Hamzah Wald Maqbul – Junayd and Sobriety 6 Ramadan 1444 Late Night Majlis Ribat
AI: Summary ©
The concept ofhip hopping is a combination of both spiritual and physical activity, and is linked to emotions and actions. It is a combination of both spiritual and physical activity, and is linked to sobriety anditis. The book focuses on actions of the people and the God, and uses anecdotes to emphasize that the book is not about a person, but rather a person. Good behavior and not putting oneself in a state that cannot be sustained is important.
AI: Summary ©
We continue from yesterday's discussion with regards to,
rapture and intoxication versus sobriety.
And,
the sheikh
transitioned
within the chapter on intoxication
into talking about the superiority of sobriety.
Now he's gonna try to make some sort
of, like,
reconciliation between the 2,
opposite con concepts.
So how is it that one can be
good and the other can also be good
at the same time despite them both being
opposites and despite his having a preference for
sobriety over intoxication,
which, he makes clear.
So he says there's 2 types of intoxications.
1 is with the wine of affection and
the other is with the cup of love.
So he's using 2 synonyms in Arabic.
The what he describes as affection is and
what he describes as love is.
So affection is muhaddah, and the cup of
love is sorry. The affection is mawaddah, and
the cup of love is muhaddah.
The former is
caused
since it is it arises from benefit, from
a nirma. But the latter has no cause
since it arises from
the regarding
of the benefactor.
So he's saying what?
That what he, in his terminology, what he
says is is what? Someone does something good
to you and then you love them for
that.
Whereas what he described in his terminology as
is what? Is that you love the person
and that's why that's why
you you love them is for the person
themselves, not because of something that they do
for you.
That the,
the is that
there's a cause that makes it happen. Whereas
the,
the Mahaba is something that's essential.
It's something that that doesn't require an external
or a third cause.
He who regards benefit sees through himself, and
therefore, he sees himself.
Whereas he who regards the benefactor sees through
the benefactor, and therefore does not see himself.
So that although he's intoxicated, his intoxication is
is
compatible with sobriety.
So he says there's 2 types of intoxication.
1 is someone did something good to you,
so you get a rush. And the second
is beat you you're in the rush because
of your love of the the person without
regards to what they do or what they
don't do.
Sobriety is also of 2 kinds. Sobriety and
heedlessness in ghaflat and sobriety and love in
Mahabbat.
The former is the greatest of veils, but
the latter is the clearest of revelations.
The sobriety that is connected with heedlessness is
really intoxication,
where, that which is linked with love,
although it is intoxication, is really sobriety. This
is an is really sobriety.
This is an important point
because there are many
worldly materialistic people who seem very sober. In
fact, they're very proud of it. And when
you talk to them about deen, they say,
don't tell me all that stuff. Talk practical
with me. Whereas what is it? It's actually
a manifestation of their drunkenness with the dunya.
They're completely drunk with the dunya. Their for
the dunya is so intense that it caused
them to not see Allah. It caused them
not to see where they came from, where
they're going. Necessarily, they know that they came
from somewhere and they're going somewhere, not to
regard any of those things. It's just that
the duniya itself is something that they're they're
drunk with. So this is the sobriety that's
connected with heedlessness is really intoxication,
while the sobriety which which is connected with
love, although it'd be intoxication, is really sobriety.
When the principle, the asl, is firmly established,
sobriety and intoxication resemble one another. When but
when the principle
is wanting, both are baseless.
In short, we're true,
spiritualist
tread. Sobriety and intoxication,
are the effect, of difference,
where, whereas when the Sultan of truth displays
his beauty, both sobriety and intoxication appear to
be intruders
because the boundaries of both are joined.
And in the end,
the end of 1 is the beginning of
the other, and the beginning and end are
terms that imply separation,
which has only a relative existence. In union,
all separations are negated.
As the poet says, when the morning star
of wine rises, the drunken and the sober
are, as one. This is a point in
the night where the drunk and the sober
both become the same. The sober one is
tired,
and the drunk person's drunkenness is wearing off,
and they're tired tired as well. So the
the point of all of this is what
is that that there's a point at which
both of these they they they kind of
merge with one another, and that's the the
the sweet spot we're shooting for.
And that's the the the sweet spot we're
shooting for,
rather than to
negate one completely
over the other.
