Conference hydra::dejavu

    Sufi is a form of Moslem mysticism with, I believe, considerable
    borrowing from Hinduism.  They often achieve trance by ecstatic
    dancing.  And that's about all *I* know of them.
    
    Earl Wajenberg

    Sufism is seen, it is true, more on the Indian subcontinent and
    the Mideast, than in Saudi Arabia proper, where the conservatives
    are in power. It claims that ALL the prophets have been Sufis, and,
    further, that we are not awake or fully human, and that the Sufi
    way is toward awakening. It does NOT always involve a 'conventional'
    disciple-guru relationship, but may encompass same at the proper
    time. If someone benefits you, do you necessarily have to know his
    name or sat at his feet for years?
        
    There are several Sufi organizations in the States which are available
    to Westerners. The most visible of these is the Sufi Order USA,
    which is based in New Lebanon, New York at the Abode of the Message.
    
    Sufism uses ALL of the known spiritual methods, at different times...
    adherence to diet, mantram (known as Wazifa), hatha yoga,
    identification with the teacher (Murshid), sacred dancing, etc.
    
    Perhaps the dances might be the most painless mode of entry. I can
    recommend a light to heavy reading list, if you wish, online or
    offline.
    
karl moeller sws tucson az    

    I reviewed my reply from yesterday and would like to fill in some
    gaps.
    
    Sufi Dancing - as practiced by the Chisti (IndoPakistan) and Mevlevi
    Orders: The guide (Murshid,Pir) collects musicians and singers known
    as Qawwali. The lyrics sung are usually sacred phrases in praise
    of God. Then obviously the disciples and others show up. The session
    as a whole is known as 'Sama', which means 'audition'. During the
    music/singing, some if not all of the audience may 'go out' in Hal.
    Hal means 'state' and is a guided near-God experience. When people
    enter Hal it means that the Qawwali must continue playing/singing
    the same phrases sometimes for hours. The music becomes the only
    link the ones in Hal have to this life. People have been known to
    die in Sama sessions.

    Interestingly, once a disciple has evinced (even internally) an
    interest in Sama and Hal, he/she is usually prevented from attendance,
    as this is seen as greed for spiritual experience.
    
    Obviously the real Sama doesn't happen in public in the States.
    The Sufi Dances, usually channeled thru an American Sufi named Sam
    Lewis, are quite nice.
    
    Tarikas: Sufism is organized as underground schools, spiritual training
    centers (often with NO visible physical central organization) which
    revolves around the teaching and essence of a certain evolved Sufi.
    The Mevlevi Dervishes in Turkey follow Rumi, the Qadiri of Iraq,syria
    and North Africa follow Ab'dal Qadir Gilani, the Chistis of India
    follow Moinuddin Chisti. and there are many more. These are NOT
    dead organizations, but are difficult for a Westerner to penetrate.
    Your psychic perpetrated a cruel joke by implying it was going to
    be simple. Just attend some dances. Right.
    
    Conversion: Although Sufism is centered around Islamic principles,
    conversion to Islam is not generally necessary, as Sufism is indeed
    the hidden reality behind conventional religion.

    There is much more to say about this, but it's veering toward
    grandstanding. I recommend 'The Sufis' by Idries Shah, published
    in paperback by Dutton Press. Puts Sufism in a current and historical
    perspective. Probably the best single statement possible. Also
    anything by or about G. Gurdjieff, a Russian Armenian trained in 
    various Sufi schools back around the turn of the century. More 
    currently, A Briton named Reshad Feild (not misspelled) has hit the 
    real thing, and was given permission to write about it.

    karl moeller

    I've been netless for a month. Decided to check in here.
    
    I see no interest of any kind in Sufism nor additional responses,
    not even from the originator or the note.

    At the same time, I see 34 responses to a topic appealingly titled
    'Demonic Possession'.
    
    Proving Sufism's point that we are neither awake nor fully human.
    
    What twisted priorities.
    
    never again. k moeller

    I had intended to Delete responses 2 & 3, but decided to leave
    them there on the slim chance that someone might be open to tham.
    
    k moeller

    re .4:
    
    >What twisted priorities.
    
    Not really.  the "Demonic possession" note was a "current events"
    kind of thing rather than a more timeless one.  Many of the topics
    here are not time-dependent (e.g., Tarot, Scrying, Dreams Come True),
    whereas this item was specifically launched by an item that came
    over the Associated Press wires.
    
