Boldfaced falsehood of Idries Shah
Rand
instrumental in my early formation. I discovered his name through
Robert Anton Wilson and proceeded to devour all 22 of the recommended
books on the booklist Shah's "Institute for Sufi Studies" sends you if
you write to the address in the back of his books asking for more
information. I still like to recommend his books to people, and have
an immense gratitude for the ways he opened my mind and made a bridge
for me to reach to an area I may not have otherwise been able to
reach.
This being said... Shah's claim to be a Naqshbandi Grandshaykh appears
categorically false. There are exactly 40 Naqshbandi Grandshaykhs ever
in existance, and unless one of them assumed the physical form and
identity of Idries Shah, which seems farfetched, then Shah was simply
lying. The only other possibility is that Shah was, in reality, Khidr,
who was the 10th Naqshbandi Grandshaykh. Even if this were the case,
his claim to be the Sahib uz-Zaman, the Master or Teacher of the Time,
could not have been true, as the Sahib uz-Zaman at the time Shah was
writing was openly known to be (and continues to be) Nazim al-Kibrisi.
Here are some Shah quotes I found online about tariqat. While it's
possible to read alternate interpretations deep between the lines,
even it were the case that Shah was trying to say something other than
what he appeared to be saying, speaking in this way could serve no
purpose except to intentionally mislead people. But the far more
likely alternative seems that he was simply against tarikat:
Excerpted from The Commanding Self:
"The deluded ‘Sufis', down the centuries, are those who have taken
temporary
teaching situations, parables and the like and stretched them to apply
as
perennial ‘truths', ‘exercises' and the like." "Among the Sufis, the
development of ‘Orders' (turuq) gives us a conspicuous example of the
process which I have been describing. Of all the major ‘Paths' among
the
supposed Sufis of today, not a single one is traceable in its
foundation to
the man who is named as its founder. Each came into being only after
his
death, formulated from some of his specific teachings employed for
local
purposes, and soon turned into a cult." "Follow them and you will
produce,
perhaps, an excellent replica of a thirteenth-century man, and that is
all."
And from Sufi Thought and Action:
"As a general rule, the less the spiritual content, the greater the
appurtenances. Tall hats, robes, and music; secretiveness and
high-flown
titles are very common. Whole orders are sustained on these
nutrients."
"Several groups make much of their Islamic connections, and their
Western
followers delight in adopting Eastern names and even titles. Among
these the
favorites are Sheikh, Pir, Qutub……"
"Transvestism, dressing up in clothes not of the period or of the
country
where the individual lives or operates, is regarded as a further
example of
the declining or impaired tradition." "…outlandish garb is imitative
of the
past -- something which truly representative Sufis warn is an
indication of
inner spiritual bankruptcy."
"A large number of ‘orders' make much play of their ‘spiritual
pedigree.'
Since the late Middle Ages, these silsilahs…have become a part of the
mythology of virtually all the orders." "History shows that this
innovation
in Sufism came about in imitation of the scholastic habit of invoking
higher
authority in a succession of transmitters, for the hadith…."
"Real Sufi ‘missionaries' always speak the language of the country in
which
they are working perfectly. The accented tones of the adventurers
generally
give them away."
This is all either boldfaced falsehood or disinformation.
Fried Jack Morgan
> Let me first say that I loved Idries Shah and that he was profoundly
> instrumental in my early formation. I discovered his name through
> Robert Anton Wilson and proceeded to devour all 22 of the recommended
> books on the booklist Shah's "Institute for Sufi Studies" sends you if
> you write to the address in the back of his books asking for more
> information. I still like to recommend his books to people, and have
> an immense gratitude for the ways he opened my mind and made a bridge
> for me to reach to an area I may not have otherwise been able to
> reach.
>
> This being said... Shah's claim to be a Naqshbandi Grandshaykh appears
> categorically false. There are exactly 40 Naqshbandi Grandshaykhs ever
> in existance, and unless one of them assumed the physical form and
> identity of Idries Shah, which seems farfetched, then Shah was simply
> lying. The only other possibility is that Shah was, in reality, Khidr,
> who was the 10th Naqshbandi Grandshaykh. Even if this were the case,
> his claim to be the Sahib uz-Zaman, the Master or Teacher of the Time,
> could not have been true, as the Sahib uz-Zaman at the time Shah was
> writing was openly known to be (and continues to be) Nazim al-Kibrisi.
The Haqqani Naqshbandi tarikat that you are referring to is not the only
Naqshbandi tarikat. There are quite a few of them, but the Haqqani are
only the most visible and public. They also keep their own silsillas
and do not keep the silsillas of others. The Naqshbandi tarikats in
India, for example, are not headed by Sheikh Nazim, but have their own
head of the tarikat. As an example do a Google search on the
Naqshbandiyya-Mujaddidiyya.
The idea that the sufi tariqas are highly organized by Western standards
is false.
You should also be aware that there have been more than one sufi teacher
with the name of "Khidr" and there are also middle Eastern males with
the name of "Khidr" even today.
You are searching through the wrong group of Naqshbandiyya.
You are incorrect. There are quite a few sufi orders that have
disappeared from this planet over the centuries. Idries Shah is showing
how to spot those that are on their way out.
What confuses many Westerners is that a number of Middle Eastern sufis
have extended their teachings to the West, but NOT FOR WESTERNERS. They
are doing it for those Easterners that have emigrated or work in the
West. And others are there only for Muslims, not non-Muslims. Many
members of the Haqqani Naqshbandiyya get upset with Idries Shahs words
on this matter, but as a matter of fact, in one of his books Idries
Shah names the tariqats that have lost their developmental capacity, and
the Naqshbandiyya are not one of them. And since there are multiple
tariqats with the same names, it still is not certain which ones of
those he is referring to, as the developmental power of a tariqat is
dependent upon the living teacher in question.
The actual silsilla of a functional tariqa is the the teachers, living
and dead, who have taught the living teacher in that tariqa, not the
succession of historical names.
And since when does the Haqqani Naqshbandiyya dress up in outlandish
garb? And for that matter, in many large cities in the U.S. and Europe,
native Western dress has now come to include a variety of robes and
clothing, not just Western business suits, although at this point I am
unaware of any sufi teachers who wear hip-hop or gangsta style clothing,
which is a native clothing in the U.S., at least.
Peter
Hello Rand,
There is much garbage out there, in written form or otherwise, and
Shah was a great exception.
Let's take what we can learn from him and leave non-essentials aside.
Regards,
Peter
Rand
afternoon, and trying to come up with some other explanation for these
statements that doesn’t require Shah to be a liar or a charlatan. I
can’t overemphasize the importance of how he taught me to think more
clearly and in ways totally new to me, and how much he helped me
bridge the gap between “there” and “here”… and I feel guilty speaking
against him now, because at a certain point he was a teacher to me and
a good one, a perfect one for where I was then. So the only
explanation I can come up with is that he was purposefully making
false or misleading statements so that when you were able to realize
they were false, you would have already reached to the next level and
would need at that point to stop relying on his books for instruction
and guidance and start relying on the real Sahib uz Zaman and the real
tarikat you should have discovered. It’s not the obvious explanation
but it’s an explanation that gives Shah the benefit of the doubt. I
loved him very much and I’ll choose to believe he knew what he was
doing, even if his books are not appropriate sources of instruction
for where I am now.
Dara
> You are searching through the wrong group of Naqshbandiyya.
Salaam
You sound very familiar have we met?
Welcome back
--DARA
Fried Jack Morgan
Dear Rand,
Someone once said that every Arabic word has 4 meanings -- the thing
itself, it's opposite, a part of a camel, and a curse.
As Idries Shah has noted, and others have found out, sufi writings and
spoken words, and indeed their actions can be taken at least two, if not
more, ways, and it is up to the reader/hearer/observer to avoid taking
the first meaning or intention that comes to mind, and considering it
without emotion and considering what knowledge one has and what
knowledge one lacks.
Most Westerners can go a lot farther understanding the writings of
Idries Shah and other sufis by finding out by being consciously aware of
precisely what knowledge they lack with respect to what they
read/hear/observe. You will note that the majority of us here in
alt.sufi fail in this respect, as difficult as that may be for some here
to admit.
To approach any sufi writings from the point of view that it is either
true or false is to approach it wrongly. Rather, one *could* start by
trying to understand or discover under what circumstances what is
written/heard/observed is true and under what circumstances it is false.
A number of Nasruddin stories and other sufi stories presented by
Idries Shah deal with this matter of how to approach sufi materials,
among other things. A number of Nasruddin stories deal with basic
attitudes and awarenesses, both correct and incorrect, that can be
adopted towards sufi materials. You will also observe that a majority
of us here in alt.sufi fail in these respects also, again there are
those here who may find this impossible to admit, although hopefully
they will realize that no one here is asking them to admit that. If
anyone posts a reply denying that assertion with respect to themselves,
you will have yourself a little indication of just how well some people
here can read, which is an indication of just how good their approach is
to sufi studies.
Rand C. Smith
Alot of what I've made known here has already been said before, elsewhere, and
in other times. Nothing new in what I've said. Still though, these words
needed to get carried again, to this place of kinder understanding which, under
normal circumstances, would not find their way on their own.
Rand C. Smith
I thank you again for all the information you've provided. The issue had
hounded myself and others for a while, and really needed reconciliation.
I will alter my approach to the materials in the manner you've described and
note for the changes in inner states.
Kind thanks,
Randy
Rand C. Smith
Hello Peter,
As it happens, I'm not quite sure how to tell the garbage apart from the
valuable quite yet, and the few things I can figured out need much
reconciliation and careful positioning (substitution) with what I've previously
known. Apparently, some things I neglected were actually quite essential. Let
it be a lesson in what happens when one devours Shah's materials...
Thanks for the positive sentiment.
Go with God.
Dara
> Thank you for the clarifications. I’m still thinking about this this
> afternoon, and trying to come up with some other explanation for these
> statements that doesn’t require Shah to be a liar or a charlatan. I
Every rose MUST HAVE thorns, and these hurt. But we do not dwell upon
the thorns or bleeding fingers when we look at the everlansting beauty
of a rose.
From within whatever Shah said that may be questioned, shall grow a
rose INSHALLAH and lets not focus on the thorns.
Cherish those good moments when his instruction gave you meaning.
> can’t overemphasize the importance of how he taught me to think more
> clearly and in ways totally new to me, and how much he helped me
> bridge the gap between “there” and “here”… and I feel guilty speaking
> against him now, because at a certain point he was a teacher to me and
> a good one, a perfect one for where I was then.
He wants you to speak as such, because many have mislead his life's
effort into nonsense statements all over the place. He is our brother,
within the constricting walls of his grave he can not defend himself.
We are alive to clear his name and what of mistakes we may find, we
will conceal or re-interpret properly.
You must say these things so the misunderstandings and the
fake-followers would perish.
> I loved him very much and ...
That is all that matters. That 'love' comes from THERE, Shah's
supposed mistakes and what not came from here and will stay here.
I prefer to love someone even if the person is 100% liar, than hate a
100% truthful person. That is the illogical form of love that the
Sufis call 'Ishq.
--DARA
Dara
Salaam Rand, I made another repsonse directly to you. However this was
teasing Jack Fried for being away for a while. I am sorry if I caused
any confusion.
Your point was well understood
--DARA
esowteric
<< ...it’s an explanation that gives Shah the benefit of the doubt. I
loved him very much and I’ll choose to believe he knew what he was
doing, even if his books are not appropriate sources of instruction
for where I am now. >>
Dear Rand,
If I might enquire, what are the major lessons that you have learnt from
Shah?
And where are you now, and what is your current course of instruction, that
brings you to conclude that "his books are not appropriate sources of
instruction for where I am now"?
Best Wishes,
Eric.
_____________________________________________
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/caravansarai
_____________________________________________
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.745 / Virus Database: 497 - Release Date: 27/08/04
esowteric
> Let me first say that I loved Idries Shah and that he was profoundly
> instrumental in my early formation. I discovered his name through
> Robert Anton Wilson and proceeded to devour all 22 of the recommended
> books on the booklist Shah's "Institute for Sufi Studies" sends you if
> you write to the address in the back of his books asking for more
> information. I still like to recommend his books to people, and have
> an immense gratitude for the ways he opened my mind and made a bridge
> for me to reach to an area I may not have otherwise been able to
> reach.
>
> This being said... Shah's claim to be a Naqshbandi Grandshaykh appears
> categorically false. There are exactly 40 Naqshbandi Grandshaykhs ever
> in existance, and unless one of them assumed the physical form and
> identity of Idries Shah, which seems farfetched, then Shah was simply
> lying. The only other possibility is that Shah was, in reality, Khidr,
> who was the 10th Naqshbandi Grandshaykh. Even if this were the case,
> his claim to be the Sahib uz-Zaman, the Master or Teacher of the Time,
> could not have been true, as the Sahib uz-Zaman at the time Shah was
> writing was openly known to be (and continues to be) Nazim al-Kibrisi.
Wali was worried as winter approached, for last winter he had run out of hay
with which to feed his animals.
So he decided to build his hay stack higher this year.
Just to be sure, he sent his farm labourer Ahmed to seek out Nasrudin and to
obtain his advice.
Nasrudin looked into the distance and his eyes glazed over, as if lost in
deep contemplation.
Emerging from his reverie, he declared at last: 'It's going to be a cold
winter.'
Ahmed rushed back to his employer to report Nasrudin's prediction and they
both set-to to build the haystack yet higher, in preparation for the cold
winter.
Just to be sure, however, he again sent his farm labourer Ahmed to seek out
Nasrudin and to obtain his advice.
Nasrudin looked into the distance and his eyes glazed over, as if lost in
deep contemplation.
Emerging from his reverie, he declared at last: 'It's going to be a long,
cold winter.'
Ahmed rushed back to his employer to report Nasrudin's prediction and they
both re-doubled their efforts to build the haystack yet higher, in
preparation for the long, cold winter.
Just to be sure, however, he again sent his farm labourer Ahmed to seek out
Nasrudin and to obtain his advice.
A third time, Nasrudin looked into the distance and his eyes glazed over, as
if lost in deep contemplation.
Emerging from his reverie, he declared at last: 'It's going to be a long,
bitterly cold winter, with much snow.'
'But how do you know these things, Mulla?' asked Ahmed.
Nasrudin pointed into the distance: 'Do you see that farm?'
'Yes, but I still don't see your point.'
'You see how high the farmer yonder has built his haystack?' asked Nasrudin:
'That is how I know.'
Fried Jack Morgan
Don't you remember that Idries Shah said there is a time and place for
books, and then a time and place for something other than books?
esowteric
> Don't you remember that Idries Shah said there is a time and place for
> books, and then a time and place for something other than books?
Dear Scott,
Good to hear from you again. I hope things are going swimmingly well for
you.
