The Naqshbandi octagonal symbol
thief#37
the octagonal symbol used by Idries Shah so profusely. Obviously of course
it is a wall and that the work commences inside that wall beyond the
ordinary world. Anybody can guess that.
But to go further? And why is the symbol ignored in discussions? Does it
have any merit, purpose, meaning? Or is it simply a logo like I stylised my
initials BMS, encircled them in an oval, and used them thus on my own
publications about motorcycles? Nothing unusual about that and they often
get registered as an official trademark and thus copyright so to say. So
what with the Shah octagon? Is it special or just mundane?
Are these interlocking keys representing a processional path through a
complex spiritual labyrinth leading, after about turns (!), to the
culmination point at the centre --- assuming the pattern works inwards and
not outwards. Does the pattern, akin to crossed keys, have any significance
at all? Any bright spark got an idea to correct this leaking crackpot?
B+++
The Tree
presence, but unfortunately like all competitions there are winners and loosers,
and the field must be wittled down to the seven grand finalist.
We would like to thank you all for entering and wish you all a safe journey
home, allthough most will be disappointed remember that all is not lost, take
with you what you have learned and prepare for the next occasion.
Remember practise makes perfect.
We will post the list of finalist shortly and would like to thank the resident
stooges for playing there part.
Best wishes The Tree (Heartwood)
france...@my-deja.com
Dear B,
Yes it is very special and significant.
There is a wealth of associations I could go through; however, I'm
sorry I do not have the time to cover them all, but the following
should give you some good leads.
'Symbols, especially the Enneagon'
"The Enneagon, or nine pointed figure, is by no means unknown in
'occult' circles in the West...It came to Europe with the Kabbala,
based on the quite well-known mathematical work of the ancient Arab
philosopher Ibn el-Laith, and this fact is mentioned in The Legacy Of
Islam...
But you should remember something very important; that the
nine-pointed figure is represented in many ways..
Another element most vital to remember is that the diagram and that
which it represents is conveyed by one further remove in drawing. For
instance, the eight-fold diagram which contains an extra space (made
by superimposing two squares) in the centre is used as a code form of
the enneagon. It is, however, only if you are in harmony with the
meaning of the enneagon ( and the great diagram of which it is a part
) that you can know what you are looking for." page 286, Idries Shah
'The Commanding Self'
As usual I recommend reading the rest of the article.
You may also wish to read in 'The Sufis' about HOO; the magic square
i.e. the representation of the eightfold diagram (HOO) through the
number 4; the meaning of the cross etc.
The 3D sterograms you refer to do have some relevance because you do
need to change focus i.e. adjust or harmonise, to see the hidden
'patterns' . (This reminds me of how Sufi stories work by stimulating
the right-hemisphere.)
But like much we could discuss, it is definately outside the scope of
this 'public' forum.
Peace
Martin Edwards
>But to go further? And why is the symbol ignored in discussions? Does it
>have any merit, purpose, meaning? Or is it simply a logo like I stylised my
>initials BMS, encircled them in an oval, and used them thus on my own
>publications about motorcycles? Nothing unusual about that and they often
>get registered as an official trademark and thus copyright so to say. So
>what with the Shah octagon? Is it special or just mundane?
I'm not sure, but you can construct it with just a straight edge and
compasses without measuring in units. On the other hand it is not
unique in this.
******Martin Edwards.******
Come on! Nobody's gonna drive that lousy freeway
when you can take the Red Car for a nickel.
-Eddy Valiant
none
the enneagon aspects without the key, you have gone passed go without
collecting the $200.
none
"thief#37" <uksolen...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9rjccl$etj$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
Eric Twose
profusely?
Dear 37th Thief,
The octagonal symbol is part of the arms of the Rulers of Paghman in
Afghanistan, of whom Idries Shah is a Prince, along with his brother Omar
Ali Shah, who uses on the cover of his book 'The Rules or Secrets of the
Naqshbandi Order'. It's clearly something to do with the Naqsbandis.
On a more mundane level, the intellectual approach may be likened to an
understanding in terms of squares and angles (hence these people were called
'squares' in the 60s), whereas what the Sufis are really teaching about may
be decribed as being circular. The octagon is an approximation of a circle
in the terms of those who can only understand the angular. It's a bridge
between the two; a half-way house, if you like.
Best Wishes,
Eric Twose
Eric Twose
Eric
GV
> It's also a pictogram of a rose, by the way (ward, rhymes with wird).
>
> Eric
The octagon represents the Complete Man (sufi) and the regenerative process
that made him such. Depending on the octagon's design, it also depicts fana.
See also Ornstein's "The Mind Field" for another depiction of this process of
development.
GV
James Souttar
thief#37 wrote:
> As I am neither a sufi nor a dervish I have not the vaguest understanding of
> the octagonal symbol used by Idries Shah so profusely. Obviously of course
> it is a wall and that the work commences inside that wall beyond the
> ordinary world. Anybody can guess that.
Some stray and disconnected thoughts that have occurred to me are:
It consists of the word 'hu' (ha, waw) repeated four times, with the ha
becoming part of the matrix in the middle. There may be some connection here
with what Ibn Al-Arabi says, in describing his vision of the 'hu' written
against a crimson background (but my memory of this is sketchy, and needs to be
refreshed).
The value of 'hu' according to the abjad is 11. 4 x 11 is 44, which decodes to
m,d (mim, dal). 'dam' in Arabic is blood, but also 'to coat, smear, daub, dye'
- and also 'rouge' (which may be a connection to the above). This may be a
homonym for the (dal, alif, mim) root which yields terms and meanings that
appear to be important to the Sufis, such as 'daum' (as in habs-i-dam,
'imprisoning the breath' and in the dam-i-kaif, explained by Morag Murray) or
'daim' (enduring, perpetual, eternal).
The 'madda' root (mim, dal) is also interesting - including the meanings: 'to
extend, expand, dilate, spread out, help, supply, furnish. And as 'mudda' a
period or space of time, interval. 'Maddad' is a creeping plant (is it too much
to see a connection with the climbing 'madder' used to achieve that intense
rosy red in Afghan carpets?) There would seem to be lots of connections here to
various Sufi exercises.
(I have a feeling that there may also be a 'reverse' reading, but I've never
been able to make it out. Reversing the figure and ground of the 'waw', one can
make out a plausible initial 'nun'. Perhaps someone better versed in stylised
Arabic letterforms can decipher it?)
As Eric pointed out, the whole is a rose - ward, in Arabic - or more familiarly
to people in the rug trade, the Persian/Turkish 'gul'. (Another significant
rug-dealers term for this kind of contained octagonal pattern is 'elephant's
foot'). Perhaps it could be seen as a 'rosy cross'? 'Rosy' not just by
reference to the 'gul' pattern, but also to the 'dam' colour?
> But to go further? And why is the symbol ignored in discussions? Does it
> have any merit, purpose, meaning? Or is it simply a logo like I stylised my
> initials BMS, encircled them in an oval, and used them thus on my own
> publications about motorcycles? Nothing unusual about that and they often
> get registered as an official trademark and thus copyright so to say. So
> what with the Shah octagon? Is it special or just mundane?
In 'Journeys with a Sufi Master', Dervish talks about Shah handing out pieces
of paper with the 'signature' of the Sufis printed on them. (Obliquely, Doris
Lessing describes something similar in 'Shikasta'). Is this the same octagonal
naqsh? Certainly it seems to assume greater importance than a publisher's
imprint would normally have. On my old Cape edition of 'Tales of the Dervishes'
it appears on the inside and back covers of the book at about 5" in height (on
the insides in a bright, rosy red). My assumption was that it was a figure that
was intended to exercise some kind of effect or influence simply by familiarity
- and for that reason Shah didn't draw undue, analytical attention to it. But
it certainly seems to bear thinking about.
Other symbols used by Shah related enterprises seem to have enjoyed this 'more
than a logo' importance. The unusual sixfold figure that Medion used, and which
used to feature with what would appear to be undue prominence on the front of
some of their ionisers, is a case in point. (My interpretation of this is that
it is a stylised form of the divine name 'Hayy' - the Living. By the Abjad,
Hayy (value 18) repeated six times gives 108 - the value of Haqq, Truth.)
>
>
> Are these interlocking keys representing a processional path through a
> complex spiritual labyrinth leading, after about turns (!), to the
> culmination point at the centre --- assuming the pattern works inwards and
> not outwards. Does the pattern, akin to crossed keys, have any significance
> at all? Any bright spark got an idea to correct this leaking crackpot?
This is an interesting interpretation, that sounds very plausible to me.
James
france...@my-deja.com
wrote:
....step . . . drag. . . drag . . . step . . . step . . . wait . . .
drag . . . step . ..
[Hands up class, who is the brightest spark!]
Plausible ha. You jest?
More than plausible James, Bruce has hit the proverbial nail on the
head. But I think you'll find that he knew that anyway. As Above So
Below - Inside Out.
It is even more so, especially if you consider the earlier 'key' I
gave i.e. the use of the number 4 to represent HOO, which is also the
number of gates in the original city of Baghdad, and maps to the 4
cardinal points - 'Earth, Water, Air, Fire', now there's a
processional path, if ever I saw one (Sufi Though And Action). Not to
mention the old Templars and stamping on crosses.
Green Domes of Baghdad and Khidir as discussed in The Sufis also
surface as disconnected in my tiny mind... triple yikes....You can
look that one up, you will find it on page.... Oh, Ok then, I'll do
it:
"It may be said, however, that an alternative name for
a branch of the Khidir Ordrr is el-mudawwira (the
round building), associated with the great palace of
Baghdad which belonged to Haroun el-Rashid. The entire
city of Baghdad was constructed in 762 A.D., in
certain geometrical proportions based on the wheel."
-The Chivalric Circle, page 220.
(And of course, we all know where Shaikh Qadir is buried, don't we? )
Now, please, please nobody mention 'Squaring the Circle'! And no one,
and I mean no one, mention Chivalric Circles or the Rosicrucian's,
ok!
Whoops one more thing, you forgot to mention the 18 points of the
Green Qadiri Rose and its relationship to the 9 pointed Enneagon and
the 9 points of the Uwaysi transmission, probably said too much now,
so I'll stop. I do not wish to encourage random experimentation. Ta (9
= sirr) etc etc.
Thinking about it, didn't Idries Shah write books full of this stuff
and how it's all connected, although stray and scattered ? Where does
the whole stop and the part begin. All for One, then!
Nothing new under the Sun - Same story then , different package. How
many times can we wrap a gift? Where shall we stop with this one?
Still, when it comes to musical chairs we will have plenty of fun
trying to unravel it all!
Scccrrrrrrreeeeeeeecchhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry, the music has stopped, I'll sit down now.
Do you know how thick a sheet of paper becomes if it starts at a
thousandth of an inch thick and is then doubled over fifty times?
We could be here a long time.......
Right then, I'll take the first sheet (veil) off. Hey look, there's
something written on the back:
###################################################
As Jami (who was a great exponent of Ibn 'Arabi's philosophy, as well
as being a master in the tradition of the Khwajagan) so succinctly
put it, when challenged as to why he didn't use big words and complex
formulations:
'Our aim is to have direct perception of Truth, not to speak cleverly
about it'.
###################################################
Right who's taking the next sheet off?
Ka-Peace,
....step . . . drag. . . drag . . . step . . . step . . . wait . . .
drag . . . step . ..
William F. Zachmann
I saw some Mevlehvi dervishes in action once (in Cambridge, Massachusetts)
but I must admit that their spinning downright pales by comparison to your
frequent performances here (and on Caravanserai). <g>
All the best,
will
<france...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:3bdeb773.2175164711@gatekeeper...
francesca_trb
>
....step . . . drag. . . drag . . . step . . . step . . . wait . .
.drag . . . step . ..
BOO or should I say HOO!