    Now it's worth noting [pun semi-intentional :-)] that all the furor
    about the so-called "demonic possession" has dwindled to gossamer
    and disappeared.  The timliness is gone, nor do I see anyone speaking
    further to the sometimes intriguing question about possession, real
    or honestly imagined.  Therefore, it's at best a dormant issue.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    	Karl, if you are still around...
    
    	If I recall correctly, .4 is the second time I've seen you dismiss
    a conference as being somehow not worthy of your continued
    participation. True, everyone needs to budget their time, and needs
    to make decisions about which conferences they will follow, and
    it is quite resonable to remove some conferences from your notebook,
    or from certain frequently accessed classes in your notebook. However,
    to make grand statements about the inadequecy of a conference
    WITHIN the conference I have trouble understanding as anything but
    rude to the community of people who have been actively participating in
    the conference, and who intend to remain active in the conference. 
    
    	Each conference is different, not only in the specific content
    of the discussions, but in the style of the discussions. It is easy
    to explain to someone the content of a particular Notes conference,
    but it takes time to learn the tone of the conference. DEJAVU, as
    I understand it, is not a conference where every reader feels compelled
    to comment on everything they read. Rather, many readers will follow
    discussions, learn from them, think about them, yet NOT RESPOND.
    There's nothing wrong in this. All the notes that have been entered
    in here are still here, to be referenced when people want them.
    
    	Of the conferences I follow, I find this one perhaps the most
    dense in terms of real information. There is not nearly the amount
    of extraneous "Me too"ing that some conferences get, or the amount
    of argument for the sake of putting forward a preconcieved opinion.
    Generally, the community is thoughtful in their silence, as well
    as their words.
    
    	I'll admit, it is at times frustrating to put a lot of effort
    and time into a particularly lengthy and articulate reply, and then
    have no response at all. This has happened to me in several conferences
    I follow...but I don't think it takes much insight to understand
    why...such a note is a hard act to follow. Rather than insulting
    your audience with being "neither awake nor fully human", you might put
    another reply under the topic, asking if anyone has any opinions
    about your previous replies, if anyone is interested in further
    discussions, etc.
    
    	In my opinion, all you have shown in .4 is that you have a long
    way to go, be it on the Sufi road, or whatever your chosen path
    to salvation and enlightenment may be.
    
    	If you do not respond to this in a while, I'll assume you haven't
    read it, and be kind enough to MAIL it to you...or at least send
    mail to tell you that it is here, in case you become interested
    at some time.
    
    	Peace and graceful rebirths to you,
    
    	Ed
    
    

    	That was absolutely "Tubular", Ed.  My sentiment exactly.....Jorge'

Oh, you didn't like my reply. Tell me, who likes to hear an alarm
clock go off?

Don't assume my pride is involved. There is good solid information
and contexts in the original responses, some of which took years to
put together. I will admit to getting quite angry at stupidity.
Ed, you are right in one aspect.. one of my errors was thinking that
this was a format where Sufism could be seriously discussed. 
The fact that a 'psychic' suggested 'Sufi' was a tipoff I missed.
    
I have major doubts as to the wellbeing of the participants in this
conference, defined by its major focus, study of the occult.

Although I could drag out endless quotations from those who know,
various prophets and teachers, allow me to paraphrase and leave.

-	Study of the occult is disguised spiritual greed. 

-	Giving the occult any energy at all is a serious mistake.

-	Study of the occult is the inverse of spirituality.

There is a very loose Sufi brotherhood in North Africa called the
Malamati. In Arabic, 'Malamat' means 'blameworthy'. The 'work' these 
people do involves opposing conventional mores and social norms...
including drinking, a major offense in Muslim countries. The criticism 
and ostracism they face gives them extra energy to do their inner work.
One of their study phrases is, "My opponent is my helper"... giving 
a brand new light to Jesus' phrase "Love thy enemy".

thank you.

    RE: .9
    
    I feel compelled to rebuke these three statements
    
    > Study of the occult is disguised spiritual greed.  
    
    It can be, sometimes not so disguised.  But many people use the
    occult to help others and to enable them to become closer to God.
    In fact, some people have ethics which prohibit them from using
    occult powers to in any way aid themselves.  Many more have ethics
    prohibiting them from using occult power to help themselves at someone
    else's expense.

