Continuation.......... Nur postes: Dear Awakener I find you very elusive, and evasive. I beg you to stop levitating and hovering over my head, as I am getting dizzy trying to catch your soul and force it to obey the power of reason. You write " If we have to learn from one another we have to learn to use the powers of Soul' Not mind as we are doing now." Your above statement in which you have depicted the mind as an ineffective tool to grasp reality has further confused me about your beliefs. As a substitute to the mind, you have suggested the soul as the sole instrument to peek into the realms of reality. But, as a person who is confined in the physical three dimensional world and time on one hand and who is confined by Quraan and Hadeeth as the only probes to peek into reality around and beyond me, I have to admit humbly, that my knowledge of the soul is as limited as Allah SWT said in the Quraan ( Say, the Ruux (Knowledge of the soul) is a matter reserved for my lord). And for that reason, I would be leery about any person who claims to have found the secret of the soul from sources beyond the Quraan and Hadeeth which have left few traces of knowledge about the soul in this regard. The second statement which seems that you are not coming forward for your beliefs about the Universality of Sufism, was vividly transparent when you suggested that there can be more than one truth, You Wrote : " Therefore the write path of the muslims are clear and anyone who is not following that right path is wrong - for the MUSLIMS" Suggesting one truth for Muslims and another for the non Muslims, which is contrary to Islamic belief that there is only one truth, and that is Islam as relayed by Muhammad SAWS in his last message which makes all other religions and faiths obsolete and not acceptable in the eyes of Allah SWT. ( And whoever seeks other than Islam as a faith, it will not be accepted from him) You also wrote : " The creator exists and creation is HIS game. His creation,is not HIM and they can not see him, hear him and or know him neither in INTTELLECT OR in OTHER MEANS. " The last part of your response contradicted your earlier confirmation that Allah SWT is NOT part of his creatures ( Mubaayen), which is the right belief, and that Allah and his creatures are separate. By Justifying what Al Hallaaj said that HE IS THE XAQQ ( ABSOLUTE TRUTH) as a higher form of thinking. You have aligned yourself with someone whose beliefs are not in line with Sunnah as you have claimed earlier. You Write in this regard : " .When Al Hallaaj is conscious of himself in his HIGHEST state of Soul which is unpersonal, then it is natural that he expresses what he knows in that state" So you are either telling the truth by justifying his action, or you told the truth when you said that Sufism is dependent on Quraan and Sunnah for guidance. But you can not be truthful on both statements. Again, excuse me, I forgot that I am reasoning by using my mind, which is unacceptable to you as you only rely on the soul as your instrument for guidance. Nur The Awakeners answers: Brother Nuur, I am not contradicting myself. This topic is in reality difficult one. I was reluctant to answer your questions but I have been frank to answer them anyway. The reason that it seems for you that I am contradicting myself is that we lack, may be , common conceptual understanding about this subjects or common shared experiences. This makes the communication impossible ! The statement" spiritualize your consciousness" or even the " The Spirit of God", have probably different meaning for us. You can explain them in Somali if you will ' Now we can not speak or know God except His attributes. This is true of Soul also. The Sufi teachers usually do not answer question as I did. In order to understand something of spiritual nature they recommend that the seeker, after he learned the word of God in Quran and Hadith on the subject, goes to seclusion and find the answer HIMSELF. There is no spoon feeding. I personally recommend the following: a) if you think that mystical experience is unattainable for you -reader- you can be your self and do what ever else you prefer ' b)if you are interested about the mystical experience: 1. Find the spacific aspect/question that you want to know more about. 2. Study the Quran and Hadith and find out how the message of God answers from that question. 3.In the evening before you sleep find a time and place(regular) where you can be ALONE about half an hour. 4.Repeat one of the names of God or another verse(s) which can bring peace to you and make you love God- and his creation. The feeling of love is a crucial aspect that one needs in this moments of SECLUSION-or in his life. For example you can repeat " Laa ilaaha illaah wa Moxamadun rasuula laah". Continue to repeat while opening at the same time submiting your will to the DIVINE WILL. 5.After twenty minutes stop, contemplate about the question or the aspects of life you want to know more about. 6. After the half hour, if nothing is happening, stop your contemplation and go to sleep. 7. In your night sleep, be aware of your dreams, and see if you meet any historical religious persons like the prophet(Peace be upon him) or angelic beings.One can get answers in that way. 8.Do not neglect your religious duties. purify self by abstening from evil and evil intentions. Learn in your daily life to be kind and compassionate to the other families of Life. The above technique is not PRESCRIPTION but SUGGESTION. The best solution to the search of mystical experience is to find a TEACHER who is adept in the mystical ways and can help you. I request you brother Nour that you should not ask me any more questions about this subject. I love everyone as my Soul brother and Sister. The awakener Positive

Continuation of the discussion between Nur and the " Sufi" friend: Nurs answer: Dear Awakener This is indeed an interesting topic for me and a great silent majority who are following this discourse with interest, so let us tackle one issue at a time. Please let us be direct in our answers so that it becomes worth our while. Witteveen has hit upon some fundamental beliefs of the Sufi orders, and your response to his article caught me off guard, so before I make my conclusions, I need to confirm your beliefs so that we will discuss according to your understanding of the issue. So let us either confirm or deny if you have the same belief as below. 1. The unity of the Universe ( Wixdatul Wujuud) which means that God is one and everything in the universe is part of God as God is the only reality that exist. So according to this theory, worshipping Jesus as God becomes understandable, also The Hindu Deities who are many become reasonable including some Hindu Sects who worship women's private parts as the God of Life. 2. Sufism is Universal, Meaning , Muslim Sufi, and Hindu Sufi, or a Christian Sufi are all in the right path to God as long as they all love God and worship their respective ways. 3. A person who claims to be God. Like Al Hallaaj, as a result of the above logic, should not be deemed Murtad, an apostate because he has a different point of view of Islam, and killing him is wrong. Do you agree with the above statements, if not where do you disagree, please clarify. For brevity and clarity I have keep the list short this time hoping that you will answer my concerns with straight forward answers, and hopefully short as the attention span of the majority of viewers is relatively short. Nur The answer of the " Sufi": Dear Nuur, Regardless of what I answer you will have more questions to ask. That is the way of the mind not spirit. Soul can directly know things without the use of other instruements ' If we have to learn from one another we have to learn to use the powers of Soul' Not mind as we are doing now. I did not want to answer this questions but let me try- ONLY this time 1.God is the creator of all creation. He is the SOURCE of every thing. He, God IS beyond his creation. His creation is not Him and He is not in his creation. The creator exists and creation is HIS game. His creation,is not HIM and they can not see him, hear him and or know him neither in INTTELLECT OR in OTHER MEANS. God exists ALONE in his ABODE. Therefore God is not part of the created universe ' 2. When we are speaking about a Islamic school of thought like the Sufis or others, they have to believe and act upon the ARKAANNUL ISLAAM WAL ARKAANU IMAAN. Their deeds must be based on the Quran and Sunna. Therefore there cannot be christian Sufis and hindu Sufis who are muslims also. If such exists then they deviated from Islam and are other religious organisations but have similarities with Islam. Baha'i and Ahmedia are world religions now which have out grown from Islam. They do not claim that they are Muslims But they feel that they share commom cultural and religious back ground with their muslim brothers. Therefore the write path of the muslims are clear and anyone who is not following that right path is wrong - for the MUSLIMS. 3.God in his abode is unmanifested, unknowable and unapproachable. It is beyond reach as I said before. When God manifests HIMSELF in the slightest degree we say THAT MANIFESTATION is from God. Other names are: the word of God, kelmullah, the spirit of God etc. In this stage manifestation needs a creator that CAN CREATE, PRESERVE AND DESTROY IT. That creator is G O D ' In this manifested state there is SOUND AND LIGHT to be seen, heard and known. Everthing in the universe is then Light and Sound. In its highest state this Spirit -or the light and sound -is unpersonal and universal. In its lowest state it takes seemingly different forms and gives different sounds. Therefore Soul which is the highest one IS is light and Sound and is part of Spirit in Its highest state. It is pure and unpersonal. In our lower state we are formed from this light and sound , have mind feeling and body. We are PERSONS IN THE LOWER STATE called for example, The awakener. When Al Hallaaj is conscious of himself in his HIGHEST state of Soul which is unpersonal, then it is natural that he expresses what he knows in that state. In that Soul state he is unpersonal and conscious part of the universe. The created universe is one with him and he is the universe. Therefore he knows HIMSELF as the spirit and only speaks as IT. But when he comes down to human level then he becomes aware of the contents of his personality and becomes limited like all of us in that state. He has name, a family, a geographical location he lives in and has a RELIGION. IN THE UNIVERSAL HE HAS NON OF THIS ' Conclusion: one has to be careful if one has not the ability to raise himself to Soul level and can not view Life from that stage. One is helplessly limited when Soul is confined in the MIND AND BODY and uses it as a VEHICLE. As for Al Hallaaj, could those who killed him raise themselves to Soul level ? No ' Why couldn't they let God do justice ? They where (probably) ignorant,mindless and limited humans who could not know better ' God does justice. It is better that we do our duties as we know them and let him make JUSTICE. That is the solution. The awakener

