El-evated Nothingness

Information for growth

In previous postings I have covered the enigma, wrapped in an allegory, called the “EL.” How can people make sense of it? After all, if true, it does present quite a paradox for certain Abrahamic “believers” of lower lumens. I mean, imagine coming to the truth of the matter that the entire “religious” matrix that has been spoon fed to you is just another facet of lies, designed to extract the heart away from All Mighty God? Imagine realizing that the entire biblical “narrative” is just a metaphor for a far more complex set of circumstances that is “material, physical, and tangible,” not etherical, a spook, angel or ghost? Imagine realizing, with certitude, that the entities unveiled are murderous, blood thirsty devils, and you have been deceived as part of the biblical, GREAT DECEPTION? Imagine cracking the code? Imagine being able to look at all of the “blood sacrifices,” and pagan rituals; and finally seeing with the heart that the illusion is over? Imagine knowing you have been freed.”

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

John 8:32

See the entire Messianic GAME that has been played on humanity is a complex millennial, “long-con” backed by force and violence. It has nothing to do with All Mighty God because it did not start with Him, it started in deception, by material beings with sophisticated esoteric sciences, technologies, and sundry other “tools.” These tools are leveled against the people via organized religion, “Clergy,” Popes, and sundry other “facilitators of the lie.” These evil doers are the messengers, who keep the people locked into a cult of blood,murder and insanity, which leads to hell. The “only” job of “religious leaders” is to keep the people enslaved spiritually, mentally and impoverished physically.

So what is the countermeasure? What is the defense? How can the average person digest the enormity of it all? Every tradition has a book. Every book has a message, and it is within these places that are “beyond space and time, that you will find your answer. It is not an easy road. It is not a path of ease. It is a path of inner reflection, which is the most ugly, and it is about self healing. It takes years of self healing, self-love, and reflection, just to be able to place oneself in the position to be guided by “The Source of All.”

“The Wearer of the Wool,” “The people of the bench,” is one such path. It is the way of the Sufi. It is the way of few.

“The priests of religion celebrate and defend the ‘dry form’ of religion, often forgetting that the purpose of religion is not merely to preserve the religion itself, but to aid one in transformation. In so doing, they become worshipers of religion instead of God. Thus, Sufis have been known to say . . . “A Sufi’s religion is God.”

“Obviously, this is a Sufi critique of religion, a way of suggesting to the orthodox—‘You have become worshipers of Islam,’ or ‘Christianity’ or ‘Judaism,’ as the case may be, ‘and have forgotten God in your observance of religion. Whereas, God is our religion!’ That is to say, the direct experience of God is a Sufi’s religion. Indeed, it was in the context of such a critique—in rebellion against conventional religion—that historical Sufism was born.”

“Sufis often say that ‘Sufism has always existed,’ being the deep impulse of the heart that seeks wholeness in divinity or the sacred found in every religious tradition. Thus, Muzaffer Ozak, the famous 20th-century Jerrahi sheikh, says—“A river passes through many countries and each claims it for its own. But there is only one river.” In every land, that river is called by a different name in a different language, but there is only one river, flowing back into one source.”

“Nevertheless, there is also a clear historical phenomenon with specific characteristics which we call ‘Sufism’ that has a definite context and origin in the Middle East. Personally, I like to explain this context through a parallel exploration of the possible etymological origins of the word, “Sufi.”

“Among the most commonly suggested origins is the Arabic word, ṣuffah, ‘bench,’ which is itself a reference to the ahl aṣ-ṣuffah, ‘people of the bench,’ or ashab as-suffah, ‘companions of the bench.’ Now these people were, in the time of the prophet Muhammad, alayhi as-salām, a supposedly impoverished group of companions of the Prophet who never seemed to leave the bench outside the masjid, or mosque, in Medina. They were probably looked upon by many in Medina as lazy and indolent; but it is said that they were actually so God-intoxicated that all they wanted to do was remain in prayer close to the mosque. They could never do enough practice, never talk enough about God, so they never left the precincts of the mosque! Thus, these “people of the bench,” according to some, are considered the first Sufis.”