"Do not boast that you have no pride, because it is less visible that
a polar bear's foot, on a snowball, in a snowblizzard." - Sno'Wan.
Whoops, silly me that was the wrong quote. I was thinking of Jami and
the ant's foot. By the by, does anyone recognise it? It was written by
a distant cousin of Dhu'l Nun the Nubian (the Black One). His cousin
was known as the White One (the unknown, the unseen in snow); some
believe that this impossibly-idealistic-mythical-creature did not even
exist. Well, he did and his name was Sno'Wan, and he chilled with
Eskimo's. He taught them all the building skills they needed, and they
even built an igloo in honour of him, known as the el-mudawwira - the
Round Building. I believe it has melted now, but the spot is well
marked, you guessed the ninth point again.
Funny, I think we are back to time and pomegranites. I've had a few
more associations kick in. I'll share a few here if you don't mind?
Thank you. You can find the rest in the book The Sufis, just look in
the index for HOO.
HOO:
The Octave - The 7 levels of man - The Nafs - The Valleys of Attar -
The Cube - The Builders - QNT - NSHR - QLB .....
"Eight symbolizes the number of perfect expression, the octagon,
representing, among other things, the cube. The figure also covers
eight of a total nine squares. The meaning here is "The eight
(balance) is the way to the nine." Nine stands in Arabic for the
letter Ta, whose hidden meaning is "secret knowledge". - Idries Shah,
The Sufis.
Qutub (the ninth point, Qadir - the Pole - the Rose - WRD - SLB....):
Transposed into figures, it totals 111 - the thrice-repeated unity,
the threefold unity, the threefold affirmation of truth, which is
unity. If this is split up into 100, 10, 1, and substituted, we get
the letters Q, Y and A. The word QYAA, spelled from these letters,
means "to be vacant, voided." It is this vacant, voided, purged
"house" into which the baraka descends (the human consciousness.)
Space,void, vacant, what space is that then? :
"Another element most vital to remember is that the diagram and that
which it represents is conveyed by one further remove in drawing. For
instance, the eight-fold diagram which contains an extra *space* (made
by superimposing two squares) in the centre is used as a code form of
the enneagon. It is, however, only if you are in harmony with the
meaning of the enneagon ( and the great diagram of which it is a part
) that you can know what you are looking for." - The Commanding Self
"It would be improper to go further in presenting material which both
Freemasons and organised dervish fraternities possess and consider to
be of high initiatory significance."
Scccrrrrrrreeeeeeeecchhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry, the music has stopped, I'll sit down again now.
Ahh, I know what you're waiting for, you're waiting for the next sheet
to come off, aren't you? Well, here goes, and in true Victor Meldrew
style, I don't believe it, there's something written on the other side
of this as well:
"The Sufi does not need the mosque, the Arabic language, litanies,
books of philosophy, even social stability. The relationship is
evolutionary and adaptive." - Idries Shah, The Elephant In The Light,
The Sufis, page 50.
....step . . . drag. . . drag . . . step . . . step . . . wait . .
.drag . . . step . ..
James Souttar
> More than plausible James, Bruce has hit the proverbial nail on the
> head. But I think you'll find that he knew that anyway. As Above So
> Below - Inside Out.
Maybe he did - it sounded reasonable to me. But one thing I've learned from people
who learned from Shah is that they don't play silly buggers. I don't see any reason
to think that Bruce was being anything other than straightforward with us.
James
Lews Therin
<SNICKER-SNACK> (I swear those vorpal scissors are the best buy I ever made)
>
> Sorry, the music has stopped, I'll sit down now.
>
> Do you know how thick a sheet of paper becomes if it starts at a
> thousandth of an inch thick and is then doubled over fifty times?
>
> We could be here a long time.......
>
> Right then, I'll take the first sheet (veil) off. Hey look, there's
> something written on the back:
>
> ###################################################
> As Jami (who was a great exponent of Ibn 'Arabi's philosophy, as well
> as being a master in the tradition of the Khwajagan) so succinctly
> put it, when challenged as to why he didn't use big words and complex
> formulations:
>
> 'Our aim is to have direct perception of Truth, not to speak cleverly
> about it'.
>
> ###################################################
>
>
> Right who's taking the next sheet off?
Apparently, it's me. Mine says:
#############################################
Truth suffers from too much analysis
--Frank Herbert
##############################################
Phew! What a relief. It could have been so much worse.
Next!
James Souttar
most interest to people who don't already claim to know all the secrets of the
universe).
As there often seems to be a divine name (or a similarly significant Qur'anic
word) at the root of many significant abjad encoding, I took another look at 44.
One of the beauties of the abjad system is that there are actually only a few
possibilities for each number (contrary to what one might expect). So it didn't
take long to find ha - wa -la (I don't know how to differentiate the two forms of
ha in ASCII, but this is the one that looks like the jim and the kha - value 8).
Hawala yields one of the hugest ranges of meanings I've ever seen for an Arabic
root - including (but by no means exhausted by): to change, undergo, transform,
become, intervene, elapse, transmute, transplant, change the course of, remit,
send, hand over. The 'transmutation' of the Christian mass is another specific
meaning. The same root gives us 'hal' (state), and the 'hawla' (strength) in the
frequently uttered Quranic invocation 'la hawla wa la quwwata illa billah' (there
is no strength or power, save in Allah).
Thinking more about the idea of a 'negative' or reverse field reading, I spent
some time trying to work out what it could be. It clearly begins with an alif
(hamza), a separated vertical. Then there is a cupped character that borrows the
eye of the waw to make a dot - not stretching the imagination to see this as a
nun. The final character(s) is open to a number of possibilities - it could easily
be a kaf or a lam, or borrow one or more dots from the matrix at the centre. One
poetic possibility that occurs to me is that it could be 'anta' (Thou) - but that
is stretching the point graphically.
James
Slp
---snip---
>
> "It may be said, however, that an alternative name for
> a branch of the Khidir Ordrr is el-mudawwira (the
> round building), associated with the great palace of
> Baghdad which belonged to Haroun el-Rashid. The entire
> city of Baghdad was constructed in 762 A.D., in
> certain geometrical proportions based on the wheel."
> -The Chivalric Circle, page 220.
>
If no one minds if I play a little bit, I should like to point out that the
Round Table of King Arthur and his nights was apparently a misreading of the
Old French that the story was originally written in, and more correctly
should be translated as the "round tower", as in King Arthur and the Knights
of the Round Tower.
Unfortunately I went to check for the book that I used to have on this
subject, and I no longer have it. The author was one of the few scholars of
Old French. So take it for what it is worth since I can no longer give one
the source for this.
Regarding the octagon on Idries Shah's books as being a maze to tread from
outside in to the center, it may be of some interest for some to note that,
if I have my locations correct, one can still find along the English coast
in some places, small mazes which the fisherman would walk from the outside
in to the center for good luck before setting out to the ocean. (Hmm.
Ocean. Hmm). Some still do this yet today in the more isolated villages,
supposedly.
And this can lead one to Roger Zelazny's stories of Avalon and the pattern
that the royal house of Avalon would walk (for those that have not read the
books, Avalon was the real reality, and there were many, many other lesser
realities that were shades and shadows of it, including this world of ours),
first as a test, for the maze had many trials, and if they successfully
walked it to the center, they came into and were granted their rightful
powers and abilities, including the ability to shape the shadows and stuff
of the lesser worlds and to travel freely among those worlds. It is perhaps
interesting in this context that the main hero, if I remember correctly, had
a rose as his emblem in some of the stories. It is also perhaps interesting
that Zelazny was a student of medieval literature.
And of course, one of the great cathedrals in Great Britain (again, I hope I
have my locations straight), built in medieval times, has a maze pattern in
the floor that leads from the outside to the center. Originally, in the
center was a monster or some other beast (removed as being non-Christian
later on). Which leads directly to the fairy tale story of "The Beauty and
the Beast" and the question for others "where is the Beauty that loves the
Beast in the center?"
Forgive me for playing a bit, I hope it is not misleading for others.
sincerely,
slp
france...@my-deja.com
wrote:
>> Francesca
Dear James,
I have know quite a few of those myself, people who learned from
Idries Shah that is, part of the 'inner circle,' so to speak, and I
have often found the opposite to be true. As I said to Jay earlier,
some of the stories they tell, it would make your hair curl.
Before you ask- sorry, even though they all live in England, I'm not
at liberty to give contact information, some have passed on now
anyway, and the ones that are still alive are living a silent, but
divinely intoxicated life. Still, they always seem to have time for
me, that's nice.
It's a small world, eh?
F,
france...@my-deja.com
wrote:
>Some more stray and disconnected thoughts about the octagonal naqsh (probably of
Dear James,
If I may ask - how relevant do you think the Abjad encoding mechanism
is, for us seekers, here in the West, not born of Arabic tongue?
Is it necessary for me to go away and become an exponent of it?
It sounds very complex. Will it help me?
One thing I often puzzle over is this - If Idries Shah thought it was
so important, why did he not dedicate a lot more publishing space to
it?
I have it from another that the only thing you need to know about
Abjad is contained within a few pages in 'The Sufis.' (I've also seen
a little in The Walled Garden, but we can ignore that for now.)
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks,
france...@my-deja.com
wrote:
>france...@my-deja.com wrote in message
>
><SNICKER-SNACK> (I swear those vorpal scissors are the best buy I ever made)
>
>
Thanks Steve,
I knew you'd get it!
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
Peace,
france...@my-deja.com
<w...@canopusresearch.com> wrote:
>Francesca,
>
>I saw some Mevlehvi dervishes in action once (in Cambridge, Massachusetts)
>but I must admit that their spinning downright pales by comparison to your
>frequent performances here (and on Caravanserai). <g>
>
>All the best,
>
>will
Why thank you Will,
I don't believe we've had the pleasure yet? It's nice to meet you.
Talking of whirling I wrote a little poem for a friend recently,
enjoy:
"We weave once more through another whorl,
Our hearts on fire, our minds in a swirl,
Dance then, O heart, a whorling spiral be.
Burn in this flame - is not the candle he?"
And no, don't mention Rumi :-)
Peace,
azo charif
it is interesting you mentioned the word ''hawl'' it is of the same root as
hal=state and tehwyl=change ,transformation from one state to other..as h is
not considered a perfect consonnant ,the root is also related to the roots
of the words of the kalima(la ilal illa allah)...
azo
James Souttar <anc...@urizen.com> wrote in message
news:3BDF0F4A...@urizen.com...
azo charif
and pieces :
if iamnot mistaken the first allusion to the sufi neqsh of ''elmothemmen=the
octagon'' in islamic literature was in a a qoranic verse:'' we yehmil rebbek
yume'ydh themanieh= on that day the throne of your lord will be carried by
eight (8 archangels''(sorry i cannot remember the numbers of the chapter and
verse).. the origin of the eight archangles are found in the diagrams of the
ancient babylonian pantheon pyramidical diagram where el the hghest god is
at the the top of the pyramid followed by the eight supreme gods(actually
four gods and four godesses) followed by the lesser gods and then geniis at
the base of the pyramid...the design of the mosque of dome inspired by
this......ibn arabi elaborated this into a complex metacosmological designs
....taj mahal (and other islamic mouments) were built upon ibn arabi
diagrams......
some certain arabic words that i believe are closely related to the
meanings of the symbol
when their roots are analysed are:
themyn(precious as in precious pearl)daireh(the circle)dur(dervish
whirling) ,themanieh(eight),elmorebbe3( thesquare or the diamond-shaped
square )masseh(diamond which is made from the
atoms of carbon),fehm(coal,carbon), fehm(understanding),kaaba,hajer
elfehm(the cubic black stone,the philosophers stone) ,qibleh((direction of
mecca)el(the highest god), lu'lu'a (pearl),la ilah illa allah(chief ''four''
words sufi formula!!!!!!!),sarmouni(probably derived from the babylonian
samani which means the eightfold)...........
