Discussion about Rumi (Split)

[Mujib]

Bismillahi al-Rahmani al-Rahim

Mawlana Rumi (ra) was, like his father, a learned scholar and teacher of Islam. He had memorized most or all of the Qur'an. He was a Mufti of the Hanafi school (madhhab). Mawlana Rumi (ra) dedicated his life to worship and teaching. His service to Islam and Muslims is incalculable.

Homosexuality

In Islam, homosexuality is not love between two men. There is no concept of homosexuality as such. In fact, this definition could be said to be un-Islamic, as this definition of homosexuality as love between two men is used as part of the argument for the naturalness of "homosexuality." Beyond love, even desire for men is not necessarily something unique as far as how it is dealt with in Islamic law. The desire for a man is like the desire for a woman, it is a temptation that must be fought. In Islam, "homosexuality" is the act of sodomy. The act of sodomy is what Islamic law and morality prohibits and condemns.

This distinction must be made because in this discussion love between men is defined as "homosexuality," and that definition is applied in making these absurd claims. Those non-Muslim writers who make these claims do not understand a love between men that is not physical, and they do not understand the references to male beauty in Sufi poetry.

Love between men, of course, does not need any explaining. The love of fathers, brothers, friends, and fellow Muslims are all love of men. Love and respect of one's teacher is part of the adab of Islam. The love a murid has for his shaykh is even greater, as the shaykh is the murid's personal guide to Allah Most High. And above all of this is the love of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), without which one does not have faith (iman). This love is the highest human love one must have. One must love him (Allah bless him and give him peace) more than one's parents and even oneself.

As for praising male beauty, this goes back to the practice of the Companions (Sahaba), who praised the beauty of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), describing in detail his blessed face (like the Moon), his blessed hair, his blessed eyes, and more of his blessed being. The loving descriptions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) in the poetry of the great Sufis are based upon these descriptions of the Companions. Sana'i (ra), for example, as cited by Schimmel in her And Muhammad is His Messenger, says, addressing the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace): "The radiance of your face is what one calls "morning"; / The shade of your two tresses is where you say "evening" (196). Mawlana Jami (ra), says, as cited by Schimmel:

The moon is a reflection of Muhammad's beauty,
Musk is a little whiff from Muhammad's mole and tresses.
In the garden of "Stay upright!" no walking cypress
Has set foot, [which would be] comparable to the harmonious stature
of Muhammad! (207)

Praise of male beauty is also often metaphorical. Masculine nouns and pronouns are used because the referent is male, or, when referring to God, the masculine is the proper reference; and because it is more proper and modest to use the masculine instead of the feminine in these praises of beauty and expressions of love. Franklin D. Lewis remarks, in his Rumi Past and Present, East and West:

Rumi did employ the symbolism of homoerotic, or more properly, androgynous love, in his poems addressed to Shams as the divine beloved, but this merely adopts an already 300-year-old conversion of the poetry of praise in Persian literature. (324)

The Practices of Some Pseudo-Sufis

It was the practice of some Sufis to gaze at handsome young men as a means to drawing nearer to God. Contemplating and admiring the physical beauty of a young man was a way of contemplating and admiring the beauty and perfection of God's creation. Men were the object of this contemplation and admiration because, obviously, gazing at women is against Islamic rules of modesty. And young men were the object of this contemplation and admiration because, obviously, physical beauty is at its peak in youth. So gazing at handsome young men was in fact a way of contemplating and admiring human beauty and perfection of creation. This practice, however, was not part of the discipline of Mawlana Rumi (ra); Mawlana Rumi (ra), Mawlana Shams (ra), and Mawlana Rumi's father (ra) are all quoted as disapproving of this practice.

Some pseduo-Sufis abused such practices and in the name of such practices indulged in other improper acts. These pseudo-Sufis and their practices were condemned by true Sufis. Mawlana Rumi (ra) and his teacher, Mawlana Shams (ra), both condemned such activity. Mawlana Rumi (ra) says in the Mathnawi, as cited by Ibrahim Gamard:

The (true) sufi [Sûfî] is the one who becomes a seeker of purity [Safwat];
not from (wearing) garments of wool [Sûf] and sewing (patches) and sodomy.
With these vile people, sufism [Sûfiyî] has become
stitching and sodomy [al-liwâTa] and that is all (V:363-64). (Gamard)

Mawlana Shams (ra) too condemned these acts and warned against them and those who practiced them. In an account from Shams al-din Aflaki's (ra) Manaqib al-`Arifin, cited by William Chittick in his Me & Rumi, Mawlana Shams (ra) instructs Mawlana Rumi's son, Sultan Walad (ra), against such practices:

When Mawlana made Walad the disciple of Mawlana Shams al-Din Tabrizi, the latter said, 'My Baha ad-Din, do not eat hashish and never engage in sodomy [lawwata], because both of these acts are immensely unpraiseworthy and blameworthy in the eyes of the Generous God'. (342)