“However, another legend says that Sufis, at first, were actually a nameless, wandering band of mystics, who roamed the world in search of the qutub, the ‘axis’ or ‘pole’ of spirituality in any given age. Thus, in the time of the prophet Muhammad, they were magnetically drawn to Medina, the city of the Prophet, where they recognized him as the qutub and embraced Islam. Thus, the originally nameless form of Sufism took on an Arabic character and name, and became associated with Islam, though it never lost its essentially universalist spiritual outlook. Some even say that this group of wandering seekers, arriving in Medina without any other material aim or intention, became the “people of the bench.”

Later, this recognition of the nameless origins of Sufism led one great Sufi master to admonish his fellow Sufis with this famous statement . . .“Once, Sufism was a reality without a name; now it is but a name without a reality.”

“Another explanation of the origin of the word ‘Sufi’ is the Arabic safā, ‘pure,’ from which we get, tasawwuff. In English, we speak of the tradition of Sufism, but that’s merely an Anglicized form of the Arabic word, tasawwuf, meaning ‘purification,’ a process or path of continual purification, purifying oneself from the more spiritually deadening effects of the ego.”

“Nevertheless, historically and linguistically, scholars tend to agree that the most likely origin of the word, ‘Sufi,’ is the Arabic word sūf, ‘wool,’ a reference to the simple woolen cloaks worn by early Muslim ascetics in the 8th and 9th-century in the Middle East.

These pious Muslims were generally called nussāk (sing. nāsik) or ‘ascetics, and wore rough woolen garments, rejecting the decadent luxuries of the increasing wealthy Islamic empire which, as they saw it, had lost its way. Their lifestyle was a protest and rebellion against the lax morality of the time. In just two hundred years, the originally poor and pious Muslim community of high ideals had become rich, bloated with wealth acquired through conquest, and extremely decadent.”

“Thus, these early ascetic Muslims were trying to reestablish the ideals of Islam based on the best models available to them. In this case, on the example of the Christian Desert Fathers and Mothers (Abbas and Ammas) who lived in desert caves across the Middle East, and who were often known for wearing coarse woolen garments, an ascetic practice in that hot, dry climate. Indeed, stories of this cross-fertilization are preserved in the Sufi tradition, especially in an episode from the life of the great Sufi master, Ibrahim ibn Adham, a king who gave up his kingdom to pursue God, who tells of a deep transmission of inner wisdom (ma'rifa) he received from a Christian ascetic.”

“According to the story, Ibrahim Adham once visited a Christian ascetic called Father Simeon in his desert cave in the mountains. He asked him, “How long have you been here, father?” “Seventy years,” Father Simeon answered. “What food do you eat?” asked Ibrahim Adham.

“Why do you ask, my son?” “I just want to know.”

“Father Simeon answered, “One chick pea a day.” Amazed, Ibrahim Adham said, “What moves your heart so much that you can live off so little?” “Well, I’ll tell you. Once a year,” Father Simeon answered, “the people of the village below come up to celebrate my work here, adorning my cave and honoring me. And when I’m weary of this life, I think of that, and I can go on.” “Now, I ask you, what work of an hour would you endure for the whole glory of eternity?” “Hearing this,” Ibrahim Adham tells us, “ma'rifa,” the inner wisdom or experiential knowledge, “descended on me.”

“These early Muslim ascetics, nussāk, were even known to say that they followed the way of the Prophet Isa, or Jesus, who wore wool instead of the more comfortable cotton. In saying this, they were not proclaiming themselves converts to Christianity—they were still good Muslims—but recognizing that Jesus was a prophet in Islam whose model was closely aligned with their values. After all, they were rebelling against a corrupt Islamic government, and with the fact that Islam had become mixed-up with politics. The Prophet Muhammad, of course, was considered the best possible ruler, a true philosopher or prophet-king, but things had quickly degenerated after his passing.”

