Currently reading a book on Islamic Gnosticism and Shi'a ghulat sects and it's fricking wild
I'm wondering if there were any similar movements within Sunni Islam, in Sufism maybe? I'm talking esoteric Qu'ran readings, transmigration of souls, God incarnate faking His own death, stuff like that
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Nice anon. Can you link me the book? Is it Persian or is there a translation?
It's in German
Heinz Halm - Die islamische Gnosis. Die extreme Schia und die ’Alawiten
Some of his stuff exists in translation
These sects only exist with Shias hence why Sunnis hate them for splitting the religion. All the weirdo esoteric sects with Sufis are also Shia most of the time.
Sunnis are basically the puritans of Islam are the no fun allowed guys
Interesting way of saying they don’t allow trannies
Not the point I was making. The point is that, even in spite of that they allow no intellectual growth, so sure, no trannies of course but that also means no scientific achievements or mental stimulation beyond worshipping a cube and fornicating with family members.
But that is moronic. Most of the intellectual growth of Persian Islam was when they were Sunni
Historically yes, but we don’t live in the early Middle Ages anymore.
You also seem to forget the defining characteristics of institutions, whether religious or secular overtime, change, whether we like it or not which is why you don’t see Democrats dressing in white robes anymore and chasing Black folk around with burning torches.
>Most of the intellectual growth of Persian Islam was when they were Sunni
no. The majority happened in the buyid era a shia dynasty and Iranians always had a high amount of shia.
Sunni countries are more advanced than Iran. The Gulf states, Malaysia, Indonesia
I don’t live there Achmed so I don’t have a Birds Eye view of what’s going on, you’re basically the only source and over the thirty years I’ve used the internet I’ve learned to not believe everything I read on here. That includes online encyclopedias if I can help it.
The Puritans were one of the most mystic branches of Christianity, though. Strong rules and work ethic do not preclude spirituality. Don't just take everything your middle school history teacher taught you for granted.
>The images of things in a glass, as we keep our eye upon them, seem to remain precisely the same, with a continuing, perfect identity. But it is known to be otherwise. Philosophers well know that these images are constantly renewed, by the impression and reflection of new rays of light; so that the image impressed by the former rays is constantly vanishing, and a new image impressed by new rays every moment, both on the glass and on the eye. The image constantly renewed, by new successive rays, is no more numerically the same, than if it were by some artist put on anew with a pencil, and the colors constantly vanishing as fast as put on. And the new images being put on immediately or instantly, do not make them the same, any more than if it were done with the intermission of an hour or a day. The image that exists this moment, is not at all derived from the image which existed the last preceding moment; as may be seen, because if the succession of new rays be intercepted, by something interposed between the object and the glass, the image immediately ceases; the past existence of the image has no influence to uphold it, so much as for one moment. Which shows that the image is altogether new made every moment; and strictly speaking, is in no part numerically the same with that which existed the moment preceding. And truly so the matter must be with the bodies themselves, as well as their images. They also cannot be the same, with an absolute identity, but must be wholly renewed every moment, if the case be as has been proved, that their present existence is not, strictly speaking, at all the effect of their past existence; but is wholly, every instant, the effect of a new agency, or exertion of the power, of the cause of their existence. If so, the existence caused is every instant a new effect, whether the cause be light, or immediate divine power, or whatever it be.
>Islamic Gnosticism
what is an islamic gnostic, an Uruk-Hai who goes to night school?
Check out this reddit post
https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicQuran/comments/paud5i/early_islamic_heresies/
>Many of the "heretical" splinters that we know about come from heresiographers themselves, e.g., al-Ash’ari (d. 324/935), al-Baghdadi (d. 429/1037) and Ibn Hazm (d. 456/1064). These sources are obviously problematic for the same reason one might not wish to consult with Irenaeus or Eusebius for an accurate portrayal about, say, Gnostic Christianity.
This redditor just assumes without reading the source material. Sunni "heresiographers", if you can call them that, quoted "heretical" writings and poetry directly, and in some cases, even preserved them.
They assume that just because a piece of writing is polemical, it immediately follows that it is disingenuous and problematic. They see proto-orthodox lie and slander the other christian sects and immediately think muslims did the same without research
>I'm wondering if there were any similar movements within Sunni Islam, in Sufism maybe?
All the crazies in early Islam flocked to the extreme proponents of Ali's Shia, but there is doubt as to whether or not Abdullah ibn Saba' was a real person, because the parallels between him and Paul of Tarsus almost seems planned
>Paul of Tarsus(at least according to Islamic sources)
Some israelite grifter from the middle of nowhere who misled millions, completely missing the point of Jesus' teachings by worshiping him instead of the one true God, humiliated and executed by the Emperor Nero
>Abdullah ibn Saba'(according to a very pro Sunni source)
Some israelite grifter from the middle of nowhere who misled millions, completely missing the point of Muhammad's teachings by worshiping Ali instead of the Lord of the Worlds, burned to death by Ali himself for his heresy
Hmm it's almost like """they""" are inherently subversive
I don’t get picrel. Why you post it
because Shias are funny
If Paul was such a grifter, why did the other Apostles accept him? Do you guys have a problem with John's gospel, too?
