August 2, 2008

My Epiphanies (X)

Posted in Aqidah, Epiphanies, Islam, Knowledge, Sufism, Tazkiyah at 4:20 am by faith786

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Assalamu Alaikum,

This is my 100th post. Wow.

Anyway, it didn’t take me long, but I decided to put up the epiphany I had *before* I heard the Shaykh Hamza lecture on Youtube.

Life lately has been rather ‘gray.’ Taking a class on Christianity made me feel sorry for Christians. I do not mean that in a patronizing way, but I feel like their understanding of God hurts them. Although they claim Him being that of Love, which is great, but they also claim He can make mistakes (wa iyathubilah), He can be in human form (meaning, he can use the bathroom and get sick [no offense to Isa as]), and that He is ultimately, imperfect. (super wa iyathubilah)

Plus, I think by Divine providence, I won’t be united with an old friend just yet. (In case you don’t know, the poem I wrote–The Start, was for her.)

Anyway, enough ranting, I decided to sit. I crossed my legs and folded my hands in my lap. After being silent for a long time, I heard my heart beat in my head. I know it sounds cheesy, but I was trying to figure out what it was saying. And soon enough, I started to literally hear, “Allah, Allah, Allah….”

So I stopped to get a grip on reality and I still felt my heart pulsate. It wasn’t as loud or hard, but it was still beating hard enough for me to notice. Then on a random note, I remembered V for Vendetta when the lady did the monologue and said that we as individuals have one inch–and it is purely our own and it is worth fighting for. And I thought, that “inch” is in our heart. I began to realize, my heart knows something I don’t.

Intellect roots from the heart. Not the mind. Our hearts impact our minds. They channel our thoughts and emotions. The heart is what gives reason and morality–not the mind. The mind is secondary; the heart is primary.

And so I felt my heart contract…and then expand. Then I felt my breath–contract and expand my lungs. I remembered Kamran Bhai’s lecture on Science and Scripture Paralleled (another post) and how the universe contracted and now is expanding. God is the Contractor and the Expander. Things around me–even stagnant things–started to *breathe* with life.

The heart is a unique thing and it’s physical and spiritual function is the core of Islam and our creation. It is the center of our gravity (unless you eat a lot) and if it is dead, we are dead. I think every other limb can not function, but you can still live, except the heart.

And our intentions–we feel them come from our heart, not our minds. And intentions are critical in Islam. The heart is a unique organ that cannot be fully understood because I think it is what bridges the physical and spiritual world. There is something about it we can never know, but yet it is so vital to our existence.

I guess where the epiphany was supposed to lead to was the idea that through the heart can we reach Allah, but I also came to realize that the physical heart is a very spiritual thing and a powerful symbol.

(Pause for dramatic effect)

Now if you haven’t already, watch the Shaykh Hamza speech in the post before this.

Please let me know if you actually benefit from my series of epiphanies or if I am wasting my time typing them. Thanks!



  1. Redwan Ahmed said,

    how do you do the read the rest of this entry thing. can you tell me please.

    thank you.

  2. Redwan Ahmed said,

    are you muslim

  3. Redwan Ahmed said,

    may allah bless you for writing comments

  4. faith786 said,

    Assalamu Alaikum,

    Thank you. To read whole entries, click ‘read the rest of this entry’ on the post you wish to read. My posts are generally not too lengthy.

    I moderated your other comments to publicize your blog, but I am afraid I do not wish my blog to be an advertisement, so I had them removed. People are welcome to see your blog, just please do not promote it here. I appreciate your comments and I hope you like my other entries!

  5. Redwan Ahmed said,

    i do like your other entries.

  6. Redwan Ahmed said,

    can you change your website please

  7. Redwan Ahmed said,

    One of the fundamental problems which is a matter of contention between the supporters and opponents of gnosis is whether reason can make any judgment about what is given through gnosis, which is supposedly acquired by interior unveilings and witnessings, or whether, for example, reason can refute some of them or not. The answer to this question is important with regard to the fact that many gnostics make assertions which cannot be given any rational explanation. They claim that they discovered these things through the esoteric way, and that reason does not have the capacity to understand them, and naturally, that reason thus has no right to refute or reject them.