In Saraks, Saraks is a a city in
Central Asia, which I don't know was populated.
I don't think it was populated after it
was destroyed by the Mongols.
At Saraks, there were 2,
spiritual
directors, 2 peers,
Luqman and Abulfadim,
Hassan.
One day, Luqman came to Abulfadil and found
him with a piece of manuscript in his
hand. He said, oh, Abulfadil, what are you
seeking in this paper?
Abulfadu said the same thing as you are
seeking without paper. Luqman said, then why the
difference? Abulfadu
answered, you see a difference when you ask
me what I'm seeking. Become sober from intoxication
and get rid of sobriety in order that
the difference may be removed from you and
that you may not you may then know
what I search for.
Meaning what?
The outward form is,
maybe
sobriety or intoxication, but the the thing that's
in the middle that people are shooting for
should be the same. He says that Tayfuri
is the followers of Bayezid and the Junaidis
are at variance to the extent,
which has been indicated above.
As regards, to ethics, the doctrine of Bayezid
consistent shunning companionship
and choosing retirement from the world,
and he enjoined all of his disciples to
do the same. This is a praiseworthy and
laudable path. So he doesn't
bad mouth him just because he disagrees with
him. Then he has just maybe 2 or
3 paragraphs about the tariq of imam Janaid,
which he,
I guess, already
explained,
through his
discussion of sobriety versus
intoxication.
The Junaidis, they are the followers of Abu
Qasem,
Junaid bin Mohammed, who was in his time
called the,
the the peacock of the ulama, the tawusulululama.
He's the chief of the Sufis and the
imam of their imams. His doctrine is based
on sobriety,
and is opposed to that of the Tafuri
as has been explained. It is best known
and most celebrated
amongst all the doctrines,
and all the shifts have adopted it, notwithstanding
that there are much difference in their sayings
on the ethics of, Tasawwuf.
Want a space forbids me to discuss it
further in this book, and those who wish
to be better acquainted with it must seek
it elsewhere.
I have
in read in the anecdotes,
of the mashaikh that when Hussein bin Mansur
Al Hallaj in his rapture broke off all
relations with Umar bin Uthman Al Maqih and
came to Junaid. So,
Al Hallaj is the kind of the
archetype, like, the the the kind of black
sheep of the Sufis back in the old
days. So he did all the stuff that
the other Sufis did, but he kinda went
off the rails,
as we mentioned from before. So he's oftentimes
discussed. People are trying to figure out, was
this guy, like, the worst of the good
people or the best of the or what
what what's what was his deal? So the
sheikh in this book takes somewhat of a
attempt to have a reconciliatory
approach toward him while emphasizing that he was
wrong in a lot of the things that
he did. And there's reasons that he went
off the rails, not because he was trying
to be bad, but there he kind
of, he didn't follow recipes, so the cake
didn't come out quite right.
He says, I've read in the anecdotes that,
the mashaikh that when, Hussein bin Mansur Al
Hallaj in his rapture broke off all relations
with Amr bin Uthman Al Maqi and came
to Junaid. Junaid asked him for what purpose
he had come to him. Hussein said, for
the purpose of associating with the sheikh, Junaid
replied, I don't associate with mad men. Association
demands sanity. If it is wanting, the result
is such behavior as yours.
In regard to Sahil bin Abdullah to study
in Amr bin Uthman Al Maqib, Hussein said,
oh, Sheikh, sobriety and intoxication are two attributes
of man, and man is veiled from his
lord until his attributes are annihilated.
Real good Sufi talk.
Right? So he says he says that sobriety
and intoxication are true attributes of a man,
and man is veiled from his lord until
his attributes are annihilated.
Junaid responded, oh, son of Mansur,
you're an error concerning sobriety and intoxication.
The former denounced
soundness in one spiritual state in relation to
god, while the latter denotes excess of longing
and extremity of love. Neither of them can
be acquired by human effort. Oh, son of
Mansur, in your words, I see much foolishness
and nonsense.
So this is,
his
brief
summary of the the emphasis of
sobriety being
a necessary
driver of a person's suit, seeing things the
way that they are and not
not putting a person's
self into
a state that cannot be sustained,
for too long of a time, lest it
start to warp the person's humanity, start to
warp the person's intellect, start to warp the
person's,
fitra, which all of which are necessary,
to drive a person and to guide a
person in there,
traversing the path to Allah