Nur, Your discussion with your "Sufi" brother were educational as well as confrontational in many aspects. Following are more postings of your discussions. One of the touchy topics was when Awakener came with the postulate/assertion ( you can read it below) that everything in our physical universe are created from and share common denominators which are LIGHT AND SOUND. That they are in ESSENCE ONE ! My question is after three years, How would you react to the above assertion ? For the readers here are more postings of the discussion between the Nur and his " Sufi" friend. The " Sufi" friend: Dear brother Nuur, You know that in this forum we can make hints and discuss simple question. Certain things are difficult if not impossible to discuss in detail both because of shortage of space or the avaible time we have. It seems to me that our discussion is becoming more intellectual and it may become difficult for the DRIVERS to learn from it. We should give priority to this group whom I wrote with the block letters 'Therefore I will recommend that you continue to teach us about the ways of the Sunnis- if you would prefer that. I have nothing to teach! Those who want to learn the ways of the Sufis can be responsible for themselves and approach a Sufi teacher. I won't be responsible for them. EVERYONE IN HIS/HER SOUND MIND HAS TO LEARN TO BECOME RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS/HER ACTIONS As the intermarriage between the Sufi and Hinduism and Budhism, it is my understanding that it is the last two religions in the east that have accomadated the first. This two religions beleive that all religions are from the same SOURCE- God, and( that) every religious person, prophet or master recieves or has recieved his/her knowledge (religious) from SAME SOURCE. Therefore they usually do not discriminate between a holy Sufi master and Hindu/budhist master or even a christian priest. It may seem wrong but this is their( chosen) way of trying to come back to God. They use all means that are available to them in order to escape more reincartions into this Life. On the contrary the Sufi masters adhere to their religious teaching and have been missionaries spreading the word of God.It is therefore there are now over 160 million muslim in Pakistan and Indian sub-continent. It is not unusual for the Sufi masters to employ creative methods so that the message can reach the masses, for example songs and drams etc. An overview of "Universal Sufism"Dr. H. J. Witteveen is probably written for the Indian and/or western audience. The writter has formulated to spread the message of God in a way that can attract the masses he is living in or those he will reach with his pen' That may explain why you disagree with him. The introduction is not intentionally written for the traditional Muslim audience. There were many other Sufi masters who lived or are living in the Islamic communities who have written extensively about Islam ,as you also have mentioned som of them in this series, and their message which is intended to the Muslim audience is uplifting and knowledgable Islamic. I won't discuss here about God and his relationship with his creation and neither defend or discredit the thesis of the The author of "Universal Sufism", Dr. H. J. Witteveen. It is difficult subject to take up. I mean the question: is God present and permeates his creation or is He in HIS ABODE AND RULES FROM THERE is difficult question to discuss in a forum. It is neither usefull to the others nor is there a space or time here to take up this question' We can discuss though about what the sensery organs tell us about the physical reality around us including our body(physical): The question:are physical forms we see including you and me and everything else separate, or are they one energy manifesting as the many ? I will also discuss about dilemma of killing a religous person, even when the person utteres unreligious statements like Al-Hallaj who said in a trance state( I am not sure if he came out of the trance or was in that state when he uttered the words) "Ana' al Haqq" -- "I Am The Truth" 1.The unity of the physical universe If we begin our physical reality from the space that we see with our eyes, the space is not empty, but is filled with subatomic particles and the fundamental forces of nature . There are already many enerigies known to science for which we have no perceptual organ. for example the electromagnetic spectrum of radio waves, x-rays etc. In certain space locations though the energy that occupies the space forms a spining vortex. This vortex patterns, manifests the properties of mass, solidity and gravitation, electrical charge etc. Such a vortex is SUBATOMIC PARTICLE, THE BUILDING BLOCK OF OUR PHYSICAL UNIVERSE. Everything in our physical reality which our five sensry organs can feel consists of subatomic particles and forces between them connect/permeate the subatomic particles. In conventional quatum physics, this fundeamental forces are seen as interactions involving the momentary existence and exchange of virtual particles. Physicists tell us that if all the subatomic particles comprising our earth were compressed so that no space or vacuum existed between them, they would take up no volum than a pin head or medium size orange ' That means that the observable objects consist of widely spaced spining vortices of energy- subatomic particles. This vortices are automatically wired together by the forces of natur which are thought to be four, which are themselves interrelated. The forces are electromagnetic, the gravitational, the weak and the strong forces. Therefore in the more conventional concepts of modern physics everything is REDUCED TO THE EXISTENCE OF PARTICLES. The physical reality including me, you, every reader of this posting and posting itself is an interconnected energy with matrix patterned into different ways. This patterning of the matrix into differents forms and vibrational levels creates the ILLUSSION of both separateness and form. According to this scientific thesis everything is ENERGY. Matter is also a CONDENSED energy. ENERGY IS ONE AND EVERYTHING IS ENERGY. THEREFORE THERE IS NO SEPARATION OF ENERGY. May be this is what The author of "Universal Sufism", Dr. H. J. Witteveen is refering to, not only in physical level but in higher levels of our beingness ALSO' As said I cannot discuss about the higher levels. In my second posting I will discuss about the dilemma of killing others because of disagreeing with them in regard to their statements or believes. Bye bye all of you The awakener

I will bring this topic to the attention of the nomads: Silence. What are the merits of Silence ? Rumi, a well known Sufi said: This silence, this moment, every moment, if it's genuinely inside you, brings what you need. There's nothing to believe. Only when I stopped believing in myself did I come into this beauty. Sit quietly, and listen for a voice that will say, 'Be more silent.' Die and be quiet. Quietness is the surest sign that you've died. Your old life was a frantic running from silence. Move outside the tangle of fear-thinking. Live in silence." An unknown author said : Silence vibrating is Creation Silence flowing is Love Silence shared is Friendship Silence seen is Infinity Silence heard is Adoration Silence expressed is Beauty Silence maintained is Strength Silence omitted is suffering Silence allowed is Rest Silence re-circled is Scripture Silence preserved is Our Tradition Silence given is Initiating Silence received is Joy Silence perceived is Knowledge Silence stabilized is Fulfillment Silence alone is." The Awakener