(see also ''the sufis'', ''journeys with the sufi master'' ,''the commanding
self'')
azo
thief#37 <uksolen...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9rjccl$etj$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> As I am neither a sufi nor a dervish I have not the vaguest understanding
o
france...@my-deja.com
Thank you Azo for those insights!
But I was a little confused by your mention of Sarmoun and its
relationship to 'eightfold.' I have a few notes on the Sarmoun, but
don't recall mention of this.
Where might I find further information on it i.e the 'eightfold'
relationship?
Thanks,
azo charif
i asked once someone who belonged to the the samania order (found especially
in sudan) where this word(samania) came from and she hinted that it is
traced to accadian and that the sarmouni brotherhood(who may have been an
ancient babylonian circle of mystics) may have the word
'persianized'....there are many theories as to its persian etymolgy(the
bees, the head -keeper etc...) ...again i said ''probably'' it is related to
the babylonian word samani (thamani in arabic and shamani in biblical
hebrew) and there is no conclusive proof that it may be so..
regards
azo
<france...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:3bdfe696.2252767628@gatekeeper...
Al
exists. Abjad is not common knowledge in the West. He showed us that someone
who is familiar with the system can read a lot from ancient symbols. IS
wrote in English for westerners. Abjad is irrelevant except maybe as a kind
of litmus paper showing up those who have a tendency to show off their
intellect instead of going straight to the heart of the matter. Why all
these attempts at decoding and analysing ancient symbols when there is much
plainer work to attend to?
10 minutes with an illiterate peasant might be better than 10 hours with an
enneagram specialist.
<france...@my-deja.com> wrote
azo charif
exercises done under a guide, as the exercise of entertaining in one's mind
simultanuesly many concepts of a given one word is more of a holistic
activity than an intellectual one only IMO....
IS noted that certain stories cannot be perfectly rendered into english
without loosing some of their original meanings because of the multiple
meanings of the technical arabic words but probably this is a minor
insignificant loss and i personnally think that neither the knowledge of
arabic(although arabic context-driven right to left reading and writing may
stimulate more the right hemisphere, according to Ornstein) or abjad is
really necessary to one's development unless it is recommended by a
teacher......
James ,Bruce or others who studied directly under Shah may tell us if they
were taught this activity within their study groups, if they think it worth
telling.........
azo
Al <al_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:D7UD7.1005$bJ6.11...@news1.mtl.metronet.ca...
france...@my-deja.com
<a...@chari.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
Thanks Azo,
I have seen many attributes associated with the word 'Sarmoun,' and
Bennett discusses at length the etymology.
However, I had not come across this 'eightfold' relationship before.
It wouldn't suprise me if your hunch was right, though.
Peace
france...@my-deja.com
<a...@chari.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
Al, and Azo,
Thank you.
It was as I suspected.
Back on Reedflute someone else gave the following answer:
"There are clearly all sorts of things in these materials that are -
and again, this is one of those words that has become overlaid with
baggage - tests. For instance, one can take what Shah says about the
abjad and - with the help of a rooted Arabic dictionary - get
thoroughly engrossed in its various intricacies and possibilities. Did
you know that 'Idries Shah' yields a root that means 'to spread about,
diffuse, make the rounds, put into circulation, be disclosed, be
divulged'? How very exciting! But what exactly have I gained by
knowing this, that wasn't entirely obvious from the books? On
reflection, only this. That I'm like a magpie - a sucker for anything
shiny, scintillating, mysterious, regardless of whether it has any
value or not. Well, that's part of the texture of my 'watan' that I
need to recognize, understand and work on. But whilst I remain a
sensation seeker, chasing after what I want to believe are
'indications', I'm effectively closing myself off from more useful
dimensions in the materials. All one really needs to know about the
abjad - that isn't revealed in a teaching situation - is contained in
about a page and a half of 'The Sufis'. "
I think the last sentence is very close to what you suggest Azo, that
within a 'teaching situation' there may be further scope for its use.
Peace,
thief#37
were anyway? For the record may the person (me) who started the thread
re-affirm that my question was meant to be taken at face value. I do not
repeat not know what the octagonal symbol on the cover of Tales of the
Dervishes etc is supposed to denote. I have never seen it discussed and
wonder why it is ignored.
I myself have ignored it --- until now. That may be significant? Idle
curiosity previously. Guesses might be 4 ways of doing the work
(emotional/monkish & physical/fakir & intellectual/scholar & a combination
way). The outer wall is the world? The bezel? The inner stuff is where the
teaching activity is? That activity has many abrupt turnings, including
about faces, and a marking-time area. It then goes straight to the heart of
the matter. (I am reading the design topographically, as a map). Is that a
valid supposition?
Bruce is not devious, convoluted, trixxy. I was born mid-Taurus (under an
unaspected sun whatever Jonathan Cainer means by that?) and am just like the
bull, run on railway lines, above board, simple not complex, too patently
obvious, etc. So my question meant just what I posted. What truly is the
reason why IS chose that symbol?
If you turn the clock back to 1968 there were no more than the usual
octagonal patterns in British society, commerce, art. Then, in the space of
12 months, they were everywhere, in tapestry, fabric designs, even Dunlop
floor tiles. Like the smiling-sun symbol of more recent date, the surfeit of
the symbol came seemingly from nowhere. One fabric designer I met at Langton
at that date told me she was deliberately using it as motif in her
commercial designs --- and why not, that was the objective & intention.
So, again, the Q --- why the octagon? What do we understand from it? And
does such matter anyway? B+++
William F. Zachmann
stuff as well) is that, employed in right measure (and quite apart from any
particular, specific, individual meanings or interpretations it might
yield), it helps to encourage a 'posture' of NOT assuming that whatever is
immediately apparent to one is all that can be found.
All the best,
will
<france...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:3be10a6a.2327475893@gatekeeper...
Eric Twose
> If you turn the clock back to 1968 there were no more than the usual
> octagonal patterns in British society, commerce, art. Then, in the space
of
> 12 months, they were everywhere, in tapestry, fabric designs, even Dunlop
> floor tiles. Like the smiling-sun symbol of more recent date, the surfeit
of
> the symbol came seemingly from nowhere. One fabric designer I met at
Langton
> at that date told me she was deliberately using it as motif in her
> commercial designs --- and why not, that was the objective & intention.
You must remember the symbol on MG sports cars, too, Bruce (used to this
day): an M and G inside an octagon, angulated to follow the contours of the
octagon? MG originally stood for Morris Garages, I believe. I wonder if this
was indirectly influenced in some way?
I also remember a number of friends wearing afghan coats in those days, and
even the guys wore embroidered kaftans instead of t-shirts. I gather Idries
Shah himself had a hand in importing such paraphernalia and selling it?
Here's to Mushkil Gusha, the remover of all difficulties.
Eric
William F. Zachmann
Are you sure that did not start out as "Moorish garages"? <g>
In any event, a very fine Thursday evening to you, too!
And may all your difficulties be little ones!
All the best,
will
"Blessed be those that go in circles, for they shall be known as wheels."
"Eric Twose" <er...@anchor92.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9rsa4g$bqd$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
france...@my-deja.com
<w...@canopusresearch.com> wrote:
>One useful aspect of the abjad system (and of much other 'secret' symbolic
>stuff as well) is that, employed in right measure (and quite apart from any
>particular, specific, individual meanings or interpretations it might
>yield), it helps to encourage a 'posture' of NOT assuming that whatever is
>immediately apparent to one is all that can be found.
>
>All the best,
>
>will
Why thank you Will,
Good point. Yes a lot boils down to 'attitude'.
But, for the children you understand, we need to remember the wheat
and the chaff, or sift, sift, sift as the Tree often reminds us.
If you enter a labyrinth, and a golden thread is proffered, do not be
surprised, when you refuse to grasp that thread, that you are left to
your own 'devices'.
P.S. Such complex, multi-layered meanings are possible in European
languages as well. But probably not as neat, since we don't have the
trilateral roots etc.
Jay Vogelsong
> If you enter a labyrinth, and a golden thread is proffered, do not be
> surprised, when you refuse to grasp that thread, that you are left to
> your own 'devices'.
It may be better never to enter the labyrinth of Sufi teachings at all.
Life is complicated enough, and if Sufism just makes it more so....
And by the way Francesca, I highly doubt there are any children posting
at this newsgroup. Just a bunch of us imperfect and not-very-likely to
be perfect adults.
BEWARE OF THOSE WHO SEEM TO OFFER THE IMPOSSIBLE! (It probably is.)
Jay
thief#37
he made motorcycles too. Eric refers to Mushkil Gusha and just in case this
perplexes anybody may I recommend a search engine (I use Goggle). Ask it,
and of the many versions that it throws up I prefer the Idries Shah account
(natch) because I know from the first-hand and manadated telling of it, that
this is an authentic version.
As an aside and revealing the dynamic that is --- from time to time --- in a
venerable tale like this, in my group (The Association for the Study of
Traditional Teachings) we were expected to go out on Thursday nights, with a
box of dates, and read the story to some unsuspecting victims, this in
accord with the principle of keeping the story alive in the hearts and minds
of men.
By the time you have exhausted --- use that word in both senses! --- all
your friends and going on to any others allowing an ear-bashing, you have to
wonder who else you can inflict it on. It got so difficult that on one
occasion I walked along the length of Dorking High St stopping any
likely-looking muggins and inviting them to meet me at the War Memorial
gardens in South St at 7 pm, sharing some dates with me, and listening to a
story I would relate, duration advised to be 20 minutes.
Had I been dressed in Jesus sandals and hippie clothes with a clothes peg in
my nose and a torchbulb shining from my navel, with long hair and smelling
of garlic, I would probably have been acceptable, in accord with the
expectations of the passer-by, easily labelled and hence as easily
dismissed. But just you try doing it dressed absolutely conventionally and
appearing totally ordinary. You may be interested to know I got my audience,
I got a quiet reception, and I was treated with dignity and a sympathetic
understanding (poor sod, he's off his trolley you know, we'll humour him).
I can also claim, though 'tis my own trumpet I blow, that this took guts,
bottle. It had a certain effect on me.......
So The Story of Mushkil Gusha is (a) preserved and in these communicative
days discoverable on demand and (b) may under some circumstances be told by
prescription and with its inner dynamic intact and unlockable by a teaching
master.
Google is worth interogating for Khidr (pronounced zidder approx), and The
Green Man, as well as Mushkil Gusha (moo-sshh-kill goo-shar). Whether any
interior dynamic is to be had in this way I leave it to you to judge,
friends. This of interest? B+++
jayen466
nt...@btinternet.com> writes
>If you turn the clock back to 1968 there were no more than the usual
>octagonal patterns in British society, commerce, art. Then, in the space
>of 12 months, they were everywhere, in tapestry, fabric designs, even
>Dunlop floor tiles. Like the smiling-sun symbol of more recent date, the
>surfeit of the symbol came seemingly from nowhere. One fabric designer I
>met at Langton at that date told me she was deliberately using it as
>motif in her commercial designs --- and why not, that was the objective
>& intention.
If your interest in Sufi studies dates back to roughly that time, it
seems more likely to me that you simply started noticing more octagons.
It's a bit like the mind filters shown graphically in the Dreamwalkers
programme.
When I agonised over selecting the right paving slabs for a garden
terrace some years ago, I found myself consciously registering the
texture of every pavement I walked on for weeks after ...
I think these 'noticings' of occult connections can be fun, but in the
end they are a perceptual side effect that will become as much a trap as
anything else, if one takes them too seriously. You engage your mind in
something, and bingo - you see echoes of it everywhere.
The other day, I came across a ginger beer drink called 'Idris' - the
can said it had a real kick to it. :-)
A.
Slp
"Jay Vogelsong" <nob...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.164c6b29c...@cnews.newsguy.com...
