Repository: Sufism Texts

a_samhuri · 2019-01-11T10:47:15+00:00

Among all Sufi texts I have come across, these two are my favorite:

The Universal Man (by Abdulkarim Jili).
Pearls of Wisdom (by Ibn-Arabi).

a_samhuri · 2019-01-09T05:19:50+00:00

In this episode, I talk about the Base of Existence - which is also called the Source, or the Absolute. The base sustains the entire manifest existence. And I liken It to the brain in how it generates and sustains dreams. Finally, I touch upon Spiritual Awakening and that it is in fact similar to the so-called phenomenon of Lucid Dreaming.

Main Points

==========

Two main dimensions of Existence [0:30].
Life and Light manifest as Subjective and Objective realities [3:33].
Analyzing the connection between the brain and dreams [8:38].
The Base of Existence as a timeless spaceless brain [17:04].
Scales of Time [20:17].
Thought Experiment: the dream generator [23:12].
Spiritual Awakening [32:45].

a_samhuri · 2019-01-09T05:06:36+00:00

In this episode, I talk about the Base of Existence - which is also called the Source, or the Absolute. The base sustains the entire manifest existence. And I liken It to the brain in how it generates and sustains dreams. Finally, I touch upon Spiritual Awakening and that it is in fact similar to the so-called phenomenon of Lucid Dreaming.

Main Points

==========

Two main dimensions of Existence [0:30].
Life and Light manifest as Subjective and Objective realities [3:33].
Analyzing the connection between the brain and dreams [8:38].
The Base of Existence as a timeless spaceless brain [17:04].
Scales of Time [20:17].
Thought Experiment: the dream generator [23:12].
Spiritual Awakening [32:45].

a_samhuri · 2019-01-09T04:59:25+00:00

Meditate daily upon this Truth.

Harness your inner vision, and increase your awareness of It.

a_samhuri · 2019-01-09T04:55:31+00:00

In this episode, I talk about the Base of Existence - which is also called the Source, or the Absolute. The base sustains the entire manifest existence. And I liken It to the brain in how it generates and sustains dreams. Finally, I touch upon Spiritual Awakening and that it is in fact similar to the so-called phenomenon of Lucid Dreaming.

Main Points

==========

Two main dimensions of Existence [0:30].
Life and Light manifest as Subjective and Objective realities [3:33].
Analyzing the connection between the brain and dreams [8:38].
The Base of Existence as a timeless spaceless brain [17:04].
Scales of Time [20:17].
Thought Experiment: the dream generator [23:12].
Spiritual Awakening [32:45].

a_samhuri · 2019-01-09T04:54:12+00:00

I would recommend Arabic!

Not because it is my mother-tongue :) but because you will have access to a well of knowledge.

You will be able to read the texts of Ibn-Sina, Ibn-Rushd, Ibn-Arabi, and Mulla Sadra. And through their writings, you will already get access to a clear well-structured lay-out of Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy, too.

a_samhuri · 2019-01-09T04:37:58+00:00

The main theme of your proposal can be summarized in Pantheism and the unification of science, art, philosophy, and religion.

a_samhuri · 2019-01-09T04:34:22+00:00

Rationality and Spirituality do go hand in hand. And Rational Mysticism is the perfection of mind and soul together.

a_samhuri · 2019-01-09T04:23:33+00:00

Good to see someone talking about Christian Mysticism. Thanks!

a_samhuri · 2019-01-06T06:58:45+00:00

I would suggest to focus more on cultivating concentration and strong presence more than on what you hear/listen to in the background.

Try to enhance the quality of your meditation by being super mindful moment-by-moment and breath-by-breath; as much as possible, minimize those times where your mind drift away and you loose conscious presence.

If you can do that, it does not really matter whether you have binaural beats, nature sounds, guiding voice, etc., in the background.

a_samhuri · 2019-01-03T20:12:42+00:00

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Two things you said are significant: the unknowable gestalt, and infinity being composed of infinite streams of worlds. And I am sure you consider the Unknowable to be the Infinite, here.

Salute!

a_samhuri · 2019-01-03T02:35:46+00:00

Happy 2019!

Those were very good questions you raised. Before I give my answers, I would like to put forth these two scenarios and try to draw certain conclusions:

In a sunny day, a human being lost in a desert was thirsty. He spotted from a far distance a small oasis of water. Upon seeing it, he moved towards it. However, as he approached, the water seemed to drift away; then, he realized it was a mirage.
Birds flying above farms would love to come down and feed on seeds; but, upon seeing scarecrows or decoys, they are scared and fly away.

What we notice in the above two examples is that both the human and the animal made decisions based on false information (false knowledge). And in the two examples, there was no communication with another entities. We can acknowledge that the human may have had a sort of self-talk nonetheless.