Yes, I do. But let's not put words in one-another's mouths. The reason for
asking the question wasn't related to books.
I can join a train in Scarborough that is advertized there as going to Hull.
I live in Selby and Selby is not on the route to Hull. Do I complain? No, I
catch the train to Hull. When we get past Seamer (beyond which, folk wishing
to catch the train will not be confused by such signs), a guard comes round
the train and sticks large signs on the windows which state that the train
is going to Manchester Airport and amongst the stations listed, beyond the
originally advertized dstination, is Selby. And when I get to Selby, I get
off the train. Others catch the train at Hull or at other stations and go on
to destinations other than Hull or Selby.
If a train advertized as "Shah's Choo-Choo" takes me part of the way, then
that's good enough for me.
Best Wishes,
Eric.
Rand C. Smith
I have sent you an answer off-list.
Go with God,
Rand
esowteric
Dear Rand,
Much appreciated, thanks.
Best Wishes to you, too,
Eric.
Fried Jack Morgan
> Scott wrote:
>
>
>>Don't you remember that Idries Shah said there is a time and place for
>>books, and then a time and place for something other than books?
>
>
> Dear Scott,
>
> Good to hear from you again. I hope things are going swimmingly well for
> you.
>
> Yes, I do. But let's not put words in one-another's mouths. The reason for
> asking the question wasn't related to books.
>
I was replying to this part of your original reply to Rand, and I quote,
"And where are you now, and what is your current course of instruction,
that brings you to conclude that "his books are not appropriate sources
of instruction for where I am now"?"
The reason for your question may have had nothing to do with books, but
your words still had something to do with books.
One does not need to have a "current source of instruction" to have
reached a point where books are inappropriate. One may just have
reached the point where they are supposed to just let things be for a
while. After all, Idries Shah pointed out the importance of not-doing
and the importance of what is not there on the sufi path. Things quite
important to learn for those from a culture where doing and having
things is considered healthy and not-doing and not-having are considered
a sin and a misfortune, respectively.
<<snip>>
esowteric
> I was replying to this part of your original reply to Rand, and I quote,
>
> "And where are you now, and what is your current course of instruction,
> that brings you to conclude that "his books are not appropriate sources
> of instruction for where I am now"?"
>
> The reason for your question may have had nothing to do with books, but
> your words still had something to do with books.
>
> One does not need to have a "current source of instruction" to have
> reached a point where books are inappropriate. One may just have
> reached the point where they are supposed to just let things be for a
> while. After all, Idries Shah pointed out the importance of not-doing
> and the importance of what is not there on the sufi path. Things quite
> important to learn for those from a culture where doing and having
> things is considered healthy and not-doing and not-having are considered
> a sin and a misfortune, respectively.
True enough, Scott.
GV
>
> If a train advertized as "Shah's Choo-Choo" takes me part of the way, then
> that's good enough for me.
>
> Best Wishes,
> Eric.
>
stating "AND I'M NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE TRAIN!" :)
Yours,
esowteric
> And undoubtedly, it has a conductor who has a sign at his back
> stating "AND I'M NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE TRAIN!" :)
LOL :) I'll have to have a look next time I take the train.
BTW: the conductor, his assistant who's on work experience, and the driver
change en-route: they don't go all the way with the train.
Fried Jack Morgan
In other words, they aren't the ones heading towards enlightenment then.
Nor are they the teachers, because the teacher goes all the way with the
student. He or she does not get off part way through.
esowteric
> >>
> >> And undoubtedly, it has a conductor who has a sign at his back
> >>stating "AND I'M NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE TRAIN!" :)
> >
> >
> > LOL :) I'll have to have a look next time I take the train.
> >
> > BTW: the conductor, his assistant who's on work experience, and the
driver
> > change en-route: they don't go all the way with the train.
> >
> > Best Wishes,
> > Eric.
Scott wrote:
> In other words, they aren't the ones heading towards enlightenment then.
> Nor are they the teachers, because the teacher goes all the way with the
> student. He or she does not get off part way through.
Yet, you'd make an exception -- for argument's sake -- of a teacher by the
name of Idries Shah and his "purely preparatory books"? Are you saying that
Shah is involved in work beyond the "literatary phase" of his operation?
Fried Jack Morgan
You do not understand how the teachership functions in sufism. It does
not function in the same manner as in other things in this world that
have teachers.
For one thing, the idea of the teacher being a driver or worker on a bus
is a terribly flawed analogy. It would be more correct to analogize the
sufi teacher as being the one who teaches people how to drive.
And Idries Shah's role was to give people information on "driving" that
they lacked, and to teach them how to learn from "driving instructors".
He himself never claimed to be a "driving instructor". That is why
his books were entitled "Learning How To Learn" and "Knowing How To
Know" instead of "Learning" and "Knowing". He repeatedly pointed out in
his books that people in the West was so bereft of a spiritual tradition
and had sunk to such a low level of spiritual ignorance that they could
not be taught until they had been taught how to be taught.
As he repeatedly pointed out, his job was to teach students how to be
students. He made no claims as to himself being a sufi teacher.
Does this reduce in value anything that Idries Shah did? No, it did
not. A very great many people would not be where they are today if not
for what Idries Shah had done, including me. The magnitude of what he
did should not be dismissed, but it should also not be taken out of
proportion.
Fried Jack Morgan
Eric, over the years I have posted much on Idries Shah, and posted
material here and elsewhere that relates to Idries Shah, though it may
not say that directly. The material is there, if you care enough to go
through the work of trying to find it. I am only back here by personal
request of another for a specific thing.
Most people want to believe what they already believe.
Fried Jack Morgan
Also, Eric, whatever your relationship is with Idries Shah, it is wrong
to expect anyone else to have that same relationship, and it is even
more wrong to try to create that in someone else. Idries Shah cannot be
everyone's teacher, not in the sense that you envision or desire.
Fried Jack Morgan
A last comment or two. Idries Shah said that anything that you learn
from is your teacher. This is true. If you learn from Idries Shah,
then he is your teacher. However, this is not the same as saying that
whatever you learn from is your sufi teacher. You can learn from a
leaf, but is that leaf now your sufi teacher? It is possible that it
can be for a very few, but not in the sense that most others can imagine.
Also, regarding the bus analogy. In the imagery that people experience
on the path, as they progress, they oftentimes start out in buses, cars,
and trains. But in the end, they are always walking, climbing, etc.,
with their own hands and feet, arms and legs. One always ends up using
one's own efforts to get to the destination. One does not get a "free
ride" in the sense that one can buy a ticket and get on a bus or train,
or let someone else do the driving for them and be chauffered to
enlightenment. One will never get there that way. Which is why the
image of a bus, or "we are all bozos on the bus" is an indicator of just
how far one has progressed, and too often an indicator of just how far
someone is willing to progress. They want someone to do all the work
for them while they party or sleep in the back. And it doesn't work
that way.
Pieter
ago I asked him what he thought of Idries Shah and why he never refers
to him in any of his works. His answer was that he thought his
reputation and claims of ancestry were dubious and that the Afghans at
least whom he conversed with in the early 70s simply seemed to have
never heard of him at all, and if they did they thought his teachings
and claims were rather eccentric. This was in the course of a different
conversation ( http://www.hermetic.com/bey/pw-interview-2.html , it's
not mentioned there) and so it remained short, I hope to pursue it
further with him some day.
Any comments are welcome, btw my reason to bring it up with PLW was
precisely because Shah's *The Sufis* was and remains for me the best
introduction to Sufism that I've seen so far.
Cheers,
Pieter
Fried Jack Morgan
have to refer to Idries Shah as a descendant of Jan Fishan Khan, because
Idries Shah did not grow up in Afghanistan, so how could they have heard
of him, whereas they would have heard of Jan Fishan Khan (apologies if I
do not have the name quite correct).
As to Idries Shah's claims being thought eccentric, most non-sufis, and
most Muslims, think the same thing about sufism in general.
And I once asked some Muslims about sufis and tarika. They had no clue
what I was talking about. Years later I asked a Muslim sufi about this,
and I was told that many Muslims have never heard of it.
Just because a person lives in a country where there are some sufis,
does not mean that they have any knowledge of it. And in many Middle
Eastern countries it is not a smart idea to advertise oneself as a sufi,
even today, unless one wants to imitate Hallaj's fate. It was only a
few years ago that a woman sufi was arrested, tried and sentenced on
charges of witchcraft and crimes against Islam, I believe in Saudi
Arabia, but I am not certain. If the Taliban were in power, or were
just in the area where the person was asking about Idries Shah (and yes,
the Taliban was in Afghanistan long before the events of 9/11), people
would have been unwilling to answer anything directly, if at all, for
fear of reprisal. The Taliban has no use for sufis.
So just because a person doesn't get a response from Afghanis about
Idries Shah doesn't necessarily mean anything, especially if one does
not take into account any of the circumstances going on in Afghanistan
at the time.
GV
> GV wrote:
>
> > And undoubtedly, it has a conductor who has a sign at his back
> > stating "AND I'M NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE TRAIN!" :)
>
> LOL :) I'll have to have a look next time I take the train.
>
> BTW: the conductor, his assistant who's on work experience, and the driver
> change en-route: they don't go all the way with the train.
>
> Best Wishes,
> Eric.
I should have perhaps included the original story the above punchline
is from for those not familiar with it.
The story is about a man traveling on a train who is exasperated at
how slow it's going. Finally, he goes up to the conductor and asks,
"Can't you possibly go any faster ?"
To which the conductor replies, "Sir, I can INDEED go faster than
this.
BUT I'm not allowed to leave the train! "
Yours,
esowteric
news:41360ec0$0$98730$e4fe...@dreader4.news.xs4all.nl...
Dear Pieter,
Maybe you've already read the following tribute?
List the accomplishments and achievements of Idries Shah, and they
begin to seem the work of many men - probably because in our
'pessimistic society', as he often described it, we do not expect such
prodigious capabilities in a single individual.
One of his lives, as it were, was as the author of more than 35 books
and over a hundred academic monographs. The books included 20
best-selling titles on Sufism - of which he was the great living
exemplar - which so far have sold 15 million copies in 12 languages.
That would have been enough for most single lifetimes. But he was also
Director of Studies for the Institute for Cultural Research , an
educational charity which researched and published materials on
cross-cultural patterns of human thought and behaviour.
He was advisor, too, to a number of monarchs and Heads of State. He
was actively involved in a cluster of other enterprises, academic,
humanitarian, scientific and commercial. He was a founder member of
the Club of Rome, a Governor of the Royal Humane Society and the Royal
Hospital and Home for Incurables. And, not least, he was a family man
and father.
Though he seemed the epitome of Englishness in speech and bearing,
belonged to the Atheneum and Garrick Clubs, and lived for many years
in a large Regency house near Tunbridge Wells, Shah was in fact born
in Simla, India, in 1924, into a distinguished Hashemite family, which
traces its ancestry and titles, confirmed and attested by Doctors of
Islamic Law in 1970, back to the prophet Mohammed. His inalienable
titles included Badshah (sovereign), Emir, Sirdar (general). Then
there was Sharif , translatable as prince of the blood, and Hadrat ,
which means holy, presence.
His Scottish mother met his father, the writer and savant Sirdar Ikbal
Ali Shah, when he was a medical student in Edinburgh, and went to live
with him in the Afghan highlands in Paghman, the stronghold and
fiefdom of the family. From the start, the young Shah was at home in
both East and West: educated, as his father before him, by private
tutors in Europe and the Middle East, and through wide-ranging travel
and personal encounters -- the series of journeys, in fact, that
characterise Sufi education and development. He was briefly at St.
Catherine's College, Oxford, and though he discontinued the course of
study there, he was always amused that that university, like so many
others around the world, incorporated his books into their essential
curricula.
In keeping with Sufi tradition, his life was essentially one of
service. His friends and associates included soldiers, scientists,
artists, writers, thinkers, businessmen; the high-achieving, the
famous, the royal. But equally they included as many, if not more, of
the obscure and humble. And in everything he did he exemplified the
way of the Sufi. It was his contention that people educated as he was,
and as he attempted to educate others, could become multi-faceted,
high-achieving, dedicated to the service of others, and also be funny,
entertaining, and in the best sense 'ordinary'. He was, for instance,
an unparalleled storyteller, and also an excellent cook. People lucky
enough to get an invitation to one of his fabled parties would fly in
from all over the world. He was also frequently to be found combing
through boot fairs and junk shops, even in the last months of his
life, looking for (and given his vast knowledge of such things,
frequently finding) rare and valuable antiques of both East and West.
His knowledge and interests seemed limitless. He could rage in the
face of negativity and wilful foolishness, but was more usually warm,
approachable and encouraging. People who benefited professionally from
his knowledge have described a range of capacities he himself would
never have bothered to draw attention to. A musicologist, for example,
says he helped her decipher ancient Egyptian songs unheard for 3,500
years (and subsequently broadcast on the BBC); a scientist honoured
during World War II for his inventions in naval radar claims that
years ago Shah helped him in the research and development of his
pioneer patents in air ionisation; one of Britain's leading architects
says that a nudge from Shah sent him in a completely unexpected
direction in his career, dramatically improving the quality and
usefulness of his work. This was characteristic: when it was
appropriate Shah would nudge and hint; throw some ball from his huge
storehouse of knowledge, and see who could catch it.
Shah's knowledge and activities took place in so many different areas
of specialisation and in so many countries, that friends and sometimes
even family were aware of what he was doing purely on a 'need to know'
basis. So an account such as this inevitably refracts a very limited -
and Western - view. The concealment was in part a mixture of modesty,
discretion, and an unwillingness to waste time; and part a refusal to
indulge anything that smacked even faintly of gossip of self-serving.
Shah himself, and those round him, were masters of disinformation. For
example, when in 1967 Robert Graves, a long-time friend, published his
new translation of the Rubayyat of Omar Khayyam and declared Khayyam a
Sufi, a group of academic Orientalists who felt their territory
undermined by the fresh air Shah was bringing to the subject, attacked
him by association, and even travelled to Afghanistan to collect
ammunition against him and his family. Unaware of the tradition there
of protecting the Hashemite family from idle curiosity. they were fed
all kinds of tall and ridiculous tales, which they gave unchecked to
the press, in an attempt to discredit him. But such attacks were
neutralised by the warmth and weight of other scholars, far more
eminent than the critics, who sprang to Shah's defence.
His public and formal work, as Director of Studies of the Institute
for Cultural Research , began when Shah was in his thirties. Such
scholarly criticism as there was in the early years climaxed in the
Omar Khayyam affair, and then dwindled, as Shah himself was invited to
lecture at various seats of learning, including Stanford University in
America, and Geneva University, where he was a visiting professor. The
Sufis, published by Jonathan Cape in 1964, slightly ahead of the surge
of interest in metaphysical ideas, pronounced that tradition alive and
well, and more or less invited readers to approach its ideas and test
them out. The evident sense, and common sense, most readers found made
it clear that here was a sane, authoritative voice in the wilderness
of the gobbledegookish mysticism of the sixties.