While the physical body has a subordinate position in relation to mind, so has mind a subordinate position in relation to Soul. The mind does not depend on its development and functions on the body- as science has lead us to believe-, but on the contrary the mind regulates the functions of the body,its growth and well being.When one accepts his real identity as Soul, then the subordination of the mind becomes clear to understand. Opposing the above view are many who believe that they are no more than body. Mind and Soul seem illusions and , by becoming more vain, they believe that everything revolves around the physical body. This egocentric view of Life which is detrimental to the real Self, leads one to become more unkind to other living beings and destructive in nature. The immortal Self that he and others are is LOST (temperarily) and inorder to survive Life becomes for him a real struggle. As a consequence such a person may believe that mind either does not exist or that it is subordinate to the body. The fact of the matter remains though that body is subordinate to mind, and mind to the real Self. Now, as to the question of what mind is perse, I have to confess that I have limited knowledge of the subject. Even though I will make my presentation in here still I will invite students of psychology to fill the gaps in my assesment. My assesment is based more on the perspective of the mystics . Mind is merely a mechanism which stores up mental images, pictures. The individual who has not developed himself into acting of himself is dependent of his opinion and ideas for this images. The pictures of the mind are in various sizes, shapes and conditions. The mind also stores patterns of thought which when stimulated echo the containt and makes them seem alive. Functioning like a phonographe recording urge or stimulation gets one to place the needle on the record. The analytical part of the mind acts as a tracking pilot of the needle on the platter. The mind then produces seeming thoughts and fantastic phenomena in abundance. It does so by co-relation, interpretation, comparison and rerelation. The phenomena/thoughts of the mind are not many times new, but are the product of the computation of mental pictures and concepts of the mind. One of the basic purposes in having a mind is to provide a storehouse of information. It also makes pictures and files them away. Association and differentiation are two basic functions of the mind. By using the REASONING faculty it indentifies everything with everything and to get its pattern and responses it becomes reactive. In short mind : associates, differentiates and then concieves similarites ! Without this association and differentiation it cannot concieve differentiated responses. That is way education is important for the mind. It uses the rich material of education as a base to enhance its computational power and thus improves the quality of its production. Seeming or not the power of the mind is still awesome in its theatre of action. If we could utilize its raw power it could satisfy most of our physical and emotional needs. The reason that we could not still optimally utilize the power of the mind is that we(humans) are not still responsible enough to savely handle this ( raw) power of the mind. I will conclude with that mind is GOOD servant but by acting of Itself it becomes a BAD master! The Awakener

Thanks both Maud and the Worrior of (the) light. What we are trying to learn from these discussion is to find/realize the Self by employing ALL avaible methods. It will be useful to present the answers (also) from a Islamic perspective. My intention is that we explore the constitution of the human being: body, mind and spirit. We will continue our discussion but I ask again: What is the relationship of Soul(Ruh) and mind ? The Awakener

Qoute: Baashi From time to time the users of this site are exposed to topics they are not familiar with........... Some posts convey feelings, others convey ideas, and some exhort us to change our views on certain things That is what communication is all about: exchange of ideas. Although your describtion is correct still things are not in black and white. The evil/bad is always contained in the good and the good is contained in the bad: the venom of the most dangerious snake has medical uses; the life giving water and sun light when they come in excess cause death/damage of life;energy in all its forms can be used for both good and bad purposes etc. If Life would be in black and white we could then develop better ability to understand the problem at hand and we could come up with better solutions. Even in the history of our beloved prophets we can find incidents which although they had good intentions in mind still they/one made grieve mistake(s)! What is damaging, harmful to one: medicine, information(topic), can be useful, helpful to another! Qoute: Baashi What happens when a Muslim goes out his way and tries to construct “proofs†in a bid to provide a rational support for our beliefs? Why would one be compelled to proof the existence of Allah? Does this effort stem from doubt or this is a bid to advance our knowledge? What kind of knowledge - one independent of revealed knowledge? Is there a limitation to what we can know? It may be an effort which stem from doubt, but it may well be a bid to advance our knowledge. As you may know the sufi school of thought teaches the esoteric side of the reveled word of Allah and His prophet. They(Sufis) " claim " that in addtion to the literal meaning of the Quran there is the underlying meaning which is not readily available to the eye but can be sought . The path to gain that knowledge is not theoritical but rather pratical and it can be learned by everyone. It is my understanding that we should not be swayed by "hints" of the esoteric teaching when it comes through our discussion. It should only be taken as esoteric and those who prefer the literal meaning of the reveled word should just disregard it- not demean it! Such an esoteric knowledge has no limits but it is not indiscriminately spread. Therefore we need not worry about it The awakener2

This is actual topic and my supplement other topics under discussion on this forum. Regarding Islam the questions can be seen from the perspective of the Sunni School of thought. It can also be seen from the Sufi School of thought. Following are actual questions: What is spirit ? How is Spirit related to God on one hand and to His creation on the other hand, and where does the Mind come on this equation ? I will welcome comments. The Awakener2

Mutakallim The title of the topic" unity of being " creates confusion in the mental plane of the reader. The word BEING in the literal since of the word refers to a created being. It can also though refer to God in His manifested state of existence .In both cases the word: being refers to a created state( being). Logically this created state needs a sponsor and that sponsor is always the creator Who remains behind and beyond all His creations. God IS is the right conception we can have NOTHING more. To say that God is a being is to put Him at a category or give Him identity. As we ALL agree, I think, we can speak the attributes of God not Him. In your discourse of the subject you say qoute: 1." Wajib Al-Wujud:Necessary Existent, is the Being whose nonexistence is not possible. This being is not brought into existence nor can this being become nonexistent, it is logical contradiction for this being to come into existence or to go out of existence. He, exalted, exists through Himself independently and his existence is required for the existence of everything else. It is important to comprehend the notion that none shares with Allah this independent attribute of existence. This is in part an answer to the age-old metaphysical question: Why is there something rather than nothing"? "When Gnostics refer to the "Unity of Being", they are alluding to the first category; viz., the Unity of Allah's necessary existence. To imagine that the Sufis are referring to the two other categories would be to delibrately misconstrue their conception. Creation has no independent being; its existence is sustained and supported by Allah, and as such it is not truly existent but only metaphorically so. This is why Suhradawi, the Neoplatonist mystic, writes in his book The Philosophy of Illumination that our existence is "sheer nothingness" and "sheer metaphor". It is only possible, Suhradawi adds, that we can be said to exist (metaphorically) only with respect to Allah. In other words, only Allah truly exists because his existence is necessary and independent". In my understanding of the subject, your above statement correctly refers to what is poetically called the OCEAN OF LOVE AND MERCY which is a state of manifestation of God. Again this state is not HIM. This Ocean of Love and Mercy in Its pure and highest state is the nearest that a BEING can come to God. In this ocean of Love and Mercy Soul experiences a unity of being with All creation. It attains also Love, wisdom and freedom. Beyond the Ocean there is ONLY God and NO being can cross into Him for simple reason that the ocean is the borderline of the manifestation. Other names for the ocean of Love and Mercy are: Kelmullah, Spirit, the Word and many other names. The creator, out of necessity, has created a polarity which is creation. The created planes and the life forms that exist in them, although an illusion, still exists through the power and Love of Him. From the higher polarity of God they do not exist because they are relative. But, seen from the lower pole, creation exists because God Loves it and Wills it to exist. The highest or the source of a being( Soul ) is the creation or the effect of God- not Him. It( Soul) exists because God wills it to do so. Consequently there is no unity of God and His creation. Neither God is A BEING. He Is God the creator and He ALONE exists. May God forgive me if I erred. More to come The Awakener2