> Francesca wrote:
> > If you enter a labyrinth, and a golden thread is proffered, do not be
> > surprised, when you refuse to grasp that thread, that you are left to
> > your own 'devices'.
>
> It may be better never to enter the labyrinth of Sufi teachings at all.
> Life is complicated enough, and if Sufism just makes it more so....
>
> And by the way Francesca, I highly doubt there are any children posting
> at this newsgroup. Just a bunch of us imperfect and not-very-likely to
> be perfect adults.
>
adults who are emotionally and/or spiritually immature.
> BEWARE OF THOSE WHO SEEM TO OFFER THE IMPOSSIBLE! (It probably is.)
>
> Jay
Also, Jay, tenacity is an admirable thing in certain endeavors, but to be so
tenacious in what looks like attempting to punish two people from your past
(based on previous postings by you) by "hitting" something entirely
unrelated to them makes you look, well, not so good. Kind of like
attempting to get back at a baker by warning people away from baking itself.
Also, Jay, sufis spend a fair amount of time keeping people out of sufism,
driving them away from it if they are not suitable for it or if sufism is
not suitable for them. If, for some reason, a person cannot be driven away
by more polite means, they will sometimes resort to, speaking
metaphorically, "smacking" them hard and painfully so that they will leave.
I have directed people away from sufism, and so have others on this list.
And other lists. And other places. It is usually not talked about.
Although Idries Shah did mention it in his writings so that people could
have the chance to understand what had happened. Although I am sure that
you noticed it when you read his works.
In your case, Jay, you have more important things to do right now, more
important matters to concentrate upon in your life than sufism. Once you
have done that, come back. I know that there is something within you that
is not done with sufism, that is nascent, waiting to be born, waiting to
experience life, waiting and wanting to experience the Truth. You need to
experience the joys and pleasures of just being a human being first.
Because later, this experience will be necessary for you to know the worth
and balance and nature of others coming to the path. And for you to
maintain your own balance on the path. It is too early for you. You need
those other experiences first. No one wants a premature birth
(metaphorically and spiritually speaking), least of all a sufi.
Respectfully,
Scott
Slp
Sufism can be the emotional and spiritual equivalent of being in the
Marines, in terms of how harsh the training can be, and sufi teachers have a
responsibility to the person desiring to be a sufi to be as certain as
possible that he person can withstand the training without being harmed, and
if the person cannot, to get them to leave sufism.
For many people on the path (though not all), they reach a certain stage
where they go through bouts of strong depression that can last anywhere from
a few hours to in some rare cases, years. If a person already has a
depressive disorder that has not been successfully dealt with, it will be
compounded when they hit that stage. The results can be devastating.
And yes, Idries Shah did write about this in his books. There are more
graphic examples in other books on the topic. For example, Halfway Up the
Mountain by Mariana Caplan, published 1999 by Hohm Press. The sufis, and
others in the mystical fields have been warning people for quite some time.
Let them do their job. Let it drop. You have more important things to do.
peace,
Scott
The Tree
>
>In article <9rs0mv$rau$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com>, thief#37 <uksolentce
>nt...@btinternet.com> writes
>>If you turn the clock back to 1968 there were no more than the usual
>>octagonal patterns in British society, commerce, art. Then, in the space
>>of 12 months, they were everywhere, in tapestry, fabric designs, even
>>Dunlop floor tiles. Like the smiling-sun symbol of more recent date, the
>>surfeit of the symbol came seemingly from nowhere. One fabric designer I
>>met at Langton at that date told me she was deliberately using it as
>>motif in her commercial designs --- and why not, that was the objective
>>& intention.
The Tree Writes:
It's amazing what your search engine can turn up may I suggest Mr 37, that
instead of your crude Google engine you trade up to Vivisimo, type in Octagon
and hey presto, all the octagon you could ever want.
"Some books are to be Tasted, others to be Swallowed,
and Some Few to be Chewed and Digested.That is, some Books are to be read only
in Parts; Others to be read but not Curiously; and some Few to be read Wholly,
and with Diligence and Attention." Francis Bacon
>
>If your interest in Sufi studies dates back to roughly that time, it
>seems more likely to me that you simply started noticing more octagons.
The Tree writes: Yes,Jayen its amazing how this works e.g. after seeing an
Austin Martin DB7, a very rare and expensive car on Top Gear, I saw 4 of them
near my home, 'Now what's the chances of that' Harry Hill
>
>It's a bit like the mind filters shown graphically in the Dreamwalkers
>programme.
>
>When I agonised over selecting the right paving slabs for a garden
>terrace some years ago, I found myself consciously registering the
>texture of every pavement I walked on for weeks after ...
>
>I think these 'noticings' of occult connections can be fun, but in the
>end they are a perceptual side effect that will become as much a trap as
>anything else, if one takes them too seriously. You engage your mind in
>something, and bingo - you see echoes of it everywhere.
>
>The other day, I came across a ginger beer drink called 'Idris' - the
>can said it had a real kick to it. :-)
>
>A.
The Tree writes: (In the Fast Style)
Mmmm ... Hot summers day, down by the river, children play in the water,
buttered tea cakes and cucumber sandwiches, Lashings of Cool Idris Ginger
Beer,....Marvelous..
Good Old Scottish Name that Idris, then again IS's mum was a morningside toff,
well practised in the New town stride.
Did you know that there are many words in Gaelic which are the same in old
persian Daric.
Few people realise that the Drudic (Endemic Sufi orders of Scotland) still
thrive today, such as the Ancient Traquair Order famed for there Strong Ale,
Further North we have the world famous Dervish College
http://www.findhorn.org/college/display.html
and not forgetting the revived order of Chippendale who train people in the high
art of furniture making. http://www.chippendale.co.uk/
Once you start looking there all over you like a rash eh...
Peace the Tree
The Tree
I am a wind across the sea
I am a flood across the plain
I am the roar of the tides
I am a stag* of seven (pair) tines
I am a dewdrop let fall by the sun
I am the fierceness of boars*
I am a hawk, my nest on a cliff
I am a height of poetry (magical skill)
I am the most beautiful among flowers
I am the salmon* of wisdom
Who (but I) is both the tree and the lightning strikes it
Who is the dark secret of the dolmen not yet hewn
I am the queen of every hive
I am the fire on every hill
I am the shield over every head
I am the spear of battle
I am the ninth* wave of eternal return
I am the grave of every vain hope
Who knows the path of the sun, the periods of the moon
Who gathers the divisions, enthralls the sea,
sets in order the mountains. the rivers, the peoples
Peace The Tree
Jay Vogelsong
> Also, Jay, tenacity is an admirable thing in certain endeavors, but to be so
> tenacious in what looks like attempting to punish two people from your past
> (based on previous postings by you) by "hitting" something entirely
> unrelated to them makes you look, well, not so good. Kind of like
> attempting to get back at a baker by warning people away from baking itself.
Your post is depth psychology and retrofitting in action, yet again. If
I were convinced I was as you describe me here (in this post an others),
I would indeed stop posting myself. Heaven knows I have stoppped
posting, on and off, when I stopped having something to say or felt I had
something better to do. But what you do not seem to realize is that I
have a specific slant on Idries Shah's Sufi materials (actually, I have
several) which I think people may be interested in hearing. I may have
been led into looking at Sufism in this different way because of
interactions with some of his students, but I have also been doing a
great deal of my own thinking on the topic. I could just as well have
concluded that they intended for me to learn some big, positive lesson
from them. Unfortunately, the most probable explanation, which I
embraced rather painfully, was different.
Thank you for the opportunity to clarify that, for anyone else who
believes that human awareness is deterministic.
> Also, Jay, sufis spend a fair amount of time keeping people out of sufism,
> driving them away from it if they are not suitable for it or if sufism is
> not suitable for them. If, for some reason, a person cannot be driven away
> by more polite means, they will sometimes resort to, speaking
> metaphorically, "smacking" them hard and painfully so that they will leave.
> I have directed people away from sufism, and so have others on this list.
> And other lists. And other places. It is usually not talked about.
> Although Idries Shah did mention it in his writings so that people could
> have the chance to understand what had happened. Although I am sure that
> you noticed it when you read his works.
I wonder why Sufis can't just say, "I think you are not suited for
Sufism. I recommend you do something else." I guess by manipulating
people, or at least trying to manipulate them, they can make a better
argument that people are deterministic.
> In your case, Jay, you have more important things to do right now, more
> important matters to concentrate upon in your life than sufism. Once you
> have done that, come back. I know that there is something within you that
> is not done with sufism, that is nascent, waiting to be born, waiting to
> experience life, waiting and wanting to experience the Truth. You need to
> experience the joys and pleasures of just being a human being first.
> Because later, this experience will be necessary for you to know the worth
> and balance and nature of others coming to the path. And for you to
> maintain your own balance on the path. It is too early for you. You need
> those other experiences first. No one wants a premature birth
> (metaphorically and spiritually speaking), least of all a sufi.
My dear sir, do you know me? Nothing in your posts suggests you do, and
I have gotten to the point where I am hesitant to offer you more personal
information to refute your "observations" in case you mangle them as
well.
Jay
Martin Edwards
>The Tree writes: (In the Fast Style)
>Mmmm ... Hot summers day, down by the river, children play in the water,
>buttered tea cakes and cucumber sandwiches, Lashings of Cool Idris Ginger
>Beer,....Marvelous..
Remember the advert with the ghastly pun: I like Idris when I's dri?
>
>Did you know that there are many words in Gaelic which are the same in old
>persian Daric.
One of the languages of Afghanistan is still called Dari, though I'm
not sure how close it is to the original.
>Few people realise that the Drudic (Endemic Sufi orders of Scotland) still
>thrive today, such as the Ancient Traquair Order famed for there Strong Ale,
>
Bollocks. Traquair is a privately owned house.
>
>and not forgetting the revived order of Chippendale who train people in the high
>art of furniture making. http://www.chippendale.co.uk/
>
I thought they were chipmunks.
******Martin Edwards.******
Come on! Nobody's gonna drive that lousy freeway
when you can take the Red Car for a nickel.
-Eddy Valiant
thief#37
polarized on something and suddenly they everywhere Just for the giggle of
it I'll mention something along these lines. Wife & self play the car number
game, start at 1 and then sequentially move up, but we insist that we don't
shift to notching next number until both have seen the existing target. We
are making 50 a year and are currently on 719. Strange things happen, you
get stuck, you see dozens of them, or the one above, or below, can go 5
weeks wiuthout the next number, see the next 4 in a single drive, you break
a log jam and more of that number is all over you like a rash. Etc Etc.
But this next really odd. If we have a Q relating to the subject of personal
development and we have an answer but are not sure if we have correct
understanding, we say if the next required number appears really quickly we
are correct; if it does not appear within say the next 50 or 60 adjacent
cars as we drive along we are incorrect. Will you buy the VERY NEXT car?
This has happened so many times it cannot be mere polarization. Perhaps it
is a quantum thing? Like to claim we are not fixated on this, just noticing
it, but we are NOTICING it. Like the feeling, nothing uncomfortable. Verra
interesting. Just a witter apropos of pretty much 'nowt. B+++
James Souttar
thief#37:
> I myself have ignored it --- until now. That may be significant? Idle
> curiosity previously. Guesses might be 4 ways of doing the work
> (emotional/monkish & physical/fakir & intellectual/scholar & a combination
> way). The outer wall is the world? The bezel? The inner stuff is where the
> teaching activity is? That activity has many abrupt turnings, including
> about faces, and a marking-time area. It then goes straight to the heart of
> the matter. (I am reading the design topographically, as a map). Is that a
> valid supposition?
I really appreciated your question, as it's made me pay attention to it. And
although bouncing ideas back and forth in a forum such as this may not exactly
be the royal road to understanding, it's helped me to see some additional
dimensions to it.