In all the books that followed, whatever he made available always
linked realistically into the culture to which it was offered. Through
Octagon Press , the publishing company he founded to keep these books
in print after mainstream publishers might drop them from their lists,
he also established a broad historical and cultural context for Sufi
thought and action. Through Octagon he also disseminated, in a range
of books, an enormous amount of little known information about
Afghanistan, forseeing that such documentation would provide a crucial
record in the aftermath of that country's tragic devastation.
During the Afghan-Russian war he risked his life more than once on
missions inside Afghanistan and with the Mujahuddin. Already in his
sixties, he entered the country secretly - had he been betrayed to the
Russians, it would have been an enormous propaganda coup . In the
event, his best-selling novel, Kara Kush , was based on fact,
incorporating his first-hand knowledge of the stupendous courage of
the Afghan people, and the appalling atrocities inflicted upon them.
And he was not above tweaking the Russian bear's tail by embedding
titbits of secret intelligence in his fiction which nobody was
supposed to know, such as the telephone number of the KGB.
About a year after his last visit to Afghanistan, in the late spring
of 1987, Shah suffered two successive and massive heart attacks. Sick
as he was, his hilarious and hair-raising analysis of the behaviour of
the medical profession, and his capacity to conserve himself and still
work, was an eye-opener to those around him. His physicians told him
he had only eight per cent heart function remaining, and could not
expect to survive. But over the next nine years, in between bouts of
weakness, pain, further illness and frequent hospitalisation, he
produced further books and worked with characteristic dedication,
seriousness, humour and light-heartedness, teaching and advising the
now necessarily depleted but still large number of people who
approached him, as well as actively directing his enterprises and
preparing those who would succeed him. He showed, as he had done all
his life, how much it is possible for a single individual to achieve
in the face of towering obstacles.
By their nature, newspaper obituaries focus on public record. But it
is necessary to say that Idries Shah's visible achievements, however
profound and wide-ranging, may really have been the very least of his
impact. His purpose and knowledge, his kindness, his seemingly
limitless patience and generosity; the warmth of his companionship;
the perceptive, zany humour in a range of wickedly accurate accents
which could send serious-minded adults rolling on the floor in
laughter; his sheer understanding and sanity , also operated invisibly
in the realm of the human heart. The thousands of people who were his
students and friends, and others who encountered him however briefly,
were probably all affected in a degree and dimension for which it is
hard to find words. It is impossible to assess his influence, and his
legacy is incalculable. The Poet Laureate, Ted Hughes, once wrote that
the Sufis must be 'the biggest society of sensible men there has ever
been on earth'. Idries Shah was indeed a sensible man. He was also, it
is said, the Sufi Teacher of the Age.
Idries Shah, writer and savant, born Simla, India, June 16, 1924;
married Cynthia (Kashfi) Kabraji, 1958; one son, two daughters; died
London, November 23, 1996.
Best Wishes,
Eric
esowteric
Dear Pieter,
And here's what the Independent newspaper had to say:
dries Shah devoted the best years of his life to bringing to the West a
better understanding of Sufism (a mystical movement of Islam, with the
belief that deep intuition is the only real guide to knowledge).
Shah was born in British India in 1924, the son and heir of Sirdar Ikbal
Ali Shah of Sardhana, and belonged to a distinguished Hashemite family.
Their best-known 19th-century forbear was Jan Fishan Khan, a notable
warrior and Sufi sage.
As a young man Shah often accompanied his father on his many diplomatic
missions, thus acquiring the grasp of cultural divergencies needed for
application of the Sufi maxim, "Right place, right people".
In 1955 Shah decided to make his home in England, though he continued to
travel widely both in the East and in the United States. The Sufis,
published in 1964 with an introduction by Robert Graves, was not his first
book in English, but it was the first to attract critical acclaim. It was
followed by a series of books, including The Way of the Sufi (1968) and
Neglected Aspects of Sufi Study (1977), making Sufi classical masters
accessible to Western readers and bringing to their attention the teaching
story as an instrument of self-development. This initiative offended some
traditional Orientalists, who persisted in regarding Sufis as belonging to
an Islamic sect rooted in the past and having little contemporary
relevance.
When in 1967 Graves published his new translation of Omar Khayym,
challenging Edward Fitzgerald's refusal to treat the Persian Khayym as a
Sufi poet, critics saw a chance to attack Shah, despite the fact that he
had had no hand in Graves's version. Those interested in Sufism as a force
in the modern world rallied to Shah's support and 24 of them, drawn from
both East and West, compiled a Festschrift in his honour, Sufi Studies,
East and West (1973).
In three of his books of tales, The Exploits of the Incomparable Mulla
Nasrudin (1966), Tales of the Dervishes (1967) and The Subtleties of the
Inimitable Mulla Nasrudin (1973), Shah resurrected the Eastern joke figure
Mulla Nasrudin, "the Mulla who is no Mulla, the fool who is no fool."
Shah founded the Octagon Press, which published much of his later work,
including two books, Darkest England (1987) and The Natives are Restless
(1988), in which he traced affinities between the English and Afghan
peoples. In all, he was author of more than 30 books, translated into 12
languages, including Russian. His enthusiasm for cross-cultural studies
led in 1965 to the establishment of an educational charity, the Institute
for Cultural Research in London, where he became Director of Studies.
Shah's many activities in the West were never pursued at the expense of
his contacts with the East and especially with the Indian sub-continent
and Afghanistan. These ties came to the fore with the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan in 1979 and he set up Afghan Relief to provide medical and
other aid to refugees. No consideration of danger or ill-health could
dissuade him from entering occupied Afghanistan, as well as working in the
refugee camps. His experiences gave lively colour to his novel Kara Kush
(1986). Robert Cecil
Sayed Idries Shah, writer: born 16 June 1924; married 1958 Kashfi Kabraji
(one son, two daughters); died London 23 November 1996.
The Independent
Best Wishes,
Eric
Pieter
Thanks for your answer, however you seem to have missed my point. I
myself have found on more than one occasion that speaking to mainstream
Muslims about Sufism will lead you nowhere. However, as you could have
seen from the link I gave, Peter Lamborn Wilson may not be the foremost
authority on Afghan Sufism but he's written a number of books on Sufism
all the same and spent quite some time in the region. So when he tells
me about what the Afghans thought of Shah at the time I assume he's
talking about knowledgeable Sufis, not just your average man in the
street. Furthermore you will see that we were talking about the early
1970s, well before the mujahedeen and the Russian troubles let alone the
Taliban in other words.
So my (implied) question remains open. What consequence if any was
Idries Shah to the Muslim or Islamic Sufi world, or did he merely work
for the West -- a sentiment that seems to be echoed here with so much
adoration, not all of it equally well founded it seems -- and if so, is
that "bad"? I really don't know, I'm just curious. You'd think any Sufi
so great would have left some imprint on his religious fellows if
nothing else.
Cheers,
Pieter
Pieter
> Dear Pieter,
>
> Maybe you've already read the following tribute?
Yes, thanks, really, for both of them. Is that first one by Doris
Lessing by any chance? She of course had some good things to say about
him.
Still, these are both from Western sources so it doesn't lead us
further. What was Shah's impact in the East, if any?
About his book *Kara Kush* incidentally, come to think of it that's
probably what got me started about him with PLW in the first place. I've
yet to read it and it has my interest; at any rate, the latter's answer
was that it was a lot of fanciful mumbo-jumbo with about the same
relevance as, say, (and this is my own conjecture) Camus's musings on a
pan-Meditteranean brotherhood of men (at the end of his *L'Homme
Révolté*) when in fact the French and Algerians were at each other's
throats at the time and much of the post-colonial world was not in much
better shape. And I've seen other sources questioning the book for that
matter.
Cheers and I hope this doesn't turn into a flame war, I'm quite serious
about it really, and I hope some critical assessment can be at place
here,
Pieter
GV
> > Scott wrote:
> >
> >>In other words, they aren't the ones heading towards enlightenment then.
> >>Nor are they the teachers, because the teacher goes all the way with the
> >>student. He or she does not get off part way through.
>
teachership per se. I thought it was responding more to the idea of
"phases" in learning expressed in Rand's post?
IS used the "train story" to end one of his lectures. The analogy I
felt was drawn in that instance in part was that the Way was/is its
own process, operating according to its own requirements, timetables,
and such and that a teacher, or operative within the Work, conducts
his higher service within those limits.
> > >
> > Yet, you'd make an exception -- for argument's sake -- of a teacher by the
> > name of Idries Shah and his "purely preparatory books"? Are you saying that
> > Shah is involved in work beyond the "literatary phase" of his operation?
> >
I didn't realize there was a disagreement about this. IS made it
clear that books could not provide everything. It was also known that
he did offer "further orientation" beyond books.
> >
>
> You do not understand how the teachership functions in sufism. It does
> not function in the same manner as in other things in this world that
> have teachers.
>
Agreed.
> For one thing, the idea of the teacher being a driver or worker on a bus
> is a terribly flawed analogy. It would be more correct to analogize the
> sufi teacher as being the one who teaches people how to drive.
Well, perhaps we're getting "our analogies in a twist" here. Either
could work depending on what one wants to emphasize.
>
> And Idries Shah's role was to give people information on "driving" that
> they lacked, and to teach them how to learn from "driving instructors".
> He himself never claimed to be a "driving instructor".
Perhaps it was not spelled out as much as some might have expected.
(He was operating for quite a bit of the time within an "Age of
Guru-ism" in which seekers often didn't think for themselves to say
the least.)
I was once at an audition (for entertainers)where a fellow didn't
say who he was, hand over a resume, or state what was his talent.
When he took out his drum, it was very obvious.
Literal mindedness can be defeating in some cases.
That is why
> his books were entitled "Learning How To Learn" and "Knowing How To
> Know" instead of "Learning" and "Knowing". He repeatedly pointed out in
> his books that people in the West was so bereft of a spiritual tradition
> and had sunk to such a low level of spiritual ignorance that they could
> not be taught until they had been taught how to be taught.
I disagree with this interpretation. It is not that people are
"bereft of a spiritual tradition" and "spiritually ignorant" that they
cannot be taught, or rather receive higher knowledge right then and
there. It is the prevalent condition of humanity (for probably eons)
that certain organs of perception are near-totally buried. In too many
cases, some spiritual traditions, religions, cultural trappings of
such can further fog over the windshield.
Perhaps IS's material have
helped readers think more clearly and examine assumptions and such,
which is all well and good. It is as valid as using his works as a
source for a job as a storyteller. However, the phrase "learning how
to learn" is a technical one and refers to one learning the
"difference between the container and the content" or being able to
"see one's King in every disguise." It has important initiatory
significance.
>
> As he repeatedly pointed out, his job was to teach students how to be
> students. He made no claims as to himself being a sufi teacher.
Are you speaking just about his books? He did indeed teach and much
of this was known word of mouth. There were groups, Society for Sufi
Studies and such, individual studies, and plenty of addresses provided
to "inquire further."
I am reminded of the analogy used in LHTL of the restaurant with the
sign RESTAURANT: FINEST FOOD", to which an enquirer suggests adding
the words "SERVED HERE", but who is then followed by another who
objects to the word "HERE", and then yet another who says "SERVED" is
redundant... to the point where the sign finally reads "FOOD" and even
then that is removed. The result was a lot of hungry people who
passed by, oblivious to the cafe.
>
> Does this reduce in value anything that Idries Shah did? No, it did
> not. A very great many people would not be where they are today if not
> for what Idries Shah had done, including me. The magnitude of what he
> did should not be dismissed, but it should also not be taken out of
> proportion.
Agreed. But aside from those people benefiting in many ways as you
mention, this does not mean that there weren't any who never went
further than that.
BTW, what does "taken out of proportion" mean ?
Yours,
Obo Vajrin
how slow it's going. Finally, he goes up to the conductor and asks,
"Can't you possibly go any faster ?"
To which the conductor replies, "Sir, I can INDEED go faster than
this.
BUT I'm not allowed to leave the train! "
>>
If I remember correctly this is a story Shah tells on one of the audio tapes.
I think he was describing a school and a teacher - train and conductor. And
the man riding on the train is you and me ;-0. What Scott says about effort
and no free ride is absolutly correct. But I think the metaphore Bozo's on the
bus or in this case, a train, can be seen as not a free ride or lacking in
their own energy requirements. A donkey is something which gets you somewhere.
A train or bus can get more than one somewhere.
Take Care, obo
Obo Vajrin
so great would have left some imprint on his religious fellows if
nothing else.
Cheers,
Pieter >>
Hello,
actually I think it is the other way round, the religious fellow usually wants
nothing to do with the Sufi.
And it is possible that Shah's "authority" was somewhat geographic in its
perameters. There is the Qutub and the four pillars in the Sufi hierarchy. I
don't know much about Islamic Sufism (Dara is our local expert) but the four
pillars represent the four points of the compass (other things as well, I am
sure). Perhaps each pillar's authority was divided geographically?
Some times to move energy you need a vessel.
Take Care, obo
Fried Jack Morgan
> Fried Jack Morgan <friedja...@netscape.net> wrote in message news:<2bkZc.46$LC3....@news.uswest.net>...
>
>>>Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In other words, they aren't the ones heading towards enlightenment then.
>>>>Nor are they the teachers, because the teacher goes all the way with the
>>>>student. He or she does not get off part way through.
>>
> I did not take Eric's analogy to be directly about a teacher or
> teachership per se. I thought it was responding more to the idea of
> "phases" in learning expressed in Rand's post?
> IS used the "train story" to end one of his lectures. The analogy I
> felt was drawn in that instance in part was that the Way was/is its
> own process, operating according to its own requirements, timetables,
> and such and that a teacher, or operative within the Work, conducts
> his higher service within those limits.
>
>
>>>Yet, you'd make an exception -- for argument's sake -- of a teacher by the
>>>name of Idries Shah and his "purely preparatory books"? Are you saying that
>>>Shah is involved in work beyond the "literatary phase" of his operation?
>>>
>
> I didn't realize there was a disagreement about this. IS made it
> clear that books could not provide everything. It was also known that
> he did offer "further orientation" beyond books.
You are responding to Eric's words here, not mine. I say this because
you do not make it clear whom you are responding to here.
>
>>You do not understand how the teachership functions in sufism. It does
>>not function in the same manner as in other things in this world that
>>have teachers.
>>
>
> Agreed.
>
>
>>For one thing, the idea of the teacher being a driver or worker on a bus
>>is a terribly flawed analogy. It would be more correct to analogize the
>> sufi teacher as being the one who teaches people how to drive.
