete text).

In the late 15th century, the enigmatic Hypnerotomachia, with its elaborate woodcut illustrations, shows the influence of themed pageants and masques on contemporary allegorical representation, as humanist dialectic conveyed them. Some elaborate and successful specimens of allegory are to be found in the following works, arranged in approximately chronological order:

[color=green]Aesop – Fables [/color]
Plato – The Republic ([color=green]Plato's allegory of the cave[/color])
Plato – Phaedrus (Chariot Allegory)
Book of Revelation
Martianus Capella – De nuptiis philologiæ et Mercurii
The Romance of the Rose
William Langland – Piers Plowman
John Steinbeck – The Pearl
Dante Alighieri – The Divine Comedy
Edmund Spenser – The Faerie Queene
John Bunyan – Pilgrim's Progress
Jean de La Fontaine – Fables
Edgar Allan Poe – The Masque of the Red Death
Jonathan Swift – A Tale of a Tub
Joseph Addison – Vision of Mirza
Modern allegories in fiction tend to operate under constraints of modern requirements for verisimilitude within conventional expectations of realism. Works of fiction with strong allegorical overtones include:

[color=green]William Golding – Lord of the Flies
George Orwell – Animal Farm
Arthur Miller – The Crucible
Philip Pullman – His Dark Materials [/color]
Hualing Nieh – Mulberry and Peach

Where the requirements of "realism", in its flexible meanings, are set aside, allegory comes more strongly to the surface, as in the work of Bertold Brecht or Franz Kafka on one hand, or in science fiction and fantasy, where an element of universal application and allegorical overtones are the norm, from Dune to [color=green]The Chronicles of Narnia.[/color]

Allegorical films include:

Fritz Lang's Metropolis
Ingmar Bergman's The Seventh Seal
El Topo etc.
Allegorical artworks include:

Sandro Botticelli – La Primavera (Allegory of Spring)
Albrecht Dürer – Melancholia I
Artemisia Gentileschi – Self-Portrait as the Allegory of Painting; Allegory of Inclination
Jan Vermeer – The Allegory of Painting

The stuff in Green , are works I have either read, or are familiar with.

So I am to understand that (assuming you are right>) These 100 or so beads on a string, are contrary to popular belief, let us not forget the paradigm of the Christian rosary AS WELL as the Muslim Tasbeeh; are actually physical metaphors of a conceptual disunity of The Majestic Divinity.?

Is this right Jo-dda, what then of atheists, who believe, they follow no Lord, and yet wear these things as fashion accessories? are thy alluding to a belief in Divinity. You should tell them Jo-dda; They actualy believe there is no Beautiful Glorious Divinity whether one or in multiple, and yet they are metaphorically showing belief; not of the truth but of the lie of polytheism.

So to clarify point two, What is your evidence that the Zhikr beads are allegorically representing 'other gods'. but ALSO explain the cause and effect to me please, I don't fully get that because an object has nuetrality in being Haq or Shirk, it alegorically alludes to the falsehood when the act and intention of the user are united in the Worship and Deen ul Haq when these lickle beads are concerned?

Hope I didn't strain you eyes! 😃 😂 8)

Now, can you put all that in your own words, please.

[quote="Dawud"][quote="Judda"][quote="Dawud"][quote="Judda"]using dhikr beads is shirk and biddah, bilal philips sed the sahaba never used them....[/quote]

Fine, hypothetically speaking, lets say, The Sahaba RA didn't use the zhikr beads.

How are they shirk? Please explain?

:?[/quote]
they r not decreed by god, thus they 'allogerically' represent another god besides which makes them shrik....[/quote]

2 things Jo-dda my man:

1./ Please explain why they are not decreed by Allah SWT, (hypothetically speaking) lets say The Blessed Sahaba RTA never did use, them, as they did not use PC's for example. What evidence beside 'this' do you have friend? 🙂

2./

So I am to understand that (assuming you are right>) These 100 or so beads on a string, are contrary to popular belief, let us not forget the paradigm of the Christian rosary AS WELL as the Muslim Tasbeeh; are actually physical metaphors of a conceptual disunity of The Majestic Divinity.?

[size=9]Is this right Jo-dda, what then of atheists, who believe, they follow no Lord, and yet wear these things as fashion accessories? are thy alluding to a belief in Divinity. You should tell them Jo-dda; They actualy believe there is no Beautiful Glorious Divinity whether one or in multiple, and yet they are metaphorically showing belief; not of the truth but of the lie of polytheism.[/size]

[b]So to clarify point two, What is your evidence that the Zhikr beads are allegorically representing [/b]'other gods'. but ALSO [b]explain the cause and effect to me please, I don't fully get that because an object has nuetrality in being Haq or Shirk, it alegorically alludes to the falsehood when the act and intention of the user are united in the Worship and Deen ul Haq when these lickle beads are concerned?[/b]

8)[/quote]

Dawud you seriously needa d.umb down your words

dunno bout Judda....but even i cant understand wat your goinon about half the time!! :roll:

Still waiting for an answer from me old mate, Jo-dda. 🙂

[quote="Dawud"]Still waiting for an answer from me old mate, Jo-dda. :)[/quote]

He only visits when he is supposed to be studying at school.

it is a VERY boring forum but not half as bad as work!!!

other forums are blocked on the filter.