“Aware of the problems of this model, these early proto-Sufis saw Jesus as a prophet who wasn’t involved in politics or governance, leading an exemplary spiritual life. Thus, it likewise became a longstanding value among many Sufis not to become too deeply involved with power brokers or politics, nor to court or seek the influence of the powerful elite, whether those with great wealth or great political power.”

“Within the larger ascetic protest movement of the 8th-century—roughly 200 years after the birth of Islam—was a fringe group called the Sūfiyya, ‘the wool wearers,’ which was likely a pejorative term originally used by their detractors to make fun of them. Nevertheless, the name stuck, and was eventually claimed by this group of spiritual idealists. Indeed, one early master, accepting the more realistic derivation from sūf, ‘wool,’ and combing it with the ideal of safā, ‘purity,’ famously said . . . “The Sufi is the one who wears wool on top of purity.”

Likewise following the model of Jesus, these early Sufis emphasized Jesus’ teachings on love, though, they did not need Christianity to show them the path to love of God. It was also there before them in the Qur’an (5:54) . . . “God loves them, and they love God.”

Thus, some Sufis even came to say, “Sufism is the religion of Love.”

http://www.inayati-maimunis.org/blogmain/2018/8/3/the-story-of-sufism

“Mysticism in Arabic and Islamic Philosophy-

“Mysticism in the Islamic context has traditionally been intertwined with the notion of Ḥikmah, which is at once both wisdom and philosophy (Nasr 1996). The source of mysticism and the mystical elements in Islam are to be traced to the Qur’an and the Islamic doctrine itself. Some of the Qur’anic verses have been viewed by the mystics and philosopher-mystics of Islam as allegorical and esoteric hints for those who can see them.”

“God is the Outward and the Inward” (Qu’ran 57:3), “he for whom wisdom is given, he truly has received abundant good” (Qu’ran 2:269), and the famous light verses...

“God is the Light of the heavens and the earth, the likeness of His light is as a niche wherein is a lamp, the lamp is a glass, the glass as it were a glittering star kindled from a blessed tree, an olive that is neither of the East nor of the West, whose oil well-night would shine, even if no fire touched it; light upon lights; God guides to His light whom He will. And God strikes similitudes for man, and God has knowledge of everything. (Qu’ran 24:35)

...can all be seen as containing esoteric insight. Through out the ages, these verses have inspired a number of Muslim gnostics, some of whom, such as Shihāb al-Dīn Suhrawardī (12^th CE) and Mullā Ṣadrā (16^th CE) have written commentaries upon them (e.g., Mullā Ṣadrā’s On the Hermeneutics of the Light Verse of the Quran).”

“From a mystical perspective, all later developments and interactions between Islamic philosophy and other intellectual traditions should therefore be seen as rational expressions of the mystical elements within an Islamic milieu. Mystical elements exist in Islam in two different and independent ways. Practically, Sufism represents the esoteric dimension of Islam in its purest form, while theoretically salient features of Islamic mysticism were gradually incorporated into the Islamic philosophical tradition. Islamic mysticism, therefore, stands on two pillars: first practical, then philosophical. That is, esoteric wisdom can either be attained through practical wisdom, which includes inner purification and asceticism, or through a type of philosophy which includes, but is not limited to discursive reasoning.”

“Neoplatonism and Sufism-

“Following the early theological schools of thought in Islam, among which were the determinists (Qadarites), the eschatologists (Murj‘aites and Wa‘idites) and the faith based theologians (Ash‘arites), there came the Islamic philosophical tradition and its many different schools of thought. Even though Al-Kindī is regarded to be the first Muslim philosopher, the full impact of Hellenic thought on Islamic philosophy is best seen in the philosophical edifice of Abū Nasr Fārābī (10^th CE) Al-Fārābī, who is considered to be the father of logic in the Islamic philosophical tradition, is also the first to have embraced Neoplatonism, albeit in a limited sense. It was his paradigm that paved the way for mysticism to enter Islamic philosophy.”