Walaalayaal, I have to confess that this discussion is going no where. Our discussion of the topic is based on purely intellectual gymnatics - not experience. It is though inspiration to the mind and Soul that I am tempted to add my view to the list A human being is composed of Soul, mind and body. Soul is the primary beingness of the human being and in its pure state, when It is not embodied with mind and body, it can experience reality in a different way. When Soul is in the territory of mind and body, as we do now, It is in handicap. In this later state higher truth are not revealed and that is what is wrong with our discussion. We are trying to understand higher truths through the vehicle of the mind ! The experiences of gnostics as they are presented in this topic are experiences of Soul recieved in a higher state of being. Anyone who wants to proof/disproof those spiritual experiences has to following the footsteps of the gnostic and find himself what awaits him in those higher spheres of existence where ONLY Soul can travel to! I mean there are authentic spiritual experiences which God grants to His devotees - and we may disagree with them when they in their human form and mind later try to communicate their experiences to us. But who are we ? Can we disproof them ? NO ! Without a spiritual experience the discussion becomes the blind argueing with the blind about the shape of the elephant ! That is what we are doing now. If we are BLIND then what should we do? We should seek experience in the higher spheres of existence. First we should seek to know Self and then by the grace of GOD we may be granted to know God !. " He who knows Self knows God " Should be our goal. This knowing though is not and cannot be based solely on intellect, because then the intellectuals would have conclusive right to visit the heavens while still living here, but it should rather to EXPERIENCE THE EXISTENCE OF THOSE SPHERES AND WHAT EXISTS THERE. CONCLUSION The experiences of the higher spheres have their loop holes. No creation can experience the unity of God. That is impossible. But Soul can expeience unity with All Life or Spirit- if you like this word.

Your discussion with your Sufi friends came at a watershed when you asked: Dear Brother Awakener ..............So when Mr. Al Hallaaj claimed that he is God, after he reached his state of TAJALLI, or the equivalent of the Hindu Nirvana, Mr. Al Hallaj was speaking on a higher level of awareness in your opinion and here is your response to me on this thread, which until now I have not read your answer as you promised; Here is a quote of your remark on al Al Hallajs claim to be the TRUTH or God : " I will also discuss about dilemma of killing a religous person, even when the person utteres unreligious statements like Al-Hallaj who said in a trance state( I am not sure if he came out of the trance or was in that state when he uttered the words) "Ana' al Haqq" -- "I Am The Truth" So Brother Awakener, will you please enlighten us about the above statement? Or do you suggest that I look for a TEACHER to teach me this difficult concept? Again, consider this discussion a search of truth, you either have it or don't, in which case you have to either share it or learn form those who respond. Respectfully Nur Your Sufi friend answered: Dear Nuur, ..........In a previous letter I explained the subject about Al Hallaaj, but for clarification I will reword it and add new material to that answer. What I said was: 1."God is the creator of all creation. He is the SOURCE of every thing. He, God IS beyond his creation. His creation is not Him and He is not in his creation". "The creator exists and creation is HIS game. His creation,is not HIM and they can not see him, hear him and or know him neither in INTTELLECT OR in OTHER MEANS". "God exists ALONE in his ABODE". "Therefore God is not part of the created universe "' (That is the answer about the existence of God) 2."God in his abode is unmanifested, unknowable and unapproachable. It is beyond reach as I said before. When God manifests HIMSELF in the slightest degree we say THAT MANIFESTATION is from God. Other names are: the word of God, kelmullah, the spirit of God etc". "In this stage manifestation needs a creator that CAN CREATE, PRESERVE AND DESTROY IT. That creator is G O D ". ( ( Note: in this second stage there is PURE SPIRIT which is created by God) "In this manifested state there is SOUND AND LIGHT to be seen, heard and known. Everthing in the universe is then Light and Sound. In its highest state this Spirit -or the light and sound -is unpersonal and universal. In its lowest state it takes seemingly different forms and gives different sounds". "Therefore Soul which is the highest one IS is light and Sound and is part of Spirit in Its highest state. It is pure and unpersonal. In our lower state we are formed from this light and sound , have mind feeling and body. We are PERSONS IN THE LOWER STATE called for example, The awakener". "When Al Hallaaj is conscious of himself in his HIGHEST state of Soul which is unpersonal, then it is natural that he expresses what he knows in that state". "In that Soul state he is unpersonal and conscious part of the universe.THE CREATED UNIVERSE IS ONE WITH HIM(Al Hallaaj ) AND HE IS THE UNIVERSE".( (Note in here that in my previous reply what I said in the sentence with the Block letters) No one: Neither Al hallaaj or any other, can become one with God. That is impossible! But we as a SOUL can experience oneness with the SPIRIT of God which is created state! Learning the wisdom of God through SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCES HAS IT'S LOOP HOLES. The knowledge comes in stages the same way it does here. Even in that advanced state of being we make mistakes. Life isabout continous learning in here and hereafter. Conclusion: According to my understanding Al Hallaaj made a mistake if he thought that he was one with God ! There is though difficult question which I have not answered clearly : the RELATIONSHIP OF GOD AND SPIRIT. Such a knowledge about the relationship of the Spirit and God can be gained Only through contemplation and seclusion ! What I did not agree and never agree is that the BLIND meaning those who have not had SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCE should have authority over those who have gained a higher station through their religious endeavor, and by the grace of God are given rare Spiritual experiences. For me Al Hallaaj was killed by menn who had less SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCE compared to him. They did not let God do justice but they took the law into their hands. IT WAS NOT NECCESSARY ! That was the point I was making when I SEEMINGLY defended Al Hallaaj! ............. The awakener Those last discussions we indeed deep and worth, with our devotion to God, to be contemplated with ! Positive