    The most important subject of this kind of controversy is that of the unity of existence (wahdat al‑wujud), which has been propounded in various forms. One is that, basically, there is nothing, has been nothing and shall be nothing but God, the Exalted. Whatever has been called other than Him, is said to be nothing more than illusions and fantasies. Another form of this proposition is that nothing exists outside the essence of God or outside the vessel of His knowledge. In this way, a sort of multiplicity in oneness may be accepted. Another form of this claim, which is more prevalent, is that the wayfarer at the end of his journey, reaches the station of annihilation (land ), and nothing remains of him save a name. Finally, the most moderate form of the claim is that the wayfarer reaches a station in which he sees nothing but God, and all things fade away into God. In more exact terminology, he witnesses the fading of all things into the existence of God, the Exalted, like the fading of a weak light before the light of the sun.

    In such cases, the opponents generally take advantage of rational arguments, and the proponents eventually say that these sorts of matters transcend the limits of reason. In this way they shirk the burden of the rational explanation of their claims. Considering these developments, this basic question will be posed: Are there truths about which reason is incapable of comprehending and has no right to reject?

    What may be said in summary here is that although reason is concerned with concepts and the function of reason is not to recognize the truth of the objective existence or origin of any objective thing, let alone the divine exalted existence, but the positive and negative judgments of reason, when they are self‑evident or may lead to self‑evidence, are undeniable and through concepts may be applied to objective things. The assumption of the error of such judgments involves contradiction. In other words, although the function of reason is not knowledge of the origins of existence, with the above‑mentioned qualifications, there can be no doubt about the validity of judgments about phenomena.

    As for the issue of the unity of existence, it must be said that the denial of existence of things other than God and the absolute denial of multiplicity not only imply the denial of the validity of the judgments of reason, but also involve the denial of the validity of knowledge by presence belonging to the active and passive aspects of the soul. In this way, how can we hold that witnessings and unveilings have any validity, regarding the fact that the best evidence for their validity is their being present to consciousness? So, the unity of existence, on this interpretation, is not acceptable at all. However, we may consider an acceptable interpretation which is propounded in transcendent philosophy [2] from which it is obtained that the existence of creatures in relation to God, the Exalted, is a relative and dependent existence, and to be precise it may be said that they are the very relation and dependence, and they have no independence of their own. That which is discovered by the gnostic is this very denial of the independence of other things [than God], which they call the denial of their real existence.

    Here the question may be posed in another form: Can we consider the judgment of reason prior to intuition and unveiling? In reply, it should be said that pure knowledge by presence is in truth the discovery of reality itself. Thus, it is irrefutable. However, knowledge by presence is usually accompanied by a subjective interpretation in such a way that any distinction between them requires great care. These subjective interpretations which involve conceptual knowledge, are fallible. What are rejected by rational proofs are incorrect subjective interpretations of observations and knowledge by pretence, not the objects of knowledge by presence themselves. In the case of the unity of existence, that which is realized through witnessings is restricted to the independent existence of God, the Exalted, which due to inattention is called true existence, according to which true existence is denied of other existents.

    It is worth mentioning that the great Islamic gnostics have explicitly claimed that some unveilings are Satanic, invalid, and may be recognized through some evidence, and ultimately may be distinguished from others by placing them under the scrutiny of rational certain arguments, the divine Book and the Sunnah.

    It is clear that an investigation into all the kinds of unveilings and witnessings and the types of knowledge by presence and the ways‑in which they are qualitatively reflected in the mind, the causes for the incorrectness of some subjective interpretations and the way to distinguish the correct from the incorrect, are beyond the scope of this article.

  8. Redwan Ahmed said,

    how do you do the read the rest of this entry on my website. can you tell me how do you do it.

  9. faith786 said,

    Thank you for your input. I do not wish to change my website.

    To read one of your articles, I click the subject title or it is already there.

  10. faith786 said,

    I changed a few posts for you. And I may put a few articles there pertaining to Islam.

    I do not wish to reveal my name, I would like to keep a bit of anonymity on public sites.

    And I have a request that if you can, please try to put all your remarks in one comment. It clutters my emails when I get seven new comments to moderate. Anyway, I hope I have helped you and I may come once in a while to post on your blog. I hope you enjoy reading other entries I have posted.

  11. faith786 said,

    Well, I am afraid you added me to the wrong site. I still wish to keep my anonymity, but if this is too complicated, I shall just be working on my own site.

  12. Sarah said,

    Wow, what a character.

  13. faith786 said,

    I love thy wording, Sarah. I wish I had such a grasp of words like thou. Have fun going to England tomorrow!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: