IDEAS

.....

Hi! Ramona,

    Your blog is great! ....I noticed that there are a lot of misunderstandings between religions.......religions are behind many wars and killings......the sad thing is that inside one religion there are still disputes like Sunnis vs. shiites.....Catholics vs. Christians.........I hope "love" can bring people together!

*****************************

A Poem by Hafiz

*****************************

Would you think it odd...

Would you think it odd if Hafiz said, 

"I am in love with every church

And mosque

And temple

And any kind of shrine

Because I know it is there

That people say the different names

Of the One God."

Would you tell your friends

I was a bit strange if I admitted

I am indeed in love with every mind

And heart and body.

O I am sincerely

Plumb crazy

About your every thought and yearning

And limb

Because, my dear,

I know

That it is through these

That you search for Him

********************** 

A poem by Hafiz:

***********************

I Have Learned So Much

I
Have
Learned
So much from God
That I can no longer
Call
Myself

A Christian, a Hindu, a Muslim,
a Buddhist, a Jew.

The Truth has shared so much of Itself
With me

That I can no longer call myself
A man, a woman, an angel,
Or even a pure
Soul.

Love has
Befriended Hafiz so completely
It has turned to ash
And freed
Me

Of every concept and image
my mind has ever known.

From: 'The Gift' 
Translated by Daniel Ladinsky

**************************************

A poem by Hafiz

**************************************

I Got Kin

Plant

So that your own heart

Will grow.

Love

So God will think,

"Ahhhhhh,

I got kin in that body!

I should start inviting that soul over

For coffee and

Rolls."

Sing

Because this is a food

Our starving world

Needs.

Laugh

Because that is the purest

Sound.

***************************

Ebn Arabi - "Love is My Religion"

Thank you Yolanda for posting this beautiful poem of EBN AL-'ARABI, MOHYI-al-DIN Abu 'Abd-Allah Mohammad Ta'i Hatemi (b. 17 Ramadan 560/28 July 1165; d. 22 Rabi' II 638/10 November 1240), the most influential Sufi author of *later* Islamic history, known to his supporters as al-Shaykh al-akbar, "the Greatest Master."

"My heart has become capable of every form :
It is a pasture for gazelles and a cloister for Christian monks,
A temple for idols, and the pilgrim's Ka'ba,
The tables of the Tora and the holy Book of the Koran.

I follow the religion of Love,
Whatever path Love's camels take.
That is my religion and my faith.

~~Ebn al-'Arabî : Ode.

For an excellent informative article on Ebn Arabi, please see William Chittick's article:
//www.uga.edu/islam/ibnarab.html

......

Hi Ramona,

   Thank you for posting the entire poem. It is beautiful! Thank you for your long post and your time. Here is another Sufi poem, which is similar to Rumi's poem......apparently you have done research in this area extensively. Thank you for initiating all the discussions here.......you are right that Coleman Barks does not know Farsi....I e-mailed him before and asked him where I can find the Farsi version of "Only Breath" (I am not)......he has no clue and he asked me to go to Nicholson's book.....I have a feeling that he probably just translated Nicholson's English version into "his" English version and published it. Nicholson has been dead for 60 years...can't challenge Coleman Barks for anything.....

I gazed into my own heart

Dear Yolanda,

First of all, you're a fortunate woman to have been in the wilderness for five days. That's where one is better able to look into one's heart and find Love in the face of God.

And the poem you cited from Wikepedia is so apropos, though I'd like to offer Reynold Nicholson's more accurate translation below:

XVII: I gazed into my own heart

I was on that day when the Names were not,
Nor any sign of existence endowed with name.
By me Names and Named were brought to view
On the day when there were not ‘I’ and ‘We.’
For a sign, the tip of the Beloved’s curl
became a centre of revelation;
As yet the tip of that fair curl was not.
Cross and Christians, from end to end,
I surveyed; He was not on the Cross.
I went to the idol-temple, to the ancient pagoda;
No trace was visible there.
I went to the mountains of Herat and Candahar.
I looked; He was not in that hill-and-dale.
With set purpose I fared to the summit of Mount Qaf;
In that place was only the ‘Anqa’s habitation.
I bent the reins of search to the Ka’ba;
He was not in that resort of old and young.
I questioned Ibn Sina of his state;
He was not in Ibn Sina’s range.
I fared towards the scene of “two bow-lengths’ distance”;
He was not in that exalted court.
I gazed into my own heart;
There I saw Him; He was nowhere else.
Save pure-souled Shamsi Tabriz
None ever was drunken and intoxicated and distraught.

• Jalaluddin Rumi Divani Shamsi Tabriz as
translated by Reynold A. Nicholson

“I gazed into my own heart;
There I saw Him; He was nowhere else.”

By the way, if you continue to read the same article in Wikepedia, under the heading "Rumi as Moslem" it reads:

"However, despite the aforementioned ecumenical attitude, and contrary to his contemporary portrayal in the West as a proponent of non-denominational spirituality, a select number of Rumi poems suggest the importance of outward religious observance, the primacy of the Qur'an and what he believed to be the superiority of Islam."

To illustrate Rumi's approach to Islam, it quotes the following quatrain:

Man banda-ye qur'ānam, agar jān dāram
man khāk-e rah-e muhammad-e mukhtāram
gar naql konad joz īn kas az goftāram
bēzāram azō waz-īn sokhan bēzāram.

I am the servant of the Qur'an as long as I have life.
I am the dust on the path of Muhammad, the Chosen One.
If anyone quotes anything except this from my sayings,
I am quit of him and outraged by these words."

~~Quatrain No. 1173, translated by Ibrahim Gamard and Ravan Farhadi in "The Quatrains of Rumi", an unpublished manuscript.

It is true that Mowlana practiced both the exoteric and esoteric teachings of Islam, though he emphasized Erfan which is the kernel of Islam rather than organized religion which is merely it's husk. Without the kernel, there would be no husk. But the reverse is not true! ;-)

Please understand that the poem titled "I am not" is not the first or only poem erroneously attributed to Rumi. In fact there are at least fifty poems containing hundreds, if not thousands of verses in the Divan and Masnavi that were not actually from Rumi's pen.

Some legitimate translators of Rumi's Masnavi and quatrains (i.e. Ibrahim Gamard and Franklin Lewis) believe that many of these poems were written 150 years before Rumi by the great Sufi Persian poets, including Sana'i and Attar. Being quite fond of these poets, Rumi would occasionally recite verses from Attar or Sana'i while whirling, and sometimes he would then add his own verses to theirs. Those disciples who were present would write the verses down and unintentionally but mistakenly attribute the entire poem to Mowlana.

Morever, as previously indicated, many scribes who wrote the poems by hand would intentionally ascribe poems to Mowlana which did not exist in the earlier manuscripts. "I am not" first appeared in the Divan that was published in India. It doesn't exist in the Konya transcript which is commonly accepted as the most reliable manuscript in existence to this day. Who knows? Maybe others will turn up in time and offer better explanations.

It's also noteworthy that there's a beautiful poetic tradition alive to this day in Iran; it's called "mosha'ereh" in which person X recites a verse by one poet, then Y takes the last syllable of the poem recited by X and starts another verse from another poet.

The mere similarity in meaning of poem "I am not" (#31) with this authentic Rumi poem: "I gazed into my own heart" (#17), doesn't mean that Mowlana is the author of both poems. It merely shows that he agrees with some of the contents.

In any event, I would encourage you to stay focused on the meaning of this last poem rather than continue to labor over the poem "I am not" which is more controversial.

After all, love is a pathless land and the lover's home is where the heart is. So let's look into one's own heart to find inspiration and one's own individual way to God, one's very unique religion of Love.

Warmly,

Ramona

...

Hi! Ramona,

    I went to the Wilderness for 5 days and missed all the actions here. Wow! It is shocking to me that "I am not" was not written by Rumi......This following paragraph is from Wikipedia, it matches the spirit of "I am not" perfectly:

********************

Rumi's universality

It is often said that the teachings of Rumi are ecumenical in nature.[45] For Rumi, religion was mostly a personal experience and not limited to logical arguments or perceptions of the senses.[46] Creative love, or the urge to rejoin the spirit to divinity, was the goal towards which every thing moves.[46] The dignity of life, in particular human life (which is conscious of its divine origin and goal), was important.[46]

I searched for God among the Christians and on the Cross and therein I found Him not.
I went into the ancient temples of idolatry; no trace of Him was there.
I entered the mountain cave of Hira and then went as far as Qandhar but God I found not.
With set purpose I fared to the summit of Mount Caucasus and found there only 'anqa's habitation.
Then I directed my search to the Kaaba, the resort of old and young; God was not there even.
Turning to philosophy I inquired about him from ibn Sina but found Him not within his range.
I fared then to the scene of the Prophet's experience of a great divine manifestation only a "two bow-lengths' distance from him" but God was not there even in that exalted court.
Finally, I looked into my own heart and there I saw Him; He was nowhere else.

******************************

Massoud

Obviously I'm challenged about remembering first names. :) Sorry! But at least I try to remember the basics.