    > Giving the occult any energy at all is a serious mistake.
    
    If you are reading this notesfile, and believing that the occult
    is something evil to be avoided at all cost, you are already giving
    it lots of energy.  Things which are kept in the dark, labeled "evil"
    often generate a lot of power over people.  If brought out in the
    open, examined for what they are, they lose this power over people.

    >  Study of the occult is the inverse of spirituality.
    
    As I said above, this is not necessarily so.  In my experience,
    it has been a very spiritual thing.  I believe that everything that
    exists exists because God created it.  To refuse to of it out of hand 
    is a rejection of God's creation.
                                
    
    Kathleen

    Re .9 There are many paths to enlightment, the occult among them.
    
    I once met an interesting Sufi whose name sounds like ka-dob-a-deen.
    He taught some Sufi dances one night in Athens, Ohio.  The group
    I was dancing in was always ending up going in the wrong direction.
    He would notice this(he was turned completely away from us) with
    a 'the universe is out of balance' pinpointing our group of dancers.
    We eventually danced in balance.
    
    --Tim
    

    Re .10:
    
    Kathleen's said it about as well as it can be said, however, a few
    afterthoughts:
    
    Study of anything can be abused.  Whether we're talking about "the
    occult" or campfire building, any discipline can be misused.  That
    doesn't make study itself evil.
    
    "The occult," by the way covers a wide and diverse area with many
    disciplines in it.   Some might argue that there's really only _one_
    underlying thing about which we're studying differeent aspects of
    [indeed, a few noters here have so argued], but even so, on a practical
    level, compartmentalizing them makes them easier to deal with
    (meteorology is actually an aspect of physics, for instance, but
    is complex enough to be a separate discipline).  So statements
    generalized about "the occult" are too broad to be valid.  Would
    a study of, say, dowsing somehow be either an inverse of spirituality
    or disguised spiritual greed?  I think not; particularly if the
    dowser was trying to help people in a drought.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    
    
    re .4 &.9
    
    Karl,  your two responses show this reader a lot of anger, frustration
    and a very judgemental attitude to folks who are trying to communicate
    with each other.  I find that offensive however, I will assume a
    lack of informaton/understanding on my part.
    
    If, in fact you are interested in getting into a deeper discussion
    of the Sufi's I think you have the oppty here to share your experience
    and information rather than to sit back and judge that those reading 
    and participating are not capable of responding the way you 'believe'
    they should.  I know several folks who are able to deal with the
    Dejavu notes in a much broader and perhaps (perhaps not) richer level
    and choose not to because the flow seems to be in a different (not
    lesser) direction. Communicating is not a  singular action, it takes
    more than one.It also requires taking responsibility for ones words, intent,
    tone etc....
    
    You apparently see some worth in Dejavu or you wouldn't feel so
    stongly about it.  I suggest you look for the positive rather than
    the negative and perhaps you may feel more inclinded to participate
    and share who you are and what you've experienced with us.  I'm
    sure many of us would be interested and who knows, you too may learn
    something, grow and find that there are some willing to talk of
    Sufi and other subjects in a different way.  
    
    To judge another, and of course trying to change another is a very 
    effective way of keeping distance, not participating and perpetuating
    a 'no one understands me' attitude.  But you know that.
      
    Didn't someone say something like...judge ye not lest thou be judged?
    
    
    Be at peace.
    
    Lora

    How is stating the obvious, that WE are asleep, 'insulting'? 
    
    As for the person who 'refuted' the three main points regarding
    study of the occult vs. true spirituality... I take it you prefer
    your own opinions over those of Jesus, Zoroaster, Meher Baba,
    and Mohammed ? 
    
    If so, show me your followers.
    

    Re  .15:
    
    The person in question, a woman whose opinions are not given lightly,
    was trying to make a point; I another:
    
    "The occult" merely is a catch-all phrase for a wide variety of
    phenomena.  One item that falls into "the occult" is the art of
    psychic healing.  If a person becomes a psychic healer because he
    or she merely wants to help others, and not for personal glory,
    is that evil or vain?  I suspect not.
    
    One of the greatest magi, who helped others and who shunned glory,
    was Apollonius of Tyana.  Anyone who read his life, as chronicled
    by Philostratus, would probably deem him a good man.  He was a psychic
    healer and magician.  
    