In conclusion, Mawlana Rumi (ra) is considered one of the greatest saints (awliya Allah: friends of Allah) and scholars of Islam. The scholars of Islam have praised him and acknowledged his status as great faqih (jurist) of the Hanafi madhhab and as a great knower of God (`arif). His works are read and taught all over the Muslim world. His is loved and revered by Muslims and non-Muslims alike, and his words have opened the door to Islam for many. The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, in a sahih hadith, that Allah Most High says concerning His friends: "He who is hostile to a friend of Mine I declare war against." Shaykh Gibril Haddad said, in a response to certain propaganda against Mawlana Rumi (ra):

It is a sign of the Divine power that Allah makes many purported disbelievers love and respect this Friend of Allah -- Jalal al-Din Rumi -- over seven centuries after his death while He makes some purported Muslims attack him and reveal themselves as corrupt enviers and friends of Shaytan. (Haddad)

Works Cited

Chittick, William C. Me & Rumi: The Autobiography of Shams-i Tabrizi. Louisville, Kentucky: Fons Vitae, 2004.

Gamard, Ibrahim. "A Reply to Misunderstandings about Rumi and Shams." Dar-al-Masnavi. n.p., 30 Dec 2009. Web. 15 Jul 2010.

<http://www.dar-al-masnavi.org/rumi-shams.html>.

Haddad, Gibril F. "Mawlana Jalal al-Din ar-Rumi "misguided"?." SunniPath. n.p., 30 Sept 2005. Web. 15 Jul 2010.

<http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.a...=3132&CATE=22>.

Lewis, Franklin D. Rumi Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teaching and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi. Oxford: Oneworld

Publications, 2001. 320-24.

Schimmel, Annemarie. And Muhammad is His Messenger: The Veneration of the Prophet in Islamic Piety. Chapel Hill: The University of

North Carolina Press, 1985. 176-215.

[Mujib]

Rūmī and the hermeneutics of eroticism

Have you read anything from this book? The author draws similar conclusions about certain verses from the Qur'an Majid. He says:

Another example, the textual tension between homoerotic beauty and homosexual activity: in spite of the prohibition of sexual attraction and intercourse between two males, male believers will be served wine by "immortal youths with goblets" who "when you see them you think them as scattered pearls." (15-16)

This is part of his logic and deduction. Do you agree with it?

You have now put forth several pages of book titles and quotes, yet not a single one of them says what you are claiming about Mawlana Rumi (ra). And you have cited nothing from Mawlana Rumi's (ra) own words. Yet you continue to slander one of the giants of the umma, who is loved and venerated by Muslims everywhere. Will you not cease?

Allah forgive us.

[شمله ور خراساني]

Have you read anything from this book? The author draws similar conclusions about certain verses from the Qur'an Majid. He says:

Another example, the textual tension between homoerotic beauty and homosexual activity: in spite of the prohibition of sexual attraction and intercourse between two males, male believers will be served wine by "immortal youths with goblets" who "when you see them you think them as scattered pearls." (15-16)

This is part of his logic and deduction. Do you agree with it?

You have now put forth several pages of book titles and quotes, yet not a single one of them says what you are claiming about Mawlana Rumi (ra). And you have cited nothing from Mawlana Rumi's (ra) own words. Yet you continue to slander one of the giants of the umma, who is loved and venerated by Muslims everywhere. Will you not cease?

Allah forgive us.

you need to buy glasses. I posted his own poetry where he praised Shams beauty and desire to kiss him.

[شمله ور خراساني]

Oh and Mujib, if you know so much about Rumi, explain why Rumi's son killed Shams Tabrizi?

[Mayana]

The biggest irony of it all is that 'homosexual intellectuals' of today's world that have absolutely no relevance are trusted and even respected when it comes to judging one of the most influential scholars of Islam. Basically, the Jews and the gays are fine - they're "intellectuals" and credible sources with their krypto-normative information defining who YOU as a Muslim are. Gays and Jews are defining your identity as a Muslim and as a result, you're turning your back against Muslims. It's beaaaautiful.

[Mujib]

You are follower of clowns such as nu ha meem keller and hamza yusuf. The same people who have been cited by RAND corporation and other American thinktanks as tools to spread Sufism so that Muslims become subsurvient to American colonialism.

Is this not more slander of scholars? Shaykh Nuh Keller writes in his article, "Making the World Safe for Terrorism":

This kind of terrorism is going on today, indeed has been carried out by American presidents and their proxies in Nicaragua, in Sudan, in Lebanon, and in Iraq for the last twenty years, as described by Noam Chomsky, Edward Said, and others whose books and articles about these events are many and well-documented, and blithely ignored by almost everyone in America.