Shahram Shahriari's link that you provide presents this poem as Ghazal #116. Whereas Nicholson and subsequent Rumi scholars designate it as #31, which explains why I couldn't find it on Shahriari's website.

Also, Shahriari who is no scholar of Rumi, doesn't give us a reference as to his source. As stated before, a mere internet link doesn't prove the authenticiy of a document. It's mere heresay with no evidentiary value or weight.

Of course, you are free to believe whatever you choose. However, there's no reliable evidence anywhere to support your position.

Be that as it may, my main point in this whole article and thread of comments is to show that Mowlana Rumi believed in Love as the only path to attain to God.

Perhaps you could expound on that by posting some commonly agreed authentic poems of Rumi and give us your commentary.

Thanks for your input,

Ramona

Ramona :)

Let me clarify a couple of things here for you:

First of all, Shahriar Shariari (and not Shahram, as you had indicated in your comment), does have a copyrighted translation of that poem at his site. This is the link to it :)

Second, I have read your detailed response, and I appreciate your attempt in addressing and clarifying this issue :) Nevertheless, the power and the magic inherent in this poem, through and through,  is so signifcant and strong, that I find your explanations, althought worthy, yet not totally adequate :)

Let me tell you what I think:

In my own personal opinion, this poem is too much in sync with all that Mowlana (Rumi) was all about, for it not to be his :) Furthermore,  unless, and until, there is an absolute and concrete determination of who the actual author is, not an Annonymous person, I will continue believing that this poem is indeed Rumi's :) Again, regardless of who may say a statement contrary to that, ie. Forouzanfar, or others!

Best Of Luck To You,

Massoud (And not Mehran, as you have said in your comment - You seem to have a problem with first names :)

P.S. If you come across the actual name of the author, please let us know - I am still open to change my mind, if that's indeed presented :)

"I'm neither Christian nor Jew" is erroneously ascribed to Rumi

Dear Friends of Rumi, Mehran,

The reason you could not find No. ghazal XXXI in your 1200-page Farsi version of Divan-e Shams, edited by Ostaad Forouzanfar, is that it doesn't exist, pure and simple. As the foremeost Iranian Rumi scholar, Forouzanfar chose to omit that poem in his Divan.

Though he had an English version of this poem, Shahram Shahriari does not have a translation to this poem #31 on his website, indicating that he doubts the authenticity of this poem.
[//www.rumionfire.com/shams/index.htm]

Nor does Shahram Shiva's old or new websites contain this poem, also indicating doubt regarding its authenticity. See:
[//www.shahramshiva.com/]
[//www.rumi.net/]

Coleman Barks who has published the popularized "versions" of Rumi's poems, bases them second hand on "translations" of John Moyne based on the 1898 Nicholson translation.
Often he takes literary license to add his own beliefs to Rumi's poems, thus distroting their true meaning.

As stated before, Nicholson admitted that "The original text does not occur in any of the editions or MSS. used by me" (p. 281 of the 1898 edition).

A. J. Arberry, translated 400 ghazals in two volumes ("Mystical Poems of Rumi," 1968; "Mystical Poems of Rumi: Second Selection," 1979). He only translated the authentic 41 ghazals previously translated by Nicholson based upon the Foruzanfar edition, and omits the seven inauthentic ones erroneously ascribed to Rumi.

A mere link on the internet doesn't trace the authenticity of a poem, and therefore doesn't carry much weight.

Nor does the common conception that this poem represents Rumi's beliefs, makes him the author.

Nobody knows who wrote the inauthentic ghazals, but it was not uncommon for scribes to attribute other Sufi's poems to Rumi.

As stated before, Rumi observed both esoteric and exoteric aspects of Islam and according to Professor Seyyed Hossein Nasr, "some 6,000 verses of the Dîwân and the Mathnawî are practically direct translations of Qur'ânic verses into Persian poetry." It is no wonder that the Masnavi is commonly known as "the Koran in Farsi."

Therefore, Mowlana doesn't negate this or that relgion. He believed that the "complete man" can attain a much higher level of spirituality, the center and circumference of which is Love. He maintained that the only living relgion is that which is based upon love (Masnavi VI, 4059)and people of all religions and backgrounds can connect with the same God through the path of Love.
The Lovers only religion is God. (Masnavi VI, 1760)

As for the meaning of "religion of Love" Rumi believed that one must fall in love before they can understand it:

Some asked: "What is the state of a lover?"
I said: "Don't ask these meanings!

The moment you become like me, you will see it,
The moment He calls you, you will call!

~~Divan 2733/29050

Hope I have adequately responded to your stated concerns.