>
>
> Well, perhaps we're getting "our analogies in a twist" here. Either
> could work depending on what one wants to emphasize.
If the symbolism is only intended to work on the surface. On deeper
levels it becomes less a symbolism and more of an actuality that is
interpreted by the conscious mind which then thinks of it as a symbol.
Idries Shah referred to this in one of his later books, where he wrote,
if i remember correctly, that a sword was not necessarily a symbol, but
an entity.
The personal symbols one uses and how they use them have a determining
factor on what one does and how one approaches things, including sufism.
>
>>And Idries Shah's role was to give people information on "driving" that
>>they lacked, and to teach them how to learn from "driving instructors".
>> He himself never claimed to be a "driving instructor".
>
>
> Perhaps it was not spelled out as much as some might have expected.
> (He was operating for quite a bit of the time within an "Age of
> Guru-ism" in which seekers often didn't think for themselves to say
> the least.)
> I was once at an audition (for entertainers)where a fellow didn't
> say who he was, hand over a resume, or state what was his talent.
> When he took out his drum, it was very obvious.
> Literal mindedness can be defeating in some cases.
Have you seen the Elvis Presley phenomenon in the U.S.? Do you catch my
drift?
>
> That is why
>
>>his books were entitled "Learning How To Learn" and "Knowing How To
>>Know" instead of "Learning" and "Knowing". He repeatedly pointed out in
>>his books that people in the West was so bereft of a spiritual tradition
>>and had sunk to such a low level of spiritual ignorance that they could
>>not be taught until they had been taught how to be taught.
>
>
> I disagree with this interpretation. It is not that people are
> "bereft of a spiritual tradition" and "spiritually ignorant" that they
> cannot be taught, or rather receive higher knowledge right then and
> there. It is the prevalent condition of humanity (for probably eons)
> that certain organs of perception are near-totally buried. In too many
> cases, some spiritual traditions, religions, cultural trappings of
> such can further fog over the windshield.
> Perhaps IS's material have
> helped readers think more clearly and examine assumptions and such,
> which is all well and good. It is as valid as using his works as a
> source for a job as a storyteller. However, the phrase "learning how
> to learn" is a technical one and refers to one learning the
> "difference between the container and the content" or being able to
> "see one's King in every disguise." It has important initiatory
> significance.
I refer you to Idries Shah's comments about "cargo cults" and his
analogy of a primitive culture that needed to be taught medicine (or was
it hygiene), but needed to be taught basic concepts first before any
understanding of basice medicine (or was it hygiene) could be given to
them. Do you think he was just saying this an example? Do you not know
the different ways to "talk to the walls so that the door may hear"? He
was referring to the West. And he was talking about the West, because
as he said, sufism was being brought to the West. Can you name any
truly Western spiritual tradition that is intact AND available? Alchemy
is an Eastern tradition, Christianity is an Eastern tradition, and has
lost a great deal of its spirituality, and what is left is either
misunderstood or ignored. Wicca comes kind of close, but much of it
is guessed at or made up in far, far too many cases, and more has been
borrowed from other cultures. Native American traditions, the real
ones, are almost completely closed to non-Native Americans.
And learning the difference between container and content, well, that is
not the only "learning how to learn" that is necessary. Try going
around asking people how children should be taught, and you will soon
discover just what most people know about learning.
>
>>As he repeatedly pointed out, his job was to teach students how to be
>>students. He made no claims as to himself being a sufi teacher.
>
>
> Are you speaking just about his books? He did indeed teach and much
> of this was known word of mouth. There were groups, Society for Sufi
> Studies and such, individual studies, and plenty of addresses provided
> to "inquire further."
But what did he teach? Even sufi teachers teach things other than
sufism, in the sense that sufism is used here in this group.
Fried Jack Morgan
> Fried Jack Morgan <friedja...@netscape.net> wrote in message news:<2bkZc.46$LC3....@news.uswest.net>...
>
<<snip>>
>
>>Does this reduce in value anything that Idries Shah did? No, it did
>>not. A very great many people would not be where they are today if not
>>for what Idries Shah had done, including me. The magnitude of what he
>>did should not be dismissed, but it should also not be taken out of
>>proportion.
>
>
> Agreed. But aside from those people benefiting in many ways as you
> mention, this does not mean that there weren't any who never went
> further than that.
> BTW, what does "taken out of proportion" mean ?
>
> Yours,
As I wrote in my other reply to you, are you aware of the Elvis Presley
phenomenon in the U.S.?
Fried Jack Morgan
There was more going on there than you think during the '70's. Not a
good time to ask questions about people whose last names were "Shah", as
the excerpts below will give you, if you think about them for a bit.
"In fact, until the early 1970s, both the U.S. and the Soviet Union were
vying with each other in aiding Afghanistan. The Zahir Shah regime
followed a strictly neutral foreign policy. American-aided projects were
allowed to be set up near the Soviet border, while Soviet-built projects
such as a hydro-electric dam came up in Jalalabad, near the Pakistani
border. Pakistan then was among the closest allies of the U.S.
Zahir Shah, until his ouster in 1973 in a military coup by his cousin
Mohammed Daoud, had embarked on a half-hearted attempt to democratise
the feudal and tribalistic Afghan society. "
...
"The two Communist Party factions, the Khalq and the Parcham, had
started organising street protests by the late 1960s. There used to be
frequent clashes between the Communists and the conservatives even in
those days. In 1970, women and schoolgirls took to the streets in Kabul
to protest against the violence unleashed by fundamentalists against
organisations fighting for the emancipation of women. In the late 1960s,
four women were elected to the country's Parliament. Parliament was of
course used as a rubber stamp by the monarchy."
"The coup that ousted Zahir Shah hastened the pace of events. The
progressive elements in the country, led by the communists, were not
happy with Daoud. Although Daoud abolished the monarchy, he conducted
himself in an authoritarian and undemocratic way. The communists, who
had a strong presence in the urban areas and some rural pockets and had
influence in the top echelons of the armed forces, staged a coup in
1978, which they called "Saur Revolution". Nur Mohammed Taraki, who had
spent his early years in Bombay (now Mumbai), became the President. He
was the head of the Khalq faction. Moscow was taken aback by the pace of
events in Afghanistan."
from "The Afghan quagmire"
Steve
> GV wrote:
> > Fried Jack Morgan <friedja...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:<2bkZc.46$LC3....@news.uswest.net>...
> >
> >>>Scott wrote:
> >>>
>>
> I refer you to Idries Shah's comments about "cargo cults" and his
> analogy of a primitive culture that needed to be taught medicine (or was
> it hygiene), but needed to be taught basic concepts first before any
> understanding of basice medicine (or was it hygiene) could be given to
> them. Do you think he was just saying this an example? Do you not know
> the different ways to "talk to the walls so that the door may hear"? He
> was referring to the West. And he was talking about the West, because
> as he said, sufism was being brought to the West. Can you name any
> truly Western spiritual tradition that is intact AND available? Alchemy
> is an Eastern tradition, Christianity is an Eastern tradition, and has
> lost a great deal of its spirituality, and what is left is either
> misunderstood or ignored. Wicca comes kind of close, but much of it
> is guessed at or made up in far, far too many cases, and more has been
> borrowed from other cultures. Native American traditions, the real
> ones, are almost completely closed to non-Native Americans.
Come on, Scott. Give a girl an even break. Is that a relative East or an
absolute East?
;-)
P.S. This is not a semantic game. If you're still working by the label on
the bottle then you've missed a lot of Naqshbandi activity over the
millenia. Amongst other things. Put it another way, and since you appreciate
directness, I'll be direct: You're stacking assumptions up here like they
were going out of fashion and constructing one of the biggest philosophical
strawmen I've seen for a while.
William B. Krebaum
"Rand" <ra...@sociologist.com> wrote in message
news:52f470eb.04083...@posting.google.com...
> Let me first say that I loved Idries Shah and that he was profoundly
> instrumental in my early formation. I discovered his name through
> Robert Anton Wilson and proceeded to devour all 22 of the recommended
> books on the booklist Shah's "Institute for Sufi Studies" sends you if
> you write to the address in the back of his books asking for more
> information. I still like to recommend his books to people, and have
> an immense gratitude for the ways he opened my mind and made a bridge
> for me to reach to an area I may not have otherwise been able to
> reach.
>
> This being said... Shah's claim to be a Naqshbandi Grandshaykh appears
> categorically false. There are exactly 40 Naqshbandi Grandshaykhs ever
> in existance, and unless one of them assumed the physical form and
> identity of Idries Shah, which seems farfetched, then Shah was simply
> lying. The only other possibility is that Shah was, in reality, Khidr,
> who was the 10th Naqshbandi Grandshaykh. Even if this were the case,
> his claim to be the Sahib uz-Zaman, the Master or Teacher of the Time,
> could not have been true, as the Sahib uz-Zaman at the time Shah was
> writing was openly known to be (and continues to be) Nazim al-Kibrisi.
Well, there are grandshaykhs and then there are Grandshaykhs and then there
is *my* Grandshaykh-- the *real* one, don'tcher know? [| ;-) >
> Here are some Shah quotes I found online about tariqat. While it's
> possible to read alternate interpretations deep between the lines,
> even it were the case that Shah was trying to say something other than
> what he appeared to be saying, speaking in this way could serve no
> purpose except to intentionally mislead people. But the far more
> likely alternative seems that he was simply against tarikat:
>
> Excerpted from The Commanding Self:
>
> "The deluded 'Sufis', down the centuries, are those who have taken
> temporary
> teaching situations, parables and the like and stretched them to apply
> as
> perennial 'truths', 'exercises' and the like." "Among the Sufis, the
> development of 'Orders' (turuq) gives us a conspicuous example of the
> process which I have been describing. Of all the major 'Paths' among
> the
> supposed Sufis of today, not a single one is traceable in its
> foundation to
> the man who is named as its founder. Each came into being only after
> his
> death, formulated from some of his specific teachings employed for
> local
> purposes, and soon turned into a cult." "Follow them and you will
> produce,
> perhaps, an excellent replica of a thirteenth-century man, and that is
> all."
>
> And from Sufi Thought and Action:
>
> "As a general rule, the less the spiritual content, the greater the
> appurtenances. Tall hats, robes, and music; secretiveness and
> high-flown
> titles are very common. Whole orders are sustained on these
> nutrients."
> "Several groups make much of their Islamic connections, and their
> Western
> followers delight in adopting Eastern names and even titles. Among
> these the
> favorites are Sheikh, Pir, Qutub.."
>
> "Transvestism, dressing up in clothes not of the period or of the
> country
> where the individual lives or operates, is regarded as a further
> example of
> the declining or impaired tradition." ".outlandish garb is imitative
> of the
> past -- something which truly representative Sufis warn is an
> indication of
> inner spiritual bankruptcy."
>
> "A large number of 'orders' make much play of their 'spiritual
> pedigree.'
> Since the late Middle Ages, these silsilahs.have become a part of the
> mythology of virtually all the orders." "History shows that this
> innovation
> in Sufism came about in imitation of the scholastic habit of invoking
> higher
> authority in a succession of transmitters, for the hadith.."
>
> "Real Sufi 'missionaries' always speak the language of the country in
> which
> they are working perfectly. The accented tones of the adventurers
> generally
> give them away."
>
> This is all either boldfaced falsehood or disinformation.
Thanks for posting these Shah excerpts.
Something like the following appeared in one of Shah's books:
A man said to his double-seeing son,
"You see two where there is only one."
"Oh, no father, for if that were true,
I'd see *four* moons instead of two."
--Bill Krebaum
Fried Jack Morgan
Here is some more --
"n 1973, former prime minister Daoud returned in a bloodless coup and
took over thegovernment, keeping the King in exile, and suspended civil
liberties. As he returned topower, rumors circulated of Soviet
involvement in the coup to restore the extremely proSoviet former prime
minister. Yet, by 1974, Daoud began to distance himself from theUSSR,
and established close relations with the Shah’s Iran, America’s police
force inthe region at the time."
from http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/st/ahmed.html
The Shah of Iran was not well loved, and was quite vicious. And was
supported by the West. All the more reason not to trust a Westerner,
regardless of who he was.
From what I have been able to find on the web, Peter Lamborn Wilson
also spent 7 years in Iran, leaving when the Shah of Iran was
overthrown. That knowledge among Afghanis could very well itself be
enough, along with him being a Westerner, to not trust him with their
real thoughts, when their own government was allied and relied upon Iran
and the Shah of Iran.
From what I have read, one needs to ask about Idries Shah in the area
of Afghanistan where his family lineage was, and then one will only get
a true response if the locals have decided that you can be trusted and
aren't someone trying to make mileage out of them or the Shah family
name. It isn't just Idries Shah they are trying to protect, it is the
entire Shah family and lineage whose name they are trying to protect. I
believe the King Zahir Shah is from the same lineage, and was quite well
thought of in that region, and is still well thought of.
Fried Jack Morgan
To leave an imprint such as what you think on his religious fellows is
not what sufism is about. Aside from those figures who weren't given a
choice about being a public figure, the idea is to not leave a trace of
oneself.
> Cheers,
>
> Pieter
>
>
GV
> Fried Jack Morgan wrote:
> >
> > So just because a person doesn't get a response from Afghanis about
> > Idries Shah doesn't necessarily mean anything, especially if one does
> > not take into account any of the circumstances going on in Afghanistan
> > at the time.
>
> Thanks for your answer, however you seem to have missed my point. I
> myself have found on more than one occasion that speaking to mainstream
> Muslims about Sufism will lead you nowhere. However, as you could have
> seen from the link I gave, Peter Lamborn Wilson may not be the foremost
> authority on Afghan Sufism but he's written a number of books on Sufism
> all the same and spent quite some time in the region. So when he tells
> me about what the Afghans thought of Shah at the time I assume he's
> talking about knowledgeable Sufis, not just your average man in the
> street. Furthermore you will see that we were talking about the early
> 1970s, well before the mujahedeen and the Russian troubles let alone the
> Taliban in other words.
I'm not too familiar with PLW. Offhand he seems to be more of a
"creative" writer and personality. I've only seen some mention of
sufism in a few of his pieces, but haven't read the books you mention.
(Any suggestions?)
I'm inclined to agree with Scott though. Unless one speaks the local
languages and has certain contacts, any info is unreliable or not
forthcoming. There is also the practice of locals putting up
smokescreens to outsiders. The region has always been volatile,
tribal, and has many networks. (Even when the area was under the
British, even British travelers had to carry letters of introduction
to one another as a standard operating procedure, no?) And whether one
is consulting "knowledgeable sufis" is another topic.
In my brief travels to the region (mid 80's), I ran across a few
religious students, some who'd heard of IS. It didn't take long for
them to relieve me of all my paperbacks (his tale collections) and to
urgently request that I send another stack ASAP to some NWFP address.