One very straightforward one comes directly from what you've said here - which
is the idea of the symbol as a 'bezel' (something that now seems perfectly
obvious, but had previously passed me by). The idea of the bezel is, of course,
a classic Sufi allusion (the prevailing metaphor of Ibn Al-Arabi's 'Fusus
Al-Hikam' - 'fass' being bezel in Arabic). But there is also this really
interesting idea of the 'naqsh' as the 'impress' of the bezel. One of the
things I've only learned recently is that the Naqshbandis were reputed to be
great exponents - and experts - in the use of rebukes, a rebuke being a perfect
example of a bezel being pushed into the soft wax of our beings to make a
permanent 'impression'. On reflection, the carefully judged rebuke seems to
have been one of Shah's great fortes.
> Bruce is not devious, convoluted, trixxy. I was born mid-Taurus (under an
> unaspected sun whatever Jonathan Cainer means by that?) and am just like the
> bull, run on railway lines, above board, simple not complex, too patently
> obvious, etc. So my question meant just what I posted. What truly is the
> reason why IS chose that symbol?
I don't think it's quite as small a world as Francesca paints - I find it hard
to reconcile my experience of people associated with Shah with hers. They could
be reticent, indirect, even oblique - but always straightforward. My impression
was that he was absolutely straightforward - and had little tolerance for
deviousness, games-playing or mystification in others.
> If you turn the clock back to 1968 there were no more than the usual
> octagonal patterns in British society, commerce, art. Then, in the space of
> 12 months, they were everywhere, in tapestry, fabric designs, even Dunlop
> floor tiles. Like the smiling-sun symbol of more recent date, the surfeit of
> the symbol came seemingly from nowhere. One fabric designer I met at Langton
> at that date told me she was deliberately using it as motif in her
> commercial designs --- and why not, that was the objective & intention.
>
> So, again, the Q --- why the octagon? What do we understand from it? And
> does such matter anyway?
For what it's worth, I suspect that it is one of those things that has an
effect directly without needing to be interpreted. I suppose in some ways this
is similar to the way a pattern of events is held in a story - the story
doesn't have to be 'meaningful' for the pattern to help to organize our minds
in subtle ways.
Somewhere Omar Ali-Shah tells a fascinating and hillarious story about getting
a prominent rock star to wear a tee-shirt with a particular diagram that will
help to reinforce an anti-drug message (as I recall it, one of his confederates
rips the star's tee-shirt off, playing the screaming fan, while someone else
offers him this one to wear). I have no idea how this mechanism might work, but
there's something about it that 'rings true'.
James
James Souttar
> I wonder why Sufis can't just say, "I think you are not suited for
> Sufism. I recommend you do something else." I guess by manipulating
> people, or at least trying to manipulate them, they can make a better
> argument that people are deterministic.
The simple reason - which one can see in many areas of life - is that telling
someone they can't have something just makes them want it all the more. Knowing
this, the Sufi would be culpable of further encouraging these people if he or she
told them that they weren't suitable. Instead, the Sufi may behave in a way that
causes applicants to conclude for themselves that they don't want anything to do
with the Sufi. But note that in coming to that conclusion, unsuccessful appicants
are making the choice to listen to the promptings of their conditioning and
supress the quieter voice of their real being (and how could they be taught
anything, if this is their state?)
This is why it is a pernicious distortion to suggest that the Sufis are
'manipulating' people - the Sufi way is about freeing people from what Shah
called 'coercive agencies', not increasing their hold on them. There is always an
element of choice, but one has to learn to be able to see what it is - to
differentiate the quiet voice from the loud, dominant one. Why else do you think
we were all encouraged to read all those books on conditioning and manipulation?
It certainly wasn't to sharpen up our skills as manipulators. There are numerous
stories about this - 'The Glance of Power' from 'Wisdom of the Idiots' comes
immediately to mind.
The Sufis work through 'impressions', not through manipulation. If you've spent
as much time reading Shah as you say you have, you should at least recognize this
distinction. An impression has an effect, yes. But it is not 'deterministic',
because we respond to it according to our capacity to make use of it. If one had
no capacity, it would simply be water off a duck's back. More usually, though,
we'll try to deflect it - perhaps through a wisecrack (as Shah observes) because
the false part of ourselves is resisting it. This is exactly the opposite to
manipulation, which addresses itself to the falsity - to the conditioning - and
seeks to exploit its foibles.
James
William F. Zachmann
on someone or another most Thursday nights for over thirty years now, I do
not merely believe but know, and with certainty, that it is an extraordinary
instrument the reasonable employment of which brings remarkable benefit "to
any need person" (one's own self most explicitly included). Personally, I
was not "mandated" by anyone. Friends who were dinner guests at my house
(apartment, actually, at the time) read the story one Thursday evening back
in 1971. I answered the question "will you repeat the story of Mushkil
Gusha on Thursday nights and help the work of Mushkil Gusha" affirmatively,
not by any verbal declaration to my dinner guests, but simply by telling the
story -- provided a) that I remembered to do so and b) that I was given or
could create an opportunity to do so -- ever since. I expect to continue to
do so.
It is said that he (or she) who tastes, knows. I do not intend, by rambling
on about the numerous experiences that telling the story of Mushkil Gusha
has occasioned for me and for others over the past three decades, to deprive
anyone of the opportunity to taste (and thereby to know) for him/herself the
unbiased experience of the employment of this instrument. Anyone who wants
to do so may choose freely to tell (or read) the story to others on Thursday
nights and to find out for him/herself. I will, however, offer one brief
observation and relate one incident that may be of interest -- possibly even
useful.
The observation is that despite having read and told this story what now
must be thousands of times over three decades, I find there is still more to
learn from it, still aspects of it yet to be explored.
The incident is as follows:
My wife Betty and I have dear friends, a married couple with a seven
(thereabouts, anyway) year old child, who themselves have some difficulties.
She was diagnosed with liver cancer nearly three years ago with a gloomy
prognosis that she would not live more than six months or so. Three years
later she is still alive and reasonably well, however the disease is by no
means in remission. Complicating matters further, relations between the two
of them have been seriously strained by a personal relationship he has had
with another woman, another close friend of all of ours. On a recent
Thursday evening, Betty and I, at a time that he was here in Massachusetts
(his wife an daughter are on the west coast at present and he shuttles back
and forth) told him (again -- for he has heard it before) the story of
Mushkil Gusha. Betty and I were both struck (a word I choose deliberately),
more or less simultaneously, by the following realization: Neither of us
had ever before given even a passing thought to what had happened to the
woodcutter's wife, despite our having been telling the story for rather a
long time (more than 30+ years in my case, 22+ for Betty).
All the best,
will
P.S. If anyone in does in fact have the capacity, whether through prayer or
by any other 'lawful' means, to help our friend to recover her health and to
live a long, healthy, happy, and prosperous life, please do so. We will be
eternally grateful to you.
"thief#37" <uksolen...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9ruf84$t0t$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
Eric Twose
> It may be better never to enter the labyrinth of Sufi teachings at all.
> Life is complicated enough, and if Sufism just makes it more so....
> BEWARE OF THOSE WHO SEEM TO OFFER THE IMPOSSIBLE! (It probably is.)
Forgive me, Jay, but it seems to me, at least, that when LaBerge and
Ornstein showed no interest in your research into Lucid Dreaming and your
authorship your pride took one helluva pounding. I presume that your
expectations were that they would take you seriously and allow you into
their privileged fraternity: a way of you being accepted by those close to
or in the Sufi Tradition?
And now, to me at least, it looks like you're still seething with so much
anger and frustration that you're saying 'sod LaBerge and Ornstein; LaBerge
is a fraud; in fact I'll go the whole hog - beware everybody! The Sufis are
all frauds and are to avoided at all costs!' (in capital letters)
I'm not saying that they're totally blameless, Jay, but can't you see that
you're rationalising and projecting blame?
Best Wishes,
Eric Twose
Janice
says...
>
> "Jay Vogelsong" <nob...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
> news:MPG.164c6b29c...@cnews.newsguy.com...
> > Francesca wrote:
> > > If you enter a labyrinth, and a golden thread is proffered, do not be
> > > surprised, when you refuse to grasp that thread, that you are left to
> > > your own 'devices'.
> >
> > It may be better never to enter the labyrinth of Sufi teachings at all.
> > Life is complicated enough, and if Sufism just makes it more so....
> >
> > And by the way Francesca, I highly doubt there are any children posting
> > at this newsgroup. Just a bunch of us imperfect and not-very-likely to
> > be perfect adults.
> >
> Jay, Francesca was not speaking of physical children. He was speaking of
> adults who are emotionally and/or spiritually immature.
The ever-effervescent Francesca is a he?
Jay did understand the intended meaning of the "children" analogy from
the outset. Really. :)
--
It will be L7 and I'll never get to heaven
if I fill my head with glue.--Paul McCartney
My homepage:
http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/ced.html
The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage:
http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html
The alt.dreams.lucid newsgroup homepage:
http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/home.html
Slp
> Scott wrote:
> > In your case, Jay, you have more important things to do right now, more
> > important matters to concentrate upon in your life than sufism. Once
you
> > have done that, come back. I know that there is something within you
that
> > is not done with sufism, that is nascent, waiting to be born, waiting to
> > experience life, waiting and wanting to experience the Truth. You need
to
> > experience the joys and pleasures of just being a human being first.
> > Because later, this experience will be necessary for you to know the
worth
> > and balance and nature of others coming to the path. And for you to
> > maintain your own balance on the path. It is too early for you. You
need
> > those other experiences first. No one wants a premature birth
> > (metaphorically and spiritually speaking), least of all a sufi.
>
> My dear sir, do you know me? Nothing in your posts suggests you do, and
> I have gotten to the point where I am hesitant to offer you more personal
> information to refute your "observations" in case you mangle them as
> well.
>
> Jay
Jay, I have read enough of your posts to know what of you that you are
presenting to others and to I in this forum.
And as regarding refuting my "observations", you have not managed to do
that, and you have not managed to do much of anything else here as well.
I asked several times for proof of your assertions and claims, you did not
provide any. I believe that others have asked for proof also. All it would
have taken would have been a quote from one of Idries Shah's books that
supported your claim. You provided none.
I suspect that you do not even have any of Idries Shah's books at all, let
alone have read any of them. To "prove" you do all you need to do is to
post a quote from one of his books, with the name of the book and the page
or pages you took it from. Although that would not prove that you had read
it, it would prove that you actually have one of his books in your
possession. I do not think that you can prove that you have any of his
books, let alone have read any of them.
At best, based on your posts, you come across in this forum as a person with
an unhealthy obsession and little or no information or understanding of
sufism other than the names of a few public sufis.
Scott
Slp
"Janice" <not...@not-here.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.164e3a45a...@news.starlinx.com...
> In article <vDJE7.656$FG.2...@news.uswest.net>, scottp...@qwest.not
> says...
> >
> > "Jay Vogelsong" <nob...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.164c6b29c...@cnews.newsguy.com...
> > > Francesca wrote:
> > > > If you enter a labyrinth, and a golden thread is proffered, do not
be
> > > > surprised, when you refuse to grasp that thread, that you are left
to
> > > > your own 'devices'.
> > >
> > > It may be better never to enter the labyrinth of Sufi teachings at
all.
> > > Life is complicated enough, and if Sufism just makes it more so....
> > >
> > > And by the way Francesca, I highly doubt there are any children
posting
> > > at this newsgroup. Just a bunch of us imperfect and not-very-likely
to
> > > be perfect adults.
> > >
> > Jay, Francesca was not speaking of physical children. He was speaking
of
> > adults who are emotionally and/or spiritually immature.
>
> The ever-effervescent Francesca is a he?
To be honest, I do not know. There have historically been some male
Francesca's, if memory serves me correctly.
>
> Jay did understand the intended meaning of the "children" analogy from
> the outset. Really. :)
>
Janice, based on what you have told me about Jay, there seems to be rather a
bit(?) of a gap between what he is intending to do, and how it comes out
when he posts it.
peace,
slp
Janice
says...