Ramona

Ramona :)

When I was putting the blog together for this peom several weeks ago, I looked through my 1200-page Farsi version of Divan-e Shams, edited by Ostaad Forouzanfar, and I couldn't find it! A dear friend, e-mailed me a link of Shahriari's translations of Rumi's various poems, and I found it there: Both the Farsi version, and Shahriari's English translation!

What puzzles me is this: If this poem is not genuinely Rumi's, then who was the author? Why was he staying annonymous?

I don't know what your experience has been with lovers of Rumi's Poetry, but in my case, every single one that I have come across, if they know nothing else about Rumi, they know this poem by heart (in Farsi)! Like they say, the author of this poem is more Rumi than Rumi himself! (I'm sure you have heard of the term so and so is more Catholic than the Pope ... This is pretty much what I'm saying here!)

I want you to know that I am grateful that you have taken the trouble to shed some light on this very controversial issue .. However, my gut-feeling is that there is much more to this story than we presently know :)

Take Good Care,

Massoud

P.S. If you come across more information, please share it with us - If nothing else, it is totally fascinating :) !!

"I am not" is not an authentic Rumi poem

The poem previously cited and attributed to Rumi indicating "I am neither Christian, nor Jew, nor Gabr, nor Moslem" is NOT written by Rumi's pen.

Early on, Massoud posted the Farsi version of this poem and provided a link to his blog which presents Nicholson's translation and Coleman Barks' version.

R2-D2 was particularly disturbed that I did not acknowledge the poem (entitled "I am not" by Nicholson) where Rumi allegedlyd explains his position regarding religion "in his very own words."

Since that poem was not the subject matter of my article, I posted the Nicholson translation in my blog to allow further commentary and discussion.

However, since posting "I am Not" from Nicholson's 1898 "Selected Poems from the Divani Shamsi Tabriz," no. XXXI, I re-discovered while reviewing my sources, that this Ghazal was not actually authored by Mowlana himself, but is commonly attributed to him by error.

I can only surmise that Professor Nicholson may have thought it authentic because of the final verse: "My Beloved Shamsi Tabriz, I am living permanently intoxicated: I have no more stories to tell except ones about drunks and
parties. "

Even so, Nicholson acknowledged that "The original text does not occur in any of editions or MSS. (manuscripts) used by me." (Ibid, p. 281). Neither does it appear in the Konya edition which is the earliest original manuscript discovered to date.

Apparently, this Ghazal first appeared in a Divan which was published in India, which may also explain the later addition of ‘Hindus’ and ‘Buddhists’ to the list of adherents of book religions including Jews, Christians and Muslims (See Coleman Bark’s fautly version of the poem).

It must be noted that block printing did not exist until the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. In Mowlana's era, there was no such thing as a printing machine or "publication." Poems were hand-written by 'scribes' and it was not uncommon for the scribes to add their own writings to the poems penned by Mowlana.

In his critical edition of the Divan, Forouzanfar who is the most reliable Iranian Rumi scholar, refutes the authenticity of seven of the fifty poems Nicholson found attributed to Mowlana.

In reference to Nicholson's book, Professor Frank Lewis states in "Rumi-- Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalalal-Din Rumi: “Any publishers contemplating reprints of this work should add a notice to the effect that these poems (i.e. numbers IV, VIII, XII, XVII, XXXI, XXXIII and XLIV) are no longer thought to come from the pen of Rumi." (p. 532)

Incidentally, though Mowlana's "Kolliyat" contains only six volumes, a seventh volume was recently added including poems written by other Sufi's or mystics but erroneously attributed to Mowlana.

In light of the above, dear Farid Agha, though I really appreciate your thoughtful comments in my separate blog, I am not inclined to discuss my understanding of this poem as an authentic writing of Mowlana. To avoid further confusion, I intend to delete that blog and request that if you wish to further discuss this matter, that you repost your comment here.

Thanks,

Ramona

Azadeh re: "altered state"

Thank you for reading my explanation with an open mind and heart. I, of course, understand the reasoning behind your prior comment.

What you describe as an "altered state" while performing sama' (the dervish dance) could also be described as "ha'l" in the sense that one is momentarily embued with the Divine essence rather than dwelling in the worldly "nafs." I appreciate your sharing of that 'numinous' experience as the mystic psychiatrist Carl Jung would put it.

I wonder what led you to that tariqat and why was it limited in time. But if you don't wish to discuss personal matters here, I will understand.

May we all increase in Love,

Ramona

Thank you

Dear Ramona,

Thank you very much for your wonderful reply. I am aware of all that you wrote and agree with you. I was simply being practical in the sense of inviting and attracting individuals who might be reluctant to approach anything that has the label of "religion" on it. But I'm not dogmatic and accept your explanation :-).