    My friend, tyhere are many pathways to Untimate Truth: some feel
    they have the only path; others may try one or two approaches; a
    few give up and do not travel.
    
    Thrithemius, Agrippa, and Albertus Magnus were all good, and for
    that matter devout, men who also happened to be excellent occultists.
    
    A true adept seeks no followers; rather, they seek him or her.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
     

    I would like to echo Steves comments.  All roads lead us to our
    goal, some are more senic and some are more well traveled.
    
    Everyone and every philosophy has their place on this planet.
    
    And, I would say that the true adept has no need of followers. The true
    adept has the duty to continue on their path aided or unaided by
    whatever forces there are. 
    
    I, for one, would not critize Sufism because it has marvelous
    connections to my own B.S. (Shamanism)  Don't agree.  That's fine.
    
      Mikie?

    As I recall, the base note requested information about Sufism. 
    As has been pointed out to us, not many of us are familiar with
    that particular spiritual discipline.  If you, Karl, have such
    knowledge (or anyone else, for that matter) the base noter would
    probably appreciate it very much, seeing as how this particular
    path was recommended to her.  The rest of us seekers of knowledge
    would also appreciate it.  Even if the only information is that
    the path must be experienced first-hand due to traditions
    of secrecy, that is valuable, too.
    
    Now, would you care to light a candle for us, or continue to curse
    the darkness?
    
    Marcia

Not only are there many paths to enlightenment, as others have pointed out,
but what is a serious mistake on one may be the essence of progress on
another. 

For example -- 

There are two forms of yoga which are philosophically very closely related:
Kundalini yoga and Tantric yoga.  Both involve the explicit use of
Kundalini (sexual-spiritual energy) for spiritual development.  But they
access that energy in precisely opposite ways. 

In Kundalini yoga, celibacy is an absolute requirement for beginners and is
strongly recommended for intermediate and advanced students.  By this means
the energy is redirected for other purposes (shades of Freud). 

In Tantric yoga, celibacy is usually, at most, recommended for beginners
(some masters require strict celibacy for beginners -- but the (private)
justification seems to be to discourage people from studying Tantric yoga
for "kicks") and sexual intercourse is actively used as a means of
releasing and using Kundalini at the intermediate and advanced levels. 

_The_Empty_Mirror_ (a great book, I should add -- both amusing and
informative) discusses a similar dichotomy in Zen meditation in Japan just
after WWII.  This is a particularly interesting parallel since zazen (Zen
meditation) can meaningfully be considered the polar opposite of yogic
meditation. 

In some disciplines an interest in the development of psychic abilities is
considered a mistake, since it distracts from the true goals.  In others it
is a matter of indifference -- simply something which, like other interests
in the material world,  will be put aside as growth continues. In still
others, the development of psychic abilities is something which is used as
a method of feedback -- to let students measure their progress and to
maintain their motivation. 

Which is right?  They all are.  Whether something is a misstep or part of
the true path depends on the path.  I have reason to believe that even
within Sufi, all three attitudes towards the development of psychic
abilities are practiced. 

Another area where there is a similar division is in intolerance of other
paths.  Most spiritual disciplines seem to teach tolerance at an advanced
level, but there is a wide divergence at lower levels. 

Some disciplines teach what I and others in this conference have been
saying -- that there are many paths and no single true path, only a true
goal -- and even that true goal looks different from the perspective of the
different paths.  The founder of Aikido (a physical/spiritual discipline
which I have studied) frequently emphasized that everyone has something to
teach the student (and he viewed himself as a student, of course). 

Other disciplines, which tread a narrow path, deliberately teach
intolerance to beginning and intermediate students.  By teaching that
alternatives are absolutely incorrect, the temptation of eclecticism --
which is an error for those paths -- is avoided. 

And of course other disciplines ignore the issue.  Intolerance is seen as a
stage that some students have to pass through to get beyond it. 

As difficult as it is at times, those of us who have chosen paths of
explicit tolerance must try to be tolerant even of intolerance. 

				Topher

    I had to smile while reading certain 'knowledgeable' responses on
    Sufism. I'm sure that the Mullah Nasrudin (a Sufi nutcase (probably
    apocryphal) /enlightened one) would have had something suitably
    witty to say. In the absence of his presence I'll offer the following;
    
    	"If I knew what two and two were, I'd say four"
    
    Brian