They couldn't read too well in European languages, but did state that
they couldn't get any such books in their region. I don't speak Dari
or Pashtu, and neither was I making the same inquiries considering the
circumstances then.
Some years later, I met an older Afghan who'd been a student of IS's
father. But the former had left his homeland some years before and
lived in various MidEast countries. I'm sure his feedback(pro), if
here, would be worth several evenings.
>
> So my (implied) question remains open. What consequence if any was
> Idries Shah to the Muslim or Islamic Sufi world, or did he merely work
> for the West -- a sentiment that seems to be echoed here with so much
> adoration, not all of it equally well founded it seems -- and if so, is
> that "bad"? I really don't know, I'm just curious. You'd think any Sufi
> so great would have left some imprint on his religious fellows if
> nothing else.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pieter
I suppose one could try to track down some of the writers in the "Sufi
Studies: East & West" symposium. Consulting some institution such as
the El-Azar or equivalent might or might not produce a useful answer
considering again what Scott already pointed out. Azo would be
someone to ask on this. And not to forget that IS's books were
supposedly burned in Iran (something to do with the idea of sufism
existing before Islam or somehow separate from it). But the inquiry
you propose may tell you much more about the opinion holders than
anything else.
And as for those "religious fellows", better to let them sleep! :)
Yours,
esowteric
> >>is a terribly flawed analogy. It would be more correct to analogize the
> >> sufi teacher as being the one who teaches people how to drive.
> >
> >
> > Well, perhaps we're getting "our analogies in a twist" here. Either
> > could work depending on what one wants to emphasize.
>
> If the symbolism is only intended to work on the surface. On deeper
> levels it becomes less a symbolism and more of an actuality that is
> interpreted by the conscious mind which then thinks of it as a symbol.
Dear Scott,
Sorry if I rattled your cage earlier. This was unintentional. I actually
agree with quite a lot that you've said, and I will readily agree that I
have much to learn and unlearn.
Submission requires ADMISSION. Perhaps that is a strange concept to you,
Scott?
Is your analogy of the mountain climber any deeper or more valid that that
of a train, a driver and a conductor? For many years of my life I was a
workaholic, so I really don't need you to lecture me on the necessity for
had work. Through that experience, I learnt that the kind of strenuous work
one might have to use in climbing a high mountain, will not in itself get
you to the top of the mountain. A deeper analogy would be the task of
levelling one's mountain, or digging in one's own ruin and unearthing a
treasure. Where I do frequently use strenuous energy, this is often used to
occupy me and wear me out, so that something else may be achieved. As I
understand it, at his Foundation, Gurdjieff used dance in such a way.
You and I both know that any analogy will, by its very nature, break down if
like a piece of elastic it is stretched beyond its "elastic limit", for the
sake of winning an argument. The idea of a free ride is not something that I
overlay on the analogy of a train as a vehicle. If you like, we could make
the train a pedal-powered train, I realy don't mind. The idea that such a
vehicle requires an input of energy that is largely invisible to the
travellers, that the functions of a conductor and driver -- and even the
real destination -- might be unknown to those embarking on the train at its
initial station (and moreso those without experience of such a journey),
would fit my use of the analogy.
To pour scorn on others for using banal analogies? Is that the Way of the
Advanced Seeker After Truth?
As for "the bozos on the bus", this is not intended to be taken in the way
you take it. It is intended to have a functional use, and is linked with the
exercising of humility:
As my own teacher once pointed out, in his own inimitable style:
"We all shit through the same hole."
"At the end of the day, all of the [chess] pieces go back in the same box."
Are there holes in these arguments of mine -- of course there are. This
reply is riddled with them, so beware that you don't fall in one of them.
Best Wishes,
Eric.
Fried Jack Morgan
Okay, give me an example of an intact Western spiritual tradition that
is also spiritually functional, i.e., it works on the same level the
sufis do, heart-to-heart communication, etc. and does not derive or
borrow substantially from any Eastern traditions, AND is open to the
majority of Westerners.
Fried Jack Morgan
esowteric
> Do you think I write ONLY for the person whose letter I am responding to?
There was a boy who worked in the produce section of a super market. A man
came in and asked to buy half a head of lettuce. The boy told him that they
only sold whole heads of lettuce, but the man replied that he did not need a
whole head, only half.
The boy explained that he would have to ask the manager and so he walked
into the back room and said, "There is some jerk out there who wants to buy
only a half a head of lettuce."
As he finished saying this, he turned around to find the man standing right
behind him, so he quickly added, "And this gentleman wants to buy the other
half." The manager okayed the request and the man went on his way.
Later on the manager said to the boy, "You almost got yourself in a lot of
trouble earlier, but I must say I was impressed with the way you got out of
it. You think on your feet and we like that around here. Where are you from,
son?"
The boy replied, "Minnesota, sir."
"Oh, really? Why did you leave Minnesota?" inquired the manager.
The boy replied, "They're all just whores and hockey players up there."
"My wife is from Minnesota", exclaimed the manager.
The boy instantly replied, "Really! What team did she play for?"
Fried Jack Morgan
Eric, over time you have shown us all what you are like underneath more
than once, here and in Caravnasarai. There is no need to keep doing it.
Ciao
GV
> >
Eric wrote:
> >>>Yet, you'd make an exception -- for argument's sake -- of a teacher by the
> >>>name of Idries Shah and his "purely preparatory books"? Are you saying >>>that Shah is involved in work beyond the "literatary phase" of his operation?
> >>>
I wrote:
> > I didn't realize there was a disagreement about this. IS made it
> > clear that books could not provide everything. It was also known that
> > he did offer "further orientation" beyond books.
>
> You are responding to Eric's words here, not mine. I say this because
> you do not make it clear whom you are responding to here.
I was responding to Eric's words, except that they seemed to be
responses to some ongoing disagreement, though I wasn't sure. It
wasn't clear to me what the words were referring to. My response is
to the idea expressed there which seemed to be about whether IS's work
was purely preparatory (books) vs. books and more.
>
> The personal symbols one uses and how they use them have a determining
> factor on what one does and how one approaches things, including sufism.
Yes, and the symbols one uses also depends first on one's overall
understanding plus the particular point one is making. In Eric's
analogy, I just read it as addressing the idea of a phase in one
person's quest as expressed by Pieter. Not as some ultimate statement.
>
>
> Have you seen the Elvis Presley phenomenon in the U.S.? Do you catch my
> drift?
>
NO. Can you spell it out a bit more? There is the "imitation" aspect
and then there is the one of supposed sightings, or perhaps the vigils
at Graceland.
> >
> I refer you to Idries Shah's comments about "cargo cults" and his
> analogy of a primitive culture that needed to be taught medicine (or was
> it hygiene), but needed to be taught basic concepts first before any
> understanding of basice medicine (or was it hygiene) could be given to
> them. Do you think he was just saying this an example? Do you not know
> the different ways to "talk to the walls so that the door may hear"? He
> was referring to the West. And he was talking about the West, because
> as he said, sufism was being brought to the West.
Are you really sure about ALL of this and what IS intended? Some of
those messages are pretty universal. There has been an overall effort
so we're told to focus a new phase of the Work in the West, but for
many reasons. I don't agree that it is just due to the reasons you
list, such as Westerners are deprived more than Easterners. The world
is undergoing many changes, and there is considerable mention in IS's
works of centers of power shifting due to this and new phases
unfolding. The Work is being offered more in the open because there
is a need for this and this can be done esp. in the West (at least
first perhaps) on such a scale. There may also be a need for general
stability for this phase, at least to disperse it quite widely through
humanity. There are times of contraction and times of release. His
works do cite the sufi influence and presence of sufis-- even in the
USA, going back a few hundred years. And he never ceased to point out
deteriorated forms of the Tradition that masqueraded as the Way in the
East and still do. The same mistaking the container for the content
exists there as well, since this applies to all people. All students
need to be taught "basics" in this field no matter what their
backgrounds.
Can you name any
> truly Western spiritual tradition that is intact AND available?
No knowledge of the Way is ever Western or Eastern. And the Greeks
were considered Western at one time. Longitude doesn't measure truth.
Alchemy
> is an Eastern tradition, Christianity is an Eastern tradition, and has
> lost a great deal of its spirituality, and what is left is either
> misunderstood or ignored. Wicca comes kind of close, but much of it
> is guessed at or made up in far, far too many cases, and more has been
> borrowed from other cultures. Native American traditions, the real
> ones, are almost completely closed to non-Native Americans.
All "traditions" are appearances on the surface. Perfectly "intact"
ones (whatever those are)are fragments to those without capacity.
People, including sufi students, mistakenly consider themselves
"insiders" because of what they've joined, or wear, or pray. But any
real teaching is always closed to those who aren't ready.
The Work has always been there, and not just for people hanging out
in the East. A person who is truly ready will be served. A fellow in
a wheelchair in rural Arkansas without any knowledge of special
languages, books, and teachers can be as much a candidate for higher
study as someone living next to some 900 yr. old sufi monastery with a
scintillating spiritual lineage. Space and time are not barriers in
this kind of learning.
If one is looking at the general projection of the Work, it is an
overall framework. But it will itself seem just as fragmented as any
other tradition without the crucial underpinnings of experience that
"turns the key." Perhaps there are just many more pieces of it being
offered openly in the past 30 years. But the underlying (or overseen)
dimension to the Work is and has always been there.
>
> And learning the difference between container and content, well, that is
> not the only "learning how to learn" that is necessary. Try going
> around asking people how children should be taught, and you will soon
> discover just what most people know about learning.
True. But the central concern to guardians of the way is allowing
those who can "learn" to do so. If others learn to say, think
straight, or make the world a better place, fine. (I don't know,
however, if "thinking straight" is necessarily a prerequisite to other
studies!) :)
>
> But what did he teach? Even sufi teachers teach things other than
> sufism, in the sense that sufism is used here in this group.
He directed students in the Way, and oversaw those who could learn.
Fried Jack Morgan
>>>>For one thing, the idea of the teacher being a driver or worker on a bus
>>>>is a terribly flawed analogy. It would be more correct to analogize the
>>>> sufi teacher as being the one who teaches people how to drive.
>>>
>>>
>>>Well, perhaps we're getting "our analogies in a twist" here. Either
>>>could work depending on what one wants to emphasize.
>>
>>If the symbolism is only intended to work on the surface. On deeper
>>levels it becomes less a symbolism and more of an actuality that is
>>interpreted by the conscious mind which then thinks of it as a symbol.
>
>
> Dear Scott,
>
> Sorry if I rattled your cage earlier. This was unintentional. I actually
> agree with quite a lot that you've said, and I will readily agree that I
> have much to learn and unlearn.
Eric, it takes quite a bit more than that to rattle my cage.
>
> Submission requires ADMISSION. Perhaps that is a strange concept to you,
> Scott?
Eric, you are far, far from ready to do any kind of teaching or guidance
on the path. And remember that Idries Shah said that the desire to
teach is a contra-indication for one to do any teaching.
This is one of the things that gets thrown back at you, because many
people can tell instinctively that you have a desire to teach (where it
comes from I do not know and would rather not guess), and this desire to
teach is one of those things that make it very easy to "push your
buttons", so to speak, which many people saw when Dara found out how
easy it was and kept baiting you and you were unable to control
yourself, even with me "pounding" on you, you were unable to control
yourself. And you are not the only one on this list like that and who
responded like that.
Yes, you know many things and have had many experiences. But so has
everyone else. You have a connection with a Greater Reality, and so
does Obo. And so does everyone else. And it does not make either of
you a teacher or a guide, it does not make you smarter or dumber than
anyone else, or better or worse than anyone else. President Bush and
Tony Blair and Saddam Hussein have the same connection to that Greater
Reality that you do and Obo does.
And you need to remember that some people that pass through here have
had certain trainings that you and Obo have not. And that some of
these people, as disreputable as they may SEEM to you, have certain sufi
connections that you do not, which gives them access to certain things
that you do not have or know.
As tough as it is, remember that Idries Shah presented more than one
sufi story about a sufi being abused and not responding to it, or
responding without defending him or herself and without trying to get
even.
>
> Is your analogy of the mountain climber any deeper or more valid that that
> of a train, a driver and a conductor? For many years of my life I was a
> workaholic, so I really don't need you to lecture me on the necessity for
> had work. Through that experience, I learnt that the kind of strenuous work
> one might have to use in climbing a high mountain, will not in itself get
> you to the top of the mountain. A deeper analogy would be the task of
> levelling one's mountain, or digging in one's own ruin and unearthing a
> treasure. Where I do frequently use strenuous energy, this is often used to
> occupy me and wear me out, so that something else may be achieved. As I
> understand it, at his Foundation, Gurdjieff used dance in such a way.
>
> You and I both know that any analogy will, by its very nature, break down if
> like a piece of elastic it is stretched beyond its "elastic limit", for the
> sake of winning an argument. The idea of a free ride is not something that I
> overlay on the analogy of a train as a vehicle. If you like, we could make
> the train a pedal-powered train, I realy don't mind. The idea that such a
> vehicle requires an input of energy that is largely invisible to the
> travellers, that the functions of a conductor and driver -- and even the
> real destination -- might be unknown to those embarking on the train at its
> initial station (and moreso those without experience of such a journey),
> would fit my use of the analogy.
>
> To pour scorn on others for using banal analogies? Is that the Way of the
> Advanced Seeker After Truth?
You see scorn where there is none. Like you thought francesca and rabcn
were the same posters, when it is quite likely that they just had the
same teacher which can result in a similar style and manner of
responding and dealing with matters relating to the path.
Fried Jack Morgan
There are people starting to worship Elvis Presley. No, they do not set
up altars and churches and regular services, but it is worship just the
same.
The way is neither of the East or the West. The presentation, or
projection, of it, however, is adapted to the time, place and people,
and this is what is Eastern, Western, Native American, Hutu, Arabic,
Hebrew, etc.
And the Greeks
> were considered Western at one time. Longitude doesn't measure truth.
The Greek tradition is no longer intact or available. Longitude doesn't
measure truth, correct. But it does affect the presentation and
methodology, which has to be adapted to time, PLACE, and people.
>
> Alchemy
>
>>is an Eastern tradition, Christianity is an Eastern tradition, and has
>>lost a great deal of its spirituality, and what is left is either
>>misunderstood or ignored. Wicca comes kind of close, but much of it
>>is guessed at or made up in far, far too many cases, and more has been
>>borrowed from other cultures. Native American traditions, the real
>>ones, are almost completely closed to non-Native Americans.
>
>
> All "traditions" are appearances on the surface. Perfectly "intact"
> ones (whatever those are)are fragments to those without capacity.
> People, including sufi students, mistakenly consider themselves
> "insiders" because of what they've joined, or wear, or pray. But any
> real teaching is always closed to those who aren't ready.