For a few years, I was part of a gathering that followed the Sufi teachings of Hidayat Inayat Khan. And prior to that, in one occasion when I was part of a week-end retreat, I did a whirling dance for a while on a beautiful piece of music and then suddenly stopped as I was instructed. For several long minutes, I went through an experience that is hard to explain, but my consciousness was quite altered and I was feeling the whole universe within me and myself as part of everything in the universe. That's the only way I can describe my experience. These are the narrow extent of my experience with Sufism.

In Persian, Spirituality is "Ma'naviyyaat" - which happens to be Arabic :-). I'm sure there is a Persian word for that if we do a research.

Thank you again for your time.

Love,

Azadeh

Azadeh re: Spirituality of Love

Azadeh re: "Spirituality" of Love

Dear Azadeh,

Thank you for your comment. Your first question is well taken and deserves a proper response.

In one of my earlier comments, I explained that my understanding of the term “religion” is very different than ‘organized, institutionalized politicized religion.’ In fact Rumi abhorred such institutions and many an Aref was persecuted and executed by the established orthodox religious institutions. Mansur Hallaj was the first Aref who was put to death by his own disciples because of his famous words "Ana'l Haq" (“I am God”) during a moment of ha’l and ecstasy (that presents a whole other discussion which I will not venture here).

The word “religion” comes from the Latin "reli-gare" (as previously noted by Nur) which literally means to "bind back to" or "re-connect with". It represents the idea of reconnecting with the Divine, the God within, the Higher Self, Rumi’s “reed-bed” whence the solitary reed was separated at birth.

According to Mowlana, all of creation strives to reconnect with its Source and prays to it, including animals, vegetables and minerals. Hence, religion is not a dirty word with its present connotations in which it has been turned to a ‘monster’ of sorts. Otherwise I would agree with you unequivocally.

But as far as I know, there's no word in Farsi that would describe the present-day understanding of "spirituality" per se. Nor am I aware of Mowlana stating that by religion, he means spirituality. If you are aware of such a verse, please enlighten me. In a couple of verses of the Masnavi, Mowlana talks about religion as follows:

“Every sort of religious sect foresaw the end (according to their own surmise): of necessity they fell captive to error.

To foresee the end is not (as simple as) a hand-loom; otherwise,
How would there have been differences in religions?” (Masnavi, Vol.I: 488-492).

Mowlana was indeed a Muslim Aref or Gnostic (meaning one who has superior knowledge of spiritual matters, and explains the whole universe as an emanation of the Godhead). I don’t use the term “Mystic” or “Sufi” because they don’t convey the full meaning of “Erfan”. Nor does the word “spirituality” import Self-knowledge or Self-realization. It merely pertains to the spirit or soul, as distinguished from the physical nature and denotes a spiritual approach to life. “Kindred spirits” are closely akin in interests, attitude and outlook, but not in the level of the development of the Greater personality within themselves (Self-hood) or their direct experience of the Godhead.

In an earlier comment I stated: “Mowlana Rumi practiced the “Shari’a”’ to the extent that it spoke to his heart, not because it was “Sunnat" or “Tradition.” He prayed not just five times a day, but was in constant prayer and remembrance of God because he was in love with his Creator, and he only prayed with Presence of Heart (Hozour-e qalb). He fasted because he believed that one must not pay too much attention to the needs of the body and must purify the soul as well as the flesh. In fact he fasted most of the time, not just during the month of Ramadan. He didn’t sleep much either because he did not want to be divested from the Divine Presence.” He paid his khoms and zakat to help the poor, not because it was an imposed tax on religion.

Although he had reached his desired union (Vesa’l) with God, Mowlana still practiced the “Shari’a”’ until the end of his life, in part because he didn’t want his (immature) students to get the idea that they didn’t need to practice some kind of religious regiment to attain to what he did in order to become “cooked” and “burned” (as explained in a prior comment).

It is of significance that in Farsi “religion” translates to “din”, which merely means “the Way” to attain to God. Clearly, God is not religion. That a reason why Arefs started following a certain “Tariqat” or another and were called “Wayfarers”. In my personal opinion, there are no set pathways in the realm of Love. Only the Heart can properly guide and direct us to God/Self.

However, many religious sectarians tend to confuse the ”Way” with the goal. Rumi criticized the “Zaheds” of his time for worshipping ‘din’ rather than God, practicing the “Shari’a”’ blindly and mechanically without the requisite Presence of Heart; whereas he worshipped his Beloved in God alone, not in religious figures like velayate’ faqih, faqeh, olama’ or a’ime.