I ask myself: does the word IMPOSSIBLE mean what it implies, ? I mean : is there something which is impossible ? Many times I conclude that Life for us in here and now is about problem solving. Therefore it has to be save to say: everything is POSSIBLE. One/people can accept, in a limited time, the notion that there are things in Life that are impossible but by choosing such a paradigm one closes his/her eyes to prevailent possiblities and consequently the impossiblity of the things or actions endures for him/her untill there comes someone with a light who breaks the spell of the darkness. The above assertions may sound philosophic but they deserve to be contemplated with. I would like to share with you the following article which may shed light on the subject. The article also sheds light on the hurdles which stand on the way for the one who decides to enlighten the others ! The Royal Institution is Not Amused Few people visit the Royal Institution, in London's Albemarle Street, for amusement. There are not many laughs at Britain's second oldest scientific institution, founded in 1799, where Sir Humphry Davy demonstrated his discovery of the elements sodium and potassium and where Michael Faraday discovered electromagnetic induction. It's true there have been some lighter moments in the famous circular lecture theatre, especially since Sir William Bragg introduced Christmas Lectures for Children in the 1920s. But, on the whole, this is stuffed shirt territory. One night in 1973 the stuffed shirts got a shock from which they have still not recovered. It was an experience at which, like Queen Victoria, they were not amused. Indeed it was so unamusing for them that it is the only occasion in the Royal Institution's two hundred year history that it has failed to publish a proceedings of a major lecture, or 'evening discourse'. The cause of this unique case of scientific censorship was the maverick professor of electrical engineering of Imperial College, London, Eric Laithwaite. Laithwaite was no stranger to controversy even before his shadow fell across so distinguished an institutional threshold. In the 1960s, Laithwaite invented the linear electric motor, a device that can power a passenger train. In the 1970s, he and his colleagues combined the linear motor with the latest hovercraft technology to create a British experimental high speed train. This was a highly novel, but perfectly orthodox technology. The advantages of such a tracked hovercraft are obvious to anyone who sees a hover-rail train running along,suspended in the air above the track -- it is quiet, has no moving parts to wear out and is practically maintenance-free. The significance of this last point quickly becomes clear when you learn that more than 80 per cent of the annual running costs of any railway system is spent on maintenance of track and rolling stock because of daily wear. The British government at first invested in the development of his device but later, after a series of budget cuts, pulled out pleading the need for economy. Laithwaite, a blunt-speaking Lancashire man who did not shrink from speaking unpopular truths, told the Government and its scientific bureaucrats the mistake they were making in no uncertain terms, but its decision to cancel was unchanged. Laithwaite refused to be beaten and took his invention one step further. He designed an even better kind of hover train -- one in which his linear motor was levitated by electromagnetism giving a rapid transit system that not only provides quiet, efficient magnetic suspension over a maintenance-free track, but which generates the electricity to power the magnetic lift of the track from the movement of the train. Speaking in the early 1970s, Laithwaite said of his new 'Maglev' system, 'We've designed a motor to propel [the train] that gives you the lift and guidance for nothing -- literally for nothing: for no additional equipment and no additional power input. This is beyond my wildest dreams -- that I should ever see that sort of thing.' Laithwaite's Maglev design was not quite perpetual motion, but certainly sounded enough like something-for-nothing to make the scientific establishment turn its nose up in suspicion. But this project, too, was cancelled by the government and further development was halted. Today, Maglev trains are being built in Germany and Japan but Britain continues to spend 80 per cent of its railway budget on maintenance of conventional transport systems -- several hundred millions every year. With the Maglev project cancelled, the technology Laithwaite had devoted the previous twenty years to developing was put in mothballs. The object of his entire career for decades disappeared overnight. By an extraordinary chance at just the same time that the Maglev project was cancelled, Laithwaite received an intriguing telephone call out of the blue from an amateur inventor, Alex Jones. Jones claimed to have a remarkable new invention to demonstrate which he had tried to interest scientists and engineers in, so far without success. Would Laitwaite like to take a look at it? While others had dismissed Jones as a crank, Laithwaite, now with time on his hands, invited him to come to Imperial College. When Jones arrived in the laboratory he had a strange-looking contraption to show. It was a simple wooden frame on wheels that could be pushed backwards and forwards on the bench top, like a child's trolley. But suspended from the front of the frame was a heavy metal object that could swing from side to side like a pendulum. The metal object, Jones explained, was a gyroscope. As Laithwaite looked on in puzzled amazement, Jones started the gyroscope spinning and then allowed it to swing from side to side. The wooden box moved along the bench top on its wheels although there was no drive to the wheels and no external thrust of any kind -- something that shouldn't happen according to the laws of physics. 'When Alex switched his machine on,' recalled Laithwaite, 'it was quite disturbing to one's upbringing. The gyroscope appeared to be producing a force without a reaction. I thought I'd seen something that was impossible.' 'Like everyone else I was brought up on Newton's laws of motion, and the third law says that for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction, therefore you cannot propel a body outside its own dimensions. This thing apparently did.' Laithwaite started some gyroscope experiments of his own, making large spinning tops with most of the mass in the rim of the wheel, and he found that, 'these very definitely did something that seemed impossible.' It was at this critical point in his career that he was invited by Sir George Porter, president of the august Royal Institution, to deliver a Friday Evening Discourse. In retrospect it might seem to be rather risky for Sir George to have invited a blunt-speaking and controversial figure to address the Institution. But, until then, Laithwaite's clashes with the government and scientific bureaucrats over the development of his Maglev train had been a conflict over money and over innovation: not over scientific principles. He had fought the same kind of battle as most senior scientists in Britain for scarce resources. He may have been the sort of outspoken individualist who finds himself in the headlines, but he was still a distinguished professional scientist, still a member of the club. It was against this background that the Royal Institution invited him to deliver the lecture. But the Friday Evening Discourse is no ordinary lecture. It is a black tie affair, preceded by dinner amidst the polished silver and mahogany of the Institution's elegant Georgian dining room, under the intimidating gaze of portraits of the giants of science from the eighteenth and nineteenth century, staring down from the panelled walls. When you are invited to be thus feted by your fellow members of the Royal Institution and to deliver a Discourse from the spot where Faraday and Davy stood, it is usually the prelude to collecting the rewards of a lifetime of distinguished public service: Fellowship of the Royal Society; Gold Medals; perhaps even a Knighthood. In keeping with such a conservative occasion, those invited to speak generally choose some worthy topic on which to discourse -- the future of science, perhaps, or the glorious achievements of the past. But Laithwaite chose not to discourse on some worthy, painless topic but instead to demonstrate to the assembled bigwigs that Newton's laws of motion -- the very cornerstone of physics and the primary article of faith of all the distinguished names gathered in that room -- were in doubt. Standing in the circular well of the Institution's lecture theatre, Laithwaite showed his audience a large gyroscope he had constructed -- an apparatus resembling a motorcycle wheel on the end of a three foot pole (which, is precisely what it was). The wheel could be spun up to high speed on a low-friction bearing driven by a small but powerful electrical motor. Laithwaite first demonstrated that the apparatus was very heavy -- in fact it weighed more than 50 pounds. It took all his strength and both hands to raise the pole with its wheel much above waist level. When he started to rotate the wheel at high speed, however, the apparatus suddenly became so light that he could raise it easily over his head with just one hand and with no obvious sign of effort. What on earth was going on? Heavy objects cannot suddenly become lighter just because they are rotating, can they? Such a mass can only be propelled aloft if it is subjected to an external force or if it expels mass, in a rocket engine for example. Had Laithwaite taken to conjuring tricks? Were there concealed strings? Confederates in trapdoors? If Laithwaite expected gasps of admiration or surprise, he was disappointed. The audience was stunned into silence by his demonstration. When he went on to explain that Newton's laws of motion were apparently being violated by this demonstration, the involuntary hush turned to frosty silence. 'I was very excited about it,' he recalled, 'because I knew I had something to show them that was startling. And I did it rather in the spirit of "come and see what I've discovered -- come and share this with me." It was only afterwards that I realised no-one wanted to share it with me. The reaction was "the man's obviously a lunatic". "There must be some trick" was what people said.' 'I was simply trying to tell them, "look, here's something very unusual that's worth investigating. I hope I've got sufficient reputation in electrical engineering not to be written off as a crank. So when I tell you this, I hope you'll listen." But they didn't want to.' 'After the Royal Institution lecture all hell broke loose, primarily as a result of an article in the New Scientist, followed up by articles in the daily press with headlines such as "Laithwaite defies Newton". The press is always excited by the possibility of an anti-gravity machine, because of space ships and science fiction, and the minute you say you can make something rise against gravity, then you've "made an antigravity machine". And then the flood gates are unleashed on you especially from the establishment. You've brought science into disrepute or you're apparently trying to because you've done something that is against the run of the tide.' The resounding silence of his audience continued long after that fateful evening. There was to be no Fellowship of the Royal Society, no gold medal, no 'Arise, Sir Eric'. And, for the first time in two hundred years, there was to be no published 'proceedings' recording Laithwaite's astonishing lecture. In an unprecedented act of academic Stalinism, the Royal Institution simply banished the memory of Professor Laithwaite, his gyroscopes that became lighter, his lecture, even his existence. Newton's Laws were restored to their sacrosanct position on the altar of science. Laithwaite was a non-person, and all was right with the world once more. For the next twenty years, Laithwaite carried on investigating the anomalous behaviour of gyroscopes in the laboratory; at first in Imperial College and later, after his retirement, wherever he could find a sympathetic institution to provide bench space and laboratory apparatus. By the mid-1980 -- what he called 'the most depressing time' -- Laithwaite had conducted enough empirical research to demonstrate that the skeptics were right when they said that there were no forces to be had from gyroscopes. 'The mathematics said there were no forces and that was correct', Laithwaite recalled. 'The thing that wouldn't go away was: can I lift a 50 pound weight with one hand or can't I? Of all the critics that I showed lifting the big wheel, none of them ever tried to explain it to me. So I decided I had to follow Faraday's example and do the experiments.' After retiring from Imperial College, laithwaite began a long series of detailed experiments. Sussex University offered him a laboratory and he formed a partnership with fellow engineer and inventor, Bill Dawson, who also funded the research. Laithwaite and Dawson spent three years from 1991 to 1994, investigating in detail the strange phenomena that had unnerved the Royal Institution. 'The first thing I wanted to find out was how I could lift a 50 pound wheel in one hand. So we set out to try to reproduce this as a hands-off experiment. Then we tackled the problem of lack of centrifugal force and the experiments were telling us that there was less centrifugal force than there should be. Meanwhile I started to do the theory. We devised more and more sophisticated experiments until, not long ago, we cracked it.' The real breakthrough came, said Laithwaite, when they realised that a precessing gyroscope could move mass through space. 'The spinning top showed us that all the time, but we couldn't see it. If the gyroscope does not produce the full amount of centrifugal force on its pivot in the centre then indeed you have produced mass transfer.' 'It became more exciting than ever now because I could explain the unexplainable. Gyroscopes became absolutely in accordance with Newton's laws. We were now not challenging any sacred laws at all. We were sticking strictly to the rules that everyone would approve of, but getting the same result -- a force through space without a rocket.' The research of Laithwaite and Dawson has now borne practical fruit. Their commercial company, Gyron, filed a world patent for a reactionless drive -- a device that most orthodox scientists say is impossible. Sadly Eric Laithwaite died in 1997. His device remains in prototype form, comparable perhaps to the Wright Brother's first aircraft or Gottlieb Daimler's first automobile. Shortly before his death, Laithwaite spoke philosophically about the long experimental road he had trudged virtually alone. Why should people reject the idea of something new?' he asked. 'Well, of course, they always have. If you go back to Galileo, they were going to put him to death for not saying the earth was the centre of the universe. I'm reminded of something that Mark Twain once said; 'a crank is a crank only until he's been proved correct.' 'So now I myself have demonstrated that I've been correct all along. Anyone seeing the experiments would know at once, if they knew their physics, that I've done what I said I could do, and that I'm no longer a heretic.' Laithwaite's reactionless drive is an extraordinary machine; a machine that orthodox science said could never be built and would never work. But though it may well eventually prove of great value -- perhaps even providing an anti-gravity lifting device -- it is a net consumer of energy, just like Griggs's Hydrosonic pump. There is no evidence at present that it is an over-unity device -- merely a novel means of propulsion that proves there are more things in heaven and earth than are currently dreamed of by scientific rationalism. But there are other Laithwaites, and there are other engines: some even more extraordinary than the reactionless drive. Alternative Science Website http://www.AlternativeScience.Com

