The erasure of islam from the poetry of rumi

[Firdousi]

Yeah! He wrote a poem about how he wanted kiss Shams Tabrizi's lips. George Micheal had more decency than that.

Share that poem with us.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Share that poem with us.

Don't tell me you never read gay literature by Rumi and other famous Persian Sufi poets! You love them yet you don't even know their work?

[Firdousi]

Don't tell me you never read gay literature by Rumi and other famous Persian Sufi poets! You love them yet you don't even know their work?

I dont "love" them, I admire them. I know how many of their poems might lead to misunderstandings. I am asking you to share that poem of Rumi wanting to kiss Sham´s lips. You made a claim so burden of proof lies on your shoulders.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

I dont "love" them, I admire them. I know how many of their poems might lead to misunderstandings. I am asking you to share that poem of Rumi wanting to kiss Sham´s lips. You made a claim so burden of proof lies on your shoulders.

How can you admire something if you havent read it? You are here saying you like rationalism and here you are being extremely irrational again.

I've posted an entire book here on this forum. I have posted quotes and citations.

[Firdousi]

How can you admire something if you havent read it? You are here saying you like rationalism and here you are being extremely irrational again.

I've posted an entire book here on this forum. I have posted quotes and citations.

You feel cornered now. So now you are trying to derail the thread.

Share that link then. Come on, prove me wrong.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Don't tell me you never read gay literature by Rumi and other famous Persian Sufi poets! You love them yet you don't even know their work?

You brought up this topic before ...and when asked to show the poem or verses ...you just disappeared and never posted in that thread again.

It's safe to conclude you're full of crap.

[maneatinglizard]

I engaged in a few arguments on this forum about 6 years ago. It's a real shame that the level of discourse has remained basically stagnant in all those years. Some of the same characters from back then too.

Its amazing how easy it is for Muslims to slander the giants among their own ancestors. If he was truly a libertine homosexual or advocated that lifestyle, you'd think the scholars of his time would've tried to censure him, as they did to scholars who committed far less obvious deviancies. If someone doesn't like his poetry, then just don't read it. There's no reason to attempt to make it haram for everyone when plenty of people have benefitted from it, and reputable scholars have praised it.

On the other hand, advocating old heterodoxies like Mu'tazilism, or for the abandonment of the outwardly apparent aspects of Islam, aren't good ideas either. Mu'tazilism died because it was an early and flawed attempt at understanding Islam in the context of logic Classical Greek philosophy. Orthodox Muslim scholars like al-Ghazali have already sifted out the good (understanding our religion and the world in a rational framework) from the bad (stupid theories of the Greeks and derived from them, like the universe being eternal and infinitely divisible, or Allah not having absolute knowledge), and reviving it would be an intellectual regression. Likewise, the outward sunnahs like keeping a beard or avoiding hanging clothing below the ankles are undeniably parts of Islam. Even if scholars have debated how important they are, they're at the very least praiseworthy actions.

Honestly, I think both sides of this debate are ultimately reactions to Western colonialism. On the one hand you have people who feel like traditional Islamic practice has been taken over by Western influence, and seek to return to what they see as the "original" Islam. On the other, you have people who feel like the Muslim world "lost" because Western society is superior, and seek to reinterpret Islam to better fit with modern Western thought. Both are ultimately attempts at redefining Islam in the context of Western dominance, and that's sad.

A hundred years later and we're still frozen in the shadow of the Western imperial powers.

[Baserka]

We hate in others the things we dislike about ourselves privately.

[Firdousi]

I engaged in a few arguments on this forum about 6 years ago. It's a real shame that the level of discourse has remained basically stagnant in all those years. Some of the same characters from back then too.

Its amazing how easy it is for Muslims to slander the giants among their own ancestors. If he was truly a libertine homosexual or advocated that lifestyle, you'd think the scholars of his time would've tried to censure him, as they did to scholars who committed far less obvious deviancies. If someone doesn't like his poetry, then just don't read it. There's no reason to attempt to make it haram for everyone when plenty of people have benefitted from it, and reputable scholars have praised it.

On the other hand, advocating old heterodoxies like Mu'tazilism, or for the abandonment of the outwardly apparent aspects of Islam, aren't good ideas either. Mu'tazilism died because it was an early and flawed attempt at understanding Islam in the context of logic Classical Greek philosophy. Orthodox Muslim scholars like al-Ghazali have already sifted out the good (understanding our religion and the world in a rational framework) from the bad (stupid theories of the Greeks and derived from them, like the universe being eternal and infinitely divisible, or Allah not having absolute knowledge), and reviving it would be an intellectual regression. Likewise, the outward sunnahs like keeping a beard or avoiding hanging clothing below the ankles are undeniably parts of Islam. Even if scholars have debated how important they are, they're at the very least praiseworthy actions.

Honestly, I think both sides of this debate are ultimately reactions to Western colonialism. On the one hand you have people who feel like traditional Islamic practice has been taken over by Western influence, and seek to return to what they see as the "original" Islam. On the other, you have people who feel like the Muslim world "lost" because Western society is superior, and seek to reinterpret Islam to better fit with modern Western thought. Both are ultimately attempts at redefining Islam in the context of Western dominance, and that's sad.

A hundred years later and we're still frozen in the shadow of the Western imperial powers.

Good points. But what should we do?

BTW I disagree with those who ant to get rid of everything Western. Thats nonsense. In general Western civilization is a admirable. We have a lot to learn from them.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

I engaged in a few arguments on this forum about 6 years ago. It's a real shame that the level of discourse has remained basically stagnant in all those years. Some of the same characters from back then too.

Its amazing how easy it is for Muslims to slander the giants among their own ancestors. If he was truly a libertine homosexual or advocated that lifestyle, you'd think the scholars of his time would've tried to censure him, as they did to scholars who committed far less obvious deviancies. If someone doesn't like his poetry, then just don't read it. There's no reason to attempt to make it haram for everyone when plenty of people have benefitted from it, and reputable scholars have praised it.

On the other hand, advocating old heterodoxies like Mu'tazilism, or for the abandonment of the outwardly apparent aspects of Islam, aren't good ideas either. Mu'tazilism died because it was an early and flawed attempt at understanding Islam in the context of logic Classical Greek philosophy. Orthodox Muslim scholars like al-Ghazali have already sifted out the good (understanding our religion and the world in a rational framework) from the bad (stupid theories of the Greeks and derived from them, like the universe being eternal and infinitely divisible, or Allah not having absolute knowledge), and reviving it would be an intellectual regression. Likewise, the outward sunnahs like keeping a beard or avoiding hanging clothing below the ankles are undeniably parts of Islam. Even if scholars have debated how important they are, they're at the very least praiseworthy actions.

Honestly, I think both sides of this debate are ultimately reactions to Western colonialism. On the one hand you have people who feel like traditional Islamic practice has been taken over by Western influence, and seek to return to what they see as the "original" Islam. On the other, you have people who feel like the Muslim world "lost" because Western society is superior, and seek to reinterpret Islam to better fit with modern Western thought. Both are ultimately attempts at redefining Islam in the context of Western dominance, and that's sad.

A hundred years later and we're still frozen in the shadow of the Western imperial powers.

What would your Deobandi 'molvi's' say if Kadodia writes a poem about his desire to kiss the lips of Ahmed Sadik Desai? Would that be considered 'orthodox' and 'traditional'?

[salman47]

His poems were deliberately mistranslated by the Western Translators,,, so thats why many Muslims think he was some gay devona!
He was actually a sufi Muslim(according to his writings)

[dawn]

Rumi being gay or bacha baz looks like wahabi propaganda picked up by westerners.