In essence, Mowlana represents the "hidden central seed" (hast-e markazi) of Islam which is surrender to God as Love. This relationship is restricted to a direct relationship between the Lover and the Beloved (sometimes mirrored through a Sheikh who has already attained to Fana’, as in Shams-i Tabriz). In short, an organized religion embraced the husk of Islam and never reached its kernel, which for Mowlana, was Love:

"The religion of Love is apart from all religions:

For lovers, the (only) religion and creed is-- God."

Mathnawi Vol. II: 1770

As for your second question, my assertion was in response to the last comment made by Nur in a recent enlightening article entitled “Journey to Alamut” by Ryszard Antolak. However, since my commentary would have digressed from the primary subject matter, I decided to write about it in another context. Hope I’ve answered your questions.

Look forward to your thoughts,

Ramona

Azita re "Spirituality" of Love

Dear Azadeh, Thank you for your comment. Your first question is well taken and deserves a proper response. In one of my earlier comments, I explained that my understanding of the term “religion” is very different than ‘organized, institutionalized politicized religion.’ In fact Rumi abhorred such institutions and many an Aref was persecuted and executed by the established orthodox religious institutions. Mansur Hallaj was the first Aref who was put to death by his own disciples because of his famous words "Ana'l Haq" (“I am God”) during a moment of ha’l and ecstasy (that presents a whole other discussion which I will not venture here). The word “religion” comes from the Latin "reli-gare" (as previously noted by Nur) which literally means to "bind back to" or "re-connect with". It represents the idea of reconnecting with the Divine, the God within, the Higher Self, Rumi’s “reed-bed” whence the solitary reed was separated at birth. According to Mowlana, all of creation strives to reconnect with its Source and prays to it, including animals, vegetables and minerals. Hence, religion is not a dirty word with its present connotations in which it has been turned to a ‘monster’ of sorts. Otherwise I would agree with you unequivocally. But as far as I know, there's no word in Farsi that would describe the present-day understanding of "spirituality" per se. Nor am I aware of Mowlana stating that by religion, he means spirituality. If you are aware of such a verse, please enlighten me. In a couple of verses of the Masnavi, Mowlana talks about religion as follows: “Every sort of religious sect foresaw the end (according to their own surmise): of necessity they fell captive to error. To foresee the end is not (as simple as) a hand-loom; otherwise, How would there have been differences in religions?” (Masnavi, Vol.I: 488-492). Mowlana was indeed a Muslim Aref or Gnostic (meaning one who has superior knowledge of spiritual matters, and explains the whole universe as an emanation of the Godhead). I don’t use the term “Mystic” or “Sufi” because they don’t convey the full meaning of “Erfan”. Nor does the word “spirituality” import Self-knowledge or Self-realization. It merely pertains to the spirit or soul, as distinguished from the physical nature and denotes a spiritual approach to life. “Kindred spirits” are closely akin in interests, attitude and outlook, but not in the level of the development of the Greater personality within themselves (Self-hood) or their direct experience of the Godhead. In an earlier comment I stated: “Mowlana Rumi practiced the “Shari’a”’ to the extent that it spoke to his heart, not because it was “Sunnat" or “Tradition.” He prayed not just five times a day, but was in constant prayer and remembrance of God because he was in love with his Creator, and he only prayed with Presence of Heart (Hozour-e qalb). He fasted because he believed that one must not pay too much attention to the needs of the body and must purify the soul as well as the flesh. In fact he fasted most of the time, not just during the month of Ramadan. He didn’t sleep much either because he did not want to be divested from the Divine Presence.” He paid his khoms and zakat to help the poor, not because it was an imposed tax on religion. Although he had reached his desired union (Vesa’l) with God, Mowlana still practiced the “Shari’a”’ until the end of his life, in part because he didn’t want his (immature) students to get the idea that they didn’t need to practice some kind of religious regiment to attain to what he did in order to become “cooked” and “burned” (as explained in a prior comment). It is of significance that in Farsi “religion” translates to “din”, which merely means “the Way” to attain to God. Clearly, God is not religion. That a reason why Arefs started following a certain “Tariqat” or another and were called “Wayfarers”. In my personal opinion, there are no set pathways in the realm of Love. Only the Heart can properly guide and direct us to God/Self. However, many religious sectarians tend to confuse the ”Way” with the goal. Rumi criticized the “Zaheds” of his time for worshipping ‘din’ rather than God, practicing the “Shari’a”’ blindly and mechanically without the requisite Presence of Heart; whereas he worshipped his Beloved in God alone, not in religious figures like velayate’ faqih, faqeh, olama’ or a’ime. In essence, Mowlana represents the "hidden central seed" (hast-e markazi) of Islam which is surrender to God as Love. This relationship is restricted to a direct relationship between the Lover and the Beloved (sometimes mirrored through a Sheikh who has already attained to Fana’, as in Shams-i Tabriz). In short, an organized religion embraced the husk of Islam and never reached its kernel, which for Mowlana, was Love: "The religion of Love is apart from all religions: For lovers, the (only) religion and creed is-- God." Mathnawi Vol. II: 1770 As for your second question, my assertion was in response to the last comment made by Nur in a recent enlightening article entitled “Journey to Alamut” by Ryszard Antolak. However, since my commentary would have digressed from the primary subject matter, I decided to write about it in another context. Hope I’ve answered your questions. Look forward to your thoughts, Ramona