Dawud i aint readin ur bloody post but it is "symbolically" representing a god beside allah. Dude it aint easy explaining shirk to ppl who dont know what shirk is!

As foir Bilal Philips i don't liston to EVERYTHING he says.... i only ever quote him on stuff that is shrik :!:

[quote="Omrow"]
He is also anti-Sunni, anti-Shia, anti-Jew, anti-Hindu, anti-Sikh,
anti-Brelwi, anti-music, anti-cemetery, anti-American and so on.

In short, he is a Wahhabi.
[/quote]

that was a disgusting steriotypical comment-I demand an apology :evil: :!:

Salam

I am sorry, I forgot to mention that Bilal Phillips is not only a Wahhabi, he is a also complete mule.

He is incapable of understanding spiritual thought.

It would be an insult to learning to call him a scholar.

Mediya has more common sense than that moron.

By the way, he pushes prams.

Omrow

[quote="Judda"]
Dawud i aint readin ur bloody post but it is "symbolically" representing a god beside allah. Dude it aint easy explaining shirk to ppl who dont know what shirk is!

[/quote]

Let me simplify it Insha Allah T'ala

How is it symbolically representing what you say it does?

Please annswer Jo-dda. 🙂

Omrow Bilal Philips is an articulate scholer. I am still w8ing 4 my apology...

Dawud after the truth is the falsehood.

After Gods laws who's laws are we following?

it means using them beads in shirk...

Salam

[quote="Judda"]Bilal Philips is an articulate scholer.[/quote]

No Jedda.

He is a babbling Wahhabi.

Salafis are often like that.

Omrow

[quote="Omrow"]
He is a babbling Wahhabi.
[/quote]
...REmind u of anyone eh :?: :twisted:

Omrow! Language!

(Juddah, having other laws etc is not shirk. Saying man made laws are divine is... You need to look into the subjet abit more... and use the intellect Allah (swt) has granted you.)

[quote="Admin"] use the intellect Allah (swt) has granted you.)[/quote]
what intellect?

why does it always happen such a beautiful and pure subject end in slurrs

here we should talk about the beauty of the soul the agonies and the joys

such as: the soul longs to worship Allah the body only knows how to worship life

the soul wishes to soar above the clouds the body binds us to the earth

the soul is truth the body a liar

the soul is full of love the body only sleeps

one day the soul will reject the body but carry the inprint of its lies

[quote="seema*"]why does it always happen such a beautiful and pure subject end in slurrs
[/quote]

it was not a "beautiful" topic, it was full of shirk.

....but don't get me started coz i know i won't stop :!: :roll:

did anyone happen to watch 'SUFI-SOUL' on tv it came on couple of weaks ago

i held a good opinion of sufism , but that programme showed real sufism in its true light

its very unislamic and yes full of shirk

i.e

decorative graves

praying to saints

bowing at graves

dancing

singing

im sure there are other ways of getting closer to god

how about namaz and quran

the life of the soul is eternal then why bind it with a body that is mortal

one that is pure as fresh water the other heavy and soiled

perhaps the answer is to marry the two to make one flowing river

leading to the one sea

[quote="Judda"]Dawud after the truth is the falsehood.
After Gods laws who's laws are we following?
[/quote]

Is not the rememberance of Allah SWT ordained in divine law?

Jo-dda?

😃

[quote="RAF786"]did anyone happen to watch 'SUFI-SOUL' on tv it came on couple of weaks ago

i held a good opinion of sufism , but that programme showed real sufism in its true light

[/quote]

Nope, soz. 🙂

Jo-dda you yourself called them 'Zhikr beads' as in beads for doing zhikr, tell me Jo-dda my friend, who's zhikr are we doing when we sa:

[color=white]
[size=24]Alahu Akbar

Subhanallah

La ilaaha ilallaah[/size][/color]

Come, come, whoever you are.

Wonderer, worshipper, lover.

It doesn't matter.

Ours is not a caravan of despair.

Come, even if you have broken your vow
a thousand times

Come, yet again, come, come.

[i]the great Rumi[/i]

[quote="RAF786"]did anyone happen to watch 'SUFI-SOUL' on tv it came on couple of weaks ago

i held a good opinion of sufism , but that programme showed real sufism in its true light

its very unislamic and yes full of shirk

[/quote]

so u get ur info regarding the beliefs and practises of Sufism from the BBC?

clever boy :roll:

actaully it was channel 4

and thanks i know im a very clever boy wink

I sawi it.

changed channel in virtual disgust.

There is nothing wrong with decorating graves, and that can never be shirk, as you are saying the person died. Allah (swt) was not born, and will not die.

However there was someone in the program who said part of the attraction with sufism was they were more about compassion and forgiveness.

But seeing those presented, that would be needed.

[quote="RAF786"]actaully it was channel 4

and thanks i know im a very clever boy :wink:[/quote]

channel four!!??

WOW

obvioulsy the people in channel four would be more clued up on Sufism then top scholars

just like the way most documentries on Islam shown by them are 101% accurate

I know ur a clever boy

so based on the indepth knowledge given to u by Shiekh channel four whay dont YOU educate us as to what sufism is

:roll:

actaully the programme did have top scholors

and channel 4 is the most objective of cannels and tends to show a fair view of documentaries its bbc 1 that is corrupt and bias

im guessing you a sufi so why dont you educate us
shiekh channel 4 is not available, i think he gone to shiekh itv for the day