“Neoplatonism, which has remained one of the salient features of Islamic philosophy, has performed two functions: the intellectual and the practical, both of which have become an integral part of living a philosophical life. Philosophically, Neoplatonism provides answers to most major questions within the context of Islam, such as how multiplicity came from unity and how corporality emanated from an incorporeal God, as well as explaining the ascending and descending order of beings.”

“Mysticism in Al-Fārābī manifests itself in two ways, philosophical and practical. Philosophically, as is evident in The Letter Concerning the Intellect (Risālah fi’l-‘aql), his interpretation of the concept of the four intellects paved the road for his successor Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā) (981–1037 CE), who made full use of Neoplatonism. Al-Fārābī tries in his writings not only to reconcile the opinions of Plato and Aristotle, with Plato seen as somewhat of a mystical figure, but also, in his discussions of political philosophy, he replaced Plato’s philosopher-king with an Imam whose understanding of truth is intuitive, who knows not only theoretical virtues but also the practical ones. However, even though his musical compositions are sung among some Sufi orders in Turkey and the Indo-Pakistani continent and one can see the influence of Sufism in his Bezels of Wisdom (Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam), reports concerning him having been a practicing Sufi are quite nebulous.”

“As to the master of the Peripatetics, Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā) himself, the consensus of scholars is that Avicenna was a rationalist who embraced certain concepts from Plato, Aristotle and Neoplatonism and that the salient feature of his philosophical writings are discursive in nature. From here on, there are generally two distinct interpretations of Avicennan philosophy: Those who see him only as a rationalist who had nothing to do with mysticism and those who argue that later Avicenna had embraced mysticism as is reflected in some of his later works.”

“Most Western scholars of Avicenna who see him only as a rationalist, similar to al-Fārābī and Averroes, (Gutas 2006, Adamson 2013) primarily rely on his discursive and rationalistic writings. Many Muslim philosophers in particular Iranian scholars of Avicenna have a more inclusive reading of his writings and tend to agree that in the later period of his life, Avicenna developed an interest in mysticism. (Nasr & Leaman 1996, Inati 1996).”

“For Avicenna, similar to many other Muslim philosophers, the ultimate philosophical endeavor was to unveil the mystery of creation in particular; how Divine unity became the multiplicity of the world of existents. To resolve this riddle, Avicenna adopts the Neoplatonic scheme of emanation which has also been used not only by Sufis and Islamic gnostics to explain the spiritual journey of man towards God but also, by almost all philosopher-mystics from Suhrawardī and Mullā Ṣadrā to Sabziwārī and Ṭabāṭabā’ī.”

“Avicenna was not a practicing Sufi with any known affiliation to a Sufi order. In fact, Avicenna’s meeting with the great Sufi master Abū Sa‘īd Abu’l-Khayr (d. 1049 CE) and the presence of an “oriental philosophy” (al-ḥikmat al-mashraqiyyah) in his writing in all likelihood are apocryphal. However, the presence of mystical elements in some of his later works is held by some to be undeniable (Aminrazavi 2003). For instance, in the ninth chapter of his philosophical masterpiece, Remarks and Treatments (al-Ishārāt wa’l-tanbihāt), in a section entitled, On the Stations of Knowers (Fī maqāmāt al-‘ārifīn), Avicenna appears to offers an explanation of the Sufi doctrine and openly to defend the gnostic and Sufi method of attaining truth.”

“While the authorship of some of his Persian writings are subject to debate, in some of his allegorical writings, such as Treatise on Ascendance (Mi‘rāj nāmah), Treatise on Birds (Risālat al-ṭaīr), Salmān and Absāl, Son of the Living Awake (Ḥayy ibn Yaqẓān) and Treatise on Love (Risālah fi’l-‘ishq) not to mention his famous poem, Ode of the Soul (al-Qaṣidah al-‘ayniyyah), the presence of Sufi and gnostic elements are vividly apparent to those who follow this interpretation.