"The more a man knows about himself in relation to every kind of experience, the greater his chance of suddenly, one fine morning, realizing who in fact he is -- or rather Who (capital W) in Fact (capital F) "he" (between quotation marks) Is (capital I)." -- Aldous Huxley Thanks Jamaal for taking your time to call our attention to this subject. It helps us to reflect upon that which most of us, in the most of their time, DO NOT reflect upon, namely: who am I and what is my relation to all else ? We usually have time for trivialities but not for that which will emancipate us SPIRITUALLY! What a waste of time. Now in my understanding Life the primordial impulse which God has created is the primary channel through which everything that exists, or seems to exist, receives the power that enables it to do a activity. Life as we can empirically observe have two characteristics: INTELLIGENCE AND THE POWER TO DO ACTIVITY. Soul, when it has the garment of human being and in all its eternal existence has also the same characteristics of Life. What I am trying to say is that Life is ALWAYS the subject, the doer of the activity, and rest is effect. In other words Life is channel that dreams come through and therefore dreams are effect. The questions arise: what is dreaming ? Is our Life as we know it in here also a dream ? Ìt is not my intention to answer these questions as I lack both time and space in here but I will duel little on the subject of LUCID DREAMING. I will present in here concise explanation about the subject:lucid dreaming. Enjoy it. 1. What is lucid dreaming? A. The term "lucid dreaming" refers to dreaming while knowing that you are dreaming. The "lucid" part refers to the clarity of consciousness rather than the vividness of the dream. It generally happens when you realize during the course of a dream that you are dreaming, perhaps because something weird occurs. Most people who remember their dreams have experienced this at some time, often waking up immediately after the realization. However, it is possible to continue in the dream while remaining fully aware that you are dreaming. 2.An example of lucid dreaming. One night I was dreaming of standing on a gentle hill, looking out over the tops of maples, alders, and other trees. The leaves of the maples were bright red and rustling in the wind. The grass at my feet was lush and vividly green. All the colors about me were more saturated than I have ever seen. Perhaps the awareness that the colors were "brighter than they should be" shocked me into realizing that I was in a dream, and that what lay about me was not "real." I remember saying to myself, "If this is a dream, I should be able to fly into the air." I tested my hunch and was enormously pleased that I could effortlessly fly, and fly anywhere I wanted. I skimmed over the tops of the trees and sailed many miles over new territory. I flew upward, far above the landscape, and hovered in the air currents like an eagle. When I awoke I felt as if the experience of flying had energized me. I felt a sense of well-being that seemed directly related to the experience of being lucid in the dream, of taking control of the flying. 3.If you are lucid, can you control the dream? A. Usually lucidity brings with it some degree of control over the course of the dream. How much control is possible varies from dream to dream and from dreamer to dreamer. Practice can apparently contribute to the ability to exert control over dream events. At the least, lucid dreamers can choose how they wish to respond to the events of the dream. For example, you can decide to face up to a frightening dream figure, knowing it cannot harm you, rather than to try to avoid the danger as you naturally would if you did not know it was a dream. Even this amount of control can transform the dream experience from one in which you are the helpless victim of frequently terrifying, frustrating, or maddening experiences to one in which you can dismiss for a while the cares and concerns of waking life. On the other hand, some people are able to achieve a level of mastery in their lucid dreaming where they can create any world, live any fantasy, and experience anything they can imagine! furether reading: http://www.psywww.com/asc/dreamfaq/node29.html#SECTION00081000000000000000 http://www.psywww.com/asc/dreamfaq/node3.html#SECTION00030000000000000000 That is all for this time positive

Priviously posted by Jamaal-11 It is one thing to see nothingness as something that is without mass or shape, and it is another to belief that everything that is something came into existence out of nothingness and by nothingness. You are right that the nothing has neither the power of self perpetuation nor the ability to create. The Nothing is rather a STATE through which the creative powers of God are project so that time/space and everything that occupies it can come into being. The nothing is not empty but is in fact a state of pure energy which has the characteristic of LIGHT and SOUND- the elemental parts of every creation. The argument can carry its weight on the very fact that nothingness is the absolute contrast of being, and thus the two are parallel. Well in my opinion the nothingness and being are not parallel but, although BEING is the PRIMARY factor, they are rather complementary and exist together. As human beings we are three in one and one in three: Soul that has a mind and a body- one in three. Or Soul, mind and body- three in one. Without a conscious and intelligent being who can become AWARE of a thing, in this case the Nothing, the existence of the thing has no meaning. All depends on the identity you choose ! Are you primarily a corporeal or spiritual being ? I believe nothingness is most powerful for the basic fact that Allah can say ‘be’ and that everything will be from nothingness. Correct ! In my opinion understanding the Nothingness leads to more understanding of both the creation and the CREATOR and therefore is worthwhile endeavor for everyone of us who is hungry for spiritual knowledge. Positive