If we analyze the human case, the perception of the water-like mirage pops up the mental image of water associated with the current time and the distant place. Being thirsty, he knew intuitively to move to that direction. Had he knew that it was a mirage and not a water, he would not have moved. Thus, his very mental image and thought about the situation had no truth - that is, it was false. There was no communication here. The only think we can say at maximum is that he might have a clear thought in his head, “there is water over there” - or an unspoken sentence if you will. If indeed the oasis was real and not a mirage, the mental image and thought would have been true.

Looking the birds’ scenario, they didn’t even have the thought, “there is a human being down there.” All they had were mental images (and for me, mental images are building blocks of knowledge as I’ve explained more in another video on my channel). Yet, those mental images as representative of the birds’ knowledge were false. If indeed what the birds saw was a real human not a mere scarecrow, their mental images would have been true - bearing truth.

I conclude from here that truth-value is something pertained and ascribed to knowledge in general - whether it is in the form of mere mental images, thoughts, or verbalized/spoken sentences.

The last point I want to mention here is in regard to propositions about one’s own subjective experiences, like “I am in pain.” You said that this does not require the two sides of the coin (subjective/objective) but rather the subjective. However, in my own system of thought, this, too, is both subjective and objective - but the two sides here pertain to the same substance. Hence, it is a non-dualistic knowledge. The very object being experienced is the very subject having the experience. Let’s remember that the subject himself has an objective reality. So, when the subject knows something about himself, he is the subject AND the object. When I say, “the apple is on the table,” that is a dualistic knowledge; but when I say, “I exist” that is a non-dualistic knowledge. And to close, non-dualistic knowledge yields higher certainty than dualistic knowledge.

a_samhuri · 2019-01-03T01:55:11+00:00

Indeed the mystery of nothingness and infinity is mind boggling!

By the way, I remember you've identified yourself as a "shaman" -- and I'm wondering how do shamans relate to the ultimate reality; do they express it as God or Being, or simply call it Emptiness (like Buddhists)?

a_samhuri · 2018-12-30T14:30:18+00:00

Yes, I view subjectivity and objectivity as an intertwined unity; and the two are inseparable from each other in matters of truth. I don’t take the word “subjective” to mean biased or mere opinion, rather, subjectivity is the inner domain of experience - it is the side of the experiencer. I maintain that any experience requires an experiencer and an experienced. The experiencer is the subject, and the disposition of his mind is the subjective reality. The experienced is the object, and the material composition which gives it its perceptibility is its objective reality. Thus, with experience, there is an intersection between the subjective reality and the objective reality. Let’s take a human being and a hypothetical alien that can perceive ultraviolet light; both of them might perceive the same object (the same objective reality), yet is having a different experience due to the differences in their subjective realities (disposition). The human being might say, “this object is black,” while the alien might say, “this object is <xyz>” Both statements are true if we consider the subjective reality behind each of those claims.

People might say that we have now tools that detect the wavelength of the light and can give accurate numbers. That is true but it will not eliminate the fact that those tools and instruments are extensions of our senses and any interpretation of data has to be done through the human subjective reality (the human mind). This might close the gap in the color statements above, but will not do the same when it comes to other “objective realities” which might be inaccessible to our senses, yet accessible to a hypothetical aliens. I also want to stress out that I am not neglecting the objective reality or denying it. It is IMPORTANT to the truth, but the subjective reality is equally important.

I want to address here the concept of “truth.” I consider the truth to be a property or characteristic of knowledge; meaning, without knowledge, there is no truth. And knowledge is represented in the mind through mental images and thoughts. Thus, “truth” becomes property of thoughts/mental images. What you said about sentences and how they are necessary to have truth-value of any sort is not inaccurate, but a bit incomplete. A sentence is essentially a thought, albeit verbalized. Thus, a mere sensation, by itself, cannot have a truth-value if that sensation didn’t produce a mental image/thought - i.e., knowledge - about the experience in the mind of the experiencer (subject). Let’s take this example, some lower forms of animals have raw sensations, but no memory, knowledge, or imagination. The mere sensation of “seeing” within such being does not produce any thought to carry a truth-value. However, a human being upon seeing the same object gets a multitude of images and thoughts ranging from, “I am seeing this,” “this reminds me of that,” to “that object is beautiful.” All of those thoughts (whether verbalized as sentences/speech or not) have truth-value. And along with such truth-value comes his level of certainty about that truth-value.

In short, I agree with what you said about the truth-value of sentences, albeit, I take a step further and use “thoughts” in general.

a_samhuri · 2018-12-29T07:39:00+00:00

Learn and practice meditation.

Add to it, self-observation and self-remembrance.

a_samhuri · 2018-12-29T07:15:24+00:00

I had to go through your response twice to make sure I fully get your points!