> > Jay did understand the intended meaning of the "children" analogy from
> > the outset. Really. :)
>
> Janice, based on what you have told me about Jay, there seems to be rather a
> bit(?) of a gap between what he is intending to do, and how it comes out
> when he posts it.
His unfortunate choice of the word "adversary" in describing a light-
hearted dream incident was certainly an example. However, it takes two
to communicate, so some of the confusions could at least potentially
arise at the reader's end. Usenet has its pluses and minuses as a medium
of communication, among the minuses being that the absence of certain
contextual cues (e.g. tone of voice) and the difficulty of seeking and
providing clarifications when the parties involved aren't engaged in
real-time interaction can lead to major and minor misunderstandings. Jay
is aware of these problems and usually at least tries to communicate
clearly, but even the most carefully aimed words can go awry when they
bounce off the biases of other peoples's various and varied perspectives.
Janice
says...
> I suspect that you do not even have any of Idries Shah's books at all, let
> alone have read any of them. To "prove" you do all you need to do is to
> post a quote from one of his books, with the name of the book and the page
> or pages you took it from. Although that would not prove that you had read
> it, it would prove that you actually have one of his books in your
> possession. I do not think that you can prove that you have any of his
> books, let alone have read any of them.
How curious. For what it's worth, I will testify that Jay has owned a
formidible collection of Sufi study books, that I have seen him reading
at least some of them, and that he has had to persuade me to humor the
contention that it is supposedly advisable, for arcane reasons, to
replace the entire set of Idries Shah titles with fresh copies
periodically. :)
I was asked to submit the following by way of a quote:
THE SEARCH FOR AN HONEST MAN
There always comes a time when instruction-materials which were
originally employed to direct the attention of certain people towards a
certain aim are adopted as "gospel," or else simplified out of all
usefulness and shallowly interpreted.
--from Idries Shah, _Learning How to Learn_ (London: The Octagon Press,
1983 edition, p. 151
Jay Vogelsong
> Jay, I have read enough of your posts to know what of you that you are
> presenting to others and to I in this forum.
And I now have a good idea of how you interpret such, which of course is
not my own interpretation.
> And as regarding refuting my "observations", you have not managed to do
> that, and you have not managed to do much of anything else here as well.
Perhaps, but have you queried all participants?
> I asked several times for proof of your assertions and claims, you did not
> provide any. I believe that others have asked for proof also. All it would
> have taken would have been a quote from one of Idries Shah's books that
> supported your claim. You provided none.
I apologize. I thought you were being merely rhetorical. I was speaking
in generalizations, of course, and thought anyone with a fair familiarity
with Idries Shah's books would be able to pick out passages, from memory,
to which I might be referring in this way. To actually go over all the
specifics I have in mind would be prohibitive. Let's just say that I
find Shah's accounts of Sufis, and even accounts of his own behavior, as
lacking both straightforwardness and proper qualifications in many
specific instances. Another poster has now provided the rationale for
such behavior, and I am again considering it. To this point, I have
obviously not been convinced that such a rationale is justifiable.
Jay Vogelsong
> Forgive me, Jay, but it seems to me, at least, that when LaBerge and
> Ornstein showed no interest in your research into Lucid Dreaming and your
> authorship your pride took one helluva pounding. I presume that your
> expectations were that they would take you seriously and allow you into
> their privileged fraternity: a way of you being accepted by those close to
> or in the Sufi Tradition?
It is not so much that Dr. LaBerge and Dr. Ornstein showed no interest in
our research. Most people are not interested, and I couldn't necessarily
expect them to be interested. I am quite happy with the level of
interest our work has sparked so far, as I am not particularly ambitious
in this regard, being a rather private type in general.
However, up to a point I regarded myself as a functioning member of ISHK,
along with both Dr. LaBerge and Dr. Ornstein, and I saw it as my duty to
point out what I saw as a problem within that organization, which has the
stated intent of research into human psychology. Now that I am no longer
a member of ISHK, I no longer have that conflict to deal with and it is
not so much of an issue.
> And now, to me at least, it looks like you're still seething with so much
> anger and frustration that you're saying 'sod LaBerge and Ornstein; LaBerge
> is a fraud; in fact I'll go the whole hog - beware everybody! The Sufis are
> all frauds and are to avoided at all costs!' (in capital letters)
If you go back over the string of posts which offered the information you
mention, you will see that I by no means dropped my complaints on anyone
in a lump. I offered bits and pieces in response to many specific
questions or implied questions over time. I will perhaps come to regret
being so frank as that even.
What specifically I intended to say was that among the students of
Sufism, and perhaps among Sufis themselves, people are unreasonably
expected to be able to judge others from cues (without proper
investigations in some instances), to respond with lies if it is seen
fit, and to otherwise distort what might be intended as reasonable
communications if they are not considered properly courteous, to me all
signs of a social grouping.
Of course anyone here is entirely free to disagree with my poor
assessment.
> I'm not saying that they're totally blameless, Jay, but can't you see that
> you're rationalising and projecting blame?
I have not claimed I am blameless for the failed communications. I may
be wrong altogether. (Some of the time I think I am either nuts or
damned, and this is largely the reason for my misery over the last
several years.) But unfortunately I must follow my own best
understanding, regardless of where its leads. What else can I really do?
Jay
Jay Vogelsong
> The simple reason - which one can see in many areas of life - is that telling
> someone they can't have something just makes them want it all the more. Knowing
> this, the Sufi would be culpable of further encouraging these people if he or she
> told them that they weren't suitable. Instead, the Sufi may behave in a way that
> causes applicants to conclude for themselves that they don't want anything to do
> with the Sufi. But note that in coming to that conclusion, unsuccessful appicants
> are making the choice to listen to the promptings of their conditioning and
> supress the quieter voice of their real being (and how could they be taught
> anything, if this is their state?)
I have read the above rationale, but it conflicts with my experience.
People vary widely in their potential responses to any given stimulus.
There is no cause and effect necessarily, since even the same person may
vary responses over time, even short periods of time. Sufis therefore
cannot "know" people will always react in any particular manner.
In other words, some people may respect the perspective of the teacher
enough to accept their opinion, among yet other possible responses.
> This is why it is a pernicious distortion to suggest that the Sufis are
> 'manipulating' people - the Sufi way is about freeing people from what Shah
> called 'coercive agencies', not increasing their hold on them. There is always an
> element of choice, but one has to learn to be able to see what it is - to
> differentiate the quiet voice from the loud, dominant one. Why else do you think
> we were all encouraged to read all those books on conditioning and manipulation?
> It certainly wasn't to sharpen up our skills as manipulators. There are numerous
> stories about this - 'The Glance of Power' from 'Wisdom of the Idiots' comes
> immediately to mind.
I very much admire the work both Idries Shah and ISHK have done in
promoting information about coercive agencies. It was not for nothing
that I was involved for so long. However, I am presently of the opinion
that both Idries Shah and ISHK have a mixed record in this regard,
specifically because deceptions are so often used as supposedly effective
teaching techniques.
> The Sufis work through 'impressions', not through manipulation. If you've spent
> as much time reading Shah as you say you have, you should at least recognize this
> distinction. An impression has an effect, yes. But it is not 'deterministic',
> because we respond to it according to our capacity to make use of it. If one had
> no capacity, it would simply be water off a duck's back. More usually, though,
> we'll try to deflect it - perhaps through a wisecrack (as Shah observes) because
> the false part of ourselves is resisting it. This is exactly the opposite to
> manipulation, which addresses itself to the falsity - to the conditioning - and
> seeks to exploit its foibles.
It may very well be that Sufis never hand out the answers, but leave it
to the people who are their students to draw their own conclusions. One
does wonder, however, if when students come up with wildly different
answers, as it were, there are in fact any unified perceptions of the
world being transmitted.
Jay
Slp
> Scott wrote:
> > Jay, I have read enough of your posts to know what of you that you are
> > presenting to others and to I in this forum.
>
> And I now have a good idea of how you interpret such, which of course is
> not my own interpretation.
Jay, it is becoming painfully obvious that how you perceive what you write
here is not the same way it appears to others. The only recourse left in
such a case is to present hard evidence that your perceptions are more
accurate, such as the appropriate quotes.
>
> > And as regarding refuting my "observations", you have not managed to do
> > that, and you have not managed to do much of anything else here as well.
>
> Perhaps, but have you queried all participants?
>
> > I asked several times for proof of your assertions and claims, you did
not
> > provide any. I believe that others have asked for proof also. All it
would
> > have taken would have been a quote from one of Idries Shah's books that
> > supported your claim. You provided none.
>
> I apologize. I thought you were being merely rhetorical. I was speaking
> in generalizations, of course, and thought anyone with a fair familiarity
> with Idries Shah's books would be able to pick out passages, from memory,
> to which I might be referring in this way. To actually go over all the
> specifics I have in mind would be prohibitive. Let's just say that I
> find Shah's accounts of Sufis, and even accounts of his own behavior, as
> lacking both straightforwardness and proper qualifications in many
> specific instances. Another poster has now provided the rationale for
> such behavior, and I am again considering it. To this point, I have
> obviously not been convinced that such a rationale is justifiable.
Jay, I have the same problem, having the majority of books that Idries Shah
published under his own name, and having read many of them more than once.
Except that I find that I cannot pick out passages from memory that support
your assertions. Quite the opposite. The burden of proof, as the accuser
of Idries Shah, is upon you. It does not take pages and pages of quotes
from Idries Shah's books to prove your point or points, it only takes a few.
That is all I was expecting, and I think others in this group would be
interested in seeing even just one quote that supports what you say. If you
can come up with even one good quote that supports your assertions, then I
am sure that it will generate at least some discussion and research and
interest among some of the people here.
Just because it is obvious to you does not mean that it is obvious to anyone
else. And if you wish for people to understand, you need to give them more
to go on than what you have. Give us one quote that supports your
assertions concerning Idries Shah, complete with book and page number. I,
for one, if I have that book, will look it up and ponder it.
peace,
Scott
The Tree
In article <ClPE7.11096$xS6....@www.newsranger.com>, The Tree says...
The Tree
>The Tree writes: (In the Fast Style)
>Mmmm ... Hot summers day, down by the river, children play in the water,
>buttered tea cakes and cucumber sandwiches, Lashings of Cool Idris Ginger
>Beer,....Marvelous..
Remember the advert with the ghastly pun: I like Idris when I's dri?
>
>Did you know that there are many words in Gaelic which are the same in old
>persian Daric.
One of the languages of Afghanistan is still called Dari, though I'm
not sure how close it is to the original.
>Few people realise that the Drudic (Endemic Sufi orders of Scotland) still
>thrive today, such as the Ancient Traquair Order famed for there Strong Ale,
>
Bollocks. Traquair is a privately owned house.
>
>and not forgetting the revived order of Chippendale who train people in the high
>art of furniture making. http://www.chippendale.co.uk/
>
The Tree
In article <9s179h$l3j$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>, thief#37 says...
The Tree
>
>Reposted Reply From Martin Edwards
>>thrive today, such as the Ancient Traquair Order famed for there Strong Ale,
>>
>Bollocks. Traquair is a privately owned house.
The Tree Writes: Since when did the nature of a buildings ownership determine
its function. I seem to remember a house owned by J.G.Bennett.
Surely Martin You could say more than this?
Here is a new axiom for you, Sift and you shall find, it is easy to find things
to disagree with, but what can you find of value?.
'Created between 1700 and 1740, the Library has a collection of about 3000 books
and has remained almost intact since it was first formed.
The portraits of philosophers and poets around the ceiling are used for
cataloguing the books.'
>>
>>and not forgetting the revived order of Chippendale who train people in the high
>>art of furniture making. http://www.chippendale.co.uk/
>>
>I thought they were chipmunks.
>
>
>******Martin Edwards.******
>
>Come on! Nobody's gonna drive that lousy freeway
>when you can take the Red Car for a nickel.