> The Work has always been there, and not just for people hanging out
> in the East. A person who is truly ready will be served. A fellow in
> a wheelchair in rural Arkansas without any knowledge of special
> languages, books, and teachers can be as much a candidate for higher
> study as someone living next to some 900 yr. old sufi monastery with a
> scintillating spiritual lineage. Space and time are not barriers in
> this kind of learning.
But how many of us here qualify for that kind of thing? You are talking
about a pretty rare thing, and it is the rareness of this kind of thing
that makes my words about the West true.
Fried Jack Morgan
a baker? The first dervish was given some day old dry bread, while the
second was kept waiting, QUIETLY and PATIENTLY, although he was
starving, while the baker made a fresh loaf of bread.
This is why you do not get anything while all the others around you seem
to be getting so much.
Hold you peace and hold your tongue, or you'll just get dried, day-old
left over bread that did not sell, too.
Obo Vajrin
supposedly burned in Iran (something to do with the idea of sufism
existing before Islam or somehow separate from it). >>
If this is true then perhaps it informs us that Dara may not be solely
responsible for the agenda he is promoteing, but merely passing on the agenda
of some folks in Iran (he usually mentions that he gets manuscripts from
Tehran, if I remember correctly). Of course there are some folks who think
this is what Sufism is about. To each his own.
Take Care, obo
PS Scott, several years ago, you had quite different comments about me to say.
Do you think I've changed or is it you who has changed? I do understand that
people change their minds all the time without really changing much of anything
at all.
Steve
> Okay, give me an example of an intact Western spiritual tradition that
> is also spiritually functional, i.e., it works on the same level the
> sufis do, heart-to-heart communication, etc. and does not derive or
> borrow substantially from any Eastern traditions, AND is open to the
> majority of Westerners.
The English dowsing community. Though community is used somewhat loosely
here.
Fried Jack Morgan
Does dowsing lead to enlightenment?
Fried Jack Morgan
Fried Jack Morgan
If one does not progress, one does not stay the same. There are certain
"islands" of stability on the path, but if one does not make it to one
of them, one falls back to a lower level. And even at those "islands of
stability", one can fall.
You are not the same person now that you were then, Obo.
Steve
>
> Does dowsing lead to enlightenment?
No practice leads to enlightenment, as you well know, but some communities
do or, more accurately, some communities and/or practices can make it more
likely. Act catalytically or as a kind of fertiliser for the field.
With that in mind, it leads to wholeness and follows the consolationless
path of the Ch'an or Naqshbandi schools.
huuumeee
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Shah's claim to be a Naqshbandi Grandshaykh>>>>>>>>>
Where does Shah make this claim?
esowteric
> >Shah's claim to be a Naqshbandi Grandshaykh>>>>>>>>>
Huuuumeee asked:
> Where does Shah make this claim?
Dear Huuumeee,
I can't think of anywhere in his own published writings where Shah himself
made a claim.
Here, however, is what Martin Brackett had to report in "The Diffusion of
Sufi Ideas in the West", published 1972, produced by Professor Leonard
Lewin's Colorado group, under Idries Shah's wing. The group is now under
Omar Ali Shah's wing.
They arrived in Turkey by jetliner, on the Orient Express, along the Asian
Highway from Lebanon and Persia. Some wore beards. robes and turbans, others
bush shirts, others still smart business suits. One hundred and fifty-five
delegates of the religious orders of Islam were meeting to elect their
Supreme Guide, the 'king' of the Sufi mystics.
No such convocation has taken place since the Middle Ages, when in the
thirteenth century Jalaluddin Rumi was unanimously chosen to be the ruler of
the dervishes. Karatas, an ancient suburb of Izmir, had been named as the
rendezvous, and in a vast underground hall the ceremonies of election were
carried out. Paradoxically, all the Sufi orders were abolished nearly half a
century ago in Turkey by the republican government -- the only country in
the world to take this step; but the convocation had been arranged for this
place a hundred years ago, and custom must be followed. The Sufis claim that
they are the heirs to the original secret knowledge of mankind, now
forgotten except by them, which tells humanity whence it comes and whither
it is going. Special mystical exercises and disciplines enable the
'recollection' of man's former state to be achieved.
In 1865, when this year's meeting was fixed, a prophecy was given out which
would enable the leaders to assemble in Izmir, instead of a date. It was to
be after the death of the Aga Khan, after the over-running of Tibet, after a
war in the Yemen, and the summer of the year in which two men descended from
the heavens, having left the world completely.
The first three predictions were necessary because it was believed by some
Sufis that the 'secret wisdom' was divided into four parts: the part held by
the Sufis, the portion kept by the old Aga Khan, another amount in the hands
of the Dalai and Panchen Lamas of Tibet. and the last fragment in the
keeping of the Imam of the Yemen. Certain disturbances of the earth would
cause all these people to relinquish their barakat. special stock of wisdom.
which would then become available to the Sufi 'king' to acquire and employ
for the good of mankind.
Forty-one years ago a number of candidates were selected, some of them only
newly-born babies, and these were given a special training in expectation of
this year's events.
There seems to be no clear account of the origin, principles and
organization of the Sufis, but a vast number of semi-religious orders termed
Dervishes are scattered throughout the East. Some are said to be the
original Moslems. others secretly Christians, yet others freethinkers. They
themselves claim to be the guardians of secret wisdom, and that is all.
It is almost impossible to join the sect, though many of their rites and
rituals are well-known. I, for instance. as a non-member, was allowed to
attend the enthronement of the 'king' on no greater recommendation than that
I was known to the Rector of the great Indian University of Deobund, whose
representative was at the meeting.
In the great hall of the monastery of Karatas the delegates formed two
lines, seated on priceless Turkish carpets, as the President (the Supreme
Guide of Egypt) addressed them. Each sheikh was accompanied by an
interpreter who whispered into his ear a line-by-line translation of the
speech. The Egyptian spoke in English, this having been discovered to be the
only language understood by all the interpreters.
On the whitewashed walls of the hall were colored symbols recalling those
seen in old illustrations of medieval magicians: circles, stars, triangles.
A huge candle, at least three feet high and a foot in diameter, stood
burning at the end of the room. The successful candidate had evidently been
elected in advance, for the sheikh said: 'We are here to ratify the election
of our High Guide, the Magnetic Pole of the Age, the Grand Sheikh of the
Naqshbandi and Qadiri rites, the Shah. Those who accord with this decision
raise their hands and state their ranks.'
One by one, as they were signaled by a master of ceremonies in a patchwork
covered cloak, fifteen venerable figures rose and spoke. Their words were
translated in this form: 'I Master of the Chishti Order of India, do hereby
accept this man as my Master and Supreme Guide.'
A tall. slight and bearded figure in a brilliant green robe was now brought
forward and presented with a banner, a cup, a book and a wand. This was the
new 'king.'
He said, in perfect English:
'I testify that I remember the true self of man and our ancient compact.
Before man existed, we existed. We work for the Protection of the feeble,
the education of the heart, head and hands for human triumph. We have
respect for all worthy individuals and institutions.'
His voice was strong and clear, his face strikingly handsome, with the
hawklike features of a bedouin.
In order to attain this rank he had not only to be selected for training, to
memorize the Koran and learn about 'all religious and philosophical
systems,' but had to travel through ten countries, supporting himself and
teaching and helping all whom he met for a period of not less than twelve
years.
Intuition, I was told, was exercised by the elders in their original choice
of candidates. After that it was up to the candidate himself to carry
through the course of study and prove his supernatural endow-ments by
'miracles' and fortitude.
After the ceremony the delegates left in ones and twos. They had spent less
than a week in Turkey. They had done nothing to break the republican law
against Sufis, because they had not formed any organization or furthered the
aims of any. And they had, as they told me, no politics. Now it was all up
to their king to get in touch with them. Until then their tens of millions
of members spread throughout the East would continue their 'inner
exercises' -- something like Yoga -- and look forward to the founding of the
first Sufi school for nearly five hundred years.
esowteric
Keywords: Idries Shah, Naqshbandi, Grandsheikh, Qutub, Pole Star, Sufi,
Mystics, Leonard Lewin, Martin Brackett, Keysign
Fried Jack Morgan
So the dowsing community produces enlightened individuals, has a format,
techniques and methodology for creating such? And can create
individuals who can create enlightened individuals?
And there are many things in this world that can "Act catalytically or
as a kind of fertiliser for the field". Which zen master was it that
was enlightened when he accidentally kicked a small stone? Idries Shah
himself said that certain things of the world were important for one's
development, but these things are not a schoolor system.
I am not talking about tings that "make it more likely". This is
nothing more than waiting for random chance. I am speaking of systems
and schools that can reliably produce enlightened individuals without
waiting for it to happen by accident. Like the sufis, for example.
The Church in the West ground Western systems into the ground hundreds
of years ago.
Fried Jack Morgan
Idries Shah never made this claim for himself as far as I am aware. It
was supposedly made by emir of Kuwait or one of the smaller Middle
Eastern countries. There is a rather long article that someone posted
in either the Mushkil Gusha or Caravansarai Yahoo groups that addressed
this.
It is also on the back cover of the book, "The Sufis", by Idries Shah.
People say that this is the same as Idries Shah saying it, because he
had control of the publishing company, Octagon Press, and as such had
control over what went on the cover of his books. But the book, "The
Sufis" was NOT published by Octagon, but was published by Doubleday
Books, meaning Idries Shah did not have control over it. He may have
had some say, but he did not have complete control over what went on the
cover. The publishing companies control that, because that is what they
use to get people to buy the books.
Steve
> Steve wrote:
> I am not talking about tings that "make it more likely". This is
> nothing more than waiting for random chance.
Nor am I, Scott. And no, in this you are wrong, it is not a matter of random
chance but a matter of grace and even the greatest of sufi schools works
within that necessity.
Which, to some eyes, has all the qualities of randomness, to others it has
the quality of unknowability. Randomness is what people tend to see when
they wish to replace the truly ineffable with something known.
Fried Jack Morgan
likely".
Put it like this. The student or devotee waits upon the grace. They
cannot deliberately get it on their own behalf. But a true teacher, if
you understand what is truly meant by the Teacher, can deliberately give
it. The Grace comes through the Teacher. The Teacher just asks, and it
is given or not given. It is that simple. The exercises, techniques,
etc. are there to prepare the student for it. The Teacher will not give
it to one who is not prepared for it or ready for it.
Is this how it is with the dowsing community? Are there teachers in the
dowsing community like this, which there among the sufis and a few other
lesser known groups that differ in their outer matters?
Obo Vajrin
Where does Shah make this claim?
>>
What Scott says is mostly true about the statement on the back cover of "The
Sufis". The line reads: "Idries Shah, whose full name is Nawab-Zaba Sayed
Idries Shah el-Hashimi, is Grand Sheik of the Sufis and the eldest son of the
Nawab (the Mohammedan equivalent of Maharafah) of Sardana, near Delhi in
India."
Omar Ali-Shah is the older brother, so eldest son is an error.
In Robert Graves introduction to this book he states on page XX: He is, in
fact, a Grand Sheikh of the Sufi Tariqa ("Rule"), but since all Sufis are by
definition equal and responsible only to themselves for their own spiritual
achievements, "Sheikh" is a misleading title. It does not mean "leader" so
much as "fugleman", the old army term for the soldier who stood in front of a
company on the parade ground as an exemplar in arms-drill.
Many sources lable Shah Naqshbandi, but I don't remember ever seeing the claim
made by either of the brothers of themselves.
Take Care, obo
GV
>
> The way is neither of the East or the West. The presentation, or
> projection, of it, however, is adapted to the time, place and people,
> and this is what is Eastern, Western, Native American, Hutu, Arabic,
> Hebrew, etc.
Yes, agreed. Regarding the notion of a new phase in the work, I
prefer to regard this as being for the "modern" world rather than just
using the word "west." As to projection, this really has to always be
contemporary and in sync with the environment.
> The Greek tradition is no longer intact or available. Longitude doesn't
> measure truth, correct. But it does affect the presentation and
> methodology, which has to be adapted to time, PLACE, and people.
The products of Ancient Greece (such as mythology & plays) survive,
just as do fairy tales. The core messages are the same. Added to
them now is a huge body of material on the Way because the age demands
it and the time is probably right.
> But how many of us here qualify for that kind of thing? You are talking
> about a pretty rare thing, and it is the rareness of this kind of thing
> that makes my words about the West true.
>
Perhaps it is a phenomenon that will become less rare. Could be
interesting to consider the idea that as there are more people whose
awareness has evolved, and if that indeed has a transformative effect
on others, then there might be an exponential increase among the
population. (Of course, the state of the world looks quite the
opposite now!) But the overall sufi operation has the longterm
welfare of humanity in mind, and there seems to be a need to increase
the upgrades down here.
And always nice to have the maps we might need ahead of time.
Yours,
Fried Jack Morgan
Other sufis with the title of Grand Shaykh. It is not that uncommon of
a title among sufis, apparently.
Grand Sheikh of the order Helveti-Jerrahi, Sheikh Muzaffer Ozak
http://www.naqshbandi.net/haqqani/sufi/sufi_orders.htm
Grand Sheikh Hazrat Azad Rasool, of the Naqshibandiyya -
Mujaddidi-Sirhindi and Sheikh holds IJAZZA in these orders :
Shadhiliyya, Qadiriyya, Naqshibandiyya, Chisti, Mujadiyya,
http://www.angelfire.com/art/sufischool/home.htm.
Grand Sheikh of the Sufi Order Halveti Jerrahi Sufi Tariqat, Al-Hajj
Muhammad Saffer Nureddin Jerrahi
http://www.giftofthegivers.co.za/gift_of_the_givers_foundation/about_us/origin/origin.php
grand sheikh of the naqbandi order: Sheikh Nazim al Haqqani el Qubrussi
http://www.urday.com/kalki/article2.asp
Grand Sheikh Hamza of Morocco, Qadiria Butshishia Order
http://www.israinternational.com/Speakers.html
Just google on the search terms "Grand Sheikh sufi" or various spellings
thereof.
Fried Jack Morgan
> Fried Jack Morgan <friedja...@netscape.net> wrote in message news:<bhLZc.41$NH4....@news.uswest.net>...
>
>>The way is neither of the East or the West. The presentation, or
>>projection, of it, however, is adapted to the time, place and people,
>>and this is what is Eastern, Western, Native American, Hutu, Arabic,
>>Hebrew, etc.
>
>
> Yes, agreed. Regarding the notion of a new phase in the work, I
> prefer to regard this as being for the "modern" world rather than just
> using the word "west." As to projection, this really has to always be
> contemporary and in sync with the environment.
>
>
>>The Greek tradition is no longer intact or available. Longitude doesn't
>>measure truth, correct. But it does affect the presentation and
>>methodology, which has to be adapted to time, PLACE, and people.