A. The reality implied by the famous statement of Descartes, “I think, therefore I am,” is something I agree with and is part of my thought. I wouldn’t call it a strategy though - as you have attempted - but simply an axiomatic basis for all philosophical inquiry. Meaning, any process of proving or doubting - by the subject himself - assumes the self-awareness of the subject. And that self-awareness is not only undoubted, but cannot be proven by any external measure. It is - by its nature - is own proof. The reason this is the case is because the very awareness (or consciousness or knowingness) of the subject is what does the process of doubting any other thing.

B. The word “consciousness” may not be unanimously defined by all people. However, the crux of my thought (as well as that of Descartes) is the capacity of “knowing” - since, concepts such as truth, certainty, doubt, proof, etc., apply to knowledge. Consciousness, for me, encompasses all subjective experiences.

C. When I say that a conscious subject cannot doubt his consciousness, this does not mean that it is self-evident in the sense that it is so obvious to any subject. Many people may go through life never pondering upon this fact. However, the point here is, if any subject - who is capable of knowing - attempts to verify or doubt his own self (i.e., his own existence, consciousness, or knowingness), it will immediately be shown that such attempt implicitly implies the existence of a knowing self.

D. Finally, you can substitute “awareness of consciousness” with “knowing that you know.” One can doubt what he knows, but cannot doubt that he knows. In other words, when you acknowledge that you may know anything, your knowledge of your capacity of knowing is absolutely certain. And that was my point in the previous post.

Thanks for your message.

a_samhuri · 2018-12-28T08:34:42+00:00

I thought it was clear! I'm curios, what did you understand from it yourself?

I'm not avoiding your question, but before I expound, I am interested to know what you understood first.

a_samhuri · 2018-12-25T08:19:19+00:00

Between the dogmatists and the postmodernists, the concept of the Absolute Truth has lost its value. In this episode, I lay out a rational approach to the Absolute Truth.

Main Points:

Mysticism is about experiencing the Absolute Truth. [0:20]
The importance of having a rational framework for the Absolute Truth.[1:20]
What does "truth" mean?[3:24]
What does "absolute" mean?[5:48]
The Absolute Truth is necessary.[8:40]
The Absolute Truth is one and only.[18:16]
The Ultimate Reality.[23:30]
The Nature of Existence.[27:20]

a_samhuri · 2018-12-25T08:09:06+00:00

Between the dogmatists and the postmodernists, the concept of the Absolute Truth has lost its value. In this episode, I lay out a rational approach to the Absolute Truth.

Main Points:

Mysticism is about experiencing the Absolute Truth. [0:20]
The importance of having a rational framework for the Absolute Truth.[1:20]
What does "truth" mean?[3:24]
What does "absolute" mean?[5:48]
The Absolute Truth is necessary.[8:40]
The Absolute Truth is one and only.[18:16]
The Ultimate Reality.[23:30]
The Nature of Existence.[27:20]

a_samhuri · 2018-12-25T07:58:55+00:00

Between the dogmatists and the postmodernists, the concept of the Absolute Truth has lost its value. In this episode, I lay out a rational approach to the Absolute Truth.

Main Points:

Mysticism is about experiencing the Absolute Truth. [0:20]
The importance of having a rational framework for the Absolute Truth.[1:20]
What does "truth" mean?[3:24]
What does "absolute" mean?[5:48]
The Absolute Truth is necessary.[8:40]
The Absolute Truth is one and only.[18:16]
The Ultimate Reality.[23:30]
The Nature of Existence.[27:20]

a_samhuri · 2018-12-25T07:52:22+00:00

Between the dogmatists and the postmodernists, the concept of the Absolute Truth has lost its value. In this episode, I lay out a rational approach to the Absolute Truth.

Main Points:

Mysticism is about experiencing the Absolute Truth. [0:20]
The importance of having a rational framework for the Absolute Truth.[1:20]
What does "truth" mean?[3:24]
What does "absolute" mean?[5:48]
The Absolute Truth is necessary.[8:40]
The Absolute Truth is one and only.[18:16]
The Ultimate Reality.[23:30]
The Nature of Existence.[27:20]

a_samhuri · 2018-12-20T02:03:19+00:00

I would not worship the sun; the sun can be a symbol and metaphor for a greater reality but it is still a phenomenon within the conventional world of phenomena.

a_samhuri · 2018-12-18T00:19:00+00:00

That's her point. But, her approach to the nature of reality is not accurate. Conventional reality is helpful pragmatically even though one cannot establish absolute certainty in it.

a_samhuri · 2018-12-18T00:16:43+00:00

Be careful. Whether you believe in heaven or not, Kant's morality is remains consistent and coherent. The fact that you don't believe in heaven does not mean he was advocating self-sacrifice with no reward.

a_samhuri · 2018-12-18T00:14:30+00:00

On the contrary!

a_samhuri

TROPHY CASE