Previously posted by Jamaal -11 Nothing is the most powerful SOMETHING. May be this song my summarise my point of view: row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream, merrily, merrily, merrily, Life is ..........A DREAM If Life is a dream then what remains is Nothing. That NOTHING is pregnant and continuously gives birth to everything which is manifested in our reality and much MORE. Therefore the NOTHING has to be the most powerful something and is- the nothing- consequently the terminal station between God and His creation . Positive

Walaal SS, thanks for sharing your thoughts with us sister. The subject you raised is difficult to debate and and I have no easy way to explain my thoughts adequately with words. In the philosophical circles the debate about (pre-)determinism has been raging for centuries with no avail. I am not a LEARNED cleric, nor have I deep knowledge of the subject, but as someone who has been around in this Life for a while , I have made my own PERSONAL observations. Whenever I think about pre-determination of the time of death I remember also the following facts: 1) God is the CREATOR and supreme RULER of the universe. In the process of creating He plans, manifest his plan, preserves it and destroys the creation when the later has served His (God's) purpose . Whatever we see, feel and think is the WILL of God in action. His will being dynamic, is in the present tense. Everything begins it's origin from Him. Even my wish to write this WORD is not an act which is independent from Him but is in fact granted to me by Him. The DIVINE will is Supreme and enduring while the individual will is confined and temporary. If the later has to endure it must come into harmony with the first. 2)God has created this theatre of action, the earth, where embodied Souls can study and unfold spiritually. Among others things Souls on their sojourn on the earth learn to experience the dual powers of GOOD and EVIL. No Soul, while staying on the earth is immune to experience these two forces. For example grieve and happiness are emotional expressions of the presence of these two forces in our being. . 3)God rules His created universe through a book of laws. These laws do not only regulate the mechanical running of the universes but they also regulate the actions of the living beings he has created. Everything: the particles of the atoms, the atom and consequently the forms that are formed of these atoms, has blueprint which it cannot deviate from. Likewise The actions of the of the human beings are regulated by their own blueprints. Without these blueprints the world would have been in a chaotic state. But God is a presence which is acting now and His decisions are NOW. One of the laws which we, Souls on the earth have to abide by is " for every action, there is apposite and equal reaction". That means whatever you do have consequence and YOU are accountable for your actions. This law makes OUR FUTURE FLUID. Because we are always reaping the fruits of our actions. GOOD DEEDS BRING GOOD CONSEQUENCES AND VICE-VERSE. Now we can use these three points as anchors for our thoughts and when it comes to the question of the TIME of death, the first question that comes to the mind is: what is TIME ? and a second question is: what is the position of man in the scheme of Life ? The answer of the first question is we do not adequately know what time is ? Time although familiar is still illusive. We usually think that time is like an arrow, has past, present and future but when we study the time phenomena we find that the past is a memory and future is a imagination. We are ALWAYS living in the present, the NOW. The answer of the second question is: man can not do ANYTHING which is independent from the will of God. The position of man in the scheme of the creation is TO PROPOSE. Man proposes and God disposes is TRUE. Man cannot dispose anything. He can not even move his finger without these divine dispositions. When then someone decides for example to kill someone, he planes, decides and then carries out his decision. When such a person comes to the stage which he decide to kill, due to our sub-ordinate position to the will of God, our proposition ( to kill another person) becomes subject to approval/rejection of God! If our proposal is approved by HIM then the killing is IN FACT predetermined and it takes place in a fixed time which is the moment it takes place, NOW. Consequently all deaths are predetermined because they are not accidental but rather accepted by the divine plan BEFORE the moment of death! Now for the second part of your question: does it matter how one dies ? Yes sister It does ! In addition with what I already said in point three I will add the following: When something bad happens, like the killing of somebody, the perpetrator has to suffer.In that way the SOUL of the perpetrator feels the same suffering that it has inflicted on the other part. Justice is served. The lesson to learn in here is: KILLING IS BAD. We learn WHAT IS BAD AND WHAT IS GOOD through the difficult way: through direct PERSONAL experiences of the BAD and GOOD. The choice is always personal. Everyone of us is free to make his/her choices but WE ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO OUR OWN ACTIONS. We are accountable for the PROPOSALS which we make to God. Whenever our proposal is approved by God we become responsible of the consequences of our actions. The path of LOVE is best and more superior than to make justice in a human level !We can choose to forgive! to voluntarily forgive:) That is being GOOD Those who can do that have learned a lesson. to voluntarily do good actions and refrain from bad action! WE SHOULD REACT POSITIVELY WHEN SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS AND RESPOND WITH CARE - AND LOVE when we can ! That is all for now. Positive

Nice comments sisters and brothers. we have discussed , some what, about the definition of the word CULTURE. The title of this topic: Do we have culture ? is also debated. ButI wish that we go deeper into the subject! The following questions in my letter stand unanswered: Do we need/have a culture ? ( we have covered this question ! ) What is my/your role ? How can the above ideals of the (four) groups be converged to the best interest of the people ? Which ideal of the four groups can (best) serve the interest of the people ? Feel free to make your comments please- preferably answering the questions Positive Lax kastaa shilalka ay isdhigto ayaa lagu qalaa.

Orginally posted by MG Is it "must" to sit with the guest even if they are ur dad's age and male?? coz i have this problem with ppl tellin my dad "oh ur kids don't like their ppl" i mean i don't hate them.. but grew up with my mom's family where if a guy nocks the door u ask who they lookin for before u open the door, and after tellin u who they lookin for u get that person or say that person isn't home without seein ur face. and i have been like dat even since 9 yrs old.. so i can't just change like dat. and my dad thinks sometimes we are rude to his ppl lol. This is a interesting question! Our culture defines what we are expected to do and the proper way we should react ----- in any given situation. In our traditional culture it is essential to be respectful to our parents- both parents. Similar respect is expected to be given grandparents and grand grandparent. Our uncles and aunts both real and extended, other relatives and any person who is older then us is entitled to be respected. Key words in our culture are: respect and a willingness to share resources with one nother! These are cardinal principles which guide our actions! These principles have to be shown in action though. How do you (now)evaluate you actions then according to these principles ? Should you sit with your guests who may come to visit your family ? It depends who they are and the nature of their visit. Let me remind you that we have one of the best cultures in the world. Of course it has out dated elements which we need to drop, for example tribalism ! Be willing to be nice to your relatives, specially when they knock your door , and when you are in doubt as to what you should do in a given situation just ask your parents. THAT IS MY ADVICE. why do some somalians hate being called (uncle, aunt). The person who negatively reacts to such benevolent words "must" be rude. Uncle/ aunt are nice words which are used to show respect to those who are older then us. Any man who is related to your father is "adeer" and those men who are related to your mother are "abti". Aunt has also a similar function. Continue to use "adeer/abti and eedo/habaryar, in their proper context. It is OK. The positive

Thanks all of you who have responded to this thread. Khayr, Won't you prefer that your footnotes are recorded by the angel in your right shoulder into your books of compensations. Yes you probably do ! Your Nick is pleasing to the thoughts. It reminds me the blessing God always showers on us. But how may of us are thankful? No brother, I am not writing thesis but I am trying to sort out my thoughts and your(positive) contributions MAY help. CM, Wind talker and others, You may be right. As Talker suggested "Perhaps, if I limited my label at "Islam oriented," one'd be able to find many under that category. That would be fair suggestion and I agree! Feel free to make your contributions. Positive