>the other Apostles accept him?
this is a fact known only from Acts which was written by a Pauline.
From Galatians, Paul's own authentic words, he says, after the people of Galatia became suspicious of him and abandoned his teachings for "another gospel", Paul says "Even if an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!"
Who do you think came to the Galatians to refute Paul and why were they so quick to distrust him?
>Do you guys have a problem with John's gospel, too?
And John is known to be the most inauthentic non-aprocryphal gospel, with direct textual evidence of interpolation and redaction by scribes
Did he ever meet an American?
>Abdullah ibn Saba
this story is bullshit to explain away why muhammad's companions warred with each other.
I talked to a sheikh about the sufis and they said they’re really just Sunnis with extra veneration to the imams. So I think the western label as mystics are really just a western meme or at least a bit exaggerated
The ghulat really do remind me of the early Christian gnostics. Lots of similarities. Bizarre religious doctrine that’s well outside the modern mainstream, a label given to many different groups with really vague similarities, and went extinct very early in the religious history
There’s also the fact they were both looked at negatively in their time.
>I talked to a sheikh about the sufis and they said they’re really just Sunnis with extra veneration to the imams
Those are sufi laymen or moderate sufis. Extreme sufis, the likes of Ibn 'Arabi, believed in the unity of being(wahdat al wujud), had strange contradictory takes about the Prophets and believed in the dissolution of man into God like in Advaita Vedanta. They believed that people of higher states can communicate directly the words of God, hence Al-Hallaj's famous saying "I am the Real"
Some sufis in Malaya and Sumatra believed in the unity of all things(wahdat al mawjud) which was almost pantheistic
Ibn Arabi most certainly did not believe in the dissolution of man into God like in Advaita. He's pretty explicit that this is wrong and a lower form of spirituality. He's also strongly anti-Shia.
I don't know his exact words, just paraphrasing what is commonly known
>and went extinct very early in the religious history
bruh. they are still around
Are Druze technically still Muslims or did they split from Islam the way Christianity split from Judaism?
Not considered Muslim
Shia are like Mormons, Ahmadis are like Moonies, and Druze are like Black Israel
>Shia are like Mormons
I feel like the difference between Sunni and Shia is way, way less than Christianity and Mormonism and it only feels heightened because how violent and dogmatic Islam is. (I'm talking normal Shia and not weird bullshit like Alawites.)
It is way way more. A Christian version of Shiaism would be like if the Virgin Mary poisoned Jesus and Peter was evil and usurped the first Papacy from John who was granted the powers of Jesus over the universe and passed them secretly to successors
The Christian version of Shiaism is Christianity(the Pauline kind)
Pauline Christianity is written into Christian scriptures.
>Pauline Christianity is written into Pauline scriptures
obviously
Do you have any idea about the autistic shit Christians used to kill eachother over? Muslims are hippies in comparison
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but from my impression Shia hate comes mainly from wahhaboids
>Muslims are hippies in comparison
Most of the religious wars in Christianity were just wedge issues for pre-existing political conflicts (filioque was just a wedge issue for the Papacy preferring the HRE to the Byzantines, English Reformation coming about to secure an annulment that Henry VIII was necessary to get a successor, etc).
Islam literally explicitly demands the armed conquest and subjugation of the entire world into an earthly autocracy, frick off outta here pretending they are comparable.
>Islam literally explicitly demands the armed conquest and subjugation of the entire world into an earthly autocracy
It literally explicitly doesn't, unless, again, you are a wahhaboid and even then only a tiny splinter group of wahhaboids
Mormonism is just White Islam. The demon calling himself jebril must have done it on a bet
> you guys think I can do it again?
“Among the Dervishes” by Omar Michael Burke is a really entertaining, interesting, and informative account of travels among and stays with Sufis and Sufi-adjacent sects or weirder Muslims with less mainstream beliefs. Like in Chapter 8, The Followers of Jesus, about a Muslim sect scattered among western Afghanistan with interesting beliefs and traditions passed down of Jesus having survived and escaped from the Cross, then helped by friends to flee to India (where they also claim he had been in his youth), then settled and died in Kashmir, where he was know as “Yuz Asaf.” See pic related. There is also much more in the book about some fascinating Sufi beliefs and practices and those of obscurer Muslim sects.
Frick. Rotated. And yes I’m a phoneposter. It’s probably turning me blind, reading and writing on this small screen so much.
FRICK!!!!!
FRICKING MOTHERFRICKER!!!!
Piece of fricking SHIT FRICK
Early shi'ism is pretty cool
Sunni Muslims don't believe anything like "God incarnate", God in Sunni islam is beyond creation and doesn't walk around in some rock on the boondocks of the milkyway in one single planet among trillions of stars among trillions of galaxies. In Sunni Islam God has plenty of servants to do his bidding without God having to do anything at all. Angels and so on which also often is beyond that sort of thing. Death is an angel, a servant of Allah himself, makes no sense to fake any death. Would be no point
>God in Sunni islam is beyond creation
He's an emo twink