With Avicenna, who represents the pinnacle of rationalistic philosophy in Persia, came two other intellectual trends.”

“On the one side there was the towering figure of Abū Ḥāmid Ghazzālī, [Peace be upon my teacher], who rejected philosophy altogether and became the exponent of Sufism alone. On the other side, there arose Ismā‘īlīs philosophy, which incorporated Sufi and Hermetico-Pythagorean ideas within a philosophical context.”

“Ghazzālī, an orthodox jurist and a major exponent of faith based theology (Ash‘arite) having studied philosophy, thought discursive reasoning stood on a solid ground but soon turned against philosophy, offering a devastating critique of reason in his, The Incoherence of Philosophers (Tahāfut al-falāsifah). Having been disillusioned with intellectual sciences, he practiced asceticism for a number of years in seclusion and finally found his answers in the Sufi tradition. The spiritual journey of Ghazzālī from an orthodox jurist to a Sufi is one of the most remarkable accounts of the transformation of a Muslim sage who turned from the outward to the inner life of Islam and found Sufism to be the only path that leads to truth. He spent the later part of his life teaching, writing and practicing Sufism.”

“Ghazzālī is one of the few mystics whose brand of Sufism embraces religious orthodoxy, a gnostic intellectual framework, and the more practical and ascetic dimension of the spiritual path. Contrary to the antinomian Sufis, who violated the Islamic law (Shari‘ah) and the more relaxed attitude of some of the other Sufis, Ghazzālī was an austere and ardent observer of Islamic law.”

“He wrote extensively on mysticism, arguing it to be the only right path to truth. A notable piece among his writings on mysticism is The Niche of Light (Mishkāt al-anwār), a significant work of an illuminationist nature and one that influenced the formation of the doctrine of illumination (ishrāq) by Suhrawardī (Aminrazavi 1996). Also, parts of his Magnum Opus, Revival of Religious Sciences (Iḥyā’ al-‘ulūm al-dīnī), such as book thirty-five of the Iḥyā’: The Book of Faith in Divine Unity and Trust in Divine Providence, are essentially devoted to an explication of the Sufi doctrine. He also has written numerous shorter commentaries on the spiritual significance of fasting, praying, invocation of divine names and attributes, and spiritual music as instruments of the catharsis of the soul.”

“The Case of Rūmī-

“Muḥammad Jalāl al-Dīn Balkhī, better known as “Rūmī,” is regarded by many to be one of the greatest Sufi poets of the Islamic tradition. In his magnum opus, Mathnawī, which has been called by some “The Persian Qur‘an,” Rūmī scorns discursive thought and ridicules philosophers for walking on wobbly stilts: Rationalists’ legs are just like stilts; How unfixed and stolid are feet of wood! (Nicholson, I: 2127)

Nevertheless, he became an influential figure in the tradition of post-Avicennian philosophical Sufism.”

“Rūmī’s critique of Peripatetic philosophy is closer to Ghazzālī’s critique of rationalism than an outright rejection of it. Advocating “epistemological humility,” Rūmī offers a critique of such traditional epistemological theories as truth by correspondence, authority, and reasoning while allowing for a more experiential aspect of truth.

In his Mathnawī, Rūmī criticizes the reliability of truth claims based on sensory perception as well: All the senses of man are impermanent. For in the presence of the light of the Day of Resurrection they’re naught.The light of the senses and spirits of our fathers
Is not totally evanescent and naught like plants (Nicholson, IV: 431–33).”

