Sufism: The Khwajagan, Naqshbandiyya, and the Malamatiyya - Part One.mp4
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 09. 2024
- Part one of a discussion between Robert Abdul Hayy Daar, author of "Spy of the Heart" and Dr. Yannis Toussulis, author of "Sufism and the Way of Blame." Moderated by Dr. Marc Applebaum. For more information please go to itlaqfoundation.com
In the realm of Greater Understanding, the workshop is dismantled after the work is finished.
that tradition repeatedly says that the formulation must change in accordance with the people, the place and the Work.
thank you for writing ''sufism and the way of blame'' mashallah. I am sure my son Idries will enjoy it someday too, enshallah
Robt Darr said Malamatis gave the last practice first (like Dzogchen?). This was my experience with Shah's teaching. I got a full dose of the Mystery, which then never changed afterwards, right up front. In my ensuing disoriented condition, i eventually realized my number one problem would be to integrate this into daily life.
Gurdjieff had also met Grandshaykh Abdullah Daghestani Of the Naqshbandi Sufi order (Golden chain), who was based in Damascus. This was i think in his book "meetings with remarkable men".
kazakhseven true because i am a student of Sheikh Nazim of the Naquasbandi and he says yes that Gurdjeff was given some secrets and told to take it to the west and not mention who gave him his knowledge yet.only when time was ready then could mention.and yes later Gurdjeff mentions who the Master was.Sheikh Abdullah Daghastani.
Sheikh Nazim talked about these topics .
A friend of mine maintained that Idries Shah's grandfather was Gurdjieff's teacher. Can anyone confirm or disconfirm?
Thank you. I hope it will be of use.
Assalamu alaykum dear Robert Abdul Hayy Daar
You have phrazed in different words the Naqahbandi technique “Indiraj al-nihayat fi al-bidayat,” or “in their end is our beginning."
I really enjoyed your talk with Yannis Toussilis.
I am presently reading "Sufism and the Way of Blame."
'People change and needs change. So what was Sufism once is Sufism no more.
What a wistful perspective and even modernist perspective of Sufism …
Well Mr. Walter, I'm not sure what you mean by "wistful," although one dictionary defines it as "having or showing a feeling of vague or regretful longing." Certainly, none of us have such a feeling. Perhaps, instead, you mean that we have a "hopeful wish" to be better acquainted with Sufism. If so, that would be more accurate since Sufism is a broad and deep tradition that admits to no end. As far as having a "modernist perspective of Sufism," one would have to inquire further into what "modernism" is or might be. If you mean, that we are part of "a movement toward modifying traditional beliefs in accordance with modern ideas," you are at least partly correct. I would, nevertheless, have you consider this: what makes you so certain that the three of us haven't been tasked to do exactly that? Moreover, that task may not be self-adopted. Instead, our teachers -- all of whom are widely accepted as vaid representatives of the Tradition -- may wish it to be so, and without the slightest degree of wistfulness on their part.
Given the majority of comments below, putting anything like this video on an open medium like CZcams may be generally a waste of time. Let's explore how come. Firstly, presentations like this one may be a magnet for so-called students of Sufism who are already convinced that they know more than they clearly do. As the old adage goes, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." Secondly, those who are convinced that they know can no longer learn anything new since, as another old adage goes, "their cups are full and overflowing" Concerning the latter, I would hate to simply encourage the typical self-righteousness of seekers who believe that they have already found what they are seeking for. If that is true, then I sincerely congratulate them! However, in a majority of cases, I doubt that this is so. A seeker who thinks that they have been appointed to "sell water to the fish" is no longer a seeker but a Master Critical inquiry is one thing and presumptuousness is another -- and if that is not essential to the adab of the Path then not only me but my teachers have been fools. If you suspect that this is so, by all means, make haste and depart!
Time is precious. Those interested in Sufism, let's say after reading Rumi for example, may come to CZcams & across this video/point of view. Commenters have thrown their two cents to show what they know & viewers can then make up their own minds.
What you are pleased to call Sufism is merely the record of past method -Idries Shah
Is it the storyteller's fault if people take ot sll literally and turn it into an idol? Idries Shah explicitly said Sufis teach through stories, and these fo not need to be taken literally. Is it his fsult if people take things literally? He also was very explicit that Sufis deliberately put pitfalls in front of students....
lol i am laughing
i am a humble student of the Naquasbandi Tariquah.
Sheikh Nazim spoke of these kinds of people you call yourself acedemics and thats exactly what you are
Sayyidi Nazim laughed at these people who only speak from ego.
yes these guys know alot i will say and talk alot and indepth
but i like the way Sayyidi Nazim.explains suffism.he says he can talk.like these people too
but that is not the way for them
have these guys worked on their egos like these Masters
who are ego less therefore they can fold time and space
or are they just talking and talking ftom.their ego bec i see they all so opinionated like they are the choosen Awliyahs Allah friends
lol
no wonder us simple folk dont listern to all these fancy acedemic talk
we can see smell and feel real holy people and we see
pure humility and a divine light pouring forth from.them.
that attracts you to them like s moth to light
no need for all
the
masters in the Golden Chain of the Naquasbandi Order to talk and debate
they were people of action
busy saving souls and lives
unlike acedemics.
I rarely read the comments posted here, but perhaps I should do so more often. I don't know who Zkirah Hakim is referring to when he says, "you call yourself [sic] academics," but just for the record, Robert Daar is not, and never has been an academic. In fact, he is a master boat builder by profession. Nor do Dr. Applebaum and I specifically refer to ourselves as "academics" outside of a limited field of activity. As for your judgment (which you are welcome to, Mr. Hakim) that being "academics" is exactly what [we] are," that, too, is a judgment on the part of a self-professed "humble student" of a tariqa. Perhaps you and I have different opinions of what constitutes humility, Mr. Hakim, but you seem to be ignorant of the fact that all three presenters in this video posses valid ijazets to teach Sufism, and that all three of us have traveled the Sufi path through various turuq over decades. Moreover, humility, in my opinion, means accepting the limits of one's own knowledge. Having said all of that, Mr. Hakim suit yourself, but at least be accurate.
Georges gurdjieff was not a saint - the contrary, even if we know that the opposite is impossible.
Perhaps Gurdjieff went to Bukhara and he indeed spoke some kind of a Turkish dialect... but he wasn't initiated for sure. So you are talking about a path of initiation basing your knowledge on experiences of an outsider. why not go for exposition on Naqshbandiya to real Naqshbandi masters? There are plenty around. Also you guys should read what Ibn Arabi sais about Malamatiyya.
Aishanuriya I think you missed the point of our discussion, for it surely wasn't based on Gurdjieff who was referred to mostly in passing. All of us have read what Ibn 'Arabi has written about the Malamiyya (he doesn't use the word "Malamatiyya"), and we have studied with what one might call "real" Naqshbandis as well as the later Melami (alt. Malami, Malamati) tradition. That is what my book, "Sufism and the Way of Blame" is all about, and Bob Darr has written about some of his own experiences in his book, "Spy of the Heart," which you can find on the internet.
Dear Aishanuriya, apparently you didn't listen to the video carefully enough. It is simply inaccurate to claim that our talk was based "on experiences of an outsider." Gurdjieff was used as a starting point in our discussion, not as its primary concern. Secondly, what makes you think that none of us have been exposed to "real Naqshbandi masters," and what convinces you so entirely that "there are plenty [of them] around?" Lastly, it seems rather presumptuous for you to conclude that all three of us are unacquainted with what Ibn 'Arabi has to say about the Malamatiyya.
These otherwise intelligent folks do not understand anything written (repeatedly) by Idries Shah.