>
>-Eddy Valiant
Perhaps if you when foot Kadam ba Kadam you may do better.
Kind Regards The Tree
>
>
The Tree
>
>Reposted Reply from 37th Thief
>
>In article <9s179h$l3j$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>, thief#37 says...
>>
>>Tree --- thanx and following thru on yr advices.
>>But this next really odd. If we have a Q relating to the subject of personal
>>development and we have an answer but are not sure if we have correct
>>understanding, we say if the next required number appears really quickly we
>>are correct; if it does not appear within say the next 50 or 60 adjacent
>>cars as we drive along we are incorrect. Will you buy the VERY NEXT car?
>>This has happened so many times it cannot be mere polarization. Perhaps it
>>is a quantum thing? Like to claim we are not fixated on this, just noticing
>>it, but we are NOTICING it. Like the feeling, nothing uncomfortable. Verra
>>interesting. Just a witter apropos of pretty much 'nowt. B+++
Do you have to buy the car at all, if there is a certain experience which is
made available and is not farmiliar, I suppose one naturally questions its
validity, now there are many things happening within the body which we are not
aware of most the time, obsorbtion of nutrients etc, but we except this is the
case and it is harmonized within us or we could say made natural. Of course I
don't need to tell you this.
Ukufi Adadi Perhaps?
Then we are moving on to stopping and seeing car 5 (Neegar Dashtan) & 6 (Yad
Dashtan)
There is also Adab
1) . . . the courtesy and mutual-respect of wayfarers; and
2) . . . the readiness, willingness, and ableness to respond to subtle
offerrings through the sharing of "the demanding memory that comes upon you of
itself" . . . recognitions of patterns that impinge upon consciousness even
though the connecting factor remains for the moment unknown and elusive like a
fish in murky water.
quantum thing?
As Zathros would say "Cannot say, Knowing I would say, not knowing cannot say"
>>
Warm Regards The Tree
Jay Vogelsong
> Jay, it is becoming painfully obvious that how you perceive what you write
> here is not the same way it appears to others. The only recourse left in
> such a case is to present hard evidence that your perceptions are more
> accurate, such as the appropriate quotes.
I will provide you with examples from memory, from Idries Shah's writings
and from accounts of Shah's interactions, of what I had in mind. Now,
were we referring to assertions piled on assertions or to the use of
deceptions as supposedly valid teaching methods? Sorry, but I've become
rather confused after so much back and forth.
Jay
Jay Vogelsong
several posts at this newsgroup will have much of an effect on anyone.
To begin with, I just wanted to add my two cents worth. I keep intending
to walk away from it all, but I keep deciding to add another post or two,
as people ask questions or show they misunderstood what I already posted.
And then, of course, I end up continuing to participate. At least that's
the way I see it (no vendetta at all to speak of).
Of course, the last post to Francesca was probably at least one
exception, where it seems I did go too far.
Jay
francesca_trb
I do not mean to be rude, but I find it hard to believe that one who
claims to be able to recognise what the '2nd domain' entails, and who
was also involved with Idires Shah and J.G.Bennett et al, would have
so little information relating to the Octagon in its many guises and
what it represents. I also find it hard to believe that you could have
'ignored' it for so long. I would have thought that you and your
colleagues would have been tripping over it on a daily basis.
>
> And does such matter anyway? B+++
Yes, the Octagon is the most important symbol you will ever encounter.
That said. Do you still need further information or leads?
Regards,
francesca_trb
I do not mean to be rude, but I find it hard to believe that one who
claims to be able to recognise what the '2nd domain' entails, and who
was also involved with Idries Shah and J.G.Bennett et al, would have
francesca_trb
france...@my-deja.com
wrote:
Dear James,
>
>I don't think it's quite as small a world as Francesca paints - I find it hard
>to reconcile my experience of people associated with Shah with hers. They could
>be reticent, indirect, even oblique - but always straightforward. My impression
>was that he was absolutely straightforward - and had little tolerance for
>deviousness, games-playing or mystification in others.
There are many ways to interpret some of Idries Shah's actions.
However, on this we must now agree to disagree, for it is well outside
the bounds of public domain speak.
Regards,
france...@my-deja.com
francesca_trb
> It may be better never to enter the labyrinth of Sufi teachings at all.
> Life is complicated enough, and if Sufism just makes it more so....
>
I'm sorry, but it's a little late for not entering, by the looks of
things you are well and truly entrenched.
> And by the way Francesca, I highly doubt there are any children posting
> at this newsgroup. Just a bunch of us imperfect and not-very-likely to
> be perfect adults.
Ahhh, Jay, are you not perfect as you are?
Did we not create thee for a purpose!
Let's leave that one bubbling away for a while, shall we.
Peace,
france...@my-deja.com
Friends,
Here's the retrofit:
Apologies to all if this post appears multiple times. No, before you
ask, it is not a Sufi trick :-)
There was a slight technical hitch as I posted. Just thought I'd clear
that one up, before some start looking for hidden meanings e.g. the
number of times the post appears, the number of letters in the post,
the number of full stops, the fact that the first line as 17 words
which adds to 8, the second has 13 words which add to 4,
Peace....
James Souttar
Jay:
> I have read the above rationale, but it conflicts with my experience.
>
> People vary widely in their potential responses to any given stimulus.
> There is no cause and effect necessarily, since even the same person may
> vary responses over time, even short periods of time. Sufis therefore
> cannot "know" people will always react in any particular manner.
>
> In other words, some people may respect the perspective of the teacher
> enough to accept their opinion, among yet other possible responses.
I'd agree with you here - using our everyday faculties of observation, reflection and
analysis, it would be quite impossible to be able to judge the reactions someone might
have to a particular stimulus. But isn't that the point? The Sufis claim that the
teacher uses a different, 'higher' form of cognition to understand what action or
interaction is required - and that, in a Sufi sense, ordinary 'knowledge' is
incompetent in this respect. This is not a one-dimensional, directive interaction - of
the kind that would be prompted by ratiocination - but a manifold, with an almost
'organic' holism in the way that it embraces the various participants and the whole
range of repercussions it can have for them and their understanding.
Nobody is demanding you accept the existence of this kind of perception. But if one
wants to test this assertion for oneself, there is only one way, summarized in the
statement 's/he who tastes, knows'.
> I very much admire the work both Idries Shah and ISHK have done in
> promoting information about coercive agencies. It was not for nothing
> that I was involved for so long. However, I am presently of the opinion
> that both Idries Shah and ISHK have a mixed record in this regard,
> specifically because deceptions are so often used as supposedly effective
> teaching techniques.
ISHK undoubtedly does good and important work through their numerous activities - and
thank God someone is doing this work! However, I think one should be wary of equating
Shah and ISHK - ISHK was undoubtedly mandated by Shah, and while he was alive operated
under his direction. But one shouldn't necessarily lay the faults of the channel at
the feet of person whose work it serves.
> It may very well be that Sufis never hand out the answers, but leave it
> to the people who are their students to draw their own conclusions. One
> does wonder, however, if when students come up with wildly different
> answers, as it were, there are in fact any unified perceptions of the
> world being transmitted.
Who says that the Sufis never hand out answers? As Rumi's (and. for that matter,
Shah's) epitaph says: 'Do not look at my outward form, but take what is in my hand.'
If we have chosen to look to the outward form because that's where we expect the
'answers' should be, but have failed to take what is held out to us, can we reasonably
blame them? (Especially when they could hardly have spelled it out more clearly).
James
Jay Vogelsong
> Ahhh, Jay, are you not perfect as you are?
I would not claim I was perfect or did not make mistakes. In fact, it
seems to me I have been admitting one of my biggest mistakes ever was to
spend so much time studying Idries Shah's books, hoping to become a
better person because of it. I now think I would have been more
effective by concentrating my efforts elsewhere, but that's just my
opinion. I may be a hopeless case regardless, or humans in general may
not be able to improve beyond certain limitations in general.
I am now much less likely to believe people when they offer me some means
to improve on my basic, all-too-human situation. It is now clear to me
there is a very big difference between being able to clearly point out
and even explain human failings and being able to provide some method or
methods to get beyond them.
> Did we not create thee for a purpose!
I wish you had put quotes around this.
> Let's leave that one bubbling away for a while, shall we.
No need to, really. I've already put my time in on such ideas.
Jay
Martin Edwards
>
>'Created between 1700 and 1740, the Library has a collection of about 3000 books
>and has remained almost intact since it was first formed.
>The portraits of philosophers and poets around the ceiling are used for
>cataloguing the books.'
>
order.
Jay Vogelsong
> I'd agree with you here - using our everyday faculties of observation, reflection and
> analysis, it would be quite impossible to be able to judge the reactions someone might
> have to a particular stimulus. But isn't that the point? The Sufis claim that the
> teacher uses a different, 'higher' form of cognition to understand what action or
> interaction is required - and that, in a Sufi sense, ordinary 'knowledge' is
> incompetent in this respect. This is not a one-dimensional, directive interaction - of
> the kind that would be prompted by ratiocination - but a manifold, with an almost
> 'organic' holism in the way that it embraces the various participants and the whole
> range of repercussions it can have for them and their understanding.
>
> Nobody is demanding you accept the existence of this kind of perception. But if one
> wants to test this assertion for oneself, there is only one way, summarized in the
> statement 's/he who tastes, knows'.
I am aware that this is the theory.
> ISHK undoubtedly does good and important work through their numerous activities - and
> thank God someone is doing this work! However, I think one should be wary of equating
> Shah and ISHK - ISHK was undoubtedly mandated by Shah, and while he was alive operated
> under his direction. But one shouldn't necessarily lay the faults of the channel at
> the feet of person whose work it serves.
Idries Shah did seem to have a way of shrugging off any confusions he may
have inspired. As someone who was once something of a perfectionist
myself, I can relate to that kind of behavior.
If none of Shah's students, even the best placed, came up to his
standards, was his teaching system as effective as it claimed to be? And
if the majority of the people who studied his works only became
suggestible believers as a result, what good are any amount of
"safeguards" or denials built into his works? (I am of course assuming
that most, perhaps all, people who studied his works were not able to
verify his claims of extra knowledge and extra perceptions.)
> Who says that the Sufis never hand out answers? As Rumi's (and. for that matter,
> Shah's) epitaph says: 'Do not look at my outward form, but take what is in my hand.'
> If we have chosen to look to the outward form because that's where we expect the
> 'answers' should be, but have failed to take what is held out to us, can we reasonably
> blame them? (Especially when they could hardly have spelled it out more clearly).
The saying "Do not look at my outward form, but take what is in my hand"
now reminds me of the quote from The Wizard Of Oz, "Pay no attention to
the man behind the curtain."
Jay
Jay Vogelsong
> > Nobody is demanding you accept the existence of this kind of perception. But if one
> > wants to test this assertion for oneself, there is only one way, summarized in the
> > statement 's/he who tastes, knows'.
I should add that I once thought I tasted something like verification,
but was apparently mistaken. I now would no longer trust myself in this
regard.
Jay
James Souttar
Jay :
> Idries Shah did seem to have a way of shrugging off any confusions he may
> have inspired. As someone who was once something of a perfectionist
> myself, I can relate to that kind of behavior.
He struck me as someone who took more than usual responsibility for his actions - but at a
certain point, there is surely only so much he could be expected to do? If people insisted
on making incompetent interpretations of his books - despite all his attempts - or
continued to behave badly towards others in situations he had set up - depite a clear ethos
to the contrary - shouldn't they be expected to have culpability in the matter?
> If none of Shah's students, even the best placed, came up to his
> standards, was his teaching system as effective as it claimed to be? And
> if the majority of the people who studied his works only became
> suggestible believers as a result, what good are any amount of
> "safeguards" or denials built into his works? (I am of course assuming
> that most, perhaps all, people who studied his works were not able to
> verify his claims of extra knowledge and extra perceptions.)