Spirituality of Love

Dear Ramona,

For some reason, I overlooked your article; but after going to your blog on "I am not," I found it :-). This is a well-researched and important article in the contest of today's rise of religiosity.

I have two question for you.

1) You say, "Shams-i Tabrizi never affiliated himself with any particular religion, denomination, creed or sect." And you add that you "disagree with any attempt to assign any particular religious affiliations to these great saints."

So, why use the phrase "Religion of Love?" I know that Rumi has said that his only religion is the religion of Love, but in the context of our world today where all religions are not only organised but have also become political, I think we need not to take Rumi's word literally. As you know, by religion *he* means spirituality. I think the expression "Spirituality of Love" is more appropriate and more efficient in conveying your important message. What do you think?

2) In conclusion, you say, "So I would hold on to my essential beliefs and refrain from fueling a fire that doesn't serve "Haq." "

 Did you write this article in response to another article? If yes, which one?

Many Thanks for your article and your response.

Azadeh

Thank you Yolanda

For enriching our spirits with the meaningful and serene videos of Mowlana's beautiful poetry. 

:-)  Ramona

شراب سرخ

  شراب سرخ، قدمتان  به این صفحه مبارک. سپاس از معرفی‌ چنین شعر زیبا که فضای عاطفی، تخيلی و پر بار وغنی، تجربه حسی و بار شعری خود را با زبانی روان، ساده، و تصويری و در ساختارهای فشرده و منسجمی که از تجربه‌های عاشقانه عرفانی میجوشد، آگاهی میدهد.

 اعماق آن نشانگر شورآتشین الاهیست که از الهامات بیواسته مولانا سرچشمه میگیرد و دل عاشق را میسوزاند . امیدوارم بیشتر از حضور شما مستفیض شویم و از شراب سرخ  روح شما بنوشیم.

 صمیمانه،

 رامونا

...

شب بود و در جایی‌ به همراه معشوقه بودیم که ندا آمد و ساز همراه شد و این شعر پدیدار گشت :

از مطلبی که در اینجا گذاشته اید و از صحبت دیگر دوستان،استفاده شد،سپاس گذاریم.

Yolanda jan

thanks for posting those videos. They are really lovely.

Ramona Yes I believe you

Ramona

Yes I believe you are taking things out of context (I will leave it to audience to judge whether it is knowingly or unknowingly). Many examples and I will just mention one:

You say "I believe Shams-i Tabrizi was a wandering dervish with a very high
degree of Gnostic spirituality."

He is sick of Dervishes if you actually read just a bit more of his works. He actually valued "zaaheds" more than Dervish because he believed Dervishes are just lazy people with no depth. He thought Zaaheds at least did go thru some pain to learn and actually do some work.That is why he picked Rumi rather than Chalabi an dothers.....

....And...Rumi was not after Shams as The Beloved......Shams was the gate keeper....after Rumi found out that there is no more Shams....He started befriending spiritually with Salahoddin!!!!

Calling Shams a gnostic is like saying "a white yogurt is actually black in color!!!!".

Shams was very stubborn, no-joking, no-non-sense, bold, all-knowing and practicing religious man. In these days, we would call him: He put his money were his mouth was. He was sincere and in-love with his beloved. He did not believe in deceiving people but rather telling The Truth as it would please his Beloved.

You also need to dwell a bit on WHY and HOW Shams captured Rumi's heart. He opened the doors of heavens to him and showed him how to use his spiritual senses to connect to The Beloved.

I actually like to see how you likn your "I think"s on Shams and Rumi to their works. Don't be ambiguious...present some references!

Ramognostic!

My stance is really clear. Your approach to analyzing Persian cultural heritage is totally based on the western views, totally strange with the essence of what these great scholars beieved in and fed from.