“While the senses provide us with some knowledge, it is not a type of knowledge that can lead to the discovery of spiritual and existential truth. Rūmī also rejects the idea of “truth by authority” and alludes to the dangers of blindly following those who claim to know the truth. His critique is particularly aimed at Muslim jurists who adhere to the Divine command theory. A myriad servile conformists who follow conjecture. Are cast down into the lowest depths, struck by scruples. For the speculative following of precedent and logical supposition. Is their foundation and the very feather and wing of their flight. Their inner devil arouses doubts and specious arguments in them. Till benightedly they plummet headlong down like blind folk (Nicholson, IV: 2125–27)”

As to the application of reason, which is at the heart of philosophical enterprise, Rūmī divides the intellect into universal intellect (‘aql-i kullī) and particular intellect (‘aql-i juz’ī). Whereas the universal intellect attends to the affairs of the Divine realm, the particular intellect’s scope is restricted to this world. In response to the Muslim rationalists (Mu‘tazilites), Rūmī states: The difference among intellects was intrinsic in origin –You should hear the doctrine according to the traditionalists—Contrary to the opinion of the Mu‘tazilites, Who maintain all intellects in their origin were basically equal, But by experience and learning, minds increase or decrease So one is made more knowledgeable than the other one –Their doctrine is false because even a boy’s counsel, Who has no experience in any course of action—From that young child a thought will spring up, Which a wise old sage with manifold experience has no inkling. (Nicholson, III: 1539–43)”

And again Rūmī asserts:

The animal man who by deceit and cunning knows… The intricacies of the science of geometry, Or astronomy, medicine and philosophy
Which are concerned with this world, Is barred from finding the way to seventh heaven. All those sciences are fit for building a stable;
They serve as columns for the abode of camels and cows. Their purpose is but to let the animal survive a day or two And yet these imbeciles call those sciences “mysteries” (Nicholson, IV: 1519–1516)”

“The number of Muslim philosophers who became proponents of mystical philosophy in the Islamic world are too numerous to mention here, but clearly mysticism is a living tradition that continues to occupy center stage in the philosophy in the Muslim world. It is virtually impossible to fully account for all the traditions of mysticism in the Islamic philosophical tradition, however such traditions do exist in almost every Muslim country today (see Kiliç 1996).”

“The impact of mysticism on Islamic philosophy has been so profound that it has changed the very essence and definition of philosophizing. The enterprise of philosophizing in the Islamic tradition is seen by most not merely as an intellectual exercise but as the intellectual dimension of the soul’s spiritual journey towards the unveiling of truth. Authentic philosophy, according to Muslim philosopher-mystics is therefore committed to providing a rationalistic commentary upon those issues which traditionally belonged to the mystical domain only.”

Aminrazavi, Mehdi, "Mysticism in Arabic and Islamic Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2021 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2021/entries/arabic-islamic-mysticism/>.

https://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=arabic-islamic-mysticism

Books by Ghazali: https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/al-ghazali

Please comprehend that knowledge can only free the mind and heart from the yokes that have been placed upon the people. As those who “long to be alive,” in heart, comprehend also that the connection is right inside of you. There is no need for mediators, counselors, pastors, priests or clergy. The Source is inside of you! The True Source is alive, it is Love, and it does not need to murder to manifest its Grandeur. The Source needs no lands, favors no groups, and Guides to The Path of Light those who are destined. Not false “luciferian” light, but the True Light that is found within the soul, the heart, the deeds and actions. Where present, it shines brightly.

Look around at the realm? The entire population of the “religious” West has been deceived, by material beings, into believing in a murderous Messianic agenda, fables, and the worship of evil by other names. The entire Asylum USA population, by default, and their delusional, NUTS, violent actions, bear witness to the fact that the “phony” sci-fi, “religion” upon this land for over 243 years is a failure, hoax, and ruse designed to fleece the people. No “good guys” have been present, they never were. You heard?

“America is a Christian nation,” yells the racist bigot, go back to your country.” How EXACTLY has Christianity been working? It hasn't because its not Christianity, and Christ is nowhere present. They put an impostor there too, and on “that day” the falsehood of modern, “organized Christianity” will be unveiled.

“Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, [Jesus] have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?”

“And then will I [Jesus] profess unto them, I [Jesus] never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”

Matthew 7:22-23

Find your path. It is awaiting, you heard?

https://www.ghazali.org/rrs-ovr/

Lord have Mercy