>
>
> The products of Ancient Greece (such as mythology & plays) survive,
> just as do fairy tales. The core messages are the same. Added to
> them now is a huge body of material on the Way because the age demands
> it and the time is probably right.
>
Have you read the books by Peter Kingsley, such as *The Dark Places of
Wisdom* about the ancient Greek tradition?
Please remember that I was talking about the presence of extant and
available Western traditions in the West. Stories that few, if any
other than those in a valid tradition can interpret correctly do not
count as a Living and valid and intact spiritual tradition. They are
small remnants of one that used to exist in the West.
I find it interesting that the only people that can properly interpret
those stories, be they Greek myths or European fairy tales are either
sufis or influenced by the sufis. If the Greek tradition or the
tradition from which the European fairy tales came from were alive and
valid, I would think that people from them would be around to interpret
those myths and stories.
>
>
>>But how many of us here qualify for that kind of thing? You are talking
>>about a pretty rare thing, and it is the rareness of this kind of thing
>>that makes my words about the West true.
>>
>
> Perhaps it is a phenomenon that will become less rare. Could be
> interesting to consider the idea that as there are more people whose
> awareness has evolved, and if that indeed has a transformative effect
> on others, then there might be an exponential increase among the
> population. (Of course, the state of the world looks quite the
> opposite now!) But the overall sufi operation has the longterm
> welfare of humanity in mind, and there seems to be a need to increase
> the upgrades down here.
> And always nice to have the maps we might need ahead of time.
>
> Yours,
It is very odd, how many people complain about religion here in the
West, but start getting defensive when I say that the only intact and
valid spiritual traditions in the West are Eastern traditions, with the
exception of the Native traditions of America (Africa I know
diddly-squat, actually less than diddly-squat, about). And by tradition
I mean a full-fledged spiritual/mystical tradition, not remnants of one.
Why the defensiveness?
esowteric
> What Scott says is mostly true about the statement on the back cover of
"The
> Sufis". The line reads: "Idries Shah, whose full name is Nawab-Zaba
Sayed
> Idries Shah el-Hashimi, is Grand Sheik of the Sufis and the eldest son of
the
> Nawab (the Mohammedan equivalent of Maharafah) of Sardana, near Delhi in
> India."
>
> Omar Ali-Shah is the older brother, so eldest son is an error.
>
> In Robert Graves introduction to this book he states on page XX: He is,
in
> fact, a Grand Sheikh of the Sufi Tariqa ("Rule"), but since all Sufis are
by
> definition equal and responsible only to themselves for their own
spiritual
> achievements, "Sheikh" is a misleading title. It does not mean "leader"
so
> much as "fugleman", the old army term for the soldier who stood in front
of a
> company on the parade ground as an exemplar in arms-drill.
>
> Many sources label Shah Naqshbandi, but I don't remember ever seeing the
> claim made by either of the brothers of themselves.
Good morning, America!
Another attribution, from "Documents on Contemporary Dervish Communities",
in the section entitled "Study of Specialized [Healing] Techniques in
Central Asia," by Ja'far Hallaji:
"The mandate to teach the [healing] technique [called "Chuff" ("breathing")]
is still held by the Hashemite family (of which Mohammed was a member), and
the present chiefs who maintain this mandate are the three senior male
members of the family: the [Paghman] Princes Ikbal Ali Shah, Idries Shah and
Omar Ali Shah. Their hypnotic knowledge and power can be seen as deriving
from three sources: that they are Sufi practioners which gives them the
curative power of Bahauddin [Nasqshband], that they are tribal chiefs, and
that they are Sayeds, descendants of Mohammed."
Best Wishes,
Eric.
esowteric
> P.S. and I am NOT a hockey player.
Why, you big girl's blouse, I never for one moment thought or meant to
suggest that you were!
Best Wishes,
Eric.
Ombre d'Or
>The Church in the West ground Western systems into the >ground hundreds of
years ago.
And Ombredor says,
Whoa, that's a mouthful of a sentence.
GV
>
> Have you read the books by Peter Kingsley, such as *The Dark Places of
> Wisdom* about the ancient Greek tradition?
Thanks for the suggestion. Will look at these, gladly.
>
>
> I find it interesting that the only people that can properly interpret
> those stories, be they Greek myths or European fairy tales are either
> sufis or influenced by the sufis. If the Greek tradition or the
> tradition from which the European fairy tales came from were alive and
> valid, I would think that people from them would be around to interpret
> those myths and stories.
Perhaps we are understanding some terms differently. I have a hard
time often trying to not misinterpret messages in this medium, if I
don't get lost in tree diagrams first and sorting out who said what.
Not to mention trying to write clearly in return.
As to tales, there are many wonderful interpretations that are
useful and enjoyable to people. It's not really a matter of which are
"proper" than it is like the analogy of the walnut: there is a further
or "core" or higher meaning there behind the others. The reality
these messages stems from and represent is always there. This stream
is often equated with the sufi Tradition. It stands behind other
traditions, and much further away from some. People cannot know or
understand the further interpretation in some tales until they have
themselves crossed over into a different "zone." It is not something
that can be "told."
I believe Sophocles's play ("Oedipus"), for one, examines in part
that "process of crossing over."
>
> It is very odd, how many people complain about religion here in the
> West, but start getting defensive when I say that the only intact and
> valid spiritual traditions in the West are Eastern traditions, with the
> exception of the Native traditions of America (Africa I know
> diddly-squat, actually less than diddly-squat, about). And by tradition
> I mean a full-fledged spiritual/mystical tradition, not remnants of one.
>
I only commentetd that in even such traditions, the same basic
"re-orientation" and learning the basics is needed at the individual
level. It is all remnants otherwise. Regardless, there is always
higher guidance for those, wherever they are, who need it. But I'd
agree that it is advisable to have access to an intact network if
possible.
Yours,
Steve
>
> Is this how it is with the dowsing community? Are there teachers in the
> dowsing community like this, which there among the sufis and a few other
> lesser known groups that differ in their outer matters?
Yes
Fried Jack Morgan
Then why didn't you say so the first time?
Steve
> >
> >
>
> Then why didn't you say so the first time?
Until you asked I did not know
:-)
TheIdiot
Having never met him, I dont give two figs for him, except that he wrote
important work of others for all to read.
Good work Idries, pity there is no more.
I doubt he was what you claim he claimed to be, - if he was, he would never
have written it all down, for we are not really worthy.
"Rand" <ra...@sociologist.com> wrote in message
news:52f470eb.04083...@posting.google.com...
> Let me first say that I loved Idries Shah and that he was profoundly
> instrumental in my early formation. I discovered his name through
> Robert Anton Wilson and proceeded to devour all 22 of the recommended
> books on the booklist Shah's "Institute for Sufi Studies" sends you if
> you write to the address in the back of his books asking for more
> information. I still like to recommend his books to people, and have
> an immense gratitude for the ways he opened my mind and made a bridge
> for me to reach to an area I may not have otherwise been able to
> reach.
>
> This being said... Shah's claim to be a Naqshbandi Grandshaykh appears
> categorically false. There are exactly 40 Naqshbandi Grandshaykhs ever
> in existance, and unless one of them assumed the physical form and
> identity of Idries Shah, which seems farfetched, then Shah was simply
> lying. The only other possibility is that Shah was, in reality, Khidr,
> who was the 10th Naqshbandi Grandshaykh. Even if this were the case,
> his claim to be the Sahib uz-Zaman, the Master or Teacher of the Time,
> could not have been true, as the Sahib uz-Zaman at the time Shah was
> writing was openly known to be (and continues to be) Nazim al-Kibrisi.
>
> Here are some Shah quotes I found online about tariqat. While it's
> possible to read alternate interpretations deep between the lines,
> even it were the case that Shah was trying to say something other than
> what he appeared to be saying, speaking in this way could serve no
> purpose except to intentionally mislead people. But the far more
> likely alternative seems that he was simply against tarikat:
>
> Excerpted from The Commanding Self:
>
> "The deluded 'Sufis', down the centuries, are those who have taken
> temporary
> teaching situations, parables and the like and stretched them to apply
> as
> perennial 'truths', 'exercises' and the like." "Among the Sufis, the
> development of 'Orders' (turuq) gives us a conspicuous example of the
> process which I have been describing. Of all the major 'Paths' among
> the
> supposed Sufis of today, not a single one is traceable in its
> foundation to
> the man who is named as its founder. Each came into being only after
> his
> death, formulated from some of his specific teachings employed for
> local
> purposes, and soon turned into a cult." "Follow them and you will
> produce,
> perhaps, an excellent replica of a thirteenth-century man, and that is
> all."
>
> And from Sufi Thought and Action:
>
> "As a general rule, the less the spiritual content, the greater the
> appurtenances. Tall hats, robes, and music; secretiveness and
> high-flown
> titles are very common. Whole orders are sustained on these
> nutrients."
> "Several groups make much of their Islamic connections, and their
> Western
> followers delight in adopting Eastern names and even titles. Among
> these the
> favorites are Sheikh, Pir, Qutub.."
>
> "Transvestism, dressing up in clothes not of the period or of the
> country
> where the individual lives or operates, is regarded as a further
> example of
> the declining or impaired tradition." ".outlandish garb is imitative
> of the
> past -- something which truly representative Sufis warn is an
> indication of
> inner spiritual bankruptcy."
>
> "A large number of 'orders' make much play of their 'spiritual
> pedigree.'
> Since the late Middle Ages, these silsilahs.have become a part of the
> mythology of virtually all the orders." "History shows that this
> innovation
> in Sufism came about in imitation of the scholastic habit of invoking
> higher
> authority in a succession of transmitters, for the hadith.."
>
> "Real Sufi 'missionaries' always speak the language of the country in
> which
> they are working perfectly. The accented tones of the adventurers
> generally
> give them away."
>
> This is all either boldfaced falsehood or disinformation.
Dara
> So what is important here, Idries Shah or the content of his books.
Well that is the problem, those claim to be his followers and those
who claim to be his opponents, neither read his books.
> Having never met him, I dont give two figs for him
I think the over-facination with him has harmed his cause. There is a
tendency: I WANT TO WORSHIP MY OWN DEAD AFGHANI which is far away from
his work and Sufism at large. These are failed christians who replace
their hate for Jesus with the obssession (not love) for IS.
The people who claim to be his readers and or followers are just a
bunch of Mullas clean shaven speaking English. If I remove the word IS
and place it with Ayatollah the IS fake followers are saying exactly
what Mullas says.
> I doubt he was what you claim he claimed to be
That is correct and thank you for mentioning it. We should leave him
at peace and focus on our own Self, after all the goal of Susism was
to know our own Self not Idries Shah.
Disclaimer: There are true IS-followers I have spoken to off-line so I
do apprecaite them very much. However the garbage we read in millions
of groups acting like Nazis are not his followers.
--DARA
esowteric
.srewollof sih ton era sizaN ekil gnitca spuorg fo
snoillim ni daer ew egabrag eht revewoH .hcum yrev meht etiacerppa od
I os enil-ffo ot nekops evah I srewollof-SI eurt era erehT :remialcsiD
.hahS seirdI ton fleS nwo ruo wonk ot
saw msisuS fo laog eht lla retfa ,fleS nwo ruo no sucof dna ecaep ta
mih evael dluohs eW .ti gninoitnem rof uoy knaht dna tcerroc si tahT
eb ot demialc eh mialc uoy tahw saw eh tbuod I >
.syas salluM tahw
yltcaxe gniyas era srewollof ekaf SI eht hallotayA htiw ti ecalp dna
SI drow eht evomer I fI .hsilgnE gnikaeps nevahs naelc salluM fo hcnub
a tsuj era srewollof ro dna sredaer sih eb ot mialc ohw elpoep ehT
.SI rof )evol ton( noissessbo eht htiw suseJ rof etah rieht
ecalper ohw snaitsirhc deliaf era esehT .egral ta msifuS dna krow sih
morf yawa raf si hcihw INAHGFA DAED NWO YM PIHSROW OT TNAW I :ycnednet
a si erehT .esuac sih demrah sah mih htiw noitanicaf-revo eht kniht I
mih rof sgif owt evig tnod I ,mih tem reven gnivaH >
.skoob sih daer rehtien ,stnenoppo sih eb ot mialc ohw
esoht dna srewollof sih eb ot mialc esoht ,melborp eht si taht lleW
.skoob sih fo tnetnoc eht ro hahS seirdI ,ereh tnatropmi si tahw oS >
...>ku.oc.nomed.swen@d71af038$2$mlf$q79ohc<:swen egassem ni etorw
>moc.ll@hh< "toidIehT"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~
--DARA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~
ARAD--
.srewollof sih ton era sizaN ekil gnitca spuorg fo
snoillim ni daer ew egabrag eht revewoH .hcum yrev meht etiacerppa od
I os enil-ffo ot nekops evah I srewollof-SI eurt era erehT :remialcsiD
.hahS seirdI ton fleS nwo ruo wonk ot
saw msisuS fo laog eht lla retfa ,fleS nwo ruo no sucof dna ecaep ta
mih evael dluohs eW .ti gninoitnem rof uoy knaht dna tcerroc si tahT
eb ot demialc eh mialc uoy tahw saw eh tbuod I >
.syas salluM tahw
yltcaxe gniyas era srewollof ekaf SI eht hallotayA htiw ti ecalp dna
SI drow eht evomer I fI .hsilgnE gnikaeps nevahs naelc salluM fo hcnub
a tsuj era srewollof ro dna sredaer sih eb ot mialc ohw elpoep ehT
.SI rof )evol ton( noissessbo eht htiw suseJ rof etah rieht
ecalper ohw snaitsirhc deliaf era esehT .egral ta msifuS dna krow sih
morf yawa raf si hcihw INAHGFA DAED NWO YM PIHSROW OT TNAW I :ycnednet
a si erehT .esuac sih demrah sah mih htiw noitanicaf-revo eht kniht I
mih rof sgif owt evig tnod I ,mih tem reven gnivaH >
.skoob sih daer rehtien ,stnenoppo sih eb ot mialc ohw
esoht dna srewollof sih eb ot mialc esoht ,melborp eht si taht lleW
.skoob sih fo tnetnoc eht ro hahS seirdI ,ereh tnatropmi si tahw oS >
...>ku.oc.nomed.swen@d71af038$2$mlf$q79ohc<:swen egassem ni etorw
>moc.ll@hh< "toidIehT"
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.754 / Virus Database: 504 - Release Date: 07/09/04
TheIdiot
Ironic it is, that in this medium, we seem to have acheived a communion,
between two who have attained reasonable self knowledge. At least, that is
what good communion tends to indicate.
Good communion IS a complement. (hehe for the IS)
"Dara" <da...@untiredwithloving.org> wrote in message
news:5e16295a.04090...@posting.google.com...