The little bands of bomb makers and plane hijackers are not at bottom religious men, but desperate men. They are inspired less by religion than by hope that on a symbolic scale they can somehow emulate the “success” of America’s and Israel’s “punitive strikes,” and “preemptive attacks.” Civilians die all the time in the West Bank and in Iraq. Someone in Jordan told me of a relative from another country who needed a kidney and could not find a donor of suitable blood group from his extended family, so he went to Iraq and bought one for two thousand dollars. The donor did not have food to eat, and was willing to sell his kidney. People are starving there. Birth defects and cancer are burgeoning from all the chemicals and explosives that have that been dropped on the people. Bombs are dropped from time to time to show them who is boss. According to Chomsky we have by now succeeded in killing one million civilians in Iraq, one half of whom were small children. The United States continually vetoes the United Nations initiative to allow UN observers into Israel to see what is being done to Palestinians there. In 1998 Clinton destroyed one half of Sudan’s pharmaceuticals and the means of replenishing them in punitive bombing raids on that country and killed untold numbers of civilians. How many? We don’t know, because the United States prevented the UN inquiry. Eighty percent of the refugees of the world bear Muslim last names. Desperation grows among these throngs, as hope wanes for a balanced U.S. foreign policy, or even an abatement of U.S. bombing and violence against Muslim civilian populations. There is no hope for people who know from the example of Nicaragua, Sudan, Iraq, and Israel that any attempt of redress or appeal to the United Nations or World Court will be vetoed or defied by the attackers. People without hope do a lot of things. (Making the World Safe for Terrorism. Bold mine.)

Is this a way of making Muslims "subsurvient to American colonialism"? Are you aware of Shaykh Nuh's actual positions on these matters, or do you rely on what RAND or someone else tells you?

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf has repeatedly condemned U.S. foreign policy. He has referred to the "war on terror" as state terrorism. In a recent talk, which was posted in the Planning for Tomorrow thread, he said: "We've got all of our talented scientists developing weapons of mass destruction, for enemies that are created out of thin air, enemies that are more like characters out of a James Bond film, living in caves somewhere. Boogiemen that are conjured up to scare people." Is that a way of making Muslims "subsurvient to American colonialism"?

[شمله ور خراساني]

That doesn't say anything.

Let me see if I can ask Inqilab. I think he got enough evidence against these two clowns.

[شمله ور خراساني]

The biggest irony of it all is that 'homosexual intellectuals' of today's world that have absolutely no relevance are trusted and even respected when it comes to judging one of the most influential scholars of Islam. Basically, the Jews and the gays are fine - they're "intellectuals" and credible sources with their krypto-normative information defining who YOU as a Muslim are. Gays and Jews are defining your identity as a Muslim and as a result, you're turning your back against Muslims. It's beaaaautiful.

Rumi most infleuncial scholar? The guy who promoted Wahdatul wujood?

Outside the Persian speaking world, only gays and lesbians have been influenced by Rumi. Muslims by and large are safe from such heretics.

[Mayana]

Rumi most infleuncial scholar? The guy who promoted Wahdatul wujood?

Outside the Persian speaking world, only gays and lesbians have been influenced by Rumi. Muslims by and large are safe from such heretics.

False. Just because you choose to only associate with gays and lesbians when it comes to interpreting (or in your case, stigmatizing) Rumi, it doesn't mean that those are the only people that respect Rumi.

Annemarie Schimmel, a German (heterosexual if you must know) Orientalist converted to Islam through her work on translating Rumi's work. She taught Islam and the History of Religion at Harvard for a quarter of a century. She has taught in Turkey, the USA and Germany. She has been appointed honorary professor at several universities. All this just caused by Rumi's work and the immensity of it..
What have you done that comes close to ANY of that, that you dare sit there and BASH someone whom you haven't even met, whose work you haven't even bothered to read, whose word you haven't even bothered to understand, whose principles you haven't even bothered to internalize?

[شمله ور خراساني]

Did you know Annemarie Schimmel is also the one who described Persian literature as a homosexual literature?

[Mayana]

lol... what's with you and homosexuality?
Your reasoning is among the most incoherent I have EVER come across.. let me summarize..:

Rumi=Sufism=Gay=Homosexual=American conspiracy to make Muslims Kafir=Sufism=Bad=Persian literature=gay=bad=converts to Islam=gay=credible source of analysis of Rumi's work=good.

Basically Rumi was wrong and bad but the person who was influenced by his work supposedly labeled him homosexual is good and a credible source? or.. Rumi is gay and hence bad but other gay people are good and credible sources?

[شمله ور خراساني]

where did I say anything negative about converts?

[Mayana]

You talked about "tools to spread Sufism so that Muslims become subsurvient to American colonialism." If Annamarie Schimmel is a convert and Sufi, "she is a tool to spread Sufism so that Muslims become subservient to American colonialism", judging by your logic or maybe the lack thereof.
So if these people convert to Islam and have Sufi tendencies, they're bad and American tools, but if they're Jews and gays that prove your point, they're good?

A shame.

[شمله ور خراساني]

You talked about "tools to spread Sufism so that Muslims become subsurvient to American colonialism." If Annamarie Schimmel is a convert and Sufi, "she is a tool to spread Sufism so that Muslims become subservient to American colonialism", judging by your logic or maybe the lack thereof.
So if these people convert to Islam and have Sufi tendencies, they're bad and American tools, but if they're Jews and gays that prove your point, they're good?

A shame.

You are one vicious little person. You are accusing me of something I am innocent of.

[Mayana]

I'm little, I agree. But I'm not vicious..
Khair, accusing people of something they're innocent of seems to be a new trend these days, ka senga?