If I try to make my point, it will be "Masnavieh haftaad man kaaghaz!!!!!!!" Fortunately, Rumi and Shams, unlike khayyam and Hafiz, believed in harmony of zaaher and baaten. So, they laid aside most of ijaaz and eshaareh and harmonized the spririt of their belief with it's appearance.

Shams believed in (as he says in Maghalaat) to preserve "shareeyyat" in their works. For example, after The Beloved, he had most respect for The Prophet. He says this all over his speeches and can find it in many many places in Masnavi as well.

So, my point is, let's not act very intellectual and try to harmonize Shams' belief with our own. This is injustice to those individuals.

Vandalizing great spirits of our cultural heritage are exactly what happened to Christianity during and after Renaissance.

I actually like the way Wayne Dyer represents our heritage whole lot more than articles like yours. There is definitely many positive outcomes of Dyer's works!

This is just my critique and I suppose I'm entitled to it.

Peace; 

....

Hi! Ramona,

    Thank you for posting Rumi's cool poem. I really like it and have copied and added to my Persian poem collection!

"Through love all that is bitter will be sweet.

Through Love all that is copper will be gold.

Through Love all dregs will turn to purest wine.

Through Love all pain will turn to medicine.

Through Love the dead will all become alive.

Through Love the king will turn into a slave! "

********************

The  poem you posted reminds me of Rumi's transcendental Seven Advice:

"In generosity and helping others be like a river.
In compassion and grace be like sun.
In concealing others’ faults be like night.
In anger and fury be like dead.
In modesty and humility be like earth.
In tolerance be like a sea.
Either exist as you are or be as you look."

Hopefully we all can get along!!!

Hi! R2-D2,

 I visited your blogs before and learned a lot of stuff from you, like Persian music, Persian poets, and sufi music! Thank you for your participation here!

Hi! Humility,

 I am glad that the atmosphere is getting more amiable here. Thank God! Actually I really like the topic and I have read all the posts. I love to learn!

Hi! Massoud,

     I participated your blogs before. I have learned a lot from you like Sufism and spiritual matters! Thank you for your input here!

Hi! PT,

     After I read your mystical poems and visited your blogs, I started to be interested in Persian poems, and Persian poets, Saadi, Rumi, Hafez, & Sufism, etc. Actually I am really glad that IC put this article in the prime spot. I hope we can have a great interaction and I really want to learn more about Rumi and Shams!

Hi! Captain,

    I think religion of love is a great topic, more love the better and less wars the better! Actually I am not surprised that so many people are drawn to Rumi! He is indeed a fascinating character. I hope by studying him that I can become a better person! Thank you for adding your input here! I also hope Rumi's work can be translated into every language of this world!

Humility, You are welcome sir

.

R2D2

You bet my dreamer friend, I guess you two got me with my tow alias's

Boy do I feel bad or what?!

-YT 

capt_ayhab

Please stop the non-sense - This lady Ramona has gone through great length to put together this interesting blog :)

Stop your derogatory remarks under either capt_ayhab, or under your alter ego Jo :) As I indicated earlier, I promise you that I would stop responding to you as soon as you stop posting comments addressed to me - That Simple!!

back to the beauty

آه در آن شمع منور چه بود                                         


کآتش زد در دل و دل را ربود

ای زده اندر دل من آتشی                                         


سوختم ای دوست بیا زود زود

صورت دل صورت مخلوق نیست                                  کز رخ دل حسن
خدا رو
نمود

جز شکرش نیست مرا چاره ای                                 


جز لب او نیست مرا هیچ سود

یاد کن آن را که یکی صبحدم                                      


این دلم از زلف تو بندی گشود

جان من اول که بدیدم تو را                                         


جان من از جان تو چیزی شنود

چون دلم از چشمه تو آب خورد                                   


غرقه شد اندر تو


و سیلم ربود

-YT 

Mr. R2D2

I respectfully ask you not to refer to me as DEAR.

onam khodeti jenab

-YT 

Dear Ramona

I was just responding to this so-called captain_ahab because he started this whole affair by his negative and inflammatory comment under Jo :)

I  promise you one thing: If he stops, so will I - That Simple :)

Time out! Cut it out boys!

it's really disheartening to see that the intended discussion about Rumi's Religion of Love has disintegrated into a pissing contest. 

But as everything eventually turns into its opposite, Rumi's poetic beauty has been superceded by ugly name calling and finger pointing, which is definitely not what Rumi's about.

If you have something to say about Mowlana, or the article, by all means join the fray. Otherwise, save us your personal "observations," and "constructive criticisms" and write your own blog, hopefully to bring in the light, not the dark.

Ramona