Is it the case that none of his students ever came up to his standards? I've no idea. Maybe
it's naive, but I'd like to hope that one day I might be able to live up to his standards.
I'd certainly rather aspire to something so apparently lofty, and difficult to attain, than
to feel smug in the knowledge that I'd met the dubious requirements of some of shabby
modern ideologies that are proffered to us as 'values to live by'.
No doubt, you'll also be familiar with the 'theory' of preparing oneself to jump much
further than one may actually have to jump.
> The saying "Do not look at my outward form, but take what is in my hand"
> now reminds me of the quote from The Wizard Of Oz, "Pay no attention to
> the man behind the curtain."
And sometimes this can feel like 'following the yellow brick road'. If you think you're too
smart, or sensible or important to go chasing after silly dreams like the Wild Witch of the
West, in the company of tin men and heartless lions, perhaps you should just leave us poor
misguided fools to it?
James
Slp
How about the use of deceptions as supposedly valid teaching methods?
Scott
Slp
"Janice" <not...@not-here.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.164e50318...@news.starlinx.com...
> In article <BV_E7.103$tZ1.2...@news.uswest.net>, scottp...@qwest.not
> says...
> >
> > "Janice" <not...@not-here.net> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.164e3a45a...@news.starlinx.com...
>
> > > Jay did understand the intended meaning of the "children" analogy from
> > > the outset. Really. :)
> >
> > Janice, based on what you have told me about Jay, there seems to be
rather a
> > bit(?) of a gap between what he is intending to do, and how it comes out
> > when he posts it.
>
> His unfortunate choice of the word "adversary" in describing a light-
> hearted dream incident was certainly an example. However, it takes two
> to communicate, so some of the confusions could at least potentially
> arise at the reader's end. Usenet has its pluses and minuses as a medium
> of communication, among the minuses being that the absence of certain
> contextual cues (e.g. tone of voice) and the difficulty of seeking and
> providing clarifications when the parties involved aren't engaged in
> real-time interaction can lead to major and minor misunderstandings. Jay
> is aware of these problems and usually at least tries to communicate
> clearly, but even the most carefully aimed words can go awry when they
> bounce off the biases of other peoples's various and varied perspectives.
>
And even the most carefully aimed words can can go awry because because they
first bounce off the initiator's biases and varied perspectives that he/she
is taking for granted.
It works both ways.
peace,
slp
> --
>
> It will be L7 and I'll never get to heaven
> if I fill my head with glue.--Paul McCartney
>
> My homepage:
> http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/ced.html
>
> The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage:
> http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html
>
> The alt.dreams.lucid newsgroup homepage:
> http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/home.html
Janice
Slp
A true story --
Years back, a man went to a training seminar on hypnosis. During the
training the students practiced on each other. Part way through this man
claimed that he could not be hypnotized. The teachers were intrigued, as
they observed him going into a hypnotic state when it was his turn to by
hypnotized by the other students in the course of their practicing upon each
other. They questioned him at length about it, he said nothing happened,
that he had been fully alert and was not in any hypnotic state. He was
quite adamant about it. So they hypnotized him again, with his permission,
putting him into a deep hypnotic trance. They verified that he was indeed
in a trance and not faking. Then they brought him out of the trance. The
man denied that he had been in a trance at all, that they were just lying to
him. So, with his permission, they videotaped him while they put him into a
deep hypnotic trance, running some very obvious tests so that he could see
the proof on the videotape himself. They brought him out of the trance,
then played back the videotape. He fell asleep when they started the
videotape. He woke up when they shut if off. They started the tape again
to prove to him that he had been in a hypnotic trance. He promptly fell
asleep again, and slept all the way through the videotape until it was over,
and then he promptly woke up. He claimed that he had not been in a hypnotic
trance, and that they hadn't proved it either. He became quite angry about
it.
I do not remember if he claimed that they were being deceitful and
dishonest.
Slp
The Tree
>
>
>>
>>'Created between 1700 and 1740, the Library has a collection of about 3000 books
>>and has remained almost intact since it was first formed.
>>The portraits of philosophers and poets around the ceiling are used for
>>cataloguing the books.'
>>
>I daresay, but the Strong Ale is made by the owner. There isn't any
>order.
In article <3be56984...@news.btinternet.com>, Martin Edwards says...
>
>
>>
>>'Created between 1700 and 1740, the Library has a collection of about 3000 books
>>and has remained almost intact since it was first formed.
>>The portraits of philosophers and poets around the ceiling are used for
>>cataloguing the books.'
>>
>I daresay, but the Strong Ale is made by the owner. There isn't any
>order.
The Tree writes: The owner must be a busy man/woman,
Reagari: Stupidity is to look for something in a place where untutored
imagination expects to find it. It is, in fact, everywhere that you can extract
it.
Sofar you have extracted that there is no order, which is by no means certain as
you would have no way of knowing. Refer back to the original message, what I
have offered is a small and very simple excercise in sifting the wheat from the
chaff the ones contained in books such as People of the Secret etc are much more
refined but work on the same principles.
It has to do with Perception and Descrimination, with Inclusion and Exclusion,
with Invitation and Deflection, with Scatter and Retrieval.
Within a valid projection, there is the need to separate the wheat from the
chaff. Each 'Seeker' must attempt to do so, and each Mentor and Order must do
so. One of the ways this is accomplished is through such devices as the
aforementioned text.
If you refer back to the original post you will see it includes instructions,
did you use them?
Regards The Tree
francesca_trb
> > Did we not create thee for a purpose!
>
> I wish you had put quotes around this.
>
Why should I have put quotes around it?
F,
Martin Edwards
wrote:
>In article <3be56984...@news.btinternet.com>, Martin Edwards says...
>>
>>
>>>
>>>'Created between 1700 and 1740, the Library has a collection of about 3000 books
>>>and has remained almost intact since it was first formed.
>>>The portraits of philosophers and poets around the ceiling are used for
>>>cataloguing the books.'
>>>
>>I daresay, but the Strong Ale is made by the owner. There isn't any
>>order.
>
>In article <3be56984...@news.btinternet.com>, Martin Edwards says...
>>
>>
>>>
>>>'Created between 1700 and 1740, the Library has a collection of about 3000 books
>>>and has remained almost intact since it was first formed.
>>>The portraits of philosophers and poets around the ceiling are used for
>>>cataloguing the books.'
>>>
>>I daresay, but the Strong Ale is made by the owner. There isn't any
>>order.
>
>The Tree writes: The owner must be a busy man/woman,
>
People working for the owner.
Jay Vogelsong
> > > Did we not create thee for a purpose!
Jay wrote:
> > I wish you had put quotes around this.
Francesca wrote:
> Why should I have put quotes around it?
I was just being picky. Without quotes one could interpret it to mean
that you, or even Sufis or their students, created me for some purpose.
In reality, only God could say truthfully say this, and it is certainly a
quote from the Qur'an with that original meaning.
francesca_trb
> quote from the Qur'an with that original meaning.
Is that an assertion?
eswiz
>
>At least one contributor on this topic was kind to me! Doubtless you all
>were anyway? For the record may the person (me) who started the thread
>re-affirm that my question was meant to be taken at face value. I do not
>repeat not know what the octagonal symbol on the cover of Tales of the
>Dervishes etc is supposed to denote. I have never seen it discussed and
>wonder why it is ignored.
>
>I myself have ignored it --- until now. That may be significant? Idle
>curiosity previously. Guesses might be 4 ways of doing the work
>(emotional/monkish & physical/fakir & intellectual/scholar & a combination
>way). The outer wall is the world? The bezel? The inner stuff is where the
>teaching activity is? That activity has many abrupt turnings, including
>about faces, and a marking-time area. It then goes straight to the heart of
>the matter. (I am reading the design topographically, as a map). Is that a
>valid supposition?
>
>Bruce is not devious, convoluted, trixxy. I was born mid-Taurus (under an
>unaspected sun whatever Jonathan Cainer means by that?) and am just like the
>bull, run on railway lines, above board, simple not complex, too patently
>obvious, etc. So my question meant just what I posted. What truly is the
>reason why IS chose that symbol?
>
>If you turn the clock back to 1968 there were no more than the usual
>octagonal patterns in British society, commerce, art. Then, in the space of
>12 months, they were everywhere, in tapestry, fabric designs, even Dunlop
>floor tiles. Like the smiling-sun symbol of more recent date, the surfeit of
>the symbol came seemingly from nowhere. One fabric designer I met at Langton
>at that date told me she was deliberately using it as motif in her
>commercial designs --- and why not, that was the objective & intention.
>
>So, again, the Q --- why the octagon? What do we understand from it? And
>does such matter anyway? B+++
>
>
Examine the following representation:
4 9 2
3 5 7
8 1 6
This is termed a magical square of order 3. It is comprised of the first
nine numbers arranged in a pattern that anyway you add it, up, down or
diagonal, sums up to 15. This is one of four ways to look at it.
See it as a distribution of qualitative energies circulating or progressing
around a stabilized core. It is an arrangement or organization. This
'Design' is the basis for the floor plan of the Chinese Ming Tang "Hall of
Enlightenment", the Eqyptian Temple Luxor the basis of the I Ching and
the Chinese art of placement Feng Shui.
In 'Classical' alchemy, this 'square' is given the designation 'lead' and
identified with the planet Saturn. The alchemist in order to produce gold
must start with lead. Lead in this sense represents a unified pattern, a
catalyst or a seed, something that 'contains', provokes and harmonizes its
opposite.
Utilizing it as a map of musical chord progression, picture the eight exterior
numbers around the inner number 5 as doorways, or key notes.
Entering the pattern at any exterior point allows one to proceed to any
adjacent number. There is only one way in. Once entered, the even numbers
at the corners allow for 3 different choices, the odd numbers (1,3,7,9)
allow 5 different choices and the number five in the middle of the square
allows for 8 different choices of progression. Five (musical fifth) is the
dominant within a musical scale and gives the music the required tension
in order to produce movement. The other notes 'circulate' around the five.
The magic square was also utilized as a talisman in connection with
childbirth. Parallels are constantly drawn in Hermetic writings between
the embryological development and birth of a child, and the production of
the Elixir.
Katya Walter in her book " Tao of Chaos", investigates the use of
the 9 magic square in the creation of the I Ching hexagrams and the
relationship of the two major maps of the I Ching. (the Ho Tu and the Lo Shu).
Walter then shows the isomorphic identity of the genetic code and
its representation in the Old family and New family forms of the I Ching,
equating the roles that RNA and DNA play with the dynamic, transcribing
aspect (Lo Shu) and the static, master plan (Ho Tu) forms of the Chinese
Oracle.
The genetic code is translated into being by the four base nucleotides,
Uracil, Cytosine, Guanine, and Adenine.-- for short U, C, G, and A. These
bases are grouped into any combo of triplets called codons. Each codon
spells out an amino acid. All together there are 64 codons. Codons are
then arranged in 'strings', which connect into 'sentences' of protein.
All life is made of these strings of materialized code.
This analinear process of understanding corresponds with recent studies done
in co chaos, but...
that's another story.
E
For those interested, additional info at
http://members.aol.com/eswiz/Jabir.html
Ian Perry
> In article <9rs0mv$rau$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com>, thief#37 says...
> >I myself have ignored it --- until now. That may be significant? Idle
> >curiosity previously. Guesses might be 4 ways of doing the work
> >(emotional/monkish & physical/fakir & intellectual/scholar & a combination
> >way). The outer wall is the world? The bezel? The inner stuff is where the
> >teaching activity is? That activity has many abrupt turnings, including
> >about faces, and a marking-time area. It then goes straight to the heart of
> >the matter. (I am reading the design topographically, as a map). Is that a
> >valid supposition?
Could it be a two dimensional representation of a multi-dimensional
system, i.e. Sanai's "The Walled Garden of Truth"?