Dara
> ARAD--
>
> .srewollof sih ton era sizaN ekil gnitca spuorg fo
> snoillim ni daer ew egabrag eht revewoH .hcum yrev meht etiacerppa od
> I os enil-ffo ot nekops evah I srewollof-SI eurt era erehT :remialcsiD
Once a class clown, always the class clown
--DARA
a.a.shah
self understanding you might like to spend some time in quiet reflection
concerning your reply which I and others here who have not corresponded with
you off line will doubtless find highly inflammatory. Words like dead
afghani, failed christians, obsession (not love), garbage we read, nazis
...... this is ill becoming of you. Take your hatred to 'Is Shah A
anker?' -- Peace, just another afghani, a.a.shah.
"Dara" <da...@untiredwithloving.org> wrote in message
news:5e16295a.04090...@posting.google.com...
Dara
> You make some good points. That said perhaps in the interest of your own
> self understanding you might like to spend some time in quiet reflection
> concerning your reply which I and others here who have not corresponded with
> you off line will doubtless find highly inflammatory. Words like dead
> afghani, failed christians, obsession (not love), garbage we read, nazis
> ...... this is ill becoming of you. Take your hatred to 'Is Shah A
> anker?' -- Peace, just another afghani, a.a.shah.
You did not read it correctly. The words are very harsh to push away
the trash that claim to be IS' follower, they are not in any form, and
they are lying about his writings right and left.
They scare people here and in other groups from Sufism, they scare
them to the point that almost everyone here has got rid of their IS
books.
But anyway thank you for your advice, remember what Jack London said:
The dogs understand ONLY the law of the club.
--DARA
Dara
Salaam your Yahoo account is a fake one. Why do you have to so anonymous?
--DARA
wrote in message news:<chs19e$a9n$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>...
a.a.shah
and money. Besides which I was brought up to live by the maxim that you
should not be saying in private what you are unwilling to share in
public. -- Peace, a.a.shah.
"Dara" <da...@untiredwithloving.org> wrote in message
news:5e16295a.04091...@posting.google.com...
Peter
Why do you write "followers" and "opponents" of IS, are there no other
catagories?
I think there are also some people who try to learn from his books,
everyone to his ability at any given time.
His books are still valuable,and will remain so for some time to come.
That in the course of such seeking some questions arise about the person
IS himself is only natural,and partially due to the fact that we are still
bad learners in this field. To really learn and not only entertain
oneself is not an easy job to do.
Regards,
Peter
Dara
> Salaam Dara,
>
> Why do you write "followers" and "opponents" of IS, are there no other
> catagories?
Salaam Peter you are correct. I met many others.
> I think there are also some people who try to learn from his books,
> everyone to his ability at any given time.
There is a difference between learning and wanker-language of his
uncalled followers, and they are on other sites trashing people's
minds.
> His books are still valuable,and will remain so for some time to come.
I am reading his books reagularly, I am qouting them and I am learning
from him INSHALLAH.
> That in the course of such seeking some questions arise about the person
> IS himself is only natural,and partially due to the fact that we are still
> bad learners in this field. To really learn and not only entertain
> oneself is not an easy job to do.
I have no questions about IS or his persona. I have nothing against
him, I am against those who are a) giving him a bad name, b) those who
are scaring people away from Sufism by their Nazi like preachings
Thanx for the comment and I will think about it more
--DARA
Obo Vajrin
Is it not peculiar that no one here seems to be able to understand what they
read except Dara (by only his own measurment).
<< almost everyone here has got rid of their IS
books. >>
Exactly how many people are here? How many of them have gotten rid of their IS
books (actuall numbers). How have you made this assessment? I don't remember
seeing any on line polls? Have you contacted all of us privately?
There is an IS story about a man and a talking snail to which the punch line is
"Oh I see, you must be one of them" (a liar).
The reason I chalenge you so often is because you keep makeing statements as
above which are so obviously propaganda that like the snail, I must conclude
that everything you say is probably false farsi fabrications.
The Best Teacher
The judge, Nasrudin's employer, sent him to find a vicious guard dog.
After several hours, Nasrudin returned with a docile puppy.
'I told you to bring me a blood-thirsty monster of a dog!' the judge
snarled.
'I know, Master, but the animal is still young enough to learn. And who
could be a better teacher than yourself?'
Page 347, "The World of Nasrudin" by Idries Shah
Take Care, obo
Fried Jack Morgan
> From Dara:<< You did not read it correctly. >>
>
> Is it not peculiar that no one here seems to be able to understand what they
> read except Dara (by only his own measurment).
I understand usually what Dara is posting. And I am not Dara.
>
> << almost everyone here has got rid of their IS
> books. >>
>
> Exactly how many people are here? How many of them have gotten rid of their IS
> books (actuall numbers). How have you made this assessment? I don't remember
> seeing any on line polls? Have you contacted all of us privately?
What? You can't spot metaphor, simile or other literary mechanisms of
exaggeration in Dara's work? Or is it that only Obo and those he
approves of are allowed to use these things?
>
> There is an IS story about a man and a talking snail to which the punch line is
> "Oh I see, you must be one of them" (a liar).
>
> The reason I chalenge you so often is because you keep makeing statements as
> above which are so obviously propaganda that like the snail, I must conclude
> that everything you say is probably false farsi fabrications.
When you make a claim like that that includes a whole people, it smacks
of prejudice and/or bigotry. If you had said "Afro-American" or "black"
instead of "farsi", it would be considered prejudice.
>
> The Best Teacher
> The judge, Nasrudin's employer, sent him to find a vicious guard dog.
> After several hours, Nasrudin returned with a docile puppy.
> 'I told you to bring me a blood-thirsty monster of a dog!' the judge
> snarled.
> 'I know, Master, but the animal is still young enough to learn. And who
> could be a better teacher than yourself?'
>
> Page 347, "The World of Nasrudin" by Idries Shah
>
> Take Care, obo
>
Be careful quoting Idries Shah stories, Obo, they too often show the
nature of the person quoting them. And the snarling judge in this story
is beginning to fit you and your posts to Dara all too well.
boundless idiot
Afghani.
President Abraham Lincoln, sixteenth president of the U.S., is a dead
American. How can stating the obvious be inflammatory?
Is stating that Idries Shah had two feet, two hands, and a nose
inflamatory also?
There are failed Christians. Even Christians know and talk about
them, although they can't always agree on just who is a failed
Christian. There are people who obssess over Idries Shah. Idries
Shah referred to some of them in some of his works.
And haven't you ever noticed that it is almost impossible to discuss
any living sufi teacher in this list without upsetting someone? Dead
sufi teachers, no problem, as long as it is Idries Shah, currently.
Discuss Haqkani, or current Chishti sufi teachers, whether American or
Middle Eastern, or Mevleyivva, or Ruuhania? Nah, too many people here
get upset. Should call this alt.deadsufiteachers.
And it used to be this group people would ask if there were any groups
of this or that sufi tarikka in this city or that city, but not any
more. And it used to be that people would post excerpts fron the
writings of sufi teachers, both living and dead, and poetry, but not
any more. They seemed to have left when this became alt.idriesshah.
Am betting it is all that french fried jack guy's fault. Or whomever
he is. Between him, that eric and that obobo and that darfra, they
have done a pretty darned good job of keeping this list on the topic
of idries Shah and making certain nothing else can get discussed here.
Wait a minute, there was some other guy in the past that someone went
round and round with for what seemed like for ever on nohting but
Idreis Shah. Those tow are just as much to blema.
Wait, darra does post links to stuff other than Idries Shah. But they
are still dead guys.
"a.a.shah" <aas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<chs19e$a9n$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>...
TheIdiot
I always beleived IS just wrote the old stories.
"Obo Vajrin" <obov...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040910203239...@mb-m06.aol.com...
esowteric
Perhaps we can all move on from the lowly pursuit of baiting, pounding and
trading insults?
Best Wishes,
Eric.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.754 / Virus Database: 504 - Release Date: 06/09/04
Dara
> are still dead guys.
Yes I do but I and my readers do not worship these dead men. Also I do
not tell people IS was a wanker because I translate some ancient Sufi
poems. I do not tell you to pay me, buy anything from me, call me
Sheikh, follow my teachings... I ask you for NOTHING.
I post in 10 other groups on the net. Not once IS or any inflammatory
topic has come up. I post in Sufi groups, Muslim groups, Christian
groups, new age spiritual groups and some with strong Jewish
affiliation. I post in US, Mid East and EU. I have people reading and
contacting me e.g. professors, published authors, Moms, college
kids... Not once I heard anything negative.
But I leave you with a business note, there are folk here banging hard
on me under anonymous names, making fun of my translations and all
that. I discovered they are working on similar translation projects
and I am a threat to some publisher's interest (not referring to ISHK
whatsoever).
So dont be naive and know for certain that dev/nul is on my side...
--DARKOOB
Fried Jack Morgan
Hey, if it is good enough for Obo, why can't it be good enough for me.
Is he better than the rest of us that he gets to misread, misunderstand,
and refuse to listen and then get to insult people and the rest of us
don't?
I refuse to believe that he is that much better than us. Therefore, he
is giving us an example which we should all emulate. After all, anger,
insults, and such are what he has been talking about all these years in
these groups and lists, and what he is looking for in these groups,
correct? These are sufic qualities that he is displaying, correct?
Therefore they should be emulated.
And remember, Idries Shah was also Muslim, and he also spoke Farsi, and
also had Persian ancestors. And he also translated sufi works and
published them. And he also made people angry with his words. And Obo
has shown us what he thinks of people like that.
Jeffrey P. George
> esowteric wrote:
>
> > Dear Friends,
> >
> > Perhaps we can all move on from the lowly pursuit of baiting, pounding
and
> > trading insults?
> Hey, if it is good enough for Obo, why can't it be good enough for me.
> Is he better than the rest of us that he gets to misread, misunderstand,
> and refuse to listen and then get to insult people and the rest of us
> don't?
Man, I leave you people alone for a month, and look what happens;-)
-Jeff
Obo Vajrin
of prejudice and/or bigotry. If you had said "Afro-American" or "black"
instead of "farsi", it would be considered prejudice.
>>
Well yes, I have certainly been at my worst behavior here these last few
months. What was Janices's word, entromania (no surprise I've misspelled
it). Now I understand that we are multi-countried here as well as having our
cultural differences. The "rule" (adab) as I see it expressed in my neck of
the woods goes something like this. It would be wrong of me to use the N word
(nigger) I'm white, but black folk I know use it all the time. When I'm at the
home of one of my best friends who is Jewish, he tells his other guests, bob is
not anti-Semetic, he's actually harder on the Christians. Now a few months
back Dara was making many anti-Western cultural and anti-American statements.
Why didn't the policeman in you question his bigotry? I don't think Dara has
US citizen papers. Jeff (or you) can rant all he wants against America. He's
paid the dues. I think much of contempory Western culture is horible, but I
will not stand by and let some person (s) propagandize that the ONLY way
forward is Islamic Sufism. And Hell no I don't want to run this place as Dara
thinks (BTW I'm not of German descent - the Nazi- I'm of Slavic descent) . If
the majority of posters here want this group to convert to Islam as seen in the
eyes of Dara, I can fold my tent and move on. Look, I've appologized a lot,
why hasn't Dara appologized to Nasrudin even once? Ever? That is the only real
burr in my saddle (if you know what I mean)
From Scott<< Be careful quoting Idries Shah stories, Obo, they too often show
the
nature of the person quoting them. And the snarling judge in this story
is beginning to fit you and your posts to Dara all too well.
>>
Well sure, don't we all look to see reflections of current selves agains the
archtypes represented in the stories? There is the Nasrudin story of the
mother asking Nasrudin to frighten the child and as he began to huff and puff,
they all ran from the room. When danger threatens it threatens all equally.
But if you want to know what I really think is most interesting, is how the
Nasrudin story fits with the Jack London quote. Several more layers of the
onion to peel.
Take Care, obo
PS IMHO, the best of alt.sufi over the last few months was the week-end when
ombredor showed up and the poetry thing happened. The mind stuff shared here
was palpable. One of the posibilities. But that was an accident or the right
time and place energy of ombredor's first rewrights which got the ball rolling.
Dara can't make IT happen, he's been trying for months, if he could make IT
happen, I would call him teacher. None of us can, that's one of the reasons we
spend time here.
PSS Scott, back a week or so, when you were asking if there was a western
tradition which was intact enough to produce an ENLIGHTMENT as the Traditional
Sufic Systems were capable, I was wondering what characteristics of Enlightment
would be usefull in contemporty times? Is it still necessary to walk on water?
And let me remind you that the Roman Catholic Church (Right on Martin they're
bigger crooks than the Mafia) has consecrated many saints over the last few
centuries. Saints by their own deffinition, just as there were sufi saints by
Islamic deffinition. Look for reality where you can taste it.
PSSS ombredor, I can tell you from first hand experience that Chartres was a
Medieval Sufi School.
;-)
Dan&Nguyet
>> And it used to be this group people would ask if there were any groups
>> of this or that sufi tarikka in this city or that city, but not any
>> more.
I'm all ears, Oh Boundless One!
If you'd like to steer this group back in that direction tell me if you
know of anything worthwhile in the great state of Michigan?
Really all of this chit-chat and yammering is giving me a headache. I
need to DO something.
Peace...
Fried Jack Morgan
There is the Concord Grove Educational Center, located by Grand Rapids,
which carries some sufi events. You could try to contact a David
Fideler (if I got the name wrong, I apologize) there for information on
sufism in Michigan.
There is a pencak silat (Indonesian martial arts) class at the
University of Michigan, which apparently has a very strong sufi
connection. You might also try working your way through various faculty
at the U of Michigan, as a keyword search of the U of Michigan website,
using the word "sufi" turned up a large number of hits and some
professors doing scholarly research on them, apparently.
You might try contacting someone at http://www.superluminal.com/ as it
appears most of their connections are in Michigan and they may be able
to direct you. Click on the "serving the guest" link to explore some
things on sufism.
The Sufi Order of the West, or the Sufi Order International apparently
has some things in Michigan. Here is a directory of their places in the
U.S. Got one place in Kalamazoo.
http://www.sufiorder.org/cgi-bin/center_list.cgi
There is apparently a Naqshbandi convention and retreat center in
Fenton, MI. This is the Naqshbandi under Sheikh Nazim al-Haqqani. Also
in Ann Arbor and East Lansing. Contact info here --
http://www.naqshbandi.net/haqqani/Sufi/centers.html
Here is a link to Shadhuli sufism in Michigan with contact numbers
http://www.sufiheart.com/contactus/michigan.htm
I have no way of ascertaining the quality of any of this. I would
consider this material just a start.
There are some that you will only find by word of mouth.
Good luck and I hope this helps.