Brother CM, The similarities/differences of the Islamic vs. arab culture is a extensive topic which I have not intended to debate. What I have been trying to bring into discussion is our culture- The Somali culture. In my part I can understand the good intentions of those in our society who would prefer more Islamic/arab oriented somali culture. I use the word MORE because the arabs as our neighbors have been influencing our islamic way of Life for, at least, the last one thousand years.We also know that substantial number of Somalis CLAIM that they are not only related to the arabs in culture but in blood. Islam is ..... a universal way of life that transcends borders, race and time,...... as you rightly mentioned. And the arabs became "civilized...... only after Islam came to them and they adopted an Islamic ( cultural) identity" The arab culture ,for me. is assimilated now by the Islamic way of Life. Therefore their (adopted) Islamic culture must transcend the arabness and arab borders! I may be wrong but it is my assumption that this is an assessment which the muslim/arab oriented share. I still agree with you that the present day arab culture is unique and has in it's self elements which are indigenously arab. But this elements can be excluded- when they are indentified. That is what I ment when I said, quote"..... They (muslim/arab oriented) look with worrying eyes to anything that is not in essence Islamic...... In conclusion the view points that I have presented are intended to inspire discussion about our culture! They are (personal) view points- nothing more. Therefore my questions stand: How can we actively participate to improve our culture or shall we ?. Positive

Walaalayaal, In another posting Shaqsii asked us many questions. In my view we are in a cultural CRISIS. A new culture is in the making and OUR culture is dying. I say our culture because the new culture is not still ours. Contrary to our cultural heritage, this new culture, is for example, more materialistic. It is more individual centred then group centered and worst of all our traditional family values are erroded ! I will here rather present the groups- not their evolving cultural inputs- which I called "new culture in the making in the above pragraph". In my view there are at least four groups in our society who are unconsciously/consciously contributing to this emerging culture. The collective members of every group is always trying to assert their influence on us so that we may share their ideal way of life. Every group thinks that their ideal way of Life has the solutions for the problems we are facing now or any eventual problems which may arise in the future. The groups are: 1) The traditionalist oriented: This group prefers our traditional pastoralist culture and/or the other sub-cultures that are indigenous. In their mental make up they are the nomads and/or agrarians and they resent change specially when it cames to culture. They believe their way of Life, or culture if you prefer that word, has been refined through experience in hundreds of years and ( therefore) it has to be the best. 2) The Muslim/arab oriented: This group which has now an emerging power believes that the shortcomings of our indigenous culture has to be replaced by what they think is already enshrined in the Quran and Hadith. This group prefers also to bridge the gape between our (pastoralist) culture and the other arab cultures/subcultures. They look with worrying eyes to anything that is not in essence Islamic- even if that shortcoming is in our pastoralist oriented culture. MANY of them believe that arabisation of our culture is a worth ideal to persue. 3)The western oriented: This group which has now also an emerging power believes that the western way of Life is the best. They consciously/subconscious copy and imitated "the civilised way of Life" in the west. For them whatever that is not western is backward. Many in this group may be convinced that westernisation of our culture is worth ideal to persue. 4) The confused and criminals: This group mostly live in the cities and towns both in Somalia and outside Somalia. They belong to non of the above groups but are still members in every group.They are the confused and criminals in our society and act upon and cultivate the negative nature of the human being. They do not have social norms that regulate their actions but rather manifest the bad and evil through their human form. They are those who are among us and causing misery in our country and poisoning our mental beingness. In short their ( unsconscious) ideal is a society without the rule of law. Where only the fittest can survive. In my understanding the above mentioned groups, and may be others that I have not mentioned, are in active competion in our society to day. Every group is trying to become the dominant. But there is NOT yet one single group that has gained cultural dominance over the others. That is why we are LOST: the lack of a dominant culture Shall we reflect upon these questions: Do we need/have a culture ? What is my/your role ? How can the above ideals of the (four) groups be converged to the best interest of the poeple ? Which ideal of the four groups can (best) serve the interest of the poeple ? Your comments are welcome. Positive [ September 02, 2003, 01:32 AM: Message edited by: Admin ]

Walaal shaqsii, The problem is in our culture . We have evolved from pastoralist based culture but have not YET found ( new ) common cultural identity. We have not in fact " evolved " from the culture of our forefathers but rather have thrown it away . And where are we now ? Now we have no culture. Whatever we have and call calture have the wrong social and caltural values . Wrong values breed wrong consequences The bright side of the matter is that we are LEARNING from our mistakes. Of course that we are becoming AWARE of our cultural shortcomings is ITSELF a learning. Let us not be discouaraged ! Everyone of us is a creative Soul that can take care of itself and it's environment. WE ARE CREATIVE SOULS ! HURRA ! Let us come with creative solutions ! Positive

Sophist, There is one thing in this universe that we know for sure: CHANGE ! Everything is in perpetual change: day follows night, seasons give way to one another, Life forms change from cradle to death. Our state of: mental, emotional and physical being ness are fluid and subject to change. Even the atoms in our body, although we cannot register it, in a speed beyond our conception change their vibration by coming into a rest before they again come back into a state of vibration. Our heart bit, our act of breathing and even our awakening and sleeping states are governed by this LAW. Time is also the product of these mechanical changes of the things that occupy TIME/SPACE. FRIENDSHIP IS ALSO GOVERNED BY THIS SAME LAW. Nothing in this universe, including our relationships with the others, is permanent. Not even friendship. In the finite universe the law of ENTROPY takes its due course. According to this law nothing stays in its original state of energy but continuously releases/ receives energy. The releasing of energy though always takes precedence over the receiving and eventually the thing by not been able to recycle energy in proportional quantity decays and dies. Friendship also is doomed into this same fate because the status quo of friendship/foe cannot be maintained in ALL times. Now the friendship factor is the preservative factor of our relationship with one another, while the enmity is the destructive factor. THE MORE YOU HAVE GOOD FRIENDS THE BETTER CHANCE YOU HAVE TO SURVIVE IN THIS UNIVERSE and vice-verse. CONCLUSION Foe and friendship exists together but are at the opposite sides of the same coin. The one cannot exist without the other. Foe like a winter is the destructive element of the two but like a spring it ALWAYS gives birth to friendship which is preservative. That means at a certain point when the climax of friendship is reached the downturn begins and the result becomes conflict and confrontation. That is natural. The result becomes eventual decay and dying which in turn, at certain point at this downturn, becomes prelude to a golden age of FRIENDSHIP. That is what Life is all about: The movement of our Life through different but mostly apposing states of existence. In this OPPOSING states we learn to experience at first hand: WHAT IS GOOD and WHAT IS EVIl!The lessons we learn through this process makes it easy for us to make the RIGHT judgment- when we are confronted by certain action. WE OUGHT TO TAKE CARE OF OUR GOOD FRIENDS- EVEN WHEN THE RELATIONSHIP IS IN ITS EBB Positive.

Welcome Mr.Somali. You know me as The Awakener2. I am kind of a guest here. I will not be active participant of the disccussion as I did in Somalinet. There are peace loving Souls her. But of course everything has draw back. It is SURE that this place has also one. If you are seeking peace or/and civilised ways that view points can be shared then this CAN be your place. Positive.

barwaaqo, Quote "One can neva have too much positivity" Thanks dear sister. Regarding the above quote, no one should be TOO positive. In such a case the person will be overwhelmed by negative forces. The midle path is best. One should not though go through Life asleep and be the effect of negative circumstances and people- unless one is AWAKE and consciously chooses such circumstances. The best atttitude is that one is disposed to be positive and